I love this translation. 5 stars for sure! But... Fox likely did not seek to reconstruct the hypothetical “original” readings before the Tikkunei Sopherim (e.g., restoring anthropomorphic phrases), as his goal was to translate the MT faithfully. His lack of commentary on the Tikkunei Sopherim reflects his focus on the text’s literary and poetic qualities rather than its textual history or scribal interventions. His translation adheres to the Masoretic Text, which incorporates the emendations, and his commentary focuses on literary and theological aspects rather than textual criticism. Fox does not highlight or engage with the Tikkunei Sopherim as a distinct phenomenon, but this reflects his translation philosophy rather than an oversight. Examples: 1. Gen. 18:22.—“But Abraham stood yet before the LORD.” The primitive text was “The LORD stood yet before Abraham.” It was felt to be derogatory for the Lord to stand and wait Abraham’s pleasure; and so the text was altered, as we have it in the present Hebrew Bible and all its versions. 2. Num. 11:15.—“Kill me, I pray thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in thy sight; and let me not see my wretchedness,” lit., my evil. The primitive text was “Thy evil”: “evil” being put by Metonymy (q.v.) for the punishment or evil which God would inflict on the People. Bullinger, E. W. (1898). Figures of speech used in the Bible (p. 1018). Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co.

Four stars for sure, because I like some of his works. My eschatological perspective aligns with scholars like G.K. Beale, D.A. Carson, and N.T. Wright, which contrasts with Roy Gingrich’s classical dispensationalism, premillennialism, and belief in a pretribulational rapture, as evident in works like The Millennium and his commentaries on Revelation and The Book of Isaiah. Despite these theological differences, I enjoyed Gingrich’s Introduction to the Old Testament, New Testament Survey and Introduction to the Pauline Epistles for their clear, accessible, and doctrinally rigorous presentation of historical and biblical data within their framework. These surveys are an excellent resource for laypeople, students, and pastors seeking a concise yet comprehensive overview of Scripture. I recommend them to anyone needing a quick dive into the biblical narrative, regardless of eschatological stance. Roy Gingrich was a classical dispensationalist, emphasizing a literal hermeneutic and a distinction between Israel and the Church. He was a premillennialist, advocating a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ, as detailed in his book The Millennium. Gingrich’s commentary on Revelation and other prophetic books, such as The Book of Isaiah, reinforces this position by interpreting Old Testament prophecies and Revelation 20 as pointing to a future, literal millennial reign. His work did not intersect significantly with their academic circles. His primary endorsements came from conservative pastors and educators (e.g., Adrian Rogers, Roger R. Clapp, George A. Hern), not from the academic theological community. Gingrich’s commentaries were primarily designed for laypeople, pastors, and students within conservative evangelical circles, particularly those aligned with dispensationalism. His work, while widely distributed (over 1,000,000 copies sold). Roy Gingrich believed in a pretribulational rapture, a core doctrine of classical dispensationalism.