The goal of a Bible change statement of faith is to provide Christendom with clarity regarding what many Bible-changed believers hold to be true regarding this event.
As a content creator focusing exclusively on this topic for 8 years, I have created and delivered over 100 sermons, conducted countless polls, and read and responded to thousands of posts on the topic of supernatural Bible changes.
I do not speak for anyone except myself, and I do not intend to establish any authoritative doctrines that would intend to have any jurisdiction over anyone. I do not advocate a departure from the scriptures, and I am not suggesting that my observations or conclusions represent extra-biblical revelation that should be added to or supersede the inspired writings found in the original autographs.
I hold that until evidence to the contrary is presented, the canon of scripture as we have today is a closed revelation, and there is no text or prophetic utterance that can be added to it. The God of the Bible stands alone as the only true God in the pantheon of false gods, and the Bible stands alone as the only compilation of writings that are inspired by this same God.
Many of the opinions found in this statement of faith are simply observations of the aggregate responses of many believers over 8 years as we have all wrestled with how we are to respond to this event. I am simply chronicling the early events of this phenomenon as a watchman documenting supernatural Bible changes from the beginning to record these historic events from their inception.
The creation of a statement of faith and a logo that churches can display is not an attempt to establish a separate denomination. Denominations that have doctrinal differences will typically create subsets within the denomination, not a new denomination.
I envision many Christian fellowships remaining in their present denomination after embracing the supernatural Bible changes, but it remains to be seen.
It may be that they will be recognized as a sort of subset of their existing denomination, and it may not. This topic will be extremely divisive, and it is likely that some denominations that reject the changes will not tolerate any fellowships that carry their brand to continue with them. Either way, individual fellowships will be forced to publicly pick a side and either acknowledge that this is happening or deny it’s happening.
Here is a logo and sample wording that churches can display so that people can easily identify where the church stands if they are looking for a church that acknowledges the changes.
“We believe that the Bible is being supernaturally changed to fulfill end times prophecy. By displaying this logo our church acknowledges that we have reviewed the evidence to support the authenticity of this event and found it credible. To view our modified statement of faith that reflects our acceptance of the supernatural Bible changes click here”
We do not view the unimaginably dire ramifications of the supernatural Bible changes as a form of proof that it isn’t happening. The judgment of God is supposed to be terrible; therefore, we reject the sentimental reasoning of the unconvinced that “God would never allow this to happen.”
We are now in possession of incontrovertible evidence that the memory testimonies of the Mandela Effect community are correct and cannot be explained away as simple, every day, run of the mill misremembering. This evidence comes in the form of the mathematical impossibility of only 10 people all misremembering 10 simple Bible quiz questions the same way. This is clearly what is happening and can be observed and repeated by anyone, and as a result, it meets the criteria of the scientific method. The chances of 10 people misremembering 10 Bible quiz questions the exact same way by chance is approximately 1 in 1 with 152 Zeros or 1.5 google. So if we’re not misremembering, then how do you explain the testimony of millions or people claiming the Bible is changing?
Amos 8:11, Lamentations 2:9, Psalm 74:9, 1 Samuel 3:1, 2 Chronicles 15:3, Ezekiel 7:26, Micah 3:6-7, Hosea 4:6, Ezekiel 14:4, Ezekiel 14:9
We are appalled to commonly see the unconvinced use appeals to authority to give themselves permission to avoid ever looking into the mountain of evidence that supports the supernatural Bible changes. Instead of responding to our questions about our evidence or the Doctrine of Preservation (DOP), we receive lectures in the form of sound bytes like “the Bible can’t change” or “God preserves His Word.” And then we are told “I don’t have time for this”, or, “I just want to focus on souls.” Conversely, we invite the examination of our beliefs and do not seek to separate ourselves from anyone. “Let the righteous smite me; it will be an oil unto me.” (Psalms 141:5)
We suggest that the supernatural Bible changes are a redemptive judgment that is revealing an epidemic of biblical idolatry within the church. The claim that everything must be done decently and in order is being used as a cudgel to keep God out of His solemn assemblies. Churches wallow in a variety of miracle cancelation doctrines that short circuit the Holy Spirit from ever healing and delivering people the way He is longing to. God’s people have been largely seduced into exchanging a prophetic, hearing His voice type of Christianity for a miracle free intellectual gospel. By beginning to make His word inaccessible, God is asking His Church the question: “Do you know me, or do you just know the book?” As a result, we reject the superficial argument that if the Bible is not trustworthy, then it will be impossible to maintain our faith. Since we’ve only had a Bible in English for approximately 500 years, it is unfounded to suggest that we cannot serve and know God if the Scriptures are taken from us. People claiming that we cannot serve God without a Bible are emulating people in the Bible that never had a Bible. We believe this observation is unequivocal and that 100 reasonable men would agree that Bible change believers seem more rational than the unconvinced.
We reject any suggestion that the Bible can’t change because the Mandela Effect would be scientifically impossible. Ironically, this common argument comes from Christians who claim to believe the Bible, which is filled with scientifically impossible events. The fact that this event is hard to believe is not proof that it isn’t happening.
People often attempt to refute the supernatural Bible changes by pointing out old commentaries that are referencing scriptures which have obviously changed. They think that Mathew Henry talking about the “wolf dwelling with the lamb” in Isaiah 11:6 represents evidence that the Bible hasn’t changed. But the Mandela effect changes are far more complicated than that. It isn’t as though our Bibles changed 10 years ago and before that Isaiah 11:6 did say lion. Instead all Bibles going back to the dead see scrolls have always said “the wolf will dwell with the lamb.” However, because all of humanity “misremembers” this enigmatic scripture and dozens of others the exact same way, mathematical probabilities are your master. Your sensibilities demand to conclude that this can be explained by the unreliability of the human memory, but that is impossible, and this sentiment can only come from someone that hasn’t bothered to even scan my book or watch my videos. Christians and church leaders should be ashamed of themselves for the unresearched rush to judgement response that we are constantly exposed to. All of humanity retains the memories of the old timeline but our history no longer reflects what we vividly remember. You can’t figure it out anymore than you can figure out God, so the fact that people can find references in commentaries to passages which we believe have changed is not proof that the Bible has a force field around it.
We view the existence of over 20 unfamiliar, universal biblical paradoxes (See page 83 of my book) as another question that goes unanswered by the unconvinced. These changes introduce strong sexual innuendo, blasphemy, and many dark themes that are inconsistent with the known nature and character of God. These impossible passages are found in The 1611 Cambridge KJV, all 5 revisions, the 1769 Oxford Edition, ASV, NIV, ISV, NLT, ESV, BSB, BLB, KJV, NKJV, NAS, NASB 1995, NASB 1977, LSB, Amplified, CSB, Holman, CEV, ERV, Majority, NET, New Heart, Websters, Weymouth, World English, LSV, Berean, Young’s, Smith’s, Douay-Rheims, Catholic Public Domain, NAB, NRSV, LAMSA, Aramaic, Anderson, Godbey, Haweis, Mace, Weymouth, Worrell, Worsley, Since they are found in virtually all versions, these anomalies cannot be explained away by version confusion, modernizations or misprints. Unless the unconvinced can explain why these Bible change examples appear in every Bible version, and why most Christians will admit that the introduction of these passages is the first time they have ever heard of them, we must insist that the unconvinced abandon any attempt to explain this phenomenon by suggesting that the entire Christian world is confused because of all the different Bible versions.
We reject the unfounded suggestion that our testimonies are invalidated by the idea that we are all just biblically illiterate. Biblical literacy has nothing to do with the accuracy of someone’s memory and their testimony. We also have the testimonies of renown Bible scholars like Dr. Paul Graton Holt. So if you are going to try to suggest that this can all be explained by biblical illiteracy, then you would have to make the argument work with Dr. Holt.
We reject the premise that the Bible would be impervious to an external attack like the Mandela Effect because the devil is not powerful enough to change the Bible. We hold that this is a false presumption, and the Bible clearly indicates that God has given Satan permission in passages such as Job 1:12, Dan. 7:25, 2 Thessalonians 2:9, Amos 8:11, and Revelation 13:9.
We reject the idea that God would never allow the Bible to be changed because we are able to point to numerous prophecies foretelling the event taking place. We therefore conclude that if God warned us that this was going to happen, then it is certainly plausible that it’s happening. Dan. 7:25, 2 Thessalonians 2:9, Amos 8:11, and Revelation 13:9.
We reject the premise that these prophetic passages or any other biblical conclusions are being taken out of context simply because some Christian authority figure says so. We expect a scholarly and respectful response to our scholarly treatment of these passages as found in the book The Mandela Effect: Supernatural Bible Changes and the Doctrine of the Preservation of Scripture.
We reject the premise that God will continue to preserve His Word, because it has been observed that He has done so in the past. This presumption draws on the unchanging nature of God Himself and projects that on the scriptures, but the scriptures not only do not teach this directly, they teaches the opposite.
Hebrews 1:11 – “They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will fold them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail.”
When I ask Christians if they believe the terms “Bible scripture, and Word” are synonymous, I’m often met with a blank stare. It’s clear to me now that this is a question that most Christians have never asked themselves. And if you stop and think about it, it’s clear that they are not the same. They are however consistently conflated to mean exactly the same thing in our churches.
John 1:1 is only one of many places that tell us that the scriptures are not the Word. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” Do you believe that your Bible is God? Would you ever hold up your Bible and say “I am holding God in my hand.” This proves that at least in some cases, the term “Word of God” does not mean your KJV Bible on your coffee table.
The original autographs of the Old and New Testaments, prior to being changed by the Mandela Effect, were directly inspired by God and were the revelation of God to man. We believe the original autographs were the infallible, authoritative rules of faith and conduct given to man to be obeyed and followed. We believe that the commands, revelations, and intent of what was given in the original autographs are impervious to the mechanism that is causing the words on the page to be changed. Therefore, we conclude that although the original decrees are becoming inaccessible through this judgment, all of mankind is still subject to the specific commands of the original communications and we are forced to use the corrupted scriptures, combined with our memories, residual evidence and consensus to parse what the original messages were so that we can obey them.
We are fully persuaded that all versions of the original autographs in their physical form are being systematically and supernaturally altered with the intent to change the meaning of what was originally given. Things that are changing include every version of all written Bibles without exception, audio and video recordings of the same, all sermons, blogs, commentaries, books, and any reference to any Scripture in any medium in any century are being systematically altered through some unimaginable methodology.
We reject the premise that the Bible could not be changing because it is inspired. There are no scriptures that teach that because the scripture is inspired, therefore it will be preserved. To assume this may seem logical but it is certainly not doctrine. We also reject the premise that because God went to so much trouble to give us His Word, it only makes sense that He would preserve it. Theological necessity is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated against God’s people. It is nothing more than a sentimental guess that is packaged and delivered as doctrine. Mark 7:13 “Making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.”
The idea of preservation is incomplete unless you define what it is that’s being preserved. The church has been guilty of sloppy doctrine by conflating the term scripture and the term word of God to mean the same thing. If it is proven that these two terms do not mean the same thing, then there are no promises to preserve the scriptures.
Virtually all of the promises that are being held out to demand that the Bible cannot change are promising that the Word of God won’t change. These promises to preserve the Word are being applied to the scriptures, which is inaccurate.
Most people have probably not noticed that the scriptures rarely indicate where God will preserve His word, they only focus on the fact that they will be preserved. But when the scriptures do tell us where, we find it isn’t in our Bibles. It’s clear that the place that God has chosen to preserve His Word in the new testament is in the hearts of His people. And in the context of this phenomenon, and to the astonishment of most people, I am forced to point out that the scriptures specifically teach that God will not preserve the Bible.
2 Corinthians 3:3
“You show that you are a letter from Christ, delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.”
Then there is Psalms 119:89, the poster child of preservation promises. But this passage turns out to be a proof text for the Mandela effect community. It is specifically telling you that it will not be preserved on the pages of your KJV Bible, but instead, it will be preserved in heaven.
Psalms 119:89
“Forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven.”
Hebrews 8:10
“For this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord. I will put My laws in their minds and inscribe them on their hearts.”
Jeremiah 31:33
“But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts.“
We therefore reject the argument that God wouldn’t allow the Bible to be changed because it would violate His own promises of preservation. We hold that all promises of preservation are being mishandled or taken out of context and are relying on terminology that is not based on strict adherence to the text. I provide alternate analysis of all of the main preservation promises in my book in chapter 5.
What you will find if you search the internet for messages on doctrine of preservation, are sermons that consist of a daisy chain of different ideas and doctrines that will be loosely strung together to form what is generally called the doctrine of preservation. These eloquent hermeneutical wonders will walk you through some or all of these ideas listed below and will culminate in the opinion that the Bible, is error free and impervious to ever being fiddled with by the devil.
Here are all of the things I had to wade through before they got to the point:
I know that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever just like the next guy, but that doesn’t mean that God won’t allow the devil to come in and make scrambled eggs out of grandma’s Guttenberg just like He allowed Satan to mess with Job. Nor can you recklessly apply the fact that God doesn’t change to the Bible. The Bible has been changing since it’s inception, so if the Bible can’t change, why does it keep changing?
The most widely held view of the doctrine of preservation is that it consists of three pillars. The first is the concept of theological necessity, which essentially states that inspiration automatically equals preservation. In other words, because God inspired his Word, it only makes sense that he will preserve it. This, however, is a presumption and not a doctrine, and it should not be held out as a doctrine as it has been for the last five hundred years. Theological necessity is not a doctrine; it is a sentimental guess.
The second pillar of the DOP is simply the observation that God has seemed to order circumstances throughout history to preserve his Word. This is known as providential preservation. From this observation, a second presumption is made, which is that since God has been shown to preserve his Word, it’s likely that he will continue to do so. This, again, is a presumption and should not be held out as doctrine as it is.
The third pillar of the doctrine of preservation is approximately eight passages found in the Old and New Testaments that seem to promise preservation of his Word in one form or another.
As we have already stated, since the preservation promises do not specifically cite the scriptures as the object of what is preserved, we do not recognize any of the promises of preservation to promise that the scriptures will be preserved. As a result, there is no controversy if God allows Satan to change the Bible. The Word of God will be preserved, even though they may become inaccessible through this judgment.
We believe that the commands, revelations, and intent of what was given in the original autographs are impervious to the mechanism that is causing the words on the page to be changed. Therefore, we conclude that although all of mankind is still required to be subject to the specific commands of the original autographs, these commands are becoming increasingly inaccessible because the clear testimony of scripture is being shrouded by the changes that are taking place on an ongoing basis.
As a result, we are forced to use our memories, residual evidence, and consensus to parse what the original messages were so that we can continue to obey them. We are fully persuaded that every Bible, in every version, in every format, in every century, without exception, is being systematically and supernaturally altered with the intent to change the meaning of what was originally given, and there is nothing that man can do to intervene.
We find the following scriptures to be true only when referring to the original autographs but not the written scriptures that we now possess: 2 Timothy 3:15-17, 1 Thessalonians 2:13, and 2 Peter
Accuracy is the idea that Scripture is truthful and precise in its assertions. Accuracy means that the Bible conveys facts correctly and reliably according to its purpose and context. Unfortunately, since so many things are being introduced into the text that are not truthful, we can no longer hold that the scriptures as they are now remain accurate. Isaiah 60:16 now teaches that men can breastfeed, which is anatomically impossible. This is an example of how a Bible change has rendered the scriptures inaccurate.
Isaiah 60:16: “Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.”
Inerrancy is the belief that the Bible, in its original manuscripts, is free from error in everything it affirms, whether it pertains to theology, history, science, or morality. Inerrancy asserts absolute truthfulness without any mistakes in the Bible’s teachings or facts. It is a more comprehensive claim than accuracy, as it denies even the possibility of any error in the original texts. For this reason, we can no longer hold that the scriptures are inerrant. We would agree that the inspired words, as they were given in the original autographs, remain inerrant, but they are only preserved in the hearts and minds of men. As an example, most people remember the lion lying down with the lamb, not the wolf dwelling with the lamb. The lion is the inspired Word of God; the wolf is not inspired.
Prior to being changed by the Mandela Effect, the original autographs of the Old and New Testaments were directly inspired by God and were the revelation of God to man. We believe that the messages contained in the original autographs were and are the infallible, authoritative rules of faith and conduct given to man to be obeyed and followed. That which was given is still in effect. Nothing that was spoken will change, and it will come to pass. The fact that it is becoming inaccessible is irrelevant.
I believe the rapture, the tribulation and the millennial reign took place and started around 70AD and and we now live in the period of time after the millennial reign. (Revelation 20:3)
The Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man. They are the infallible, authoritative rule of faith and conduct. It is important to note that certain commentaries point out that 2 Tim 3:16 has often been interpreted as “Every scripture that is inspired by God,” not “All scripture that is inspired by God.” This emphasis on the word “all” is overemphasized on purpose in an effort to push the narrative that the scriptures are perfect and flawless because many church leaders use their superior knowledge of the scriptures to maintain control of their operation and narrative. They overemphasize the role of scripture in the life of the believer because they are incapable of demonstrating the gospel and they need a substitute. They have an intellectual emphasis like the pharisees did, but they should not be comfortable with a miracle free, intellectual gospel because Paul tells us to turn away from such people. (2 Tim 3:5)
This scale is a subjective assessment of how inspired a passage really is. In other words, I don’t believe that you can put God speaking directly to Moses when He’s giving him the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:2) on the same revelatory authority as someone saying, “Hey, bring my jacket when you come” (2 Tim 4:13).
As I mentioned, some commentaries indicate that the rendering of 2 Tim 3:16 as “All scripture” is inaccurate and should be rendered “Every scripture.” This changes the meaning dramatically and opens the door to interpret inspiration to apply to some and not all scripture.
(16) All scripture is given by inspiration of God.—Although this rendering is grammatically possible, the more strictly accurate translation, and the one adopted by nearly all the oldest and most trustworthy versions (for example, the Syriac and the Vulgate), and by a great many of the principal expositors in all ages (for instance, by such teachers as Origen, Theodoret, Grotius, Luther, Meyer, Ellicott, and Alford), runs as follows: “Every scripture inspired by God is also profitable for doctrine, for reproof,” &c.
One has to acknowledge that Paul goes out of his way to indicate to the reader that certain things that he was putting down in writing were not inspired. We see an example of this in:
Luke 1:35
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct yet unified as one Lord God Almighty.
Denying the eternal Father-Son relationship is a denial of the Doctrine of Christ.
The Father and the Son are equally honored in the Godhead.
The Lord Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God, as evidenced by:
His Virgin Birth:
Man, created good and upright, fell through voluntary transgression, incurring both physical and spiritual death.
Man’s redemption is only through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
Conditions to Salvation
Baptism in Water
The baptism in the Holy Spirit empowers believers for life and service.
The initial evidence of Spirit baptism is speaking in tongues.
Sanctification involves separation from evil and dedication to God.
Supernatural Bible Change Outreach is a division of
Wakeuporelse a 508 (c)(1)(a) Private Ministerial Association operating in the private
To learn more visit www.wakeuporelse.com
Copyright © 2025. All Rights Reserved