A theory on what the fruit in the Garden of Eden.

[Mudcat]

This is obviously wild speculation, but I was thinking this morning about some rather secular evolution related thoughts.

Herd instinct in herbivores.

Pack/Hunting instincts in particular carnivores.

I have heard it said that humans were originally herbivores, but now we are omnivores.

What if "flesh" was the fruit.

And fruit/tree is some sort of allegory/metaphor for killing an animal and eating it.

[Garden Girl]

I think it's too early for you to be "thinking"...

GG

[sethpayne]

This is obviously wild speculation, but I was thinking this morning about some rather secular evolution related thoughts.

Herd instinct in herbivores.

Pack/Hunting instincts in particular carnivores.

I have heard it said that humans were originally herbivores, but now we are omnivores.

What if "flesh" was the fruit.

And fruit/tree is some sort of allegory/metaphor for killing an animal and eating it.

I think that has some merit but the text in Genesis presents problems for the idea. Prior to the Flood , eating animals ... period .. was forbidden. It was only afterwards that mankind ate meat.

[Frijaneen]

Not believing in a literal Adam and Eve, I have license to use my imagination just a bit more than those inclined to take Genesis literally.

In the first creation account, Genesis 1, God commands Adam and Eve to multiply and replenish the earth, but no mention is made of a forbidden tree from which Adam and Eve could not eat.

In the second creation account, Genesis 2, God made Eve from Adam's rib and did not command them to multiply and replenish the earth. He then tells them they may not partake of the fruit from the forbidden tree in the middle of the garden.

Sex is the forbidden fruit of Genesis 2, in my estimation.

Their innocence lost, Adam and Eve were embarrassed and covered themselves.

And since it was Eve who enticed Adam, I'm guessing Eve sprung from Adam's rib a thirty-something year old woman.

Frij

[thesometimesaint]

The "Forbidden Fruit" was a pomegranate.

Ps.

From Wiki:

Exodus 28:33â??34 directed that images of pomegranates be woven onto the hem of the me'il ("robe of the ephod"), a robe worn by the Hebrew High Priest. 1 Kings 7:13â??22 describes pomegranates depicted on the capitals of the two pillars (Jachin and Boaz) which stood in front of the temple King Solomon built in Jerusalem. It is said that Solomon designed his coronet based on the pomegranate's "crown" (calyx).[32] Jewish tradition teaches that the pomegranate is a symbol for righteousness, because it is said to have 613 seeds which corresponds with the 613 mitzvot or commandments of the Torah. For this reason and others, many Jews eat pomegranates on Rosh Hashanah. However, the actual number of seeds varies with individual fruits.[33] It is also a symbol of fruitfulness.[34] The pomegranate is one of the few images which appear on ancient coins of Judea as a holy symbol, and today many Torah scrolls are stored while not in use with a pair of decorative hollow silver "pomegranates" (rimmonim) placed over the two upper scroll handles. Some Jewish scholars believe that it was the pomegranate that was the forbidden fruit of the Garden of Eden.[34] Pomegranate is one of the Seven Species (Hebrew: שבעת המינים, Shiv'at Ha-Minim), the types of fruits and grains enumerated in the Hebrew Bible (Deuteronomy 8: as being special products of the Land of Israel.

[Maidservant]

The fruit of the tree in Adam and Eve's story is my current question to God, my current nut to crack. I will disclaim and say I am not doing a whole lot of pro-active study which is probably why I don't have understanding yet, but does leave my mind open for opportunities to learn. So thanks for the thread.

I need to also disclaim that I am keeping more than one belief in tension or suspension or both about what history/literalness/mechanisms the story of Genesis (Adam and Eve) are and what they mean along with, therefore, what the symbolism means in terms of any historicity involved, and also willing to accept the idea that there is more than one set of literalness in it (if that makes sense).

However, my primary mode of thinking at this point in my life is that "Adam" means everyone -- all of us, each of us -- as we journey through life and the plan of salvation.

And so I think about the fruit and want to know what it means in terms of the plan of salvation, or our purpose in life, not merely as a one time act that occurred thousands of years ago.

I say all this mainly so you will know where I am coming from.

So . . . the fruit . . . .

Here is the main question I have at this time, the puzzle piece I think I just have to find (although I may be ahead of myself, ha ha):

The Adam and Eve story is a "beginning" story. And yet! A "fruit" is an ENDING. What is an ending doing smack dab in the middle of a beginning story?

A fruit is a consequence or culmination of a process. The fruit of plants is the crowning acheivement (although within the fruit are seeds to start all over again, hmmmm . . .). We talk about the fruits of the spirit, which here again is a RESULT .

Now as we know in the story, this fruit is of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Which is funny because that is almost plain as a nose on a face, not even very symbolic, although it is a key to the rest of the symbolism in the story.

I am starting to think then that "eating the fruit" means, simply, the fact that we have come to earth to participate in a mortal world and all that it entails.

But . . . I know I have more thinking to do, but that is as far as I've gotten so far.

[ERayR]

This is obviously wild speculation, but I was thinking this morning about some rather secular evolution related thoughts.

Herd instinct in herbivores.

Pack/Hunting instincts in particular carnivores.

I have heard it said that humans were originally herbivores, but now we are omnivores.

What if "flesh" was the fruit.

And fruit/tree is some sort of allegory/metaphor for killing an animal and eating it.

Mudcat:

The scriptures say it was "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". Why does it have to be anything that we know of now? Perhaps it was accessing the heavenly data base on their laptop.

[Uncle Dale]

...

What if "flesh" was the fruit.

...

Or...

Merlin Stone... equates the sycamore fig with the forbidden fruit of the book of Genesis. Since the early days

of rabbinical commentary readers of Genesis have tried to identify the common fig or sycamore fig tree with

the biblical tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Stone follows this same pattern, stressing the sexual aspect

of having a knowledge of good and evil. She also points out the connection between fig leaves and the genitals

(an association also found in Mithraic religion). It is likely that devotees in some tree-cults covered or clothed

themselves in tree leaves during special festivals. Such practices may have occurred in Hathor's tree-goddess

worship....

ISRAELITES AND SYCAMORE FIGS

Goddess iconography, mythology, and cultic practices passed back and forth between ancient Canaan and the

Nile valley. While neither region fully adopted the beliefs and methods of its neighbor in this exchange, Egyptian

ideas about the sacramental, revitalizing powers of the sycamore fig must have been known and understood in

Canaanite goddess worship. In this context, the sexual implications pointed out by Stone would have taken on a

particular significance in the eyes of the Canaanite's henotheistic cousins, the Israelites. The Genesis story of the

forbidden fruit, the figs of "good and evil" in Jeremiah 24, and Jesus' cursing of the fig tree in the gospels are all

best understood with a knowledge of the probable use of this fruit in the Canaanite cults. In the case of the Jesus

pericope, the gospels probably half-conceal some obscure, messianic action which was part of the passion story

and which demonstrated the Messiah's triumph over the sin which began with the eating of the forbidden fruit.

The Israelites were no strangers to the common fig, sycamore fig, and mulberry (sycamine). They had their

sycamore dressers (Amos 7:14), overseers (I Chron 27:18), and their fears of losing the precious trees (Ps 78:47);

but by the time of Jeremiah, at least, the religious leaders no longer accepted any cultic use for the fruit. The

promulgation of the Garden of Eden story was part of their strong attack on unorthodox practices and the sycamore

fig was denounced as "the evil fig."

http://sidneyrigdon.com/DRB/BEGIN/sycamore.htm

UD

[kamenraider]

I believe that the tree of knowledge of good and evil was an ordinary fig tree. The only thing special about it was that Adam and Eve were commanded not to partake of it, and by so doing would lose their access to the fruit of tree of life and thus become mortal. They had become "earthly" by eating physical food, but were kept from being mortal by also eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. I agree that there's sexual symbolism connected with the fruit, but I think it points to the purpose for partaking -- to reproduce and populate the earth with mortal children.

Here's an interesting story about the tree of life:

About 1903 when Moroni Jessop was returning from his mission in England, he stopped at the temple square in Nauvoo. While other missionaries walked around seeing the sights, he -- being tired and sick from the trip -- lay down in the shade of what appeared to be a young tree. When he awoke, he looked at it. It seemed so strange, so nice and wonderful. It seemed that he had never seen a tree like it. He picked a leaf off and looked at it and said the leaves looked just like beautiful velvet.

Years later Moroni took Lorin Woolley up to see his mother, Ellen Shaffer Jessop, in Millville, Utah; and in her presence he told Lorin of this occasion and of this tree. Lorin asked him of the temple lot and where it stood. Then he patted "Rone" (Moroni) on the back and said, "This boy has seen the tree of life that the Prophet Joseph planted." Lorin Woolley said that he and two other men had met there one time. They made a covenant with one another and with the Lord, and they each broke off a twig. He said that the other men broke their covenant and lost the twig, but he still had his.

--Reminiscences of John W. Woolley and Lorin C. Woolley, Vol. 4, No. VIII, pg. 8.

Animals don't grow on trees. They wouldn't stay in the middle of the garden either.

[Pem]

I suspect the meaning of the 'forbidden fruit' has to do with a special dualist wisdom that Man has aquired.

I found the following quote interesting because it incorporates the dualism between religion and science:

"The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge gives death without the fruit of the Tree of Life. Man must know himself before he can hope to know the ultimate genesis even of beings and powers less developed in their inner nature than himself. So with religion and science; united two in one they were infallible, for the spiritual intuition was there to supply the limitations of physical senses. Separated, exact science rejects the help of the inner voice, while religion becomes merely dogmatic theology--each is but a corpse without a soul." (Isis Unveiled by H.P. Blavatsky, page 264)

[Maidservant]

Hmmm. I like that. Although I might search around for some other terms or concepts to insert into the duality. But that one works too. Duh, duality, that is so easy, why didn't I think of it?

[DispensatorMysteriorum]

I believe that the tree of knowledge of good and evil was an ordinary fig tree. The only thing special about it was that Adam and Eve were commanded not to partake of it, and by so doing would lose their access to the fruit of tree of life and thus become mortal. They had become "earthly" by eating physical food, but were kept from being mortal by also eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. I agree that there's sexual symbolism connected with the fruit, but I think it points to the purpose for partaking -- to reproduce and populate the earth with mortal children.

Here's an interesting story about the tree of life:

Animals don't grow on trees. They wouldn't stay in the middle of the garden either.

You're really citing the Jessop's and Woolley's? Are you a "Mormon fundamentalist" sympathizer?

[Frijaneen]

You're really citing the Jessop's and Woolley's? Are you a "Mormon fundamentalist" sympathizer?

Well, Pen's really citing Blavatsky.

*Shudders*

Frij

[Maidservant]

This is obviously wild speculation, but I was thinking this morning about some rather secular evolution related thoughts.

Herd instinct in herbivores.

Pack/Hunting instincts in particular carnivores.

I have heard it said that humans were originally herbivores, but now we are omnivores.

What if "flesh" was the fruit.

And fruit/tree is some sort of allegory/metaphor for killing an animal and eating it.

Here is something I've always wanted to know in terms of literalism. It says that the Lord made coats of skins. Did the Lord go hunting? I have actually heard other explanations, such as that the coats of skins were actually made of plant matter. Or that they were symbolic religous garments, and don't have to be, um, literal. But in any case, just another thought.

[mfbukowski]

The fruit of the tree in Adam and Eve's story is my current question to God, my current nut to crack. I will disclaim and say I am not doing a whole lot of pro-active study which is probably why I don't have understanding yet, but does leave my mind open for opportunities to learn. So thanks for the thread.

I need to also disclaim that I am keeping more than one belief in tension or suspension or both about what history/literalness/mechanisms the story of Genesis (Adam and Eve) are and what they mean along with, therefore, what the symbolism means in terms of any historicity involved, and also willing to accept the idea that there is more than one set of literalness in it (if that makes sense).

However, my primary mode of thinking at this point in my life is that "Adam" means everyone -- all of us, each of us -- as we journey through life and the plan of salvation.

And so I think about the fruit and want to know what it means in terms of the plan of salvation, or our purpose in life, not merely as a one time act that occurred thousands of years ago.

I say all this mainly so you will know where I am coming from.

So . . . the fruit . . . .

Is our individual first sin- when we put ourselves and our pride ahead of what God wants us to do. It puts us out of the garden of innocence and into the lone and dreary world.

But if we do not partake of the fruit of the knowledge of evil, we cannot progress because we cannot understand carnality. Without understanding carnality we cannot overcome it and become like Christ - the one who underwent all so that he could overcome all.

[mfbukowski]

Here is something I've always wanted to know in terms of literalism. It says that the Lord made coats of skins. Did the Lord go hunting? I have actually heard other explanations, such as that the coats of skins were actually made of plant matter. Or that they were symbolic religous garments, and don't have to be, um, literal. But in any case, just another thought.

Our spirits "put on" flesh when they come here. John 1:14 says that the LOGOS "tented in us" in the Greek. Christ put on a "skin" as a temporary dwelling like a tent. We all take on coats of skin when we take on a body. (which is also symbolized in the temple)

This notion has been explored a lot on this board by David Bokovoy and Kerry Shirts. (e=mc2)

[Cold Steel]

What if "flesh" was the fruit? And fruit/tree is some sort of allegory/metaphor for killing an animal and eating it?

Maybe that's where the Lord got the "skins" from which he made Adam and Eve's clothing. "Okay, you guys wanted to eat itâ??here, you can also wear it!"

Actually, who knows? I have more questions about the Garden story than just about any other. Why, for example, was the serpent implicated? Why was the serpent also identified with Christ in the desert (on Moses' staff)? There must be aspects of the story that are highly figurative, yet we know that Adam had to have lived and done something to bring about the fall of man.

[Nyal]

This is obviously wild speculation, but I was thinking this morning about some rather secular evolution related thoughts.

Herd instinct in herbivores.

Pack/Hunting instincts in particular carnivores.

I have heard it said that humans were originally herbivores, but now we are omnivores.

What if "flesh" was the fruit.

And fruit/tree is some sort of allegory/metaphor for killing an animal and eating it.

I think I read somewhere that it may have been a metaphor for sex. Forbidden fruits of the dev-il.

[The Nehor]

I think John Cleese had it right that all fresh fruit is inherently dangerous:

[mfbukowski]

Why was the serpent also identified with Christ in the desert (on Moses' staff)?

I thought that had something to do with the ouroboros

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros

[The Nehor]

I think I read somewhere that it may have been a metaphor for sex. Forbidden fruits of the dev-il.

This comes from the sex = evil/dirty idea that is nowhere in scripture.

[scooby]

it is not sex. didn't the GAs state as much recently? it would be difficult for eve to have sex before adam, and then approach adam with it later.

[charity's child]

Here is something I've always wanted to know in terms of literalism. It says that the Lord made coats of skins. Did the Lord go hunting? I have actually heard other explanations, such as that the coats of skins were actually made of plant matter. Or that they were symbolic religous garments, and don't have to be, um, literal. But in any case, just another thought.

In an old folk tale "Manyskins", the title character wears a coat made up of skins of every animal in her father's kingdom - given willingly. None of the animals died, they gave bits and pieces.

Who knows?

[charity's child]

I vote for the plant no longer known - although I wouldn't be surprised if persimmons were evolved from it. Have you ever eaten a persimmon?

[charity]

Silly people. We know what the fruit was. Sort of a light red eggplant that grows on trees. It's in the movie, for Pete's sake. And we all know that artistic ides are absolute truths. Right?