Ok, the title of my post actually comes from two different books. The first is called “DNA and Tradition: The Genetic Link to the Ancient Hebrews“, by Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman. The rabbi looks into DNA evidence concerning the tribe of Levi, as well as the other lost tribes of Israel.
In the introduction to the book, there are several interesting quotes, and he quotes from a book written by Rabbi Moses Maimonides (1135 – 1204 ) called Guide for the Perplexed, which examines the issues of being a religious scientist.
Of course I find some interesting parallels between this jew, looking of the lost tribes, and mormons, looking for the Lamanites. And it seems my science vs religion, and DNA posts are getting the most comments lately, so I thought I’d tie these topics together.
Here are some interesting quotes from the book.
“Albert Einstein is quoted as having stated that if you cannot explain something to your grandmother, then you probably don’t really understand it….”
“Although writing more than 700 years ago, [Rabbi Moses] Nachmanides’ message is even more clear and relevant today. His writings directed the person of faith to realize that there is much more hidden than revealed, both in the traditional Biblical writings and also in the natural world. Our challenge is to continually study and investigate both realms, with the realization that apparent conflicts are merely artifacts of temporary incomplete understanding in one or both realms. This avoidance of intellectual pride, allows the person of traditional religious faith to work comfortably within the framework of rigorous scientific hypothesis and empiricism. This is also in keeping with the rationalist approach in Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed.”
I plan future topics on Rabbi Kleiman’s DNA analysis of the Cohen gene, and will note that as I quickly skimmed through the book, he does mention “Mormans” claims to the tribe of Manasseh in the Book of Mormon. As I just started the book, I’m not sure if his analysis is positive, negative, or neutral, but I look forward to reading chapter 5, which more fully addresses this topic.
I’ll stop here for now, and ask for opinions regarding “intellectual pride.” Anybody agree/disagree with any of these rabbis?
2 comments ↓
I guess the intellectual pride is deciding that you know and not being humble enough to admit that you really know very little. It might also be an understanding that religious belief cannot be empirically verified, so there is very little in a system of empirically verification that could be detrimental to religious belief.
Yes, DPC, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Both sides can be guilty of intellectual pride.
Leave a Comment