2007-09-11 12:20:52 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
The fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was not an apple.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was only one tree.
2007-09-11 12:31:23 · answer #1 · answered by Q 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just that the KJV bible, translated from Hebrew and Greek, the languages used to write things in the days 2000 yrs ago or so... calls the trees in the midst of Eden the Tree of Life and also a second tree called the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. That second one is the one Eve & Adam ate from, and she and Adam got kicked out of Eden before they also ate from the Tree of Life, which may have made them more spirit-like, no one knows.
& That's all I know about it! Can't claim to know a single bit more. Or even all that for sure...
What is an archetypal world-tree, I wonder.
2007-09-11 12:36:56 · answer #2 · answered by LK 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First, I have heard it said that "apple" is a poor translation of the original word which is more accurately translated as "pomagranate."
Second, it is not the tree that matters but the results of the act. In traditional Christianity, it is sin and "they" are banished from paradise. In gnosticism, it is enlightment and "they" realize their imprisonment and leave due to increased knowledge.
Third, if it were an archetypal world-tree, would this suggest that traditional Christianity would seek that "ignorance is bliss" since knowledge is evil?
2007-09-11 13:06:14 · answer #3 · answered by Think 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Such an association is an attempt to take the particularity of the biblical story and reduce it to a generality. Appeals are often made in this regard in the modern considerations of religious practice and narratives. This is construed as evidence supporting such claims as there is no absolute truth communicated in religion or that all religions are essentially alike. These claims may be true, but the consideration of similarities in religious practices and narratives without a serious understanding of difference does not help to support such arguments.
2007-09-11 13:56:12 · answer #4 · answered by Timaeus 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, the fruit Eve supposedly ate was more likely a fig, not an apple. There is no mention of an apple, but she and Adam were wearing clothing made of fig leaves when found by god.
2007-09-11 20:54:53 · answer #5 · answered by aisha 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what evidence is there that any woman eating a fruit is something to concern ourselves about?
i dont feel it, my spirit and brain dont feel it, so for me its not important
all the hype that is put upon Eve and the eating of that apple, is amazing to me, how can something one woman did , many years ago according to legend, have such an impact? upon us? are we somehow less then those creations? i think no, we all carry the universal spirit,
sorry, i guess i didnt address your question, does it really make sense that one womans action with one apple has such importance? i eat apples, i also was bitten by a rattlesnake, yet i am just one human woman born!
2007-09-11 13:46:06 · answer #6 · answered by dlin333 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None--Australopithecus none withstanding, my friend. But the good news is, the Double-blind studies on the subject will bring a whole new meaning to life as we know it.
2007-09-11 12:32:16 · answer #7 · answered by Ke Xu Long 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What evidence says it was an apple she ate?
2007-09-11 12:35:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Holy Bible
2007-09-11 12:30:44 · answer #9 · answered by radar 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋