The Revision Revised. Three Articles: I The Greek Text, II The New English Version, III Westcott & Hort's New Textual Theory to which is added a Reply to Bishop Ellicott's Pamphlet in defence of the Revisers and their Greek Text of the New Testament

by John William Burgon

The importance of this book cannot be underestimated. There is no one book that exposes Westcott and Hort's false Greek Text and false Greek theory behind that text any more thoroughly and convincingly than The Revision Revised. Dean Burgon defends the traditional text of the New Testament. He shows clearly the defects in both manuscript "B" (Vaticanus) and manuscript "Aleph" (Sinaiticus). It is very important to see the arguments contained in this historic volume because virtually the same Greek text of Westcott and Hort (1881) FORMS THE BASIS OF ALMOST ALL OF THE MODERN VERSIONS AND PERVERSIONS. See the Appendix, pages 2-3.

Genres: Theology

644 pages, Hardcover

First published February 4, 1997

About the author

John William Burgon was an English Anglican divine who become the Dean of Chichester Cathedral in 1876. He is remembered for his passionate defense of the historicity and Mosaic authorship of Genesis and of Biblical inerrancy in general.

Reviews

[Frederick · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very detailed and thorough work on the faults of the Westcott-Hort Anglican Revision of the Authorized Version that so many fundamentalists stand by. Burgon literally annihilates the foundation on which the modern New American Standard Bible and the New International Version and all of their progeny and wannabe imitators rest, the Greek text of the Anglican Revision committee of 1881. As the foundation, at least in part, for virtually all modern Bible versions, I think it is important for the conservative Christian in particular to see it for what it actually is, a fraud and a sham. Burgon calls the Critical Text, "a foundation of sand," and a, "shapeless ruin," on page 516. And yet, many conservative Christians will still swear by Bibles they don't have the stomach to read through from cover to cover. I only know a handful of Christians who have read the Bible through even once. They view my 59 times reading the Authorized Version through as excessive and obsessive. But, when your sword of the Lord is a butterknife and not a sword I suppose you would have no interest in letting God speak to you through it.

[Brad · Rating 5 out of 5]

Its amazing to me that this book exists and is ignored. It is thorough, concise, exhaustive, and to this day has not been refuted. Yet all of our modern translations still use and reference Westcott and Hort's text. Modern textual criticism must come clean and address these issues.

[Nathan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very interesting but dated book defending a traditional text position (not necessarily Majority text and definitely not TR-only position).

[Tom Brennan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The essential thing to understand about this book is the context surrounding its writing. Not originally intended as a book, it was rather a series of articles/responses surrounding a 19th century English revision of the King James Version. The author, known today by his title as Dean Burgon, was an Anglican pastor and academic, a thorough-going fundamentalist before the term was ever invented. In his battle for the Bible, which involved verbal combat with Higher Criticism and theological liberalism, he eventually came to see the underlying Greek text of the Revised Version as an enormous problem. Created and championed by Westcott and Hort, Burgon's work in this book is intended to prove their creature, what has become known as the Critical Text in our day, highly inferior to the existing text, generally called the Textus Receptus. Burgon does this laboriously, savagely at times, humorously at others, but intensely all the time across hundreds of pages of discussion about specific Greek phrases, manuscripts, lectionaries, versions, and church fathers. It is a massively sourced work in which he piles up evidence after evidence.

Though Burgon cannot be accurately labeled King James Only in the 21st century sense of the term, his defense of the Authorized Version via the text underlying it is essential to the ongoing debate over the English Bible. It is a dense book to wade through, though it is helped by his take no prisoners style, rare in 19th century writing. He must have been a caution as a preacher, but I digress. The value is the painstaking clarity he imparts to an issue still being hotly contested today. I want, as much as is feasible, to study the supports underlying the theological positions I have been handed, hold, and hand to others in turn. I do not read biblical Greek, being limited to only two semesters of it in Bible college. But Burgon is as close to a primary source as I can find. He did read the Greek, and spent years collating a large variety of manuscripts, fathers, and versions and cross checking them with the then brand new Critical Text. To my knowledge, as I pen this, his work in this book has never been refuted.

If you want to know in detail why so many thousands of English speaking churches and preaches still cling tenaciously to the King James Version, one of the primary supports is Dean Burgon's work. I have finally gotten around to reading it, and I have found it compelling. You are, of course, welcome to your own conclusions.

[Mark Jr. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Burgon is, in my mind, the original KJV-Onlyist. His opinions don’t line up neatly with the movement in its current predominating forms, but he set the tone and much of the basic content still found in countless YouTube videos today. I've got more to say in, Lord willing, an upcoming video review.