• takeda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    From what I’ve been taught, the apple is merely a symbolism, and it was really about Adam and Eve having sex, and that’s why people are born with original sin and need to be baptized to get it lifted.

    Not that it changes much, but it wasn’t just an apple.

    • De_Narm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      9 months ago

      Imagine giving them both the body parts and the urge for sex and then being pissed they fucked.

    • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ooh, I’ve never heard that interpretation before. Honestly, given my wildly puritanical upbringing I’m kinda surprised I haven’t.

      I was always taught “it’s not about the fruit, it’s about their disobedience”. I feel like that at least makes a little more sense, but it’s still not great.

    • Entropywins@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’ve heard a rabbi describe it as an allegory of the transition from childhood in the garden to adulthood when we are cast out and face all the hardships of adulthood. Something that happens to everyone, even the first everyones.

      • uphillbothways@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        Except for the children of the rich. Those adult children we’ve somehow allowed to reign over us in the real world and torment us in modern actuality.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:”

        If this is an analogy for parenthood it would appear that daddy really hates when their children grow up and is willing to smite them for it. Not exactly father of year material.

        You know if you just read the text it is pretty clear that the story is about some angry bronze age god full of his very human pettiness.

    • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Everyones interpretation is different.

      For example, the fruit of knowledge in the real world would be psilocybin mushrooms and other psychedelics. There is a large number of mushroom based iconography on very old images of Jesus.

      Considering the psychedelic nature of spirituality in Latin America, including use of the San Pedro cactus to perform Chrstian rites, it makes a lot of sense that “god” would be mad at A&E for eating shrooms

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        John Allegro right? I would be more inclined to buy into his theory if

        • Someone could show a path from the Dead Sea Scrolls all the way to the late Middle Ages that escaped all documentation (besides the two initial finds) except stained glass and icons. Not a single person bothered writing it down for over 800 years. That is an impressive conspiracy.

        • The link between the Qumron community and the John the Baptist community isn’t as well established as I think he made it out. Yes there are overlaps but they were part of the same general culture. There isn’t a smoking gun, someone clearly was part of both and carried works across.

        • The mushroom imagery is interesting but there are plenty of non-mushroom imagery as well. Including wands and rabbits and fish and eggs. Allegro is pointing to the one that gets the result but can’t account for the others.

        • I just don’t see why you need a drug trip to come up with the Gospels. Every single part of it was either borrowed from Paul or from Jewish and Greek works that existed at the time. Plagiarism doesn’t need a chemical aid. As for the things that Paul said one dream could have produced it.

        But hey Allegro might be right. All we would need to find is one document from the Vatican that mentions mushrooms in that context or another scroll in a cave or the equivalent of the 1st century BCE Grateful Dead poster ha.

        • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Funny you mention the Vatican… whats in the vaults is probably worth hiding for their coffers to remain full, and people like us will never see any of it

          If there was proof, my guess is things like global conquest, crusades, burning of the library of Alexandria, etc could account for the lack of its publicity.

          In the end, its a fun theory that may or may not be true. But pretty much all of Genesis is provable false, so it doesnt matter anyways.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Really it doesn’t explain anything that isn’t already explained, it doesn’t simplify the data that we have, and it doesn’t point a direction to search for new evidence. Also you know lots of people around the same time were advancing drugs -> enlightenment ideas and all we got out of it is some bad sci-fi.

            The evidence presented 60 years ago is the same evidence they have today. All the work done on understanding history and the human brain hasn’t added to those theories. Not a great sign. Successful theories get more supporting evidence over time not the same level of “wouldn’t it be cool?”.

            • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              All we got out of it was 50 years of prohibition because of how afraid the govt was of free thinking individuals

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                I never said I was against it’s use. I am clear that this sequence of historical events are explained adequately without saying it is part of it. Just because X happened does not mean Y was a factor, and it doesn’t mean I am against Y.