Leviticus

Levine’s JPS commentary is an outstanding and highly distinctive contribution, particularly valuable alongside Christian commentaries. His strength lies in precise Hebrew philology and what he calls a “realistic” approach to Levitical ritual: rather than treating the cult primarily as abstract symbolism, he reconstructs it as an actual religious system, drawing extensively on ancient Near Eastern evidence and later Jewish sources. His discussions of technical terminology are frequently illuminating; for example, his analysis of kippēr from the Semitic evidence understands expiation fundamentally in terms of cleansing or wiping away impurity rather than merely “covering” sin. His distinction between Leviticus 1–16 as largely instructions for priests and 17–27 as priestly instruction to Israel also provides a compelling account of the book’s organization. Christian readers will naturally need other works for Christological and canonical interpretation, but as a philological, historical and Jewish commentary Levine is exceptionally useful.

This is a good, responsible commentary with plenty of lexical analysis, including some comparative work. Any study of Leviticus—or the Bible more generally—ought to include plenty of input from Jewish voices. [Full Review]

Baruch Levine is one of the world leading scholars on the book of Leviticus, and this commentary shows it. The work is not written for the layman. It is a technical commentary on the Hebrew text. For those doing in-depth work, it should be consulted. [Full Review]

Baruch Levine's JPS (1989) is worth consulting by those doing serious academic work. I don't think it would be all that helpful for those teaching a more popular audience, though it isn't because it's really hard to read. He just doesn't focus on what popular audiences would care about. Hartley's commentary is probably the best detailed work for that sort of thing, and Milgrom is probably going to be more valued among the more critical works than Levine. Milgrom is a little more sympathetic to the materials he's commenting on as well. Scholars will, of course, also need to look at Levine, and Levine might have a little more of an eye for theology than Milgrom, certainly than Gerstenberger or Budd. Nevertheless, as with Gerstenberger, Budd, and Milgrom's Anchor Bible volumes, I don't expect this to be all that helpful for those preparing Bible studies and sermons. [Full Review]

A specialist in Ugaritic studies looks at Leviticus. [Full Review]