Brethren, almost every English Bible version goes through revisions if it is around long enough. I am disappointed that the ESV does this without issuing a clear statement as to why they have done this, but the NIV has done this as well. At least the NET bible gives reasons for their translation or word choices (as good or bad as they may be). I would like the ESV to follow suit. And I would love it if they would stop omitting conjunctions. One place of significance is Joshua 1:1 which begins with a Hebrew conjunction which shows continunity with the Pentateuch. I'm not sure why they ommitted that - I find that a tremendous mark of the unity of the OT text.
I have no desire to get into a bible version dispute respecting the KJV (I grew up on it and still love it), but I think it helps to be fair to the modern translations. There is a rather major difference between the original KJV of 1611 and the KJV of later generations. The 1611 AV included the uninspired text of the apocrypha and future versions did not. That was one massive editorial change with clear doctrinal implications, but there were some
other less significant ones as well...