What I think is interesting is how the depiction of the apple is now associated with revolutions and change. Apple records, Apple IPhones. Snow White’s Apple (which put her to sleep). And even an apple fell on Newton’s head.
Great piece; appreciate this! I'm with Michelangelo that it was a fig. In Luke 19, while the Greek for "tree" that Zacchaeus climbs is rendered a "sycamore," some translations render it a "sycamore fig" - that same scene..."the son of Man has come to seek and to save what was lost." Definitely a harkening back to Genesis...
If eve did eat the apple, why do men have an ‘Adam’s apple?’ And couldn’t it be that since after they ate the apple it would shift their morality. So he probably lied on behalf of himself and said eve ate it.
It's my understanding that Eve was decieved, but Adam knew he was doing wrong and ate of the fruit knowing God said not to. God spoke to Adam with this instruction.
My understanding could be wrong.
But any way you look at it, both man and woman would sin. You haven't met anyone on earth who hasn't sinned.
I truly do not understand the concept of sin, as all sin that is stated sound like basic human urges.
We sometimes forget that us as humans are also animals. But back to what you were saying about not one human that has never sinned, yes. It is true to never meet someone who hasn’t sinned, especially when the “sins” are the most normal things a human can experience/do.
If you need to believe in god / have a religion to have good morality you must truly sit down and think with yourself. Because you cannot tell em the only think keeping you from doing horrible things such as r.pe and m.rder is believing in an imaginary higher power is truly mortifying. But yeah sure whatever keeps your morals intact.
Now Rob, you know what I meant. You know that I was not trying to normalize r.pe or m.rder in anyway. Those are urges we can suppress. But those like laziness, lust (in some aspects), and greed (also in some aspects) are nothing but basic human urges. We can go back and forth but scientifically and logically what I say stands for being true.
Sin is, in simple terms, any perversion of the natural faculties against their divinely-ordained purposes (or, more broadly, any violation of the creative decree).
Interestingly, though, in Germanic languages such as English the word comes from a present participle of “is”, in the sense of “that which ought not be”. (It’s also a direct cognate of the Latin word for “guilty,” in the same context.)
The same concept from a different perspective, as it were.
Actually, if you read the text carefully, Adam blames God: “This woman whom YOU gave me”. This is after earlier waxing eloquent about her being flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. Commentary on human nature.
The Latin wordplay between malum and mālum is genius, honestly. It's wild how a simple linguistic coincidence shaped centuries of religious iconography. I've always found it intresting how much theological interpretation hinges on translation choices and cultural context rather than the original text itself.
For a minute I thought you were going to ask the more fundamental question of why Eve was stitched up by men who made up the whole story. One can but hope.
"Stitched up by men"? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
In the Bible, there are two versions of Eve's creation: In one, she is created from Adam's rib; in the other, she is created at the same time as Adam ("man and woman, He created them").
That there are two versions is the interesting facet.
That -she would not truly die if she ate from the forbidden tree; instead, her eyes would be opened, and she would become like God, knowing good and evil, a direct contradiction to God's warning that they would die.
( essentially she would exceed her programming -that synergy is possible, this is what the parent wants for her child )
( the original Hebrew Bible uses the generic word peri (פְּרִי)
for "fruit" in Genesis, not specifying an apple,
but later
Western tradition, especially through Latin translations and art, popularized the apple
due to Latin wordplay (malum meaning both "evil" and "apple") and visual depictions, leading to its common association with the forbidden fruit. This is a great example of semantics limiting cognition and needs further analysis )
Yes, and obscuring the central problematic issue as to why Eve was blamed for all the evils in the world when clearly it is men who 'sin' the most and get away with it by obscuring the truth.
the fruit of the forbidden tree in the garden in Eden did not introduce evil to the world; free will under command did. Free will was the necessary condition for evil, and God's command against them eating of that one ordinary tree was the activating condition. The tree was just a primary tool, a moral one (for avoidance of the word 'test'), to see or determine or reveal what mankind will do with their freedom when asked to remain aligned with God's divine order, or choose themselves over God. If God didn't place that command, there would have been no determining factor in the first place. God's command is the subject of contemplation here, not the ordinary tree with the fruit that was forbidden.
thinkers like Augustine argued that evil isn't a substance but a privation, a turning away from the good (in this case, God's order) through the misuse of free will. the serpent's temptation (Genesis 3:1-6) exploited that freedom, framing the command not as protective wisdom but as restrictive jealousy, which then prompted Eve and Adam to prioritize self-determination over alignment with the divine. if there were no command in the first place, humanity might have remained in innocent harmony—but without the capacity for genuine virtue either, since true goodness requires the possibility of choosing otherwise.
Some years ago I wrote an academic paper arguing that the Adam and Eve story was originally conceived as a political allegory about military conquest, made possible by the invention of agriculture. Here is a link for any who are interested: https://shorturl.at/AFEQ8
The macron. How we students exaggerated it. Mālum vs malum was a classical. Another that made us laugh was the triple anus: ānus, woman too old for child-bearing, annus, year, and ānus, ring or anus. Sorry for the disgression. As for the fruit, I found interesting how it changed. And how Michelangelo thought it out.
Fantastic. How could you not go for the "malum" wordplay?
It is also true that in Old English "apple" WAS the word for "generic fruit," and hence Bible translations in older English sources used it. It only came to mean one particular fruit, the apple, after the Normans invaded and Old English and Old French words had to find their places in the new hodgepodge that became modern English.
What I think is interesting is how the depiction of the apple is now associated with revolutions and change. Apple records, Apple IPhones. Snow White’s Apple (which put her to sleep). And even an apple fell on Newton’s head.
Given the impact of smart phone technology on our lives, is it surprising that its most recognizable symbol is the bitten apple?
So really enjoy this article! Thank you
Thanks for reading 🙌
Great piece; appreciate this! I'm with Michelangelo that it was a fig. In Luke 19, while the Greek for "tree" that Zacchaeus climbs is rendered a "sycamore," some translations render it a "sycamore fig" - that same scene..."the son of Man has come to seek and to save what was lost." Definitely a harkening back to Genesis...
Love it.
If eve did eat the apple, why do men have an ‘Adam’s apple?’ And couldn’t it be that since after they ate the apple it would shift their morality. So he probably lied on behalf of himself and said eve ate it.
It's my understanding that Eve was decieved, but Adam knew he was doing wrong and ate of the fruit knowing God said not to. God spoke to Adam with this instruction.
My understanding could be wrong.
But any way you look at it, both man and woman would sin. You haven't met anyone on earth who hasn't sinned.
I truly do not understand the concept of sin, as all sin that is stated sound like basic human urges.
We sometimes forget that us as humans are also animals. But back to what you were saying about not one human that has never sinned, yes. It is true to never meet someone who hasn’t sinned, especially when the “sins” are the most normal things a human can experience/do.
Your lack of understanding explains perfectly why there is no morality without God.
If you need to believe in god / have a religion to have good morality you must truly sit down and think with yourself. Because you cannot tell em the only think keeping you from doing horrible things such as r.pe and m.rder is believing in an imaginary higher power is truly mortifying. But yeah sure whatever keeps your morals intact.
You're the one who said that sin - things like r*pe, m.rder - are just normal human urges. You think we're all just animals.
I'm happy that God has provided guidance, otherwise we would have no moral law to prevent you from your urges.
Now Rob, you know what I meant. You know that I was not trying to normalize r.pe or m.rder in anyway. Those are urges we can suppress. But those like laziness, lust (in some aspects), and greed (also in some aspects) are nothing but basic human urges. We can go back and forth but scientifically and logically what I say stands for being true.
Sin is, in simple terms, any perversion of the natural faculties against their divinely-ordained purposes (or, more broadly, any violation of the creative decree).
That is why the word sin literally translates to “missing the mark”
The Hebrew word for it, yes.
Interestingly, though, in Germanic languages such as English the word comes from a present participle of “is”, in the sense of “that which ought not be”. (It’s also a direct cognate of the Latin word for “guilty,” in the same context.)
The same concept from a different perspective, as it were.
But I honestly feel like that part was added to put a blame on women. After all it is in fact a book written by men.
Actually, if you read the text carefully, Adam blames God: “This woman whom YOU gave me”. This is after earlier waxing eloquent about her being flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. Commentary on human nature.
Flesh of his flesh my ass!
The Latin wordplay between malum and mālum is genius, honestly. It's wild how a simple linguistic coincidence shaped centuries of religious iconography. I've always found it intresting how much theological interpretation hinges on translation choices and cultural context rather than the original text itself.
You're building myth upon myth to come up with a statement that you think is profound.
? It seems to me that the writer is simply reporting on the beliefs of other cultures and individuals- regarding the biblical fruit.
For a minute I thought you were going to ask the more fundamental question of why Eve was stitched up by men who made up the whole story. One can but hope.
"Stitched up by men"? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
In the Bible, there are two versions of Eve's creation: In one, she is created from Adam's rib; in the other, she is created at the same time as Adam ("man and woman, He created them").
That there are two versions is the interesting facet.
One account does not rule out the other. One merely describes how the other was done.
Because Eve sought knowledge, is the bottom line!
That -she would not truly die if she ate from the forbidden tree; instead, her eyes would be opened, and she would become like God, knowing good and evil, a direct contradiction to God's warning that they would die.
( essentially she would exceed her programming -that synergy is possible, this is what the parent wants for her child )
( the original Hebrew Bible uses the generic word peri (פְּרִי)
for "fruit" in Genesis, not specifying an apple,
but later
Western tradition, especially through Latin translations and art, popularized the apple
due to Latin wordplay (malum meaning both "evil" and "apple") and visual depictions, leading to its common association with the forbidden fruit. This is a great example of semantics limiting cognition and needs further analysis )
Yes, and obscuring the central problematic issue as to why Eve was blamed for all the evils in the world when clearly it is men who 'sin' the most and get away with it by obscuring the truth.
Wonder what religion would've been like if Eve had eaten nuts instead of the apple?
Great write up, I love it!! 🥑
the fruit of the forbidden tree in the garden in Eden did not introduce evil to the world; free will under command did. Free will was the necessary condition for evil, and God's command against them eating of that one ordinary tree was the activating condition. The tree was just a primary tool, a moral one (for avoidance of the word 'test'), to see or determine or reveal what mankind will do with their freedom when asked to remain aligned with God's divine order, or choose themselves over God. If God didn't place that command, there would have been no determining factor in the first place. God's command is the subject of contemplation here, not the ordinary tree with the fruit that was forbidden.
thinkers like Augustine argued that evil isn't a substance but a privation, a turning away from the good (in this case, God's order) through the misuse of free will. the serpent's temptation (Genesis 3:1-6) exploited that freedom, framing the command not as protective wisdom but as restrictive jealousy, which then prompted Eve and Adam to prioritize self-determination over alignment with the divine. if there were no command in the first place, humanity might have remained in innocent harmony—but without the capacity for genuine virtue either, since true goodness requires the possibility of choosing otherwise.
Some years ago I wrote an academic paper arguing that the Adam and Eve story was originally conceived as a political allegory about military conquest, made possible by the invention of agriculture. Here is a link for any who are interested: https://shorturl.at/AFEQ8
Comments welcome.
The macron. How we students exaggerated it. Mālum vs malum was a classical. Another that made us laugh was the triple anus: ānus, woman too old for child-bearing, annus, year, and ānus, ring or anus. Sorry for the disgression. As for the fruit, I found interesting how it changed. And how Michelangelo thought it out.
Fantastic. How could you not go for the "malum" wordplay?
It is also true that in Old English "apple" WAS the word for "generic fruit," and hence Bible translations in older English sources used it. It only came to mean one particular fruit, the apple, after the Normans invaded and Old English and Old French words had to find their places in the new hodgepodge that became modern English.
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=apple
Humans are designed with honesty, goodness, and pure truth. She simply listened.