EATING THE FRUIT

roberthagedorn

This thread really should be directed to Religion & Spirituality.  But the resistance in those fields to what I am doing is so remarkable that I will not waste my time going there.  So, what am I doing that is so offensive to so many people?  I am marketing the exegesis of the second and third chapters of Genesis--the Adam and Eve story--in the form of a book entitled, "Judge This Book By Its Cover," a tiny book available at Amazon, cheap, that can be read in a few minutes.  The exegesis presented in the book is the identity of the forbidden fruit:  anal sex between Adam and Eve.  Reading the book will be unnecessary if you can be a philosopher and find the mistake in the following poem:  They eat the fruit, but what do they eat?  We lift the curtain, for a wary peek.  Through a forest of mystery hiding it all, we see a body, naked and weak.  This BODY is the garden in whose center grow, the two famous trees, but never a weevil.  Here is the tree of life and the one, of knowledge of good and knowledge of evil.  Because the two trees are right next to each other, care must be taken to avoid the one bad.  For the fruit of BOTH trees is pleasure, so the pleasure is there to be had.  To be fruitful and multiply, eat from the first.  But eat from the second, and no one conceives.  So here we go now:  one, two, three--pleasure, shame, fig tree leaves.

Black Swan

roberthagedorn wrote: »

This thread really should be directed to Religion & Spirituality. 

Agree. The Religion & Spirituality forums have been dedicated to address the contents of your post, and have a better informed audience for such discussions. Theological questions are normally addressed there, while this forum addresses the below:

Black Swan wrote: »

Forum Guidelines:

You are encouraged to elaborate upon or challenge a philosophical position, logic, significance, relevance, analytical method, context, interpretation, prediction, historical antecedents, empirical foundation, or comment by a poster, but you may not personally attack a poster; i.e., attack the post, not the poster.

Citing philosophers and their works in support of your position taken is greatly encouraged. Links are sometimes helpful too.