Refrigerator logic, or a shower thought:

According to Genesis, God forbids Adam and Eve from eating fruit of the tree of wisdom, specifically of knowledge of good and evil.

Serpent talks to Eve, calling out God’s lie: God said they will die from eating the fruit (as in die quickly, as if the fruit were poisonous). They won’t die from the fruit, Serpent tells them. Instead, their eyes will open and they will understand good and evil.

And Adam and Eve eat of the fruit of the tree of wisdom, learning good and evil (right and wrong, or social mores). And then God evicts them from paradise for disobedience.

But if the eating the fruit of the tree of wisdom gave Adam and Eve the knowledge of good and evil, this belies they did not know good and evil in the first place. They couldn’t know what forbidden means, or that eating from the tree was wrong. They were incapable of obedience.

Adam and Eve were too unintelligent (immature? unwise?) to understand, much like telling a toddler not to eat cookies from the cookie jar on the counter.

Putting the tree unguarded and easily accessible in the Garden of Eden was totally a setup

Am I reading this right?

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    You want a better plot hole?

    Ask yourself one, really easy, simple question:

    “Which came first? People? Or animals?”

    Then read Genesis 1. Think you have the answer? Then read Genesis 2. ;)

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      According to Dan McClellen, Genesis 2 is a retelling of Genesis 1 revised according to the sensibilities of a later century, according to scholarly consensus. Of course, also according to scholarly consensus (and revealed to students in seminary) the bible is not univocal, not divinely inspired and not inerrant, even though many denominations assert these by fiat. (Otherwise they wouldn’t give ministries authority to tell their flock not to be gay.)

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It’s not though. Genesis 1 is the Elohist creation myth, Genesis 2 is the Jahwist creation myth. They both just got jammed together.

        This is why Genesis 1 has animals created first, and man and woman created at the same time, while Genesis 2 has man created first, then animals, then woman.

        Two different mythologies.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 minutes ago

          Also, plants come before the sun in Genesis 1, which just sounds like bad planning on God’s part.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 hour ago

          it’s also important to note that Gen 1 was pretty much intended as propaganda. it was riffing off other mythologies; except trying to one up them. “OUR god is so STRONG that he created the world ALONE. In SIX DAYS. and he NAPPED on the SEVENTH!!!”

          It gave justification for a few of the earlier genocides, because their god was stronger than the other peoples, so it’s all cool.

        • Zloubida@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Terms like Elohist are not used anymore by scholars. The documentary hypothesis collapsed in the 70s…