Question:
In your post, “YOU MAKE SABBATH OBSERVANCE A REQUIREMENT FOR SALVATION,” you specifically emphasized the KJV when citing Revelation 22:14. That stood out to me because you did not do that with the other verses. I looked up the verse in other translations and noticed it reads very differently. Why is that? Is this the reason you prefer the KJV?
Answer:
Yes, that is exactly why we emphasized the KJV in that text.
In many places, differences between Bible versions may appear small to the casual reader. Sometimes the changes are matters of style, wording, or readability. But at other times, the difference is much more significant. Revelation 22:14 is one of those places.
The KJV reads:
“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.”
Many modern versions read instead:
“Blessed are those who wash their robes…”
That is not a minor difference. That is a different reading.
Now let us be clear from the outset: no one is saved by commandment-keeping. Salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. Sinners are justified by the merits of Christ, not by the works of the law. But that does not remove the translation issue. The question here is not, “How is a man saved?” The question is, “What does Revelation 22:14 actually say?”
And that matters.
Why? Because Revelation is a book that repeatedly joins together faith in Christ and obedience to God. It speaks of “the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” So when one reading says, “Blessed are they that do his commandments,” and another says, “Blessed are those who wash their robes,” we are not dealing with a mere wording preference. We are dealing with two different textual readings, and that difference affects how the verse is read and understood.
This is one reason we prefer the KJV.
For example, Revelation 22:14 is not the only place where the difference is substantial. In Acts 8:37, the KJV preserves the eunuch’s confession of faith before baptism: “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Many modern versions omit the verse entirely or place it in a footnote. In 1 Timothy 3:16, the KJV reads, “God was manifest in the flesh,” while many modern versions reduce it to “He was manifest in the flesh” or similar wording. In Colossians 1:14, the KJV says, “In whom we have redemption through his blood,” while many modern versions omit the words “through his blood.” Those are not minor matters when the issue is the wording of the text.
There are also places where the difference is even more pointed. In Isaiah 14:12, the KJV reads, “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!” Many modern versions replace “Lucifer” with “morning star” or a similar phrase. That is not insignificant, especially when the title “morning star” is used elsewhere in Scripture in reference to Christ. Whatever explanation men may offer, that kind of change introduces confusion where the KJV does not. Likewise, in 2 Peter 2:9, the KJV says, “The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished.” Many modern versions change that final expression so that it reads more like the unjust are being kept for judgment while already under punishment, rather than being reserved unto the day of judgment to be punished. Again, that is not just a matter of smoother English. It affects how the text is naturally understood.
The same may be said of passages like Mark 16:9–20 and John 7:53–8:11, which many modern versions bracket, question, or set aside altogether. Whatever explanations are offered, the practical effect on the ordinary reader is the same: uncertainty is introduced into the text. Instead of simply receiving the word, the reader is taught to stand over it, wondering what belongs and what does not. That is a serious issue.
So when we point out a verse like Revelation 22:14, we are not isolating one unusual case. We are drawing attention to a broader pattern. Once you begin comparing the KJV with many modern versions, you quickly find that the differences are not merely stylistic. Again and again, the issue is omission, alteration, or uncertainty in places that matter.
Our commitment to the KJV is not about sentimentality, nor is it about pretending that older English is holier English. It is about confidence in the text. We believe that God has not only inspired His word, but preserved it. And because we believe that, we take textual questions seriously.
When we emphasize the KJV, we are not trying to be dramatic. We are simply signaling to the reader that the wording of the text in that place is important and that other versions do not say the same thing. In Revelation 22:14, that difference is too significant to pass over without notice.
This also helps explain why we do not always make the same point at every verse. Not every textual difference carries the same weight. In some places, the difference may be less central to the argument being made. But in a verse like Revelation 22:14, where the wording itself is directly relevant to the issue under discussion, it deserves to be identified plainly.
So yes, the difference you noticed is one reason we prefer the KJV over many modern versions. Not because every modern version is equally bad in every place, and not because we believe a man cannot understand any truth unless he reads the KJV, but because we are persuaded that the KJV more faithfully preserves the wording of Scripture in places where modern versions often differ in substantial ways.
And this is not just about one verse. Revelation 22:14 is simply a clear example of a larger issue. Once a person begins comparing texts carefully, he will find that this is not an isolated case. That is why we continue to use, preach, and defend the KJV.
In the end, our concern is not to win an argument about Bible preferences. Our concern is to handle the word of God faithfully. If a verse differs substantially from one version to another, then that is not a matter to be brushed aside. It should be examined carefully, honestly, and reverently.
That is why we emphasized the KJV in that post. And that is why we continue to do so.
