> Doesn't the Hebrew say that this breath of *life* made the man a *living
> being*? (People get confused by relating the King James version's "soul"
> with our immaterial nature thinking that God took some animal and
> breathed a "soul" or spirit into him to make him into the image of God.)
> Why would God breath the breath of life into a living being to make him a
> living being? It doesn't make sense.
>
The Hebrew in 2:7 is "man became a *nephesh hayah*" Often "nephesh" is
translated "soul," but that doesn't seem exactly right. It is, in fact,
used in giving the number of dead warriors after a battle. The NIV chose
to render "nephesh" simply as "being," and translate "hayah" correctly as
an adjective meaning "living."
If this is to be understood as describing the point or process whereby
some already-existing hominid is infused with some sort of spiritual
potential, thus to be changed into "God's image" then we should take the
"hayah = living" as "spiritually living." But as I think I indicated, I
feel this is about as far as the text can be stretched; I prefer the more
traditional interpretation where God by special creative act did
something unique in making "man."
Garry DeWeese