Subtle Subversion

“And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.”

Revelation 22:19

What may possibly be a typographical error (or an erroneous opinion) on something can hold a subversive message. None of us are exempt from making mistakes but this seemingly minor blunder can cause some serious theological error. Changing a definite article to an indefinite article changes the message altogether.

Let’s use an example from the passage above,

…God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life…
…God will take away from that person any share in a tree of life…

Going back to Genesis 2:9, we know that the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil were symbols pointing to two opposing forces. To put an indefinite article on the tree of life- a symbol ascribed to God, reduces His supremacy from the millions of false gods out there, as if there is more than one tree of life. There is only one tree of life just like there is only One True God.

The screen shot shows us a clear subversion of John 1:1. It appears to be a subtle change adding an indefinite article and refers to a completely different being, one that is not co-equal with God.

This post ties to yesterday’s post with Psalm 145:18, “The Lord is near to all who call upon Him, To all who call upon Him in truth.”

If there is an iota of change in reference to God’s character and what He revealed about Himself, it could be why some people pray and do not get an answer at all which can cause disillusionment because God will not answer those who are not calling upon Him in truth. He is merciful to all (Matthew 5:45) and only He can see the person’s heart so He knows who is calling on Him sincerely. However, any alterations on the truth sends you elsewhere.

Any person who owns a phone has a specific phone number to reach them. Simply misdialing one number will lead you to reach some stranger on the other line.

“You are My witnesses,” says the Lord,
“And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
Nor shall there be after Me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord,
And besides Me there is no savior.

Isaiah 43:10-11

11 thoughts on “Subtle Subversion

  1. Along the lines of that same concept, the subversion “was a god” (as if He is allegedly one of many); Daniel 3:25 has been subverted in many revisions. When the three hebrews were in the fiery furnace & Nebuchadnezzar saw four men, he included, “…and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.” Instead “the” and a capitalized “Son,” they changed it to, “…like a son of the gods.”


    1. I would not consider the one you referred to as a subversion period. We have to look at the person who uttered it, Nebuchadnezzar, who was a pagan. It came from a man who does not have the knowledge of who God is, describing it as he saw it. It only becomes a subversion when it is coming from someone who claims to have an understanding of who the One true God is and in that, he is disqualified. It was merely a record of what he said.


    2. I will respectfully disagree. I do not consider the word of God at any point, a human record alone because that reduces it to human journalism. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” (2 Tim 3:16). Nebuchadnezzar technically either dictated or wrote the next chapter (Daniel 4)–either way, if it is in the scripture, it is given by inspiration of God. Therefore, looking at the person who uttered it is inconsequential for translation or interpretation. It reads as “the Son of God” in the King James Bible. My question then would be did they change that in revisions because it did not say that or because of what they thought about Nebuchadnezzar?


    3. Thanks for the 2 Timothy quote. I wholeheartedly believe in that. What I said was “very specific” to Nebuchadnezzar’s utterance only. Here is how I regard the Bible: it is The Word of God which contains historical accounts, principles that govern our life, and prophecy.

      My question to you is this. Does the pagan view of Nebuchadnezzar dictate how we must view the deity of Christ that is laid out by the apostles who were in His company? What about Job’s friends? They completely got it all wrong that even Job had to intercede for them. (Job 42:7-8)

      You either trust that God can preserve His Word. The most important thing here is that we learn NOT to view God as the pagans and the Jehovah’s Witnesses do since we have the full revelation which Nebuchadnezzar did not have at the time of his utterance.


    4. We can disagree agree on things. I believe the King James Bible is the inerrant, infallible word of God. That is not a claim that everybody else is an unbeliever though. Per reading your work, we agree the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins, was buried & on the 3rd day He rose from the dead. It was important to mention that because demeanor & such often does not come through in writing. A healthy point of debate between mutual born-again Christians.

      Liked by 1 person

    5. I do appreciate you taking the time to read and comment. Of course we will have our differences. I know I have called on Jesus Christ as my Savior and even though I am not a King James Only reader, I rest in the security of His atonement for my sins.

      Have a pleasant evening, bro.


Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s