First, how do you know it wasn't an apple?

Second, do you seriously think that this is the first mistake or mistranslation discovered in the Bible?
The story of Jacob mentions camels in Palestine at a time when there were no camels in Palestine yet. The story was put to paper centuries after it purportedly happened, during the Babylonian Exile, and during this time there WERE camels in Palestine.
Hell, Evangelicals retranslated the Bible in the 1980s just so they can argue that the Bible considers the death of a fetus as a crime equal to murder. (Which it doesn't in all other translations.)

Not sure how I engendered all the hostility, but to your first point, you probably wouldn't want me to post here all the evidence against the apple. Virtually all Bible scholars are in agreement on this, though, and it won't take much Googling on your part to discover this. Secondly, did I say it was the "first mistake or mistranslation" discovered in the Bible. Of course, not! Hence the "gasp." And I have no idea what you mean by "my best shot." I was just sharing a little trivia. Sorry to ruin your day.

I'd guess the hostility was engendered by the condescending tone of your OP.

As the source of proof to disprove something in the Bible.
And, what possible difference would it make?
Has to be one of the lamest OPs I’ve ever seen in this forum.

That bar is pretty high. There's been some pretty lame and clueless OP's around here.
It always amazes me how willing folks are to come and display the depth of their ignorance so proudly to people who assuredly will know vastly more than them.

Why would I use a condescending tone on this subject in this forum? I have NO IDEA what you're talking about. Whatever. I have never encountered such mean spiritedness in this forum but rest assured I've learned my lesson. I won't bother to try to be amusing with my silly little trivia, or anything else, again. Carry on.

Speak to a group of people at a 1st grade level as if you are telling them something they've never heard before, when they have graduate level knowledge, can really only be considered condescending.

Sorry you are getting treated this way!

Any detailed reader of the book already knows that the apple isn't mentioned explicitly. It was generally referred to as the "forbidden fruit".

Whether believers or not, are pretty much in agreement that the “forbidden fruit”
was the tree of knowledge.

I was referring to the overwhelmingly populist view--most people think it was an apple. I sincerely regret annoying you.

God: "You can eat the fruit of any tree here except for that one."

Adam: "Why?"

God: "Because then you'll have the knowledge of right and wrong."

Adam: "You mean the ability to understand that it's wrong to eat that fruit?"

God: "Fuck you. Get out."

But you probably don't care either. Whatever serves the punchline.

Having to go through life and deal with so many stupid people like me.

Of course it's a punchline. This isn't typically where you're going to find in-depth theological discussion. It's a protected group for people who don't buy into religious myths. From time to time, we like to poke fun at those myths. It doesn't mean we're all too simple to appreciate literary metaphor.

Startin' to sound like JPR.

Or are you confusing making fun of an *idea* with making fun of *people*?

What other ideas should be forbidden to make fun of?

Whole bunch of them in another group.

What other ideas besides religious beliefs do you think should be protected from ridicule?

Just as much as misrepresenting BLM or feminism to make a punchline would. I would expect the same respect for those of faith, as I would the undocumented.

"Misrepresenting" implies that there's one true, correct interpretation.

Are you sure you want to go there with religious texts? Do you have the one, true interpretation of the Christian bible?

But the specific reference you made was the opposite of almost all interpretation of the specific passages to which you alluded.

But not all.

You don't get to determine the interpretation of a religious text. Your criticism is invalid.

Let me ask you this. Take a look at this link:

https://www.google.com/search?q=adam+and+eve+cartoons&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjU3uCcjNvaAhVpzoMKHWlLBLEQ_AUICigB&biw=1842&bih=941

There are many humorous cartoons about the Adam & eve story. So many of them show apples as the fruit, too. I assume that you are going to get busy tracking down the authors of those cartoons to berate them for insulting believers, too? Oh wait, some of those authors ARE believers, and enjoy poking fun at their own myth. D'oh! What a funny spot you've put yourself in.

I have no intention of doing what you tell me to do. I merely mention your behavior in the context of this forum and your participation in it. You'll note of course that I didn't report you under the rules. Merely brought your behavior to your own attention and it seems to bother you to see it acknowledged.

And yes, self deprecating humor is very common in almost all endeavors. It is often not as appreciated by those who are otherwise critics of the population.

I'd say that one of us is definitely oblivious to where they are posting right now.

Hint: it isn't me.

I am astounded that you think you have the duty to come into a discussion area for NONBELIEVERS and begin berating them for not showing proper respect to your religious myths.

This is exactly the same fucking shit that homophobic bakers do when they refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, or doctors who refuse to treat trans patients. Their beliefs aren't being respected! Are you happy to give legitimacy to their defense? Aren't you going to join them in condemning homosexuals and trans people for making a mockery of their faith?

You've got a lot of nerve.

It is supposed to be the point of the entire site.

Now you need to provide the link that you still haven't managed to: the notion that poking fun at the story of Adam & Eve is "bigoted intolerance" toward religious belief.

Please proceed.

Purposefully I'd add.

For that I don't need a "link" any more than I need a link to explain courtesy.

You don't get to decide what is a "misrepresentation" of a religious myth. You are not the sole arbiter of religious truth.

Now if someone had said, "Look at what idiots ALL Christians are for believing that Adam & Even ate an apple!" you *might* have the barest semblance of an argument. But that isn't what was said here, and you know it, otherwise you would have just alerted the admins and let the rules save the day.

And I will again point out that what you are doing is no different than what the anti-gay bigots do - screaming that their beliefs must not be mocked, that they must be allowed to practice them without being forced to tolerate other viewpoints.

Seriously, I think you just don't understand the DU rules. I also think you don't understand that trotsky expressed a widely-held opinion - that the story of Genesis is that of a god holding humanity to a rule that it wouldn't have the ability to understand, if the story referred to a god that existed and to an 'ignorant' humanity. This is not some blasphemous utterance that attacks believers.

Apple has long been a generic term for fruit, so confusion could arrive from that as well.

I mean, nothing in that book is to be taken literally, it is apparently the worst thing in the world to do so. Therefore, nothing in the bible is wrong, because nothing is meant to mean anything as written.

improve the natural order without there being negative consequences.

In modern history the Europeans represent Adam and Eve and indigenous peoples represent the natural order.

For another industrial production vs the pristine environment.


That is how I interpret Genesis.

It's been my downfall. Never should have touched the thing.

"I don't know nothin' about right and wrong."

God:
"Don't eat that fruit, it will give you knowledge of right and wrong."


Adam:
"Okay, but I don't understand why it would be wrong."

God:
"Just don't!"

Adam (after eating the fruit):
"Oh, now I see, oops!"

God:
"and now I will punish you because...reasons."


Or maybe it was all about fucking, and the fruit in the center of the Garden was Eve's pussy.

The point of it is that it's a magical fruit of "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". So it's not really any known fruit.

But it is "the fruit of a tree". So wheat would be way out; and it's hard to call a vine a 'tree'.

What we need to remember is that artists depict things using what they're familiar with. This is why they've used anachronistic clothes, or people who clearly belong in the country they're painting in, rather than in the Middle East 1500 years before they were painting. So they also paint "fruit" like the fruit they're most familiar with.