Genesis

Sarna’s commentary is remarkably rich for its size. Its concise notes combine sensitive attention to Hebrew wording, ancient Near Eastern evidence, Jewish interpretation and the literary artistry of Genesis. Sarna is especially good at showing how biblical institutions and narratives transform their wider cultural environment rather than merely reproducing it; his treatment of circumcision, for example, explains how a widespread rite is given a distinctively covenantal meaning. He rarely wastes words, and even brief comments often clarify a narrative detail, repeated expression or theological theme more effectively than much longer discussions elsewhere. As a Jewish commentary it does not offer Christian canonical interpretation, and its compactness sometimes leaves difficult positions underargued, but these are role limitations rather than defects. Sarna is one of the most consistently insightful companions to the Hebrew text and an indispensable complement to evangelical commentaries.

This is the gold standard, in my judgment. I am a Christian, but this Jewish work is fantastic.

Studied from this commentary in Hebrew school. Nothing but respect for Nahum Sarna. He has gathered the writings from the Jewish sages and produced a fine book.

Nahum Sarna's JPS Torah commentary is a very good representation of Jewish scholarship on Genesis. Those doing scholarly work ought to consult it. There are a number of commentaries I haven't listed, however, that that's true of. The main reason I'm listing it is because I think it's one of the most readable scholarly commentaries, even with the pages moving backwards and the Hebrew text being printed (with translation). I don't think most people teaching through the book will need it, but those who like to have a lot of input from diverse sources might want to go to this commentary if they want a purely scholarly work from a very different perspective from the ones above. Sarna pays closer attention to the history of interpretation, particularly Jewish interpretation, than most commentators. He isn't as sparse on theology as some older critical commentators, but I wouldn't say it's a strength of this commentary either. [Full Review]

A recent Jewish exegesis of the Hebrew text with appreciation for traditional Rabbinic exegesis. [Full Review]