I really appreciate the first chapter’s discussion of Fluidity of Divine Embodiment and Selfhood in Mesopotamia and Canaan. The discussion on the salmu and mis pi ceremonies was interesting. In the introduction I liked that Dr. Sommer pointed out that when in Exodus 33:20 G-d tells Moses, “‘A human cannot see Me and live.’…this text does not claim that G-d has no body for us to see; the point is rather that seeing G-d’s body will lead immediately to death.” I appreciated him mentioning that in Genesis 18 Abraham couldn’t at first distinguish G-d from the human looking visitors.
I appreciated the disscusion on scholarly denial, where he said that starting with Saadia Gaon and then Maimonides “the denial of G-d’s corporality was a crucial aspect of monotheism; a G-d with a body was a G-d who could be divided, and for these philosophers the belief in a divisible G-d constituted what one might call internal polytheism. The internal polytheism implied by the belief in a physical G-d was even more objectionable to these thinkers than a belief in many gods.”
I liked where he said Deuteronomy 4:15 “…does not deny that G-d has a form, however;…Deuteronomy insists only that G-d’s body never comes to earth because it always remains in heaven. Similarly, the Ten Commandments prohibit Israelites from making a physical representation of G-d, but never deny that G-d has a body that might in theory be represented” ( p. 9).
I appreciated the discussion on the shem and the mal’akh on page 59. “ …shem functions outside the deuteronomic and priestly texts both as a synonym for G-d and as a hypostasis or emanation of G-d that is not quite a separate deity.” The discussion on the kabod was also interesting. “G-d’s kabod in several nonpriestly Biblical texts means G-d’s body and, more specifically in many passages, G-d’s intensely bright body, which is normally surrounded by a cloud.”

I understand the Golden Calf incident differently after reading this book.

Chapter 6 “The Perception of Divinity in Biblical Tradition: Implications and Afterlife” was especially interesting. I appreciated Dr. Sommer saying, “…portrayals of YHWH as possessing multiple bodies and overlapping selves do occur in ancient Israel’s scriptures. Editors who were primarily loyal to priestly and deuteronomic outlooks in effect covered these portrayals with a veil, but they neither destroyed them nor altered them beyond recognition. These less common portrayals constitute what we might call a minority position within the Hebrew Bible…The final from of the Hebrew Bible tempers that tradition and calls it into question, but it allows it to remain within the sacred precincts” (p. 125).
He also says that, “…every passage in sacred scripture is there to teach us something. We may have the right to react to what is in scripture; we may have the right to disagree with it; but we have no right to ignore it. A Jewish understanding of G-d that does not reflect the fluidity tradition us a defective one” (p. 125).
I liked the discussion on Multiple Conceptions of the Shekhinah in Rabbinic Literature in this chapter and “Fluidity in Kabbalah”. I enjoyed the discussion on “Fluidity in Christianity”. He said, “For all the trouble that Jewish and Muslim philosophers have had with this notion, the trinity emerges as a fairly typical example of the fragmentation of a single deity into seemingly distinct manifestations that do not quite undermine that deity’s coherence” (p.132). Reading this book, made the concept of trinitarianism actually make sense. “Classic language of trinitarian theology, such as…one nature, three persons or one substance, three manifestations, applies perfectly well to examples of YHWH’s fluidity in the Hebrew Bible and to the fluidity traditions ini Canaan and Mesopotamia” (p.133).
The discussion on “Christianity in Light of Judaism’s Embodied G-d” on pages 135-137 was extremely interesting as Dr. Sommer went into reasons aside from Trinitarianism why Jews do not believe in Jesus, which for me prompts further study.

I enjoyed reading the appendix. Different forms of monotheism interest me. So, I liked reading about monolatry and henotheism.

This book is an excellent resource for those who desire to understand how God related with the people of Israel in the ancient world. It is relevant for all who come out of a Judaic or Judaic-Christian background. It is especially helpful in grasping the meaning of how God expressed God's self in a culture that was situated in the midst of many other cultures with many different gods. We are told that Israel's relationship with God was monotheistic - this book shows that the circumstances of God's relationship with Israel was far more complex -- even "fluid" in how God interacted with the people. The book explores the differing strands of biblical scholarship and how these differing interpretations have come down to us today in the Hebrew Scriptures. Excellent scholarship.

A very scholarly book, dealling with biblical,pre-biblical references to the concept of God having a body, and where was it.
The author is a very religious Jew,and presents a detailed review of a astouding collection of material.
He does an excellent job of teasing out the threads of the various writers of the bible.
This is an excellent choice for students, although it might upset fundamentalists of several religions.

This is a good academic read. I heard Mr. Sommer on a podcast discuss the subject matter and he intrigued me. Religion has always fascinated me and I do like an analytical view of it without all the emotion most invest in religions. I am confident his conclusions are spot on. I have no doubt that ancient Israelites saw G-d in a more fluid and more directional manner than most people see Him today. A more vivid example of that is how religion and spirituality is practiced in India. Their manners probably resemble more of ancient Israelites than modern day Judaism. This book does dive into the historical background of why Israelites may have resembled those of their neighbors, the Canaanites and Mesopotamians. Mr. Sommer does a great job of building the case. However we can’t kid ourselves and we have to assume that this is purely speculative because we just really don’t know what was happening in ancient Israel and Canaan on a regular basis. The book tries to say there was commonality between all the ones practicing the religion but I find that hard to believe. I am not convinced that they were so organized enabling them to follow a certain pattern. I’m sure that the practices were different from village to village or community to community. I also wish he would’ve explained the mindset of the people then. That too would have been speculative but some background to set the scene would have made the point clearer. This book is for the academic empirical thinker rather than the devout religious person unless they can separate themselves.

The extraordinary thing about this very interesting book is that, while clearly an example of advanced scholarship, it is so readable by the layman interested in religious ideas that its audience is much broader than is usually the case with this sort of thing. I heartily recommend it to anyone interested in what the Bible meant to the people who wrote it.

Really terrific book, learned, clear and definitive.