368
submitted 2 months ago by Don_Dickle@lemmy.world to c/til@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 145 points 2 months ago

It's also not the Tree of Knowledge, it's the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. And that presents a problem:

If Adam and Eve did not yet understand what is and is not a good thing to do, they could not possibly have understood that it was not good to disobey God. Eve did not know the serpent was evil. And yet he punishes Adam and Eve for doing what they did not realize was wrong of them to do.

[-] zaph@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 months ago

And yet he punishes Adam and Eve for doing what they did not realize was wrong of them to do.

You say this like punishing people who don't understand the rules isn't a fundamental part of christianity.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

Adam and Eve was pre-Christianity though.

[-] bizarroland@fedia.io 10 points 2 months ago

Side note, and God created the tree of the knowledge of Good and evil. God created everything. Therefore, God created evil.

Further, God does evil.

After the flood, there is a line that says "and God repented of the evil he had done"

And to me, that just basically means that evil is circumstantial. Not that there is a pure drop of evil in the universe, but rather that a thing that is meant to be a good thing can be an evil thing based on its interpretation.

To whit: it wasn't evil that Adam and Eve were naked. God made them that way. And yet because they became aware of it and changed a innocent thing into an evil thing, that is what the evil was.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 2 months ago

Which makes a lot more sense when you know these stories are adaptations of earlier myths. The polytheistic religions they came out of had no problem thinking the gods do evil things sometimes because they feel like it. As things transitioned to monotheism, and "God is good and merciful" was taken as a given, you end up having to jump through hoops to explain why this passage explicitly says God did evil. Even if the explanation is on some level convincing, it's going to be more convoluted than "these stories evolved from earlier polytheistic religions".

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 months ago

Consider that it is the knowledge itself that cast us down.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

It doesn't matter. They were being punished for something they didn't know not to do.

[-] Crazyslinkz@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Ignorance of the law is no excuse or whatever 🙄

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ruko24@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago

You should check out the book Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. He points out the importance of the name of the tree and has really interesting anthropological theories regarding the origin of the Adam and Eve story.

[-] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

Also God kinda lied to them or at least deceived them by saying they'll die if they eat the fruit from memory.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 4 points 2 months ago

He mostly punishes Eve. The first few pages are sexist as fuck

[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 4 points 2 months ago

The Gnostic interpretation always made more sense to me. The serpent being a form of Christ.

[-] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 50 points 2 months ago

I think apple used to be a generic term for fruits.

It is especially apparent for exotic fruits, for example here is a list of fruits from the Caribbean, none of then are related to the European apple:

  • golden apple
  • wax apple/rose apple
  • pineapple
  • sugar apple
  • custard apple
[-] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 months ago

It can, but I'm not sure if that explains why it's often represented as an apple in the west.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say:

In Western Europe, the fruit was often depicted as an apple. This was possibly because of a misunderstanding of – or a pun on – two unrelated words mālum, a native Latin noun which means 'evil' (from the adjective malus), and mâlum, another Latin noun, borrowed from Greek μῆλον, which means 'apple'. In the VulgateGenesis 2:17 describes the tree as "de ligno autem scientiae boni et mali": "but of the tree [literally 'wood'] of knowledge of good and evil" (mali here is the genitive of malum). There is nothing in the Bible indicating that the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge was an apple.[10]

[-] Tja@programming.dev 15 points 2 months ago

Potato (Pomme de Terre, Erdapfel)

[-] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

In a slavic language (either Croatian or Czech, I forgot), it's krompir, literally ground/soil pear.

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 months ago

My German professor even mentioned the archaic apfelsine for the citrus orange.

[-] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Apfelsine is not archaic. Very widely used today, at least here in the south.

Also, it literally means "Chinese apple" lol

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Artyom@lemm.ee 45 points 2 months ago

My money's on it being a pomegranate originally. Apples wouldn't have existed in the fertile crescent over 2000 years ago. Pomegranates are also messy and look bloody when eating them, fitting the "carnal knowledge" side of the story. I've heard other people suggest they could have been dates, but pomegranates seem like a way better fit for the story.

[-] CasualPenguin@reddthat.com 7 points 2 months ago

I don't know why but I want to say persimmon. They're worth getting tossed out of paradise for atnleast

[-] pikmeir@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Adam and Eve never once complained about how freaking annoying it is to eat a pomegranate because 90% of it is dried bark and every tiny seed has its own inedible seed so I doubt that's what it was.

[-] norimee@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I read somewhere it should have been a fig.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 33 points 2 months ago

Except that basically all fruits were apples for a really long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple

Etymology
The word apple, whose Old English ancestor is æppel, is descended from the Proto-Germanic noun *aplaz, descended in turn from Proto-Indo-European *h₂ébōl.[3]
As late as the 17th century, the word also functioned as a generic term for all fruit, including nuts. This can be compared to the 14th-century Middle English expression appel of paradis, meaning a banana.[4]

So yes... We have no idea what the fruit actually was. Because all fruit were basically called "apple".

[-] ra1d3n@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago

Good thing there never was any apple because it's all fantasy improv. Just decide on a fruit and you are as right as everybody else.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You can still approach the story on its own terms. If we said Captain Sisko drank tea rather than Raktajino, it'd still be wrong, even though Sisko and Raktajino don't actually exist.

[-] ra1d3n@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

There is a original writer on startrek. They could recon Sisco to a tea lover tomorrow. The Bible is more like meme history, there is no regulating mechanism other than popularity. If you made the apple a banana tomorrow and most people agreed, it would be a banana and you would be right.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 2 months ago

That's more of a cultural thing, and one that I have broader things to say in terms of how copyright law has altered our culture.

Fantasy stories come from pre-copyright sources. Greek gods, elves, mermaids, etc. were all folk tales that developed without anyone caring about ownership. If the term "canon" meant anything at all, it was because the community accepted a certain set of stories by consensus. Biblical canon was done that way. Even this tends to be a written culture thing; oral cultures have a much more fluid understanding, and care less about consistency.

When copyright comes along, you start having big corporations controlling canon. We tend to only accept Star Trek things from Paramount as canon, and even that has limits; Star Trek comics and novels aren't usually canon, even though Paramount licenses them.

Lord of the Rings will be copyright-free in about 20 years. It itself borrowed a lot from those pre-copyright folk tales. I'd be interested to see if the community starts to come to a new consensus on stories from new authors becoming LotR canon.

[-] ra1d3n@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

I'm not arguing for or against, just saying that there is no path on deciding what the author meant because we don't even know who wrote it and they are long dead anyway. And there is nothing to study in nature because it was all fiction.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 8 points 2 months ago

What the author "meant" is vastly overrated. The author is dead is sometimes more literal than other times.

We can pull information out of the text on its own. We can get cultural context to see how they would approach it. In OP's case of the apple, we know that the term "apple" was a generic term for fruit for much of English history (and still is in some other European languages). We also know that what we call apple trees now don't grow in that region, and therefore, it's almost certainly not that kind of apple.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Good thing there never was any apple because it’s all fantasy improv.

The validity of the story was never in question for me... I'm atheist. Doesn't mean we can't discuss the story for what it is. It's clear the writers of the story called it an apple because that's what all fruit would have been called. That's it. Don't need to shit on someone else's belief in the process.

Just like the majority of colors were more or less unnamed in a LOT of cultures until relatively recently.

Edit: Typo

[-] ra1d3n@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

Of course, and I did not shit on any beliefs. I only commented on the phrasing that you chose, namely "what the fruit was". Even if you were talking about a short story fan fiction this would be the same situation.

The story had dozens of authors and rewrites. There is no correct answer. Possibly some authors and editors would give you different answers. My take is that there is no correct answer to be found and we can't rely on checking facts of the event.

[-] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 27 points 2 months ago

I like the "magic mushroom" theory.

I won't say I believe it. But I like it.

[-] Infynis@midwest.social 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Apple is probably the most common interpretation because a lot of languages use it as kind of a vague fruit term, and the Bible has been retranslated and reinterpreted roughly one million times. The French call potatoes apples

[-] Deebster@programming.dev 15 points 2 months ago

Including English: æppel meant any kind of fruit, which is why you have names like pineapple and elephant apple.

[-] MacStache@programming.dev 21 points 2 months ago

It was probably butt. Buttfruit. Eating ass was the forbidden fruit.

[-] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 months ago

So the fruit was a dingleberry?

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 16 points 2 months ago
[-] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 months ago

The good thing about fiction is if there is a gap, you can fill it with your own headcanon

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

its like a banana except you have suck out the fruit from one end

[-] Vaginal_blood_fart@feddit.uk 11 points 2 months ago

Well I'd guess fig since the covered their naughty bits with fig leaves after

[-] Boozilla@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

It's been depicted as various things in old art and literature. Apple is very common. But you also find figs, grapes, pomegranates, and occasionally pears. Probably some others I missed.

[-] Chewget@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago

Isn't it a birds and the bees story translated through a religious conservative lense... The forbidden fruit is sex.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 6 points 2 months ago

It's knowledge of good and evil and it says that quite literally in Genesis, but fundies say all kinds of dumb stuff.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] minibyte@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

It’s common knowledge Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. I’m not sure why because it doesn’t say that anywhere in the Bible.

Well, I do. It was the easiest way to suppress women’s power in the church and in general.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 2 months ago

I think there was a non-canonical gospel that said so. And yes, the early church seemed to be relatively liberal with women's rights. A lot of that got clawed back with later additions and choices of what books to include in the biblical canon.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

They were Palestinian, right? It was probably a Clementine.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

nice try, Tim Cook.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
368 points (100.0% liked)

Today I Learned

17686 readers
1101 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS