What exactly is the Apple?

>More importantly, they disobeyed God because they thought they knew better. The Original Sin is a sin of pride.
Sounds like a really petty and poorly planning god, if he would put temptations in plain sight and forbid them without any clear reasoning.

I don't like knowledge being the embodiment of sin. That's even worse then literalism.

I kinda like it if you see it as material knowledge as opposed to spiritual knowledge. There is no evil in God's kingdom therefore knowledge of evil is baser knowledge that conditions the soul, causing us to forget spiritual truths and binding us to this existence.

It was literally just a fruit tree. God was just testing us. There is no magical transformation described. There's no mention of reason, or sentience, or anything like that. The knowlege we gained is that it's evil to disobey God.

He told them they could eat literally anything else in the garden. He told them if they ate the fruit form the tree they would die. They had no reason to distrust him. It was a dick move.

but it's knowledge of good and evil, not knowledge of evil. are you saying God doesn't have knowledge of evil? then he isn't omniscient

A magic golden ball that a precursor race used as choke chains for humanity.

Wasn't that the plot of Assassin's Creed? The first one, I mean, before they started to milk the series dry.

Yes it is. Thank you for explaining the joke.

A very stupid metaphor

I only ever played the first one and got about halfway through the second one. It seems like they've gotten really shitty, have they?

They have.

Literal translation is "fruit" actually.

Of course God knows evil, he just isn't tempted by it for the very reason that he is omniscient and omnipotent. The reason it's Good and Evil is because it represents the free will and choice we have as humans. In fact in this context Good and Evil are one and the same as they are both expressions of material entanglement as opposed to connection with God. I can help save lives in the third world but what good does that act do for the my or their soul? The body, like avert thing material, is temporal in nature. The soul is not.

Therefore the Knowlege of Good and Evil is knowledge of the material world as opposed to knowledge of God. It's the temptation inherent in free will

It's painfully obvious when you read it that there is no such thing as origenal sin or even any sort of going on at all. This isn't part of the text.

It's also pretty obvious that the snake never lied. He told them that they would be like Gods and know good and evil. Adam and Eve learned good and evil and all futures humans do.

The key change after eating the fruit was that man became less connected with nature and become civilized. The fruit represents higher knowledge.

>and all future humans do

wew lad

At best, I'd say a sizeable portion of experienced adults have a vague apprehension of good and evil.

>He told them if they ate the fruit form the tree they would die.
That's not reasoning. And a lie to boot.

this doggy should burn for eternity

They became spiritually dead and God took the fruit of life away from them meaning that they were under material death sentence.

>They became spiritually dead
Nice meaningless babble.

> God took the fruit of life away from them meaning that they were under material death sentence.
Do you think there's a difference between
>if you eat this fruit, you will die of its effects
and
>if you eat this fruit, you will die I will come in and shoot you in the head

I agree with everything you said except the nature of the knowledge.

It can be seen as material knowledge, as you implied with 'less connected to nature' (although technically nature is material too) and also demonstrated by the apple, which fills our material need for food. However it is only 'higher' knowledge by a material standard, not a spiritual one.

This should clear up any confusion as to why apparently 'higher' knowledge is presented in a sinful light

It was a grapefruit.

>meaningless babble
As opposed to meaningful babble? It's dogma bro.

To be in a state of mortal sin is to be spiritually dead.

And God didn't say they would die from the immediate physical effects, just that they'd die that day, which they did.

>And God didn't say they would die from the immediate physical effects, just that they'd die that day, which they did.
Except they didn't. They were cast out. Purely on the whim of god. Don't redefine the word "die" in your vain attempts at rationalizing a bankrupt religion.

He lied about the effects of the fruit, the snake was literally right and pointed out that god was a liar.

>And God didn't say they would die from the immediate physical effects, just that they'd die that day, which they did.

As opposed to what? The idea of the human being living longer than a hundred years+change is not scientifically possible.

Genesis wants to imply that humans were immortal and that all animals were vegetarians until a fruit was eaten. This is high fantasy. It's also a completly unsustainable enviroment with any sort of reproduction dooming them.

It's mystical and supernatural.

>muh science

Fuck off.

They also had no reason to distrust the snake.

And unless god lied to them they were immortal and as such had infinite time to be tempted by the snake.
Unsupervised as well since god just apparently wasn't omniscient at the time because reasons.

>It's mystical and supernatural.
Suck a unicorn's fart, nigger.

*tips fedora*

Prelapsarian reproduction is mentioned in the whole "go forth and multiply" thing.

>*tips empty head*

Sorry, there really isn't an effective counter to the fedora meme.

I'm sorry I couldn't outmeme you, sir. You have won this argument with the magic meme power.

>>muh science
>Fuck off.
Fuck off back to the cave you crawled out of and away from the computer, magic man.

I've always believed that the Knowledge of Good and Evil wasn't necessarily the giving of knowledge about what is good and what is evil, but rather it represents man choosing for himself what he thinks is good and what he thinks is evil.

Essentially it's moral relativism. It's when man chose to do evil and call it good and vice versa.

If you believe that Adam and Eve lived in naive simplicity prior to eating the fruit, it could even symbolize the giving of true free will whereby they could choose God of their own accord, but at the same time allowed the possibility of evil choices to enter the world.

>knowledge of
>means you get to choose
Sure. And slavery means freedom.

1. I never said you "get to choose". What is wrong is still wrong and what is right is still right. I said merely that it represents man choosing to call good what is evil and the other way around. Like people saying that abortion isn't murder or homosexuality isn't a sin. They can say that, but it doesn't change the nature of either of them.

2. Just because it says "Knowledge of" doesn't mean it has to represent a literal giving of knowledge. If you believe in a literal Adam and Eve, then maybe you need also a more literal definition of the events of the garden of Eden. I don't. I'm not even saying that what I think is right. I'm just offering an opinion.

What Scriptural evidence do you have for that?

I don't have anything specific. I am pretty sure I read it in either a church father or contemporary theologian. It would have been an Orthodox theologian because I read mostly Orthodox theologians.

I believe free will or an ability to choose must have been present in the beginning, but that they perhaps weren't aware of the fact that they could choose between good and evil (maybe like angels in the beginning?) until that point.

To be honest, it's just the most satisfying explanation of it that I've heard outside of Augustine's traditional understanding.

> Tree of the knowledge of good and evil

Is this a metaphor for consciousness

The red pill

Yes you did, you evasive cunt. That's what moral relativism is. You don't have to use the same exact wording to convey the same idea.

Please tell me how knowledge implies opinion. Without redefining the word to suit your preconceived notions first, because I can do that too.

>hurr durr, when jesus says "slaves obey your masters", he actually means all humanity and is referring to our senses, telling us to embrace hedonism

The word for knowledge represents both cognitive and experiential knowledge. With knowledge of the ability to do evil comes rationalization.

But whatever. It's just an opinion. I don't know why you're getting so mad about it. Disagree with me, but there's no reason to call me a "cunt."

>knowledge of the ability to do evil
Do you think eating that fruit was evil?

Serious teological question for Christians : could God beat SSJ 3 Goku without backup from angles? like 1v1 nigga gg no jeshua

It was disobeying a command of God, so yes, in that moment it was evil (obviously it's not an eternally immoral act because there are no fruits we cannot eat and we already have this "knowledge").

I think with the decision they realised their ability to do evil and with knowledge they understood the whole spectrum of good and evil. And with that knowledge of evil choices, they came to know other ways of behaving. And because of the sensation of doing wrong ("feeling good" in many cases even if that's only fleeting and not worth it in the long-term), perhaps rationalize what is evil as good based on experience.

Or not. It's an opinion I haven't really thought a lot about. It's not really pressing to me.

most likely a pomegranate
apples didn't even grow there at the time

it isn't

Its certainty, which according to the socratic definition of knowledge certainty is a definite aspect of it.

I think man was supposed to be filled with doubt, but god is there to make things perfect, so we just need to have faith in him that everything is going to be okay.
even if we might think otherwise.

How do you know where the Garden of Eden is?

>It was disobeying a command of God
>evil
kek

That aside, you just conceded that the tree is irrelevant, which makes me wonder what the hell it was even doing there, or why it was so important, given that "corrupting influences" like the snake dude were allowed to run around and educate A&E on good and evil anyway.

I said "with knowledge they understood". I was more saying that they realised they could make a choice with the snake (an evil one) but the fruit gave them the whole spectrum of good and evil.

But, yeah, what you're saying is close to what Augustine thought. So it could be that too.

Explain how Adam could name all the animals if he wasn't conscious, heretic.

It's self-consciousness. They were animals, they ate from the tree of good an evil, the achieved self consciousness, covered their sex in shame.

It's a lie.

The fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was not an apple. It was unique, and is heavily guarded right now.

The real fruit actually gave our ancestors the knowledge of good and evil, and they went from as created, in a loving dependent relationship with the living God, to separated from God (dead), trying to live life by the knowledge of good and evil.

It's the Fall of Man, where mankind went from spiritually alive to spiritually dead, by one sin. And by that sin, all mankind was condemned.

And there did not need to be any redemption. God owes us nothing.

Unbelief.

The apple represented knowledge/intellect.

Basically:

>God creates the universe
>God creates angels (little gods, ambassadors)
>An angel called Lucifer rebels against God
>Lucifer is cast out and becomes known as Satan

>Satan sees mankind, in its innocency
>wants to "liberate" us from the "tyrant God"
>mankind is "enlightened" and knows the difference between good and evil
>Sin and death enter the world

Pagan mythology talks about a being/deity/god giving mankind *knowledge*. The Book of Enoch describes fallen angels and Satan coming to Earth to teach us how to make swords and turn women into attractive sluts. Ancient aliens and all that.

Babylonian legend is from the perspective of Satan, aka Enki aka Prometheus.

The Hebrew perspective is from the Most High, the Creator, the Logos. The I AM.

God wants us to be holy and righteous.
Satan wants to deceive us and go to hell.

>tfw interpreting the fucking Genesis literally

Basically it's the story of how humans were hanging out as monkeys in the garden of Eden, like what you think when you see a dog living the dog life and feel envy, and then they became humans and everything went to shit for them.

>monkeys

Post discarded.

I take Genesis literally.
God does not lie.

I'll believe it until it's been proven wrong.
So instead of attacking me with shitty reaction images and epic maymays, prove Genesis wrong and I'll convert to your Darwinian monkey religion.

I'm not saying that the Genesis is wrong. I'm saying that taking it literally is wrong, for it is a (fictional) story about something real.

The devil and the tree are viable alternatives in order for you to exercise your free will. You can choose not to worship God, and not to love God, because He made that possible for you.

The devil is a liar, and a thief, and a murderer, from the beginning.

He lied to Adam and Eve.
He stole the entire world from Adam.
He killed humanity.

There's no other way to understand it.

>fictional

Incorrect, baseless bias and opinion. Adam and Eve are your ancestors. If they're fictional, you're fictional.

The Jews don't consider it "original sin". Just increased responsibility. So that's one interpretation.

Also they don't think the snake was anything more than a talking snake. I believe the first reference to the snake being Satan was in Revelations.

You have to get bored of this shit eventually. There's no way going through the same shitposting routine everyday could keep a functional adult entertained.

Why would I get bored of correcting people?

it serves as a metaphor of what makes humans different from animals.

Basically, when we know right from wrong, in a moral sense, we should be acting accordingly. Unlike animals, who can't reason, and therefore can't do anything wrong.

But again, the bible is sort of stupid in that regard, as Eve couldn't possibly reason before taking the fruit, and therefore the act shouldn't be considered wrong.

Guess the old testament god was a bit of a twat.

In the Hebrew the word denotes an enchanter, a sorcerer.

God told them not to eat the fruit or else they would die. The serpent said that GOD didn't know what he was talking about and eating the fruit won't lead to death. Eve choose to trust the serpent over God and Adam choose to trust Eve over God; they have no excuse.

>thinking the Bible, especially Genesis, is anything other than allegory and metaphor

W E W
E W E
W E W

L A D
A D A
D A L

word, that idiot actually thinks women aren't made of a rib!

Orthodox view:

We ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. We ate the fruit too soon, we were immature, we needed to walk the Garden of Eden for eons before we grew up spiritually in the presence of God to be able to take the fruit. We were expelled from the Garden not because God was mad but because He was afraid we would eat from the fruit of life and live torturous existence in eternal separation from the God. Like a children pushed away from the burning stove on which they just burned themselves.

Basically, on Earth, our godlike intellect part developed too soon without the spiritual part guiding us how to behave, resulting in us destroying each other and the world around us. Jesus came to show us the way to fix this

Something they shouldn't have done.

>omnipotent creator
>b-but it's not scientifically possible!!

Shrooms

Yeah I'm sure a bunch of camelfuckers who anthropomorphisized where rain came from didn't write down their oral stories of creation and didn't literally believe them.

Wew lad. I'll tip my imaginary fedora for you, because that's exactly what you're planning to retort.

The significance of the fall for me lies in that fact that, until they actually ate from the tree in their initial state of innocence, true knowledge of good and evil was incomprehensible.

The only choice capable of reaching such understanding would necessarily be an act that disobeyed God, that was in its very nature evil.

Being born into sin is the necessary violence which opens up the space for us to be received by Christ the redeemer. God sacrifices his son not to offer salvation, but so that in the existential crisis of his death ('Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani'), no trace of Him remains beyond his mortal life, excepting that pure goodwill of Christian spirit which faith inspires, even when we are left with no choice but a forced choice of evil.

Nothing in the history of human knowledge has been shown to break the laws of nature and science. A miracle is by definition something that isn't possible. You might as well postulate about how a genie works.

underrated

Was the snake the embodiment of satan or was it just a random snake that could talk?

So how is disobeying God "evil"

It sounds like that disobeying God causes him to harm people. God created disease as punishment for disobdience. In other words the people suffering from sickness right now are doing so because thousands of years ago Eve ate an apple, some of these people suffering might not even know shit about Christianity or God. Humans had to invent medicine in order to defeat the destruction God brought.

This just makes God sound like an antagonist. Obey him unconditionally or he will create suffering and distribute it randomly. He sounds like some sort of alien super villain or demon king.

> what is the apple?

You answered your own question there

The idea that it was Satan did not emerge until after The Apocalypse of John was written.

Although what's odd is that God punishes all future generations of snakes. He makes them lose their arms so they are forced to crawl on their bellies and their diet has to consist of dust.

Revelations wasn't interpreted until fairly recently as mentioning that Satan was the serpent in Genesis. several medieval painting depict the serpent in the garden as having a female upper body

He is an antagonist.
God is evil, but he's all powerful so you should listen to him.
God doesn't need to be good, and only retards spew that he is.

Taking the fruit was not an act of "evil"

Humans at the time had no knowledge of good so they could know God wanted them to be good. They also had no knowledge of evil so they could not know taking the apple would be evil.

The snake is just an animal, which knows neither good nor evil.

It is the fruit of good AND evil because you cannot have good without evil. God himself is neither good nor evil, because he is completly developed. Humans started out neither good nor evil for the opposite reason, they were undeveloped like the snake. Once they gained knowledge they gained the ability to be both good and evil. Humans are now tasked with becoming "like God" and going beyond good and evil.

Only if god wanted to

If God is never tempted, how can he be virtuous?

How can you be courageous if you never feel fear? or compassionate if you're never tempted by hate?

why the fuck was it so close
you dont leave the stove on, give the kid a ladder and then blame him for it