-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Texe Marrs
- Thread starter robycop3
- Start date
Rufus_1611
New Member
I am not insulting anyone. He is making the argument that his wife has hugged heterosexual males and should not be therefore considered an adulteress and somehow this equates to Bush hugging and kissing a sodomite prostitute as being natural.Amy.G said:
Rufus_1611
New Member
My point is, if most all of our corporate, financial and entertainment leaders were North Koreans and we were fighting foreign wars against the enemies of North Korea, it seems like that would matter.Amy.G said:
If most all of our corporate, financial and entertainment leaders were Muslims and we were fighting foreign wars against the enemies of Muslims, it seems like that would matter.
Thus, if most all of our corporate, financial and entertainment leaders were Judaizers and we were fighting foreign wars against their enemies, it seems like that would matter. A Christian who brings up an issue such as this, should perhaps be listened to rather than villified and called names.
I continue to defend this guy as he is KJVO, opposed to government led churches and confesses the name of Jesus Christ, the individuals that he has been accused of wrongly writing about, such as W and the Jews, do not make this same confession. If he has these things right, then it is possible that he is awake on other issues as well and thus far, I have not heard a compelling argument to suggest that he is everything he has been portrayed to be by his mockers in this thread.
Rufus_1611 said:
I'm not interested in calling anyone names. But I am interested in the point that you are trying to make.
You suggest (or perhaps just relay that Marrs claims) that "most all of our corporate, financial and entertainment leaders [are] Judaizers. I would be interested in understand the data on this. I've heard for years, from folks in certain circles, that the Jews controlled the papers, the entertainment industry and banking and that US support of the nation of Israel is a direct result of the influence of these powerful Jews.
The problem with this is that a majority of conservatives (evangelicals and otherwise) in the US support the nation of Israel, a majority of liberals (theological and otherwise) oppose this US support, and yet a majority of Jewish voters have aligned themselves with the liberals in nearly every election in memory. Doesn't quite fit your point.
Further, let's look at each of these groups. The entertainment industry has a clearly pro-Palestinian, pro-Islamic, and non-pro Israel playbook. For several years, this bias has pressured films from portraying Muslims as terrorists. Surely this group is not supportive of pro-Israel foreign policy.
How about the mainstream news media? When was the last time you saw a report on the Arab/Israeli conflict that was even remotely balanced? For that matter, when was the lasts time you saw balance in the reporting of US foreign policy regarding the Middle East? The MSM is clearly not pro-Israel.
What about big business? This group in interested in profit. Investments are placed in areas where there is a high profit to risk ratio. What is Marrs' basis for suggesting that big business has a pro-Jew bias?
Magnetic Poles
New Member
The words Terry quoted from Texe's website condemn him as a racist and anti-semite. Rufus, you should give it up on your defense of him, unless you share those qualities with him. I guess its true that every nut case can find followers.
"Racist" and "antisemite" are thoughtstopper words. Once they are spat at a person or a claim, all thought stops and the only concern--like when someone yells "fire!"--is to get the heck out of there before you get burned to a crisp. I recommend that thoughts be addressed rather than labeled with tags that are not only hard to define precisely, but also bring discussion to a halt.
No one denies that the Jews, as a people, reject Christ. In fact, I did some study in their own writings about the question "Who is a Jew?" and the only real consensus I could find was that (1) you identify with the Jewish community and heritage and (2) you reject Jesus.
It's also hard to deny their overwhelming success, as I mentioned earlier.
The question is, is there something fundamentally wrong with being Jewish? Does it make one behave with bad character? Does one Jew conspire with another because they have a common goal of exalting Jews and preying on goyim? Are we justified in distrusting one with Jewish ancestry? I wonder what Marrs says about these questions, although selling the Protocols implies the answer.
Blacks dominate the NBA because they're just better. Jews lead in nearly every field because they're just better. It's not a conspiracy.
If the goyim want to lead, they need to get off their collective rear and excel.
No one denies that the Jews, as a people, reject Christ. In fact, I did some study in their own writings about the question "Who is a Jew?" and the only real consensus I could find was that (1) you identify with the Jewish community and heritage and (2) you reject Jesus.
It's also hard to deny their overwhelming success, as I mentioned earlier.
The question is, is there something fundamentally wrong with being Jewish? Does it make one behave with bad character? Does one Jew conspire with another because they have a common goal of exalting Jews and preying on goyim? Are we justified in distrusting one with Jewish ancestry? I wonder what Marrs says about these questions, although selling the Protocols implies the answer.
Blacks dominate the NBA because they're just better. Jews lead in nearly every field because they're just better. It's not a conspiracy.
If the goyim want to lead, they need to get off their collective rear and excel.
Rufus_1611
New Member
tinytim said:
Well, yes. I am saying there are elements of his worldview that cause me to hear him rather than villinize him. I'm not saying I agree with everything he says as I really don't know all that he contends and I suppose I'll start spending more time on his site as a result of this thread. If he was to depart from sound doctrine, then I would call that out. However, as far as I know, he is a Fundamental Baptist who seems to love the Word of God. He has some fringe views about the world and would appear to be, like a good watchman, trying to warn others about it. I do not see how this makes him an "American Nightmare".
The arguments that have been used against him have not compelled me to think him to be worthy of scorn...
You don't need to go to Mr. Marrs to come to suspect that W is pink. Data on this (not proof) can be found at many more resources then just Marrs' site. However, you won't find this data on mainstream so-called "conservative" sources.
You don't need to go to Mr. Marrs to suspect that there is something amiss with the Zionists. Martin Luther's The Jews and their Lies, Henry Ford's the International Jew, Elizabeth Dilling's The Jewish Religion: It's Influence Today, or the speeches of Benjamin Freedman all provide very effectual, rational arguments for why Christians should be careful and more aware about this topic.
I would defend his belief in Jesus Christ, and his belief in the KJV. I would defend his stance on separation from the world and the way that community cared for each other and I would defend his freedom to exercise his religion and his right to bear arms consistent with the lawful rights of the citizenry under the constitution of the United States.
I would speak against his SDA affiliations, and his belief that he had the inspiration to open the seals. If he ever stated that there was a path to God other than Jesus Christ I would not consider him a brother and would speak against his doctrine.
Finally, I would speak and have spoken against a government that would kill women and children in order to protect them.
Are you referring to Eric John Phelps?
I would support his KJV position and support his beliefs that the Roman Catholic Church is antichrist and there is a Jesuit army out there doing the popes biding.
I would not support his Calvinist positions. Nor would I support his unbalanced approach to all the world's woes being applied to the Jesuits. I would not support anyone who hates anyone else for we are to love one another and we are to love our enemies. However, I would look for data relative to his "hate" of sodomites. I suspect our definitions of hate are a bit different, as I believe those that do not speak out against sin and warn people of the peril they face are the real haters.
True. SDAs and Mormons use a KJV Bible but I do not stand for their false beliefs. If Mr. Marrs starts promoting Ellen G White or Joseph Smith or some false doctrine, I'll speak out against him. In the meantime he's just a Christian who thinks he's got a piece of the world figured out and is trying to expose it. Maybe he's wrong on a few things, but if he loves Jesus Christ, I love him.
"As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith." - Galatians 6:10
Rufus_1611
New Member
Thank you for these wise words.Pipedude said:
That's about the extent of it.
Yes there is. In the same manner that there is something fundamentally wrong with being a Muslim, a Buddhist, or a Hindu. Those who reject the light of Jesus Christ are fundamentally flawed. In addition, those who believe on the Talmud or the Zohar are less capable of good character as evil communications corrupts good manners (1 Cor 15:33).
It can not be denied that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a real document. It is rarely denied that this document was made available in the early 20th century. It is difficult to deny that much of what is described in the protocols has come to pass. While the author(s) of the document is debatable, the content is worthy of understanding.
No, that's not the one... it is the one with the "God hates Fags" campaign, the one that shows up at military funerals to protest...Rufus_1611 said:
I would just like to warn you to be careful...
Which it appears you will be. I have some friends with strange beliefs, but I still consider them to be brothers and sisters in Christ, so I see where you are coming from... of course, my friends know that I consider them "nuts" over their beliefs, as they do mine. :smilewinkgrin:
Just be careful who you defend. It may backfire one day.
Oh, and it is always OK to change your mind about someone, I have many a time! ... So if, during your investigation, you realize that this brother in Christ is nuts... I promise not to say "told you so" :tongue3: :thumbsup:
And I will defend your right to disagree with any of us!
tiny
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Another thing that helped me see that Texe Marrs was
not good for me was the following misunderstanding of
his:
There is a book: Report From Iron Mountain
on the Possibility and Desiraability of Peace.
(Dial Press, 1967). This booklet is hard back but
only has 109 numbered pages.
It is the report of a special study group, probably
comissioned by the USGovernment but not
by the president at the time (Lyndon Johnson).
Consider this from the cover:
"They [the special study group] concluded
[that] lasting peace, while not theoretically impossible,
is probably unattainable; even if it could be acheived it would
almost certainly not be in the best interests of a
stablesociety to achieve it ... "
By 'war' here we are talking about the 'cold war'
and military preperation for all out Nuclear War.
But Texe Marrs didn't see it that way.
While I was studying his documents about the Report,
i was attending several Saturday garage sales and ran
across my copy (rejected from some libarary) for
sale. Reading the book, I realized that Texe Marrs
was (what is a nice way to say this?) full of himself.
Here is the REAL conclusion of the matter:
(p 94) The objective of government policy in regard
to war and peace, in this period of uncertainty, must
be to preserve maximum options. The recommendations
which follow are directed toward this end.
There was no conspiracy there to worry about.
Anyway, if it is a Secret Conspiracy - how come some
folks know all they are doing?
not good for me was the following misunderstanding of
his:
There is a book: Report From Iron Mountain
on the Possibility and Desiraability of Peace.
(Dial Press, 1967). This booklet is hard back but
only has 109 numbered pages.
It is the report of a special study group, probably
comissioned by the USGovernment but not
by the president at the time (Lyndon Johnson).
Consider this from the cover:
"They [the special study group] concluded
[that] lasting peace, while not theoretically impossible,
is probably unattainable; even if it could be acheived it would
almost certainly not be in the best interests of a
stablesociety to achieve it ... "
By 'war' here we are talking about the 'cold war'
and military preperation for all out Nuclear War.
But Texe Marrs didn't see it that way.
While I was studying his documents about the Report,
i was attending several Saturday garage sales and ran
across my copy (rejected from some libarary) for
sale. Reading the book, I realized that Texe Marrs
was (what is a nice way to say this?) full of himself.
Here is the REAL conclusion of the matter:
(p 94) The objective of government policy in regard
to war and peace, in this period of uncertainty, must
be to preserve maximum options. The recommendations
which follow are directed toward this end.
There was no conspiracy there to worry about.
Anyway, if it is a Secret Conspiracy - how come some
folks know all they are doing?
saturneptune
New Member
Rufus,
You are a part of the fringe known as "faith out of control." It appeared in 1692 in this country. It appeared at the Crusades. There are other examples. It almost seems you have added a new member to the Trinity, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and marrs. Of course you would have to call that a quadity. Maybe you should start your own TV show.
You are a part of the fringe known as "faith out of control." It appeared in 1692 in this country. It appeared at the Crusades. There are other examples. It almost seems you have added a new member to the Trinity, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and marrs. Of course you would have to call that a quadity. Maybe you should start your own TV show.
Rufus_1611
New Member
Oh Fred Phelps (also a Calvinist). It's a special kind of person that will lead his flock to protest at a funeral. I don't have many favorable things to say about that gentleman.tinytim said:
That's the spirit. :thumbsup:
I'm always open to adjusting my worldview. The best arguments that fit scripture and fit the evidence are the ones I endevour to adjust too and I pray that God grants me, and all Christians for that matter, the discernment to match up with His worldview.
Thank you brother.
Rufus_1611 said:
I absolutely do deny this. Even a Russian court in 1993 ruled that this was an anti-Semitic forgery.
What do you mean by "rarely denied that this document was made available"? Of course, that's true. But that says precisely nothing. Henry Ford paid for its distribution in the U.S. because of his particular misinformed views.
Apparently the secret police of Czar Nicholas II authored it in 1903, plagiarizing other sources, in order to help "justify" pogroms.
Rufus_1611
New Member
saturneptune said:
I believe in the Godhead as described in the Holy Bible and Marrs is not listed as being a member:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." - 1 John 5:7
I don't watch that mind wrecking, idiot box of an idol, so I certainly would not desire to appear on one.
Rufus_1611
New Member
I appreciate what you are saying but I do not see the courts of Russia past or present, as being an authority on truth.Karen said:
It says that if it was authored at that time and the things contained in the document have come to pass, then it is either a playbook for an agenda that has come to pass or the second most accurate work of prophesy in existence.
I don't agree with Mr. Ford on all things but I am not convinced he was misinformed on this issue.
Perhaps that is true however, I don't suspect the Czar had a chance to defend himself against these charges as the Communists/Socialists making these claims, sort of made him go away.
Rufus_1611
New Member
There will be zambonis in the underworld before that occurstinytim said:
Rufus, Questioning someones beliefs and statements does not make one a mocker. Are we not told in scripture to expose false teachers and stay away from them? A false teacher cannot be a brother in Christ. Jesus said some will say Lord, Lord, but He'll say "I never knew you." Being KJVO does NOT make you a christian any more than being a Pharisee made people righteous. Texe Marrs' rantings serve no purpose other than breeding hate. What are we supposed to do with all this information? Avoid anything Jewish? Jewish business? Products produced by Jewish companies? What is the purpose of exposing this Jewish conspiracy of world control? So what if Jews own most of the businesses in the U.S.? (which I'm not convinced) Nothing they do or say can take away my faith in Christ. I'm sealed and secure. So what's his point? What is he trying to accomplish? Surely as a "christian" he has a Godly purpose. His website does nothing but spread hatred and paranoia. And if you'll do some reading, he believes the Antichrist will be Jewish. Never heard that one before. The list goes on and on. A good tree bears good fruit. What is the fruit Marrs is bearing? Don't be deceived.:1_grouphug:
Before Rufus made this accusation, I'd say that most of what had been written in response to him was, indeed, mockery.Amy.G said:
That's an extremely common view among premils
A good question. What, indeed, is one supposed to do with this info about "the Jews"? Sounds to me like Marrs would admonish that you should refuse to hire them, elect them, buy from them, or borrow money from them, lest they increase in power and outlaw Christianity or sausage or something.
I would recommend two things: (1) get to know some Jews. Some are repulsive, some are nice (kinda like KJVOs). There's no substitute for putting a face with an idea; (2) read some Jewish stuff about Jewish-Christian relations. Just see what they say and how they say it. You don't have to believe anything without verification, but you'll never understand anything until you hear both sides of the issue. Even the Bible warns us that every man's story sounds good until you hear the other side.