Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor


I would like to ask your opinion on what you make of the TV
programme "Tomorrow’s World" that appears Sunday morning on
Prime TV. They seem very biblically based, yet Selwyn Stevens in
his book "Signs & Symbols" say they are actually a cult and
teach a "Galatian style legalism mixed with British Israel
theories and Old Covenant Law." They refer frequently to End
Times. A lot of what they say I go along with, but …. I
don’t want to appear too critical, but are they in error?
Mr Stevens says, "Since Armstrong died, there has been a sudden
shift toward more orthodox biblical beliefs. However they
continue to reject the biblical view of the Trinity of the
Godhead which is common among cults."

Alister North

Dr Stevens is right on all points – just rejecting the
Trinity labels you "cult" immediately. This is the organization
behind the "Plain Truth" magazine. They have become more orthodox
since Herbert W Armstrong died. I remember seeing him alight from
his personal Lear jet at Auckland Airport some years ago,
surrounded by a group of adoring young girls who traveled with
him. However, becoming more orthodox is light years away from
being orthodox. Their current teaching allows no separation
between the two baptisms. They say you are baptized in the Holy
Spirit the same time you are baptized in water, the error coming
from the misuse of Acts 2:38. They are Sabbath keepers, saying
that Jesus was resurrected on Saturday evening which is absurd.
They accuse mainstream Christians of confusing "born again" with
"conversion," saying that unless we are changed into "immortal
spirit beings" we have not been born again. They don’t
understand "Christ in you, the hope of glory." They push the 10
Commandments rather than the new Commandment which Jesus gave
which strengthens and supports the original 10 anyway. Jesus
said, "I didn’t come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill
it." This is a clue to the legalism and tradition that still
lingers. They believe our goal is to assist Jesus Christ to bring
peace and joy to earth through a government based on God. Clearly
they have their End Time doctrine well and truly fouled up
– that will be a feature of the Millennial reign!
That’s "Kingdom Now" heresy. These people, like the
Jehovah’s Witnesses, have built up most of their following
from former members of Traditional Churches who worship with a
liturgy, but have never been taught the Word of God properly.
Keep well clear- there is no hope here! And that’s the
plain truth! Ed


I am interested in your thoughts about the ‘Non’
vote by the French and Dutch recently in connection with the
European constitution.

I read in the paper at the time that they had thought that
they had removed themselves from the control of Europe, but I
just wonder whether they have scored an ‘own goal’ in
making themselves more open for the man of perdition to start
having control over them.

Gill Davis

We think that this is probably a hiccup along the way. If you
look at all the other things that have been introduced in the One
World agenda, most, if not all have had an initial failure. Think
of eftpos or the National ID card. The End Times One World
Government plan is all about totalitarianism, power, and absolute
control. The first building block in this process must be the
control of money. Let us not forget the Euro is here to stay, and
that speaks volumes. Ed


I am writing in response to one of your letters in the June
Omega Times. the question was asked about the KJV and debate over
subsequent versions. I have worked with a Bible translation
organization for over 25 years and was very disappointed to read
your answer to the question as it contained some major
inaccuracies. The whole subject of translation and the MSS
involved could fill a whole library, but here are a few

1. The Septuagint MSS are simply a Greek translation of the
Hebrew Old Testament, so are themselves a translation, and not
original documents, and of course could not be the source for the
KJV New Testament.

2. The Vaticanus B MSS cover only New Testament writings and do
not include Revelation, and so could not be wholly the source of
any full translation of the Bible.

3. There was never any one, original, superior MSS available to
any translator, so translators had to look for and compare all
the MSS available at that time. Many hundreds more ancient MSS
are available today than in the time of the KJV translation.
(e.g. The Dead Sea scrolls) In Colossians 1:14 the oldest MSS available
today do not refer to "the blood" and so many modern translations
have followed these MSS. That in no way changes the meaning of
the whole passage, as the "blood" is referred to in many other
verses. The other "omissions" referred to are based on comparing
ALL the sources available, especially the earliest ones.

4. Finally, the Bible is God’s word to us and is meant to
be UNDERSTOOD. Most variations in words used in different
translations do not alter the meaning, but simply seek to convey
the meaning in the language that reader understands. Anyone who
objects to this really should learn Hebrew and Greek and go
directly to the oldest MSS available and read them for
themselves. Otherwise, let us all praise God that so many
translators over the centuries have done it for us.

Rosalie Rentz


May the Lord richly bless you in your new endeavour with a
really wonderful magazine.

It comes at the time needed most as we see more pieces of the
end times coming together. We Christians need to wake up and be
ready for the battle - and not be found with a flagging listless
spirit We need to prepare and your magazine will help us do

A.E. Yorke