One of the last ditch, insipid "defenses" of critics of the King James Authorized 1611 Bible is the "revision hoax" which presents the myth of numerous "revisions" of the Bible and "thousands of changes." These delusional critics run haphazardly to this shallow objection of the infallibility of the English Bible as their "fortress" in a feeble attempt to delay their ultimate and unavoidable defeat. Theirs is a direct attack on the Word of God as preserved in the English language: the King James Version of 1611. Unfortunately for them, their fortress is systematically torn down, brick by brick in all of its absurdity. Sanity must prevail in this matter and, as always, the answer is in God's Word. There are times when a completely foolish and uneducated attack such as this should simply be ignored and times when it should be met with an answer. To ignore this issue would be to leave these Bible attackers believing that they are wise in their own conceit, necessity therefore dictates that the matter be addressed. Can their argument be answered? Absolutely! If God did preserve His Word in the English language through the Authorized Version of 1611 (and He did), then where is our authority for its infallible wording? Is it in the notes of the translators? No. Is it to be found in the proof copy sent to the printers? No. We need to establish from the outset that the authority for our preserved English text of the King James Bible is not found in any human work. The authority for our preserved and infallible English text is in God Himself! So let’s examine these critics claims of numerous "revisions" over hundreds of years The first initial detail which is striking and delivers a crushing blow to their insidious attack is the fact that the first two so-called "revisions" of the King James Bible actually occurred within 27 years of the original printing and were not, in any sense, a "revision" but simply a careful correction of earlier printing errors. The last two so-called "revisions" were simply the standardization of the spelling (which we will examine further in just a moment). The thousands of alleged "changes" to the Bible which they claim are simple "spelling" changes. Suffice it to say that their accusation of four major revisions is truly a fraud and a myth. Let’s examine the character of these so-called "thousands of changes."

Suppose you were to see an original copy of the King James Version. Right away you would notice some very different things between it and the one you own. First, you would hardly be able to read its words, and those you could make out would be spelled in very odd and strange ways. Does this then mean that the King James Version has undergone a multitude of changes since its original printing in 1611? Absolutely Not! Let's examine the evidence. The changes can be divided into three kinds: printing changes, spelling changes, and textual changes. First: the type style used in 1611 by the KJV translators was the "Gothic Type" style. At first, it was the only style in use. In 1612, the first King James Version using "Roman" Type was printed and within a few years all Bibles printed used the Roman Type Style. A change in type style no more alters the text of the Bible than a change in format or type size does. Besides some general change in form, several specific "letter" changes needed to be made. For instance, the Gothic "s" looks like the Roman "s" when used as a capital letter or at the end of a word, but when it is used as a lower case "s" at the beginning or in the middle of a word, the letter looks like our "f." Therefore, also becomes alfo and set becomes fet. Another variation is found in the German "v" and "u." The Gothic "v" looks like a Roman "u" while the Gothic "u" looks like a Roman "v." This explains why our "w" is called a double-u and not a double-v. In the 1611 edition, love is loue, us is vs, and ever is euer. But remember once again that these are not even spelling changes. They are simply "type style" changes. In another instance, the Gothic "j" looks like our "i." So Jesus becomes Iefus (notice the middle "s" changed to "f") and joy becomes ioy. Even the Gothic "d" had the stem leaning back over the circle in a shape resembling that of the Greek Delta. These changes account for nearly all of the so-called "thousands" of changes in the KJV, yet they do no harm whatsoever to the text because the text itself is not changed. In the 1611 printing additional "e"'s were often found at the end of the words such as feare, darke, and beare. Also, double vowels were much more common than they are today. You would find mee, bee, and mooued instead of me, be, and moved. Double consonants were also much more common. What would ranne, euill, and ftarres be according to present- day spelling? See if you can figure them out. The present-day spellings would be ran, evil, and stars. These typographical and spelling changes are the so-called thousands of changes in the King James Bible. None of them alter the text in any way.

The total absurdity of the myth that there have been several major "revisions" to the 1611 KJV is now clear that it is exactly that - an absurd myth. The character of the so-called "changes" clearly show them to be simply corrected "printing" errors. There were no actual "revisions" in the sense of updating the language or correcting translation errors. There were only editions which corrected early typographical errors. There is one problem with these attackers’ accusation and theory of numerous major "revisions". There are no such revisions. The King James Bible of 1611 has not undergone four (or any) major revisions. Again, our authority for the infallible words of the KJV English Bible lies in the power and promise of God Himself to preserve His Word! God certainly has the power and therefore, we certainly have His true Word.