Revolve Bible

The site nor the clip says that this is a tool to get people to realize that Hell is real. They say quite plainly that it is a real tape. They lie about the documentation, when the thing has been shown to be from the most falsely-tabloid-y publication you can buy from the aisle of the supermarket. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]I don't see where they say that it was a real occurence.

 

I have two daughters. Hence, I bought two. They each have their own copies of other translations/editions, including the KJV, NIV, and NKJV which I've purchased for them as well. I try to get student editions whenever possible. </font>[/QUOTE]Do you read this new book entirely? What makes you trust it?

 

A tool? Don't you mean a lie? I read through it
and listened to the screams from hell. The
dude on the audio kept saying that it was real.

This is sad. Unfortunately alot of our christian brothers and sisters are being led astray by this type of unbiblical nonsense.

-kman

 

HomeBound said:

DC Talk music is ungodly. Check this site out

</font>

1. I am familiar with that site. How do you come to the conclusion that DC Talk's music is "ungodly" from an article that doesn't even refer to DC Talk's music?</font>
2. Isn't it interesting that in attempting to defend Dial-the-"Truth"'s assessment of DC Talk, you avoid their "arguments" completely in favour of yet another site that makes a completely different argument? Wow, that sure speaks volumes about their credibility. And yours.</font>

In fact, I'm so convinced that DC Talk is ungodly that I'm going to put one of their CDs on the stereo right now and listen to it while I read my Bible. I don't have a copy of Revolve, but I can always wrap a magazine cover around my NIV.

 

HomeBound said:

I don't think that this was ever believed to be actuals screams from hell, it was just a tool that was used to get people to realize hell is real.

Where does Dial-the-"Truth" say this is a "tool"? The beginning of that page says it is presenting "documented evidence" for hell, and when they present the newspaper article and audio clip, they do not tell the reader that it is not part of that "documented evidence" but merely a "tool."

The radio announcer on the sound clip (Art Bell, now there's a credible source!) reads an email saying the sound is "absolutely real" and adds nothing that suggests he disagrees.

Other "documented evidence" for hell on this page includes:

</font>

• anecdotal evidence of near-death experiences</font>
• eight-foot-long tube worms found near undersea volcanic fissures (Dial-the-"Truth" strongly suggests that these worms are the body received by condemned souls because they will resemble their father, Satan)</font>

What a load. The Dial-the-"Truth" crowd are liars and whackjobs. Shame on you for defending them just because they agree with your KJV-only tradition.

 

Okay, I think we are off subject here. Let me just say that the clip may be a hoax and Dial-the-Truth might have information that is not correct, I don't really know because I have not researched all of their literature and probably neither have you guys.

Back to this book named "Revolved." Does this thing contain the entire Bible or just the NT? Also, don't you think the girl on the front has too much skin revealing?

 

HomeBound said:

Okay, I think we are off subject here. Let me just say that the clip may be a hoax and Dial-the-Truth might have information that is not correct, I don't really know because I have not researched all of their literature and probably neither have you guys.

Wrong again.

Back to this book named "Revolved." Does this thing contain the entire Bible or just the NT?

It is a New Testament.

Also, don't you think the girl on the front has too much skin revealing?

For a Muslim? Sure.

 

So a Muslim has a better dress standard than you?

 

HomeBound said:

So a Muslim has a better dress standard than you?

Nope. Does the Bible say that it is sinful for a young woman to leave her face, neck, and shoulder uncovered? Chapter and verse, please.

[ October 15, 2003, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

Great logic as usual Ransom. Where does it say in the Bible that she has to even have her breasts covered. "Chapter and verse"......please. [snipped]

[ October 15, 2003, 11:16 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]

 

[humor]Pleeeeeese, Brohter Ransom,
can you learn some HTML (hyper-text
mark-up language)? SOme of us
are Humor Impaired literalists who cling
on your every word.
Try "[irony]", you might like it.
Be sure to undo with "[/irony]" so
it won't leak into the following post.
[/humor]

 

It sounds to me like you have not opened one up. Please tell me what you think is there not to trust, rather than asking me an off the wall question.

 

Some Muslim sects require a strict conservative dress for women. Some have standards that are more contamporary.

The idea of passing judgement upon a study bible based on the picture on the cover is absolutely ridiculous. If anyone is getting sexually aroused by the picture on the cover, I think they should seek counseling.

 

Faith, Fact & Feeling said:

Great logic as usual Ransom. Where does it say in the Bible that she has to even have her breasts covered.

If you're referring to the girl on the cover of Revolve: She does have her breasts covered, and it looks like her two friends do as well.

So what's your beef?

 

From reading that link, I now know that:

1. It is possible for a person to change another person's faith.
2. It is not required to love a sinner.
3. The Holy Spirit's job is not to convict the world of sin.
4. We still have to obey the law - including not weating garments made out of more than one fabric, apparently.
5. If a person believes that tattoos are part of the old covenant, then he must believe that it is okay to prostitute one's daughter.
6. A person who even sips alcohol is a drunkard.
7. Christians have no responsibility to care for the planet. "He [God] is not concerned about it (direct quote)," so we shouldn't either. So go ahead and pollute!
8. Rock and roll and abortion exist today because of the NIV.
9. A person does not need to make Christ Lord of his life to be saved.


Frankly, I'd rather kids read Revolve than this article. There are so many theological mistruths on the website that it is staggering.

And on the subject of praying, I discourage dating people from praying together at first. Praying is a very intimate thing that people can do, and it often leads to more trouble than it is worth. They can pray over their meal and pray separately for each other, and even pray together in groups, but to pray with each other by themselves is a dangerous proposition. </font>[/QUOTE]ScottEmerson,

Regarding point number one, do you believe that people have no role in changing another persons faith (please consider this for a bit before you reply)? Clearly the point in the article about the Revolve statement “Don’t try to talk them into changing their faith” is that this is a false non-biblical concept. Every prophet, preacher, teacher, apostle and even the Lord Jesus Christ Himself were engaged in trying to talk others into changing their faith. This is the whole duty of the born-again believer in Jesus Christ. We are to be witnesses. A silent witness is no use in witnessing any more than they are in a court proceeding. Living it always includes talking about it, for of the abundance of the heart the mouth will speak (Luke 6:45). Yes, you should be gracious, but also firm in your convictions. The whole point of doing this is love. If you love someone, you will not be content with them continuing in error and disobedience to God. If you do not study your Bible daily and warn others of the dangers of a false faith, you have demonstrated your lack of love for others. The reason the modern Christian so enjoys this slop about not trying to change someone’s faith is because they are cowards and are ashamed of Christ. If you really want the Holy Spirit in your life, start doing personal work. The Bible will come alive to you then, and not be just some dead translation that has a bunch of antiquated law in it and a few devotional nuggets to help you feel good now and then. That book is written for the “good soldier” in Christ. Not this wishy-washy, non-judging, peace and love hippy Christianity we have today. It is no wonder most cannot understand this book. Their eyes are so blinded to its truth they cannot even see that the whole Bible is geared around this purpose of being personally active in changing the faith of others. Scott, it is not only possible to change the faith of others, but it is your duty. It is God’s will for the born again believer. It is the only thing on this earth that you can do that will have eternal significance.

Regarding point number two, how did you come to this conclusion? I have read the article, but maybe I missed something. Please show how you derived this judgment.

Your third point is equally confusing. Yes, the Holy Spirits job is to convict people of their sin. However, you do know we are co-laborers with God on this don’t you (1 Corinthians 3:9)? Preaching, teaching, witnessing all work in conjunction with the Holy Spirit of God to convict people of their sins. That’s why God has preachers and witnesses. God works through the faithful witness. Preaching pleases God in that it leads to the salvation of those who believe (1 Corinthians 1:21). If you remove faithful witnesses and preachers from the equation, do you still expect the Holy Spirit to convict people of sin? The Holy Spirit convicts people of sin through Christian witness and preaching. Living a moral life is not enough. You have to share the Word of God.

Your fourth point is very misleading. Surely you know that these folks are not adding the law to justification by grace through faith. The law was given for our admonition, it was a curse placed on a disobedient people. But it still has very practical applications today. They are simply pointing this out. The issue this article was addressing was getting tattooed. Marking up your body with tattoos is neither modest nor is it in agreement with how one should treat the temple of God. It is essentially creating permanent (with exception of painful and costly laser treatments) idols on your flesh. What agreement does the temple of God have with idols? The child of God should come out from these things, be separate, and touch not this unclean thing. Clearly.

Your fifth point is somewhat humorous. BTW, why is wrong to prostitute your daughter? Why do you say spiritual fornication with tattooed idols is ok, but fleshly fornication is wrong? Do you have difficulty discerning the significance of spiritual matters?

Ok, sixth, you just want to drink your beer, don’t you? I just love that statement in Revolve justifying beer drinkers with “even Jesus turned water into wine at a party”. Let’s examine this for a moment. Do you know how much wine Jesus made? About 150 gallons. Now, of course, the NIV, which never changes anything of significance, says that Jesus did this “after the guests have had too much to drink”. So, let me understand this correctly, Jesus came to a party where people had been drinking to excess, and He supplied a few extra kegs to liven things up a bit. Is that your Jesus Scott? I believe the KJB rendering (or NASV) that states they had plenty to drink. I also believe the wine they drank and Jesus made were both non-alcoholic. Will you be as the Pharisees and accuse our Lord of being a winebibber?

Point seven. Are you an environmentalist? Boy, you won’t challenge someone’s faith in a false religion, but you sure do get fired up about the environment. You watch a lot of TV don’t you. No, they are not saying through your trash out everywhere. They are saying that people who revel in not challenging false faiths are often involved in many, like environmentalism. Looks like that shoe fits you.

Point eight. Where did they say that? Aren’t you just making that up? Didn’t they really say that these modern, watered-down perversions are popular in a time when perversion is running rampant, and is even justified as Godly by so called “Christians” and “Christian Denominations”. They make an excellent point. Every objective measure of morality in this country has went off the chart to the negative in the same time period that these versions are so popular. Coincidence? I don’t think so. BTW, I do just love that Barna stat on daily Bible readers, don’t you?

Point nine. When I was saved I simply came to the point that I turned my life over to Jesus. I came to the conclusion that I had made a real mess out of things and all I knew was what I had heard, that Jesus saves. I was 23 years old, a drug addict, criminal, and a fornicator. My entire life was transformed almost overnight. I didn’t ask “what must I give up to be saved”. That thought never entered my head. I simply turned it all over to Him. Now, if that is what you mean by lordship salvation then we are on the same wavelength. But if you mean I can lose my salvation by returning to my old ways, then that is where we part company. I believe that salvation is of the Lord, and it is not contingent upon my enduring to the end through law keeping or good works. I believe as Paul did that the man discussed in 1 Corinthians 5 was saved. The guy speaking out in revolve would have judged this man differently than Paul. But I want to make one thing perfectly clear, there is no threshold at which one loses his salvation. We all sin. We are all disobedient to God. Thank God salvation is not by works of righteousness that I have done, but according to His mercy and the washing of regeneration. Lordship salvation seem to imply a very high level of understanding of and complicity with the entire will of God. I think this article says it best in that “no person who ever lived EVER made Jesus Christ the Lord of everything in their life”. When I was saved I didn’t know even one Bible verse. All I knew was that I was a mess, and Jesus saves. Now, 15 years later, I am abundantly blessed in every aspect of my life. I can’t number all my blessing they are so many. But what if I had stumbled or fallen over the years and fell back into sin and made a royal mess of things and grown bitter toward God, was I still saved that night years ago? I say yes.

In closing you stated that you discourage couples from praying together at first, obviously in agreement with Revolve. Listen to yourself for a minute. You actually discourage couples from talking to God about matters when their together. This is unbelievable, and unconscionable on your part. Praying together is the utmost best thing two dating young people can do together. It is a surety that in this day of promiscuous sex that few will because they are either under conviction about their sins, or have never been saved. The ones that do open their hearts to God in this way, saved or lost, will most certainly be blessed.

Scott, I know this seems very harsh. But you have publicly taken a stand on issues that you seemingly know little or nothing about, or are severely misguided on. You now have a decision to make. Repent of this modern, liberalized Christianity, or be confirmed in it. This Revolve bible is a not so subtle perversion of the truth of scripture. The article Homebound attached is accurate and well thought out. Please, reconsider your position.

 

Amen FFF! Preach it!

 

Wrong again. There is nothing you or I can do to change a person's faith. We can give the message, we can share our faith, we can explain the gospel, but there is absolutely NOTHING we can do to make someone change their faith. Only the staunchest Pelagian would seem to disagree.

And I'm not arguing about talking about it. We should absolutely talk about our faith, but we cannot change another person's faith.

Any theology that states that a person can change another person's faith is man-centered. True God-centered faith will state that it is the individual's decision to follow Christ, which occurs only after he or she is drawn by God. Point one stands.

Read the reply about the answer saying that the girl should show her friend the love of God. The website is quite clear about saying that her job is to rebuke and judge the girl.

Neither of the passages you presented show that it is man's responsibility to convict the world of sun. We are to proclaim what is right and wrong, but the only Person who can CONVICT a man or woman of sin is the Holy Spirit. This is Biblical fact, and you have not shown otherwise.

You didn't address the fact that close to the verse in question, it says that we shouldn't wear clothing of two types of fabric. Are you saying that anyone who does that is an abomination to God? If you go back and read the site, you'll see that they are not saying that it's a good principle and that it makes good sense in the new covenant - they, instead, say that we should follow it because it is in the Bible. By that same principle, they should advocate that anyone who speaks against their father should be stoned. They are, quite simply, wrong in their application of the Leviticus passage to say that tattoos are sinful, ESPECIALLY when they ignore the myriad of other passages that they ignore.

Why is it wrong? It goes against the command of Christ to love your neighbor, and against the command of Paul when he tells parents to not provoke their vhilcren to wrath. The problem is with the logical fallacy listed in the site, not with me.

And no, I have no difficulty discerning the significance of spiritual matters. For the majority of Cristians who choose to get tattoos, they are not committing a sin in doing so.

I don't drink. I'm not saying that Jesus Christ was a drunk. You're creating a strawman fallacy. The link is saying that anyone who drinks is a drunkard. Your beef is with them, not me. Jesus Christ, indeed, drank alcoholic wine. How do we know this? At the passover (which was the last supper - Mark 14:14-17), the Jewish people drank wine (not grape juice). Also, considering when the grapes were harvested and when passover was is a difference of seven months. They didn't have refrigerators, so to keep the grapes from souring, they were fermented. Jesus drank wine.

So to answer my assertion, you go to an ad hominem attack. I see how it works. I do believe that I am challenging false faith in my challenge of the kv1611 website, but that is neither here nor there. The site specifically says that God is not concerned about the planet. To say such things ignore the fact that God has entrusted us with the care of the planet. By the way, I am an environmentalist - I try to do my part to keep the earth clean. It's called being a good steward of the gifts that God has given us.

How is it since the new versions cropped up we’ve had 45 million abortions, legalized sexual sodomy and perversion, pornographic explosion, rock and roll hell, the new age outbreak, the Satanic Bible and church, and the spiritual killing of America?

Unless you can show a direct link, then it is, indeed, a coincidence. May I point you to a class on basic research methods? You've got to show a definite cause and effect, which neither you or the author of the site is able to do.

The majority of Bibles that exist are KJV. The quote doesn't talk about daily Bible readers. The actual quote from Barna is: "The King James Version is more likely to be the Bible read during the week than is the NIV by a 5:1 ratio."

What do you think making Lord over one's life means?

I am not sure of your background, but I have a educational and vocational background in marriage and family counseling. I have seen more than a few cases where dating couples who were committed to Christ went farther then they had after they had prayed together. I stand by my statement, and encourage you to do a little more research in the area. I am not saying that they should not pray individually nor in a group. But when they are alone, praying together leads to more intimacy than many couples are used to.

Nah - just misguided.

I actually know a great deal about these things. I am not misguided. Don't try to sneak in an ad hominem here. It just doesn't work.

Many, many young girls are reading the Bible because of the Revolve Bible. In fact, trying to make the KJV as the only "legal" Bible is much more a perversion of Scripture than what is found within the cover of Revolve.

It is poorly researched, misguided, and wrong. The whole site does a poor job. The facts on their Hell page confirm that beyond what is found on the revolve page.

 

This is comical. You say “There is nothing you or I can do to change a person's faith”, then you say “We can give the message, we can share our faith, we can explain the gospel”. So these things you list are nothing. Go back to my discussion of co-laborers with God. Why don’t you just admit you’re making a big brouhaha out of absolutely nothing. Your original statement was that you learned from this article that “It is possible for a person to change another person's faith”. You know full well they were not saying you can do the work of the Holy Spirit, or force a conversion. You have completely misconstrued what they are talking about. You’re just someone who likes to twist peoples words and make baseless accusations and statements like “Only the staunchest Pelagian would seem to disagree” and “Point one stands”, how silly. Is that what they taught you to say at seminary?

You are really lost in man’s wisdom Scott. Nobody is talking about a “man-centered faith”. What we are talking about, again, whether or not someone should try to convert someone from one faith to another. Now do you believe you should try to do this or not? Are we co laborers with God on this or not Scott? Was Peter wrong to preach to the Jews? Was Paul wrong to preach to the Gentiles? Come clean and quit dodging the issue. Neither the article nor I contend that someone can be forced into changing their faith. Now you can dodge and duck all you like, but we “talk about our faith” to end of converting them to ours. If they follow a false faith, then, at some point, we must address that in our witness. The born-again believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit works through us in our witness and preaching to save the lost and convert others from false faiths. Are you so blind you cannot see this? Revolve implies that we cannot point out to this girl that homosexual lust is a sin. They say this is the Holy Spirits job. They simply don’t understand how the Holy Spirit works and neither do you. We must point out to this person it is a sin, nicely of course, then it is the Holy Spirits job to convict her of this and bring her to repentance. The Holy Spirit uses our vessels as vehicles for conveying God Word. Is this clear?

No Scott, the website is not saying “her job is to rebuke and judge the girl”. You made that up. The website is ridiculing this non-judging mentality that the Devil has used to hijack Christianity and mute the Holy Spirit witness. It is not judging this girl to point out that homosexual lust is a sin. Again, do it nicely, try to maintain a relationship with her, pray for her, but for God’s sake, say something. If you really love this person you would be profoundly burdened for her. Sometimes you just have to step out on faith with these difficult situations Scott.

A young man was interning here where I work this summer. He seemed like a good fellow so I asked him if he was saved, he didn’t know. I asked him if he was born again, he didn’t know. I asked him if he went to church, he didn’t. After talking about Jesus for a few minutes with him he realized what was going on. He got angry and accused me of judging him. I asked him if he was judging me in saying that. I also told him that “judge not” was the Devils favorite verse. He said “you people in the South are Bible fanatics”. I said “but of course you wouldn’t judge anyone”. He said “I just think you have assumed a lot about me”. I said “I didn’t assume anything, I asked you if you are saved, you didn’t know, I asked you if you are born again, you didn’t know, and I asked you if you went to church and you said no. So you see I didn’t assume anything about you”. He said “I don’t have to talk to you about this”. I said “no you do not, and it was not my intention to argue with you, just please consider what I have said”. Well, I have to say, that was stressful for me at work and all, but that is where the Holy Spirit comes in. I prayed fervently all that evening that the Lord would help me with this young man. The next day something miraculous happened. While this young man (about 22) was sitting at a desk outside my office the former VP of Supply Chain stopped into to ask me Bible questions. He was there about 30 minutes. After he left the current Director of Supply Chain stopped in for a Bible discussion. All the while this young man heard me discuss Jesus with these people. A couple of days later he spoke to me. After that I took him to lunch a couple of times and gave him my testimony and discussed the Lord with him. I made great progress with this fellow spiritually in the weeks that followed. This is but one of many experiences I have had like this. I have no doubt that this “judge not” mentality of this age is a satanic work to stifle the work of the Holy Spirit.

Look at the hypocrisy in your own statements. You judged and condemned these people falsely in stating that they teach “It is not required to love a sinner”. Your brand of Christianity is so quick to condemn and judge anyone who tries to take a stand for the truth. Telling lost people the truth and being mean about it is not love. But by the same token, failing to tell people the truth is not love either. One must tell people the truth and be nice about it (unless you’re dealing with Pharisees). This being nice about it does not include allowing them to walk all over you with this “judge not” attitude.

In strawman number three you claim you learned from this website “The Holy Spirit's job is not to convict the world of sin”. You learned no such thing. You just made that up to be inflammatory. You know very well what I mean when I say we are colabors with God. You said “We are to proclaim what is right and wrong”. Yes Scott, that’s how it works, that is how the Holy Spirit works in the life of the believer to convict people of their sin. Get it? I think you do, you just want to argue don’t you.

Don’t try to sidestep your claim. You said this website teaches “We still have to obey the law - including not weating garments made out of more than one fabric, apparently”. You learned no such thing from this site. Certainly there are parts of the OT law that are not applicable to us today. But just as certain, there are many parts that do apply. The NT command is to be modest. This is the command for today regarding dress. Again, you have made false accusations regarding the content of this website. This will be clear to anyone who reads it. Furthermore, where do you get this stuff about stoning children who simply “speaks against their father”? Now if your talking about Deuteronomy 21:18, that deals with evil children that are stubborn and rebellious and absolutely do not respond to discipline. My take on this is that it was severe; maybe even a danger to the rest of the family, like Cain, and not how you have mischaracterized the Word of God.

Logical fallacy? The only problem with logic here is that yours is rooted and grounded in the world, and not rooted and grounded in the Word. Do you have kids? Would you allow them to get tattoos? What if they wanted facial tattoos, which some are doing now, would that be ok? Maybe it will work out so that you find out what that is like.

Well, if you believe Jesus drank alcohol, why don’t you. BTW Scott, how much alcohol content does naturally fermented wine have? Did they ever water it down? You mentioned refrigerators, what about granulated sugar? Is that important to fermentation and alcoholic content? Do you contend that fermentation was the only way to preserve grape juice? Our church has two Jewish missionaries, one a completed Jew that was born in Israel. So just tell us all about how Jesus drank alcoholic wine, don’t you know. Make sure and ignore all those verses sited on this website you’ve slandered. Furthermore, you fail to address what I said about the wedding feast at Cana and the NIV rendering about the guests having had too much to drink. Are you afraid of the logical fallacy of your argument?

You have grossly mischaracterized the nature of this segment of the article out of your admitted bias. Most everyone takes out their trash I believe. I am personally for recycling and do it myself, but would not make it a preaching issue as Revolve and you have. What I am against is all this energy that makes a god out of “mother earth”. This site did not say what you allege that we should just “go ahead and pollute”, that is a lie. It is a fact that God puts a lot of emphasis in His book on Spiritual matters, and virtually nothing on carnal matters like environmentalism. It is a fact that He will destroy this earth at some point in the future. It is a sign of the apostasy of this time that Revolve and people like you get all up in arms about pollution of the planet, but will recommend that people should not pray in some situations, and that its is ok to drink beer and get tattoos. Remember the context of their point was around the “Top Ten Random ways to make a difference in your community”. In their list 5, or exactly half were environmentalism related. Zero, zip, nada about witnessing, passing out tracts, inviting people to church. Are you on board with that Scott? As I said initially, you have grossly, I mean grossly, mischaracterized the nature of this segment of the article.

Nice attempt to divert attention off your false accusation that this site claims “Rock and roll and abortion exist today because of the NIV”. Are you a liar or not? No direct causation like this was assigned, period.

I answered that question in detail.

I am not sure about your background either, which is my point. Maybe you give more weight to some formal training in the wisdom of this world than you do the Word of God. That seems to be the case BTW. You have assigned a direct causation between immoral acts between dating couples and praying together. You are on dangerous ground here.

I’m not the one encouraging our youth to get tattoos, drink beer, substitute personal witness for community service, and discouraging dating couples to pray. That would be you Scott.

No one is so blind as those who refuse to see. You find one potential factual error to justify this mess you have made with all your false accusations. You’re a real piece of work.