Wisdom 8:19-20 confuses me to no end

  • Thread starter Thread starter japhy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

japhy

Guest
I can’t find any Catholic commentary on it, and all the Catholic Encyclopedia says is “It is true that to justify their rejection of the Book of Wisdom from the Canon, many Protestants have claimed that in viii, 19-20, its author admits the error of the pre-existence of the human soul. But this incriminated passage, when viewed in the light of its context, yields a perfectly orthodox sense.” It doesn’t offer up the “perfectly orthodox sense”, though.

RSV: As a child I was by nature well endowed, and a good soul fell to my lot; or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body.

NAB: Now, I was a well-favored child, and I came by a noble nature; or rather, being noble, I attained an unsullied body.

KJV: For I was a witty child, and had a good spirit. Yea rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled.

DR: And I was a witty child and had received a good soul. And whereas I was more good, I came to a body undefiled.
 
I think the NAB translation gives the most orthodox sense–sometimes the word “soul” is used in a more poetic sense, not necessarily the literal soul or spirit.

NAB: Now, I was a well-favored child, and I came by a noble nature; or rather, being noble, I attained an unsullied body

It’s not talking about ensoulment, but the development of a good nature and a pure body.

Here is the commentary from the NAB:

[19-20] Here the sacred writer mentions first bodily, then spiritual, excellence. To make it plain that the latter is the governing factor in the harmonious development of the human person, he then reverses the order.
 
Genesis315 said:
I think the NAB translation gives the most orthodox sense
…
Here is the commentary from the NAB:

[19-20] Here the sacred writer mentions first bodily, then spiritual, excellence. To make it plain that the latter is the governing factor in the harmonious development of the human person, he then reverses the order.
Click to expand...
Wow, I don’t know how I missed that. Score 1 for the NAB.
 
I’m no expert, but I sure don’t see the problem. The passage describes an existing soul uniting with an existing body. That union could happen in the first instant of existence (the moment of conception). What exactly is the issue?

Do we also toss out the Old Testament for not getting the nature of God correct? (rhetorical question, obviously)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top