To be honest, I didn't like it very much. For example: commenting on Genesis 2:15-20, the writer starts with the vision that the good-and-bad-knowledge tree must be something good, because it's a good thing to know the difference between good and evil. Therefore he says that the prohibition to eat from it is a strange prohibition and he tries to explain the text in a way that it supports his (pre-supposed) vision. In short, I think there's too much pre-supposed vision in this commentary, which doesn't do justice to the text itself. I'm a fan of the NT-series by N.T. Wright, but not of this one.
Goldingay is an exceptional scholar and a whole-hearted follower of Jesus, who thoroughly understands the cultural context in which Genesis was written in (and therefore the message that the original audience would have heard), but also brings the text to us, guiding us in how it applies afresh in our everyday life.
I highly recommend this and everyone of the other commentaries in the series.
AUTHOR ATTEMPS TO USE "FALSE SCIENCE" TO SHOW GOD IS UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE HOW HE CREATED THE UNIVERSE. AN INSULT TO GOD AND BELIEVERS. AUTHOR ATTEMPTS TO DISCREDIT GENESIS AS NOT BEING TRUTHFUL AND FACTUAL. SUGGEST HE READ 2 PETER 2 AND BEWARE.