"In defense of Revelation 22:14"

“Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” —KJV

Although we briefly commented on this matter recently, the implications of the present attempt to change the meaning of this passage are serious enough that a fuller defense was considered necessary. Hence this present article.

Thank the Lord for Revelation 22:14! This verse, which so fully agrees with the rest of Holy Scripture, is a signpost pointing us along the path we must take if we would finally reach heaven. Only those who, through the enabling grace of Yeshua Messiah, have obeyed Elohim’s moral, Ten Commandment law, will enter through the gates of heaven and have a right to eat of the tree of life.

The following statement is excerpted from our book, The King James Bible and the Modern Versions (KJBMV), which is gradually being released month by month in our Information packs:

Revelation 22:14. This very important verse has been changed in the Neutral Text, and therefore in most modern translations.

“Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”—KJV.

“Blessed are they that wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates.”—RSV; the footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities read do his commandments.”

There are interesting aspects to this variant:

First, it is clearly a doctrinal issue, and antinomians would be glad to see the “commandments” taken out of the verse.

Second, the variant is quite Biblical; for there are two other verses in Revelation which say something similar:

“Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood.”—Revelation 1:5b, KJV.

 “These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them  white in the blood of the lamb.”—Revelation 7:14b, KJV    

Third, it is an intriguing fact that the alternatives in Revelation 22:14 rhyme in the Greek!

“Blessed are those doing the commandments His.” / Makarioi oi poiountes tas entolas autou. “οι ποιουντες τας εντολας αυτου” (Textus Receptus)

“Blessed are those washing the robes His.”/ Makarioi oi pluntes tas stolas auton “οἱ πλύνοντες τὰς στολὰς αὐτῶν” (NA/UBS).

It is very possible that a copyist became confused, due to the similar sound, and he substituted something like the earlier two verses in Revelation.

William Tyndale was the best Bible translator the English language has ever had. His version formed the foundation for the KJV. In contrast, modern translation committees are politically appointed from a variety of denominations, and many of their members are not qualified for the work they do. In addition, they work from faulty Greek Texts, based on the Westcott-Hort Text. They do not use the ancient manuscripts, none of them!

Angel Rodriguez, author of this Review article, says:

“ ‘Robes’ is found in the earliest manuscripts available to us.”—Ibid.

 In reality, the “earliest manuscripts” are not the fourth-century Greek uncials (the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus); they are actually quotations from the so-called “early church fathers” and the very early translations, such as the Syric and Coptic.

In his Review article, Rodriguez admits that the very early church fathers quoted the verse as “commandments.” That clearly shows that by the second  and early third centuries, prior to the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus (Rodriguez’ “earliest [Greek] manuscripts”), the earliest Christians already used the “commandments” version of that verse instead of the “robes” version! That is of the highest significance! The evidence, therefore, clearly supports our KJV translation of Revelation 22:14, not the modernist versions of it. Yet, according to the modernists’ theory (which Rodriguez apparently espouses), “robes” was the earliest and “commandments” a later mistranslation of it. Yet Rodriguez says:

“When all the evidence is taken into consideration one must acknowledge that its weight tends to support ‘robes.’ ”—Ibid.

“The fact that Tertullian and Cyprian appear to have used a text in which the word ‘commandments’ was used is significant but not necessarily decisive.”—Ibid.

The fact that they quote the “commandments” phrase a century or more before the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus quote the “robes” phrase—is decisive!

Rodriguez mentions that two early commentators (“fathers”) quoted the “commandments” verse, but he does not mention the fact that three very early translations also translated the verse as “commandments” rather than as “robes” (Harclean Syriac, Philoxenian Syriac, and Bohairic Coptic). Kurt Aland, et al., of the United Bible Societies in the Greek apparatus of their Greek New Testament, says that the first two, named above, can be as early as the second century while the Bohairic Coptic can be as early as the third. In strong contrast, the “robes” translation is first found in the fourth century Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and also in the Sahidic Coptic, which Aland, et al., says is a later version than the Harclean and Philoxenian. Athanasius also supports the “robes” version.

The following translations all quote Revelation 14:12. Here is what we find:

Translations supporting “robes”:

Sahidic Coptic (Old Egyptian), 3rd-6th century Jerome’s Vulgate (Latin), A.D. 4th century Ethiopic (Old Ethiopian), 6th century Ardmachanus Italic (Old Latin), 9th century Hafnianus Italic (Old Latin), 10th century Colbertinus Italic (Old Latin), 12th-13th century Demidovianus Italic (Old Latin), 13th century Divionensis Italic (Old Latin), 13th century

Translations supporting “commandments”: Harclean Syriac, 2nd-7th century Philoxenian Syriac, 2nd-7th century Bohairic Coptic, 3rd-6th century Armenian (Old Armenian), 4th-5th century Gigas Italic (Old Latin), 13th century

What do we learn from the above? The Harclean and Philoxenian Syriac are generally considered to be earlier and more accurate than the Sahidic Copic. Thus we find that the earliest translations support “commandments,” not “robes.”

The so-called “church fathers” were the Christian writers, in the first millennium of the Christian era, who quoted from the New Testament. Their quotations tell us what the text was like at the time they lived. Nearly all the New Testament is quoted by the earlier church fathers; and they rather consistently support the Majority Text, which is the basis for our beloved King James Bible. The Aland, et al., Greek apparatus lists all the “fathers” which support one or the other of the two versions of Revelation 22:14.

Here are these ancient Christian writers, along with the dates when they wrote (only twelve are listed, because they are the only ones who quoted Revelation 22:14):

Supporting the “commandments” phrase:

Tertullian, A.D. 220

Cyprian, A.D. 258

Tyconius, A.D. 380

Andrew of Ceasarea, A.D. 614 Beatus, A.D. 786

Arethas, A.D. 914

Supporting the “robes” phrase:

Athanasius, A.D. 373

Fulgentius, A.D. 533

Apringius, A.D. 551

Primasius, A.D. 552

Ps-Ambrose, Sixth century Haymo, A.D. 841

What does the above list tell you? It says that Tertullian and Cyprian (writing in A.D. 220 and 258, respectively) support the “commandments” phrase; whereas the earliest writer supporting the “robes” phrase was Athanasius (A.D. 373).

We know that the original had to be one or the other; it could not have been both! So, at some point, an ancient copyist accidentally (or intentionally) changed the wording of Revelation 22:14. When was that change made? It had to be between A.D. 258 and 373.

Yet Rodriguez and modernist Bible translations, since 1881, contend that “robes” is correct because the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are the earliest Greek manuscripts, and they have “robes.” 

But the truth is that, although they are the earliest Greek manuscripts we have today, they were not the earliest manuscripts. The early church “fathers” preceded them and clearly show us what those earliest manuscripts said. (In addition, by far the great majority of later Greek manuscripts support “commandments.” They also support all the rest of our King James Bible. That is why they are collectively known as the “Majority Text.”)

The modernists argue that the “robes” phrase must be the original in Revelation 22:14, because Rev- elation 7:14 is similar to it. But Revelation 12:17 and 14:12, two extremely important end-time verses, link directly to 22:14.

It thus appears that Rodriguez, in his analysis, did not go deep enough into the ancient witnesses.

Unfortunately, when he decided that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus took preference over earlier manuscripts, that did end his article.

In the last two paragraphs (fully a fourth of the article), Rodriguez states that “robes” is probably the correct translation—since we are saved by grace, wholly apart from any obedience to the Ten Commandments!

“Their sins were washed away by the blood of the Lamb and not [by] their obedience to the commandments.”—Ibid.

He concludes the article by trying to back away from that conclusion somewhat. But the damage has been done. Our official church periodical has told our members everywhere that they should hence-forth accept the modernists’ antinomian position on Revelation 22:14.

(I have been asked the question, “Who is Angel Manuel Rodriguez?” He is one of four researchers working in the General Conference Biblical Research Department, in Silver Spring, Maryland. He was appointed to that position in order to prepare reports, based on the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy, in defense of our historic teachings.)

On one side stands the King James Version, and with it, all the post-Reformation Bibles of England, Germany, Scandinavia, France, etc. They all support the “commandments” phrase.

On the other side stands the Catholic Latin Vulgate of Jerome, the pre- and post-Reformation Catholic Bibles and all the 20th-century Bibles. They all support the “robes” phrase.

Once again, I say, take your pick.

“Blessed are they that wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb: that they may . .”—Rheims- Douai (R.C.)

“Blessed are they who wash their robes so as to. .”—New American Bible (R.C.)

“Blessed forever are all who are washing their robes, to have the right to . .”—Living Bible.

“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may . .”—Revised Standard Version.

“Happy are they who are washing . .”—Emphasized Bible (Rotherham).

“Blessed will they be who wash . .”—Twentieth Century New Testament.

Before concluding this analysis, it should be mentioned that—just as do the Sunday keepers,—Rodriguez assumes that “keep the commandments” and “wash their robes” are opposites; one involving active obedience as a factor in salvation and the other a passive reception of it. But this is an error. 

Both manuscript evidence, other Bible statements, support the “commandments” phrase;—yet both phrases actually teach the same thing! 

“Wash their robes” does not mean hauling your clothes to the corner laundry and waiting while they are cleaned. It means taking your clothes down to the living waters of Messiah—and washing them yourself! 

This is done by submission and obedience. It is an active, not a passive work. It is a work done by faith in Messiah which purifies the soul. We seemingly do it all, yet in reality it is almost entirely done by Elohim. It is infinite power, working through our very willing choices and cooperation.

---