The Revision Revised
This present book, The Revision Revised, is another of Dean John William Burgon's
masterpieces. It contains, as do all of his books, overwhelming evidence from manuscripts,
lectionaries, ancient versions, and church fathers showing clearly three deficiencies: (1)
the deficient Greek Text of Westcott and Hort; (2) the deficient English translation based
upon it; and (3) the deficient theory underlying the Greek text. His arguments are
powerful and convincing!
The appendix of this edition shows conclusively that the false revised Greek text and
theory of Westcott and Hort are virtually identical to the false revised Greek text and
theory of Nestle-Aland and the United Bible Society. Therefore, The Revision Revised forms
a strong basis for a refutation of the false Greek texts and theories rampant today which
form the basis for the modern English versions.
In the way Dean Burgon repudiates the English Revised Version of 1881 and defends the
Authorized King James Bible, this book will also form a strong basis for defending the
King James Bible against the modern versions such as the NASV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, NEB,
TEV, CEV, and the others.
You will want to order several copies of this book and distribute it widely! Order a
copy for your pastor, your church library, your missionaries, you favorite schools, and
The text of this Burgon Reprint is based on a complete photographic reproduction of
Burgon's 1883 Revision Revised. The reprint publisher has post-scripted Burgon's work with
a thirty-five paged "Westcott and Hort's Greek Text and Theory Refuted: Summarized
from Dean Burgon's Revision Revised" written by D. A. Waite, Th.D, Ph.D.
Excerpted from The Revision Revised by Dean John Willi Burgon. Copyright 1997.
Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved [This selection is from Article 2--The New
English Version.] Whatever may be urged in favour of Biblical Revision, it is at least
undeniable that the undertaking involves a tremendous risk. Our Authorized Version is the
one religious link which at present binds together ninety millions of English-speaking men
scattered over he earth's surface. Is it reasonable that so unutterably precious, so
sacred a bond should be endangered, for the sake of representing certain words more
accurately,--here and there translating a tense with greater precision, getting rid of a
It may be confidently assumed that no 'Revision' of our Authorized Version, however
judiciously executed, will ever occupy the place in public esteem which is actually
enjoyed by the work of the Translators of 1611,--the noblest literary work in the
Anglo-Saxon language. We shall in fact never have another 'Authorized Version.' And this
single consideration may be thought absolutely fatal to the project, except in a greatly
To be brief,--As a companion in study and for private edification: as a book of
reference for critical purposes, especially in respect of difficult and controverted
passages:--we hold that a revised edition of the Authorized Version of our English Bible,
(if executed with consummate ability and learning,) would at any time be a work of
inestimable value. The method of such a performance, whether by marginal Notes or in some
other way, we forbear to determine. But certainly only as a handmaid is it to be desired.
As something intended to supersede our present English Bible, we are thoroughly convinced
that the project of rival Translation is not to be entertained for a moment. For
ourselves, we deprecate it entirely.
On the other hand, who could have possibly foresee what has actually come to pass since
the Convocation of the Southern Province (in Feb. 1870) declared itself favourable to 'a
Revision of the Authorized Version,' and appointed a Committee of Divines to undertake the
work? Who was to suppose that the Instructions given to the Revisionists would be by them
Who was to imagine that an utterly untrustworthy 'new Greek Text,' constructed on
mistaken principles,--(say rather, or on no principles at all,)--would be the fatal
result? To speak more truly,--Who could have anticipated that the opportunity would have
been adroitly seized to inflict upon the Church the text of Drs. Westcott and
Hort, in all
its essential features,--a text which, as will be found elsewhere largely explained, we
hold to be the most vicious Recension of the original Greek in existence?
Above all,--Who was to foresee that instead of removing 'plain and clear errors' from
our Version, the Revisionists,--(besides systematically removing out of sight so many of
the genuine utterances of the SPIRIT,)--would themselves introduce a countless number of
blemishes, unknown to it before?
Lastly, how was it to have been believed that the Revisionists would show themselves
industrious in sowing broadcast over four continents doubts as to the Truth of Scripture,
which it will never be in their power either to remove or to recall? "Nescit vox
For, the ill-advised practice of recording, in the margin of an English Bible, certain
of the blunders--(such things cannot by any stretch of courtesy be styled 'Various
Readings')--which disfigure 'some' or 'many' 'ancient authorities,' can only result in
hopelessly unsettling the faith of millions.
It can not be defended on the plea of candour,--the candour which is determined that
men shall 'know the worst.' 'The worst' has NOT been told: and it were dishonesty to
insinuate that it has. If all the cases were faithfully exhibited where a 'few,' or
'some,' or 'many ancient authorities' read differently from what is exhibited in the
actual Text, not only would the margin prove insufficient to contain to the record, but
the very page itself would not nearly suffice . . . . It is the gross one-sidedness, the
patent unfairness, in a critical point of view, of this work, (which professes to be
nothing else but a Revision of the English Verses of 1611,)--which chiefly shocks and
offends us. # 0611)
To order any
of our DBS
publications Please Click Here ]