Freethought & Rationalism Archive

FreedFromOz · 10-26-2008, 09:03 AM

A friend gave me a book called The Science of God (or via: amazon.co.uk) written by Gerald L. Schroeder, which I haven't finished it yet.

I have a couple of translation questions. If I am reading correctly, Schroeder is stating the bible science go together in the sense that the earth is really 4 bn years old. He uses some strange calculations to make 4 bn yrs fit into the 6 day story reconciling evolution with the creation story, but that is not where my main question lies.

He states that humans existed before Adam, but they didn’t have the neshama (spirit?) until god breathed it into Adam and then we became truly human. And then goes into a discussion of creation vs. making such as Adam was first made and then created. He first begins by discussing Gen 2:7 “And the Lord God formed the adam dust from the adamah…”
And since I won’t do well describe what I mean I have added the quote of the following.

Quote:

“The Bible also explicitly states that the bodies of animals were formed from the same material as Adam, the ground:” And the Lord God formed from the adamah all the animals…” (Gen 2:19).

There is, however, a crucial difference in the original Hebrew between these two verses. The Hebrew word for formed, ya-tsar, when used for the forming of mankind, is spelled with two Hebrew letters yud. Although the structure and grammar are the same in verses 7 and 19, when used for the formation of the animals, ya-tsar is spelled with one yud. …

Yud is the abbreviation of God’s explicit name, best translated as the Eternal. As the ancient commentators, Rashi, Maimonides, and Nahmanides explain this verse, by doubling the yud for mankind, the Bible is telling us that although mankind and animals may share a common physical origin, there is an extra spiritual input in humanity. The neshma, the spiritual soul of humankind, is the factor distinguishing man from beast.” (pg 139)

Is this an accurate translation, or is it cherry picking and a convenient way to try to reconcile biblical tradition with actual science? The book is trying to state that even 6000 years ago, the writers of the bible knew what it took modern science millennia to figure out, that “humans” pre-existed the Adam and Eve story. He also states that early writing (Mesopotamia) and the beginning of "humanity" go together, but that is another subject.

spin · 10-26-2008, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreedFromOz

Is this an accurate translation,

Sounds like pure fantasy.

The first yod of the word WYYCR is a grammatical issue. The verb root is YCR. The W is usually translated as "and", while that first yod indicates the "imperfect" aspect of the verb. If you look at the following verse, it starts with WY-, just as v.9 does. If you look at 2:21 you'll find that Adam slept with the verb for "sleep", Y$N, in the same form, ie WYY$N, and obviously there is no possibility that the yod there could be related to god as it is Adam who sleeps.

spin

ApostateAbe · 10-26-2008, 02:20 PM

If someone with a religious agenda translates a word in a way that nobody else does, then chance are, well, you know what I'm saying.

FreedFromOz · 10-26-2008, 04:17 PM

Thanks, I thought something sounded fishy, but since I do not have any experience with ancient Hebrew, I thought it would be in my best interest to ask. I am trying hard to finish the book so I can at least tell my friend I finished it, but it seems like it may be a waste of time. I think it has just enough factual information to make it seem plausible to the untrained, unquestioning person and then mixes the rest with with conjecture making it difficult to discern fact from fiction.

neilgodfrey · 10-26-2008, 05:03 PM

If you haven't already seen them you may be interested in some reviews of The Science of God:

http://brneurosci.org/reviews/scienceofgod.html

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../review-s.html

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...html#Schroeder

Neil

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-26-2008, 02:20 PM	#3
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	If someone with a religious agenda translates a word in a way that nobody else does, then chance are, well, you know what I'm saying.

10-26-2008, 04:17 PM	#4
FreedFromOz Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Midwest Posts: 55	Thanks, I thought something sounded fishy, but since I do not have any experience with ancient Hebrew, I thought it would be in my best interest to ask. I am trying hard to finish the book so I can at least tell my friend I finished it, but it seems like it may be a waste of time. I think it has just enough factual information to make it seem plausible to the untrained, unquestioning person and then mixes the rest with with conjecture making it difficult to discern fact from fiction.

10-26-2008, 05:03 PM	#5
neilgodfrey Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Darwin, Australia Posts: 874	If you haven't already seen them you may be interested in some reviews of The Science of God: http://brneurosci.org/reviews/scienceofgod.html http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../review-s.html http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...html#Schroeder Neil

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.