Changes of Meaning as of August, 2012
Page last updated, May 19. 2014



Discovered Changes of Meaning to the Messages of Jane Lead in the SDV Editions by the editor at janelead.org

 


Note:
Abbreviations used on this page are as follows ...

  • PasstheWORD is abbreviated as PTW;

  • Jane Lead is abbreviated as JL;

  • The Editor at janelead.org, Diane Guerrero, is abbreviated as DG.

 

Here is the promise made by the editor, Diane Guerrero, at janelead.org regarding the Meaning of JL's messages...

This screen-capture was made from the early homepage at janelead.org.

DGs Promise to keep JLs message untouched

The report below will show you examples that will help you to evaluate just how credible Diane Guerrero is, when she gives these assurances to her site visitors.  Is she keeping her word in the modified SDV documents that she is presenting and selling?


A Radical Reversal of Meaning [first reported May 17, 2012]
in
JL's Revelation of Revelations 2nd Edition, 1701 SDV Edition

The most 'scandalous' reversal of meaning to the messages of Jane Lead, that has been uncovered so far, was to be found in DG's SDV modification of Jane Lead's Revelation of Revelations - 1701 Edition

We will first describe what was changed, what it means, and then we will show you the screen-captures that we have recorded to prove that DG implemented this change.  It was NOT a typographical error !

Near the end of the authentic original 1st Edition is a sentence which reads: ...although each Saint may have a full Provision and plentiful Portion of Spirit in themselves, so as they have no dependance on another, yet love is freely communitive, and disperseth it self in great variety, so as what one Saint is gifted and furnished with, the other may want of that sort and kind, and so a heavenly Traffick and Correspondency may be maintained, feeding and feasting with each other...etc.

DG has never had an on-line SDV rendition of the 1st Edition, but her SDV modification of the 2nd Edition of Jane Lead's Revelation of Revelations removes the word, "no" from the above quote so that it reads: ...although each Saint may have a full Provision and plentiful Portion of Spirit in themselves, so as they have dependance on another, yet love is freely communicative...etc.— which reversal of meaning leaves the Saints dependent on each other.

To quote from one letter that PTW received concerning this matter: 

"It is incredible how the removal of one two-letter word, (no), can destroy the meaning of the truth. The changed sentence implies that the elected ones are dependent on each other which is totally incorrect and negates the work of conversion from the Holy Spirit.  This shows how subtle Satan operates even unto deceiving of the elect if they are not continually on guard."

"There is a great difference between dependence and sharing.  Every truly elected Saint is complete in themselves and is led by Christ through the Holy Spirit, therefore has NO dependence on another. 1John 26-29.  Sharing is where some elected ones are given revelations and visions and these are what they ought to share with one another for upbuilding and encouragement.   There are many scriptures showing that we are dependent on Christ and the Holy Spirit and not what the imposter wrote."

The writer of the above also urged that PTW make public the changes in the Spirit Deceiver's Versions (SDV) of JL's works; we agree. It is time to bring what has been hidden into the light.

So please bear with us, as we show you in detail what you need to see in order for you to have the information that we have gathered and what is apparent from it...and brethren, this was NOT a typographical error on DG's part.

 

First, here is an image of PTW's source-copy of the 1st Edition page containing this sentence so you can see exactly how it reads in the authentic JL manuscript.

 RofR-orig-page-1stEd-shows presence of the word-no

 

Second, here is a screen-capture of the on-line transcription at PTW of the same 1st Edition sentence.  This is the copy that DG illegally used as the foundation text to build her derivative version of the 2nd Edition. [More on that later in the report.]

  PTW-transcription-of-orig-page1stEd.-shows word-no

 

Third, here is DG's source-copy of the 2nd Edition page that contains the sentence of interest...notice that the 2nd Edition original text still contains the word, "no" !! 

  RofR-orig-page-2ndEd-shows presence of the word-no

So it was a conscious change to the original 1683 e-text by Diane Guerrero, a deliberate action on her part, to remove the word "no", at the time that she first edited that sentence for her published on-line version(s).   We say versions because in 2009 DG posted to her site an HTML version of the supposedly unedited 1701 text. Later she replaced it with a PDF version of her modified SDV edition.

Fourth, here is a screen-capture showing DG's title page next to her page containing the same sentence of interest from DG's HTML file {mentioned above} of that supposedly unedited version of the 2nd Edition, 1701 printing of The Revelation of Revelations that she first posted online in 2009.  Notice that she had already removed the "no" at this very early stage.

RofR-meaning change-in-DGs-html-file

 

 

Fifth, before we leave her HTML file, let's look at side-by-side copies from PTW's 1st Edition (on the LEFT) and DG's 2nd Edition (on the RIGHT) HTML files, focused on the text surrounding the sentence with the reversed meaning but also showing the underlying HTML code below each view of the text.

RofR-text-code-comparison-PTW-vs-DG

Do you see any similarities?  She copied the 1st Edition text and used it as the foundation to build her 2nd Edition derivative.  When she made that copy, she got the underlying older HTML3 code syntax from PTW's e-file.   It seems very clear that DG had either opened, or copied and pasted from the PTW e-file of the 1683 Edition of Jane Lead's Revelation of Revelations, and then made her changes and additions to it so as to produce her SDV modification of the 2nd Edition. Either way, the older PTW code went along, behind the scenes, so that it would be proof of the theft. {There is more evidence of the theft of e-files in the report entitled, "Detailed Comparison of a Copied File"}

As soon as DG realized that her HTML versions were being examined and that her copyright violations were thereby exposed and confirmed by the presence of PTW's underlying code, she began removing the HTML versions from janelead.org and replacing them with PDF files so that others could not detect the matching HTML codes that we had found in her SDV documents.

and...Sixth, here is a screen-capture showing the same sentence from DG's replacement PDF file of Jane Lead's Revelation of Revelations - 1701 Edition, SDV.

RofR-meaning change to DGs PDF file

Notice that the same reversal of meaning appears in the later PDF file.  So there was no inadvertent typographical error, no mistake on her part, other than to expect that readers would not be shown the change.  But the Lord is good; there is nothing hidden that will not be uncovered in His timing.

And now you know... but there is more to tell... about DG's 2nd Edition. [see below]

 

new13.gif (275 bytes)   added material as of  August, 2012
A Summary of New Issues with DG's SDV Imposture of the Revelation of Revelations, 2nd. Edition, 1701.

When PTW was preparing the authentic transcription of the Second Edition of JL's Revelation of Revelations, which also went on-line at PTW in August of 2012, the methodology applied was to use PTW's own copyrighted e-text, from the 1683 First Edition, as their foundation, so that the 2nd Edition corrections could be applied and the new material added to it;  the resulting new e-text became the authentic transcription of the original of the 2nd Edition. 

This is a valid method for PTW to use, but NOT so for DG, since the e-file of the 1683 edition was and is copyrighted.  Remember that DG never obtained a copy of the original 1683 manuscript of JL's The Revelation of Revelations;  there was no SDV edition of it;  there was no upload of it to SCRIBD.  The only place to find the wording of the authentic 1683 edition, was at PTW, and that's where DG went for it when she did her SDV of the 2nd Edition.  There is no doubt that she copied the e-text from PTW.  We already showed you proof-examples of the copied HTML codes above in this report and also in another report examining the details of the copied e-text from The Heavenly Cloud Now Breaking.  And now, here is additional new information, very recently uncovered, that corroborates our earlier findings. 

When the authentic R of R 2nd Edition transcription at PTW was recently completed, we were prompted to make one more pass through the entire document, this time comparing the last free download, the "Special Preview" of DG's PDF file of the SDV Second edition, with the authentic 2nd Edition e-text that PTW had just generated.   We were to compare the two documents, both generally and line-by-line.

Generally we were to learn and reveal to you, just how true DG was to the original. 

We found that the order of presentation was changed by DG in her SDV edition;   the names of two parts of the original were changed by DG;  a new Table of Contents was constructed by DG which she inserted at the beginning;  it included a part of the original that was entitled 'Contents', which was to immediately precede the main message, and thus was eliminated by DG altogether.   It is also disturbing that DG chose to divide her SDV 2nd Edition into 261 paragraphs, when in reality, the authentic original has only 213 paragraphs.  This is more evidence that DG was not true to the original, which you can verify for yourself since PTW's authentic transcription is in the same order as the original manuscript. 

The line-by-line comparison with the R of R 2nd Edition "Special Preview" SDV revealed exactly why we were prompted to look at it and just what we were sent there to see.

There, sitting in DG's PDF file, were (and still are) a large number of whole segments of PTW's copyrighted transcription of the 1683 e-text, left in tact - exactly the way it reads in the 1st Edition!   Apparently DG had either not finished her SDV editing of PTW's e-text before she issued and accepted money for her "Special Preview" SDV edition, or she did an incredibly sloppy job.  DG had overlooked eighty (80) specific, now documented, instances of the exact wording from PTW's 1683 e-text transcription that had not been correctly updated.   She had not finished updating those 80 instances of e-text to match what was called for in the 1701 manuscript original before she published her "Special Preview".  

Not only did DG leave those 80 new proof-examples of her violations of PTW's copyrights, but also there were found to be six (6) more Changes of Meaning to the R of R 2nd Edition, SDV.   Additionally, at least twenty (20) typographical errors existed within the new material of her SDV 2nd Edition — that is, within the added 2nd edition material which DG had to type on her own.

Rather than divulging further details, it seems appropriate for DG to go back and find all of these for herself, if she has not done so already.   

 

One more new deception by DG to be reported as of August, 2012: 

A new website, entitled spiritsday.org, which duplicates the content of janelead.org has been created by DG.   She sells the same illegal SDV editions there, offers various "Studies" to you, invites you to pay her for the corresponding current SDV edition so that you can follow her teaching, and then invites you to reward her for her illegal activities.  Please, do not knowingly join with her in the propagation of these impostures.  The evidence shows that the SDV documents are not true to the messages from the Godhead that were spoken through Jane Lead. 

~~~ End Notice of August 2012  Update ~~~

 


Other Reports of Changed Meaning

Other changes to the meaning of the messages have been discovered and made known to us, so we have placed a sampling of them in this on-line report.  The changes to meaning that we list below are each supported by a screen-shot of DG's modified SDV text from her on-line PDF file at janelead.org (as of early May 2012 before it disappeared);  you will find enough information to go back to her SDV versions and confirm what we have shared.  We have listed, along with each change of meaning, any comment that came with the report. 

 

Changes of meaning in JL's Heavenly Cloud Now Breaking SDV Edition

[HC 1:5   SDV]  In the 3rd paragraph of "The Introduction" of the original 1681 manuscript, there is an emphatic statement by Michael, the Prince of the new and everlasting Covenant which reads "Therefore in order hereunto, do thou signify what way must be followed for Restitution...".  (The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)

DG'sHC1-5-change-of-meaning screen-shot
The SDV edition has fractured the text into multiple paragraphs, then severed this command of Michael from his preceding message, by beginning a new paragraph, which only reads "
Therefore signify what way must be followed for restitution..." greatly diluting the emphasis and reason for the directions from the Lord which follow.  This is a typical example of the dilution and confusion that can be introduced by such meddling with the original content of the text. 
   When compared to the original 1681, 1st Edition of The Heavenly Cloud, DG has taken many liberties with her SDV edition, often interrupting the continuity of thought of many passages and interjecting her own subject headings that were not in the original.
   When Jane Lead published her original 1701, 2nd Edition of The Heavenly Cloud, she did add four main section titles.

  1. JL's first section mark and title is,          I. Of the Spiritual Dying.

  2. Her second section mark and title is,     II. Here follows the Resurrection.

  3. Her third section mark and title is,        III. Here follows the Tract of Ascension

  4. JL's fourth section mark and title is,      IV. Upon Ascension and Descension.

    Diane Guerrero, the editor at janelead.org, saw fit to break her SDV Edition of The Heavenly Cloud into 42 marked sections compared to Jane Lead and her editor, Francis Lee's 4 — thus adding to the dilution of the messages and the confusion of many readers. 

[HC 1:23 SDV]   Here the message is elaborating more on the whole scope Of the Spiritual Dying.   Speaking of the Natural and Bodily Sense which we all share, the original of both the 1st and 2nd Edition of The Heavenly Cloud reads here: "This sense indeed is apt and fit for such an inferior mortal State as we are fallen into.  A low and earthly Sense doth well agree with a low and earthly World.(The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)
DGsHC1-23-change-of-meaning screen-shot
DG's SDV version changed the word, "
inferior" to "interior", thus changing and confusing the meaning.

[HC 1:24 SDV]   The text speaks of our goal to obtain a state in which "we may have a broad open sight of an express Glory". Within the message there is text describing that our sensible part must be suspended and laid as in a dead sleep, {trance-like} during such a time.  A sentence within both the 1st and 2nd Edition of The Heavenly Cloud reads thus:"But that which is the most certain Knowledge, and Sight, and Hearing is, when the whole sensitive motion of the Soul, Spirit, and Body is entered into a Transical, Eternal Nothingness.(The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)
DGsHC1-24-change1-of meaning screen-shot
DG's SDV edition blatantly changed the word, "
Transical", to "transient" — again adulterating the meaning. 

Further on, the message of the originals goes on to tell us why we must enter into this transical state, and what is the more sure way for it ... "even through the cessation {ceasing} of the outward senses". (The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.) 
DGsHC1-24-change2-of-meaning screen-shot

DG's SDV edition replaces the word, "cessation", with the word, "sensation" so that it now reads "sensation of the senses"...another changed message!!

[HC 2:4   SDV] vs. PTW original of both the 1st Edition and the 2nd Edition, section entitled "Here Follows the Resurrection" 5th paragraph. #2 — The original speaks of "a high graduated sound Wisdom", that is to displace what JL calls "the subtil Spirit of Reason" in us. (The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)
DGsHC2-4-change-of-meaning screen-shot

DG changed this phrase to "a high "gradient" sound Wisdom"...changing the inherent meaning and implications of the message leaving the Spirit of Reason to live and work as usual. 

[HC 2:12 SDV]   One example of DG's change of "Sion" King to "Zion" King". (One such change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)
DGsHC2-12-change-of-meaning screen-shot

This replacement of Zion for Sion, DG applied 7 times throughout the entire SDV Heavenly Cloud document...removing a precious gateway to the deeper meaning which JL's messages had opened.

[HC 3:1   SDV]  Speaking of the ascending soul, the phrase in the original reads "Oh what Angelical Sounds, and winding up Powers, that do make a Soul all restless, till it comes to its own prepared Mansion!(The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)
DGsHC3-1-change-of-meaning screen-shot
DG changed the word, "Mansion" to the word, "motion" — turning the Soul's arrival at its destination into a continuous state of movement!...reversing the meaning!

[HC 3:21 SDV]   This change was applied to the original text of the last full paragraph before the set of verses entitled, "The Ascension".  The original reads, "For something I do see breaking forth as the Light of a new Day and by the great Alpha and Omega it is testified, that what by his Spirit hath been revealed, shall not go off as a dead Scene, shewn only in the literal description and so folded up again."  This is the first sentence of an important message that was being conveyed through JL.  It is a long message. (The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.)
DGsHC3-21-change-of-meaning screen-shot

When DG modified this text, she changed the word," Scene" to "seine", followed immediately by her own interrupting notation (circled in red) directing the reader to a footnote of her own commentary and proffering a teaching of her own — thus diverting and distracting the reader from the importance of the current message and surely impacting the meaning of the message.   DG further fractured the teaching right in the middle of a sentence and began a new paragraph, [HC 3:22 SDV], thus further preventing the complete thought of the message from registering fully with the reader.  What else would we expect from an agent of the author of confusion, distraction, and subversion?

[HC 4:7 SDV]  Again another fractured teaching.  Part of section IV of the original text, entitled "Upon Ascension and Descension" which deals with the actions to be performed when an elected one is finally fixed with the glorified body of the Holy Ghost and again descends to do the assigned works of the same.  Particularly troubling is a change within an original sentence that reads, "A rich Prize shall be possessed, even such a living stock for subsistence, as shall be blessed with the multiplying Power of the Holy Ghost." (The change is shown below in a screen-shot from DG's SDV edition.) 
DGsHC4-7-change-of-meaning screen shot
DG changed the word, "
subsistence" to "substance" in her SDV edition, thus changing the meaning of the promise of provision and implies the use of the gift for an opposite, worldly end. Who gave her the authority to change the words from the Godhead?  Is there any doubt?


Finally, consider seriously, in regards to all that we have shown you, whether Diane Guerrero fulfilled her promise to leave Jane Lead's messages "untouched"?  Was she telling the truth when she said...

DGs Promise to keep JLs message untouched
...we think you will agree, she did not keep her promise; she did not speak the truth. 

So rather than believing what she said, let us be convinced by what she has done. 

 

All things being considered, it certainly appears that Diane Guerrero boldly lied to all of us when she promised that she would be faithful to God and to Jane Lead, and that JL's messages, themselves, would be left untouched.  She not only touched them, she violated them in a destructive way.  

If we have accomplished our task, and if you have viewed all 5 of the evidentiary Reports from the Fair Warning page, it should be clear to you by now that the promises, words, and works of Diane Guerrero are not to be trusted, nor should DG's SDV editions be given your credibility, your recommendation, your resources or your precious time. 

The god, to whom DG has been faithful, is the god of this world, disguised as an angel of light, on a mission to destroy what threatens his kingdom.   Are we surprised?

Links to the other evidentiary Reports can to be found at the bottom of
the Fair Warning Reports Page.

Back to:   The Fair Warning Reports Page

Back to: Index of Jane Lead Manuscripts