[HN Gopher] Does This Medieval Fresco Show a Hallucinogenic Mush...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Does This Medieval Fresco Show a Hallucinogenic Mushroom in the
       Garden of Eden?
        
       Author : prismatic
       Score  : 77 points
       Date   : 2021-08-09 05:51 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.atlasobscura.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.atlasobscura.com)
        
       | andrewtbham wrote:
       | It's possible that manna from heaven and the bread at communion
       | are mushrooms. that many of the experiences seem to by
       | psychadelic: the burning bush, the transfiguration, etc. And that
       | it was all gotten rid of during the black death.
       | 
       | https://psychedelictimes.com/the-secret-psychedelic-mushroom...
        
       | XantosD wrote:
       | There are several examples from Scandinavia of old Christian
       | churches with art depicting psychedelic mushrooms. Not 13th
       | century though
        
       | motohagiography wrote:
       | If you want to go down a rabbit hole, look into biblical and
       | other references to how important and common the acacia tree was,
       | and then consider that it's thought to be a significant source of
       | DMT. (The second fresco in the article has what appears to be an
       | acacia tree in it). One can only speculate what someone could
       | have imagined if they were around one while it was burning and
       | they inhaled it. The analog feedback patterns one sees when their
       | senses are impaired are by almost all accounts, geometric
       | patterns like fractals, and so the discovery of geometry and
       | association of it with mysticism could have a common chemical
       | origin. If there was something to be known or learned from
       | psychedelic experiences, a national security service would need
       | to know and understand its boundaries. Given radio was only
       | recently discovered, people new to the idea of communicating over
       | long distances using invisible energy would have had to consider
       | whether there was some chemical connection. I'm not saying it's
       | aliens...but it may very well be all drugs.
        
       | mbesto wrote:
       | If you're curious about the ties between religion, shamanism and
       | psychedelics theres a great book by Terrence McKenna on this
       | subject called Food of the Gods:
       | https://www.amazon.com/dp/0553371304?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2_dt_b_...
        
       | pram wrote:
       | The premise doesn't even make sense, the tree of knowledge is a
       | Bad Thing in the Genesis story. Even if it was a magic mushroom,
       | how could you possibly come to the conclusion that it's being
       | depicted in a positive light?
        
         | takoid wrote:
         | The Tree of Knowledge is not the "bad thing" (sin is a better
         | vocabulary choice) in the book of Genesis. The sin is the
         | defiance of God's instruction by Adam and Eve avoiding the
         | fruit from the Tree of Life.
        
         | tokenpreneur wrote:
         | It's not the Tree of Knowledge that is a 'bad thing', but
         | rather Adam and Eve did a bad thing by defying God's command
         | not to eat from that tree.
        
         | pmoriarty wrote:
         | Something else to consider is that some early Christians (like
         | the so-called Gnostics) believed that there was an esoteric (or
         | secret) meaning or teaching in Christianity.
         | 
         | The esoteric meanings were often mirror images of the exoteric
         | (or plain/obvious/surface) meanings. So where eating of the
         | Tree of Knowledge might be viewed as "bad" in the exoteric
         | interpretation, in the esoteric interpretation it could be
         | viewed as good.
         | 
         | Similar inversions happen with the snake in the Garden of Eden,
         | who is similarly viewed in a negative light in the exoteric
         | interpretation, but as good in the esoteric interpretation. The
         | same thing happens with Judas, and even the creator God
         | himself.
         | 
         | I'd encourage reading up on the Gnostics for more details on
         | exactly what those views were.
        
           | jazzyjackson wrote:
           | The book "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn includes a retelling of
           | genesis in this mirrored sense: the devil has adam and eve
           | convinced that the garden is paradise and there's no need to
           | leave. god has to sneak in to convince eve to eat the apple
           | and become free. (paraphrase from 10 yrs ago, I should pick
           | that book up again...)
        
           | Natsu wrote:
           | The heyday of gnosticism was a thousand years or more prior
           | to this fresco, though.
        
             | pmoriarty wrote:
             | But the gnostics weren't completely eradicated until much
             | later. The Cathars[1], for instance, weren't defeated until
             | about the time of this fresco.
             | 
             | And, anyway, one need not be a gnostic in order to believe
             | there is a hidden side to Christianity.
             | 
             | [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathars
        
           | 52-6F-62 wrote:
           | True, and early Christian cults were often mixed up in
           | offshoots of the mysteries traditions as well.
           | 
           | So while the article mixes up which storied tree that image
           | is supposed to represent, there's a real question of whether
           | or not the similarities to the amanita mushroom were
           | intentional or not. When placed in the context of esoteric
           | traditions, it's a worthwhile question.
        
         | tk75x wrote:
         | Knowledge of good and evil is a "Good Thing", and one
         | interpretation of the reason God put the tree in reach of Adam
         | and Eve is that he wanted them to eventually partake of its
         | fruit, but they did it early and without whatever other prep
         | was necessary. Think of it as a child slowly learning concepts
         | instead of being immediately presented with complex knowledge
         | and not having the necessary foundation to process it. Not sure
         | about the positive light depiction, but I could see
         | hallucinogenics being viewed as something that expands your
         | knowledge/mind especially since people report out of body
         | experiences when using them.
        
           | mandeville wrote:
           | Ditto. Also in traditional doctrine it was good because the
           | fall led to jesus. Look up felix culpa on wikipedia. As for
           | the mushrooms, it's not as if medieval clergy didn't have a
           | good time.
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | You can't mention Felix Culpa though without mentioning
             | Original Sin. Like most things in traditional Catholicism,
             | there is a duality and a paradox. You can't get one without
             | the other. Mentioning the Fall as a strictly good thing is
             | simply ridiculous. That does not find any ground in
             | traditional Catholicism, which also believed (and still
             | believes frankly) that all the bad things in life,
             | including the pain of childbirth, disease, sin, and
             | destruction, are directly attributable to the sin of Adam
             | and Eve.
             | 
             | Plus, there are several translations of it. The common
             | rendition into English is 'happy fault', which may be too
             | positive. The other translations include 'lucky mistake',
             | 'happy mistake', blessed fall, etc. Note again the duality,
             | the paradox, and that the fundamental noun (fault, mistake,
             | fall) is negative. It's a paradox, a mystery, meant to get
             | you to think deeper, not some stunning endorsement of
             | listening to Satan.
        
         | theli0nheart wrote:
         | > _the tree of knowledge is a Bad Thing in the Genesis story_
         | 
         | Not at all. I'm certain that it differs between faiths, but in
         | mine (Judaism), the tree of knowledge was not A Bad Thing.
         | 
         | Eating the forbidden fruit / fruit of knowledge exposed Adam
         | and Eve to evil things; tarnishing their purity. After they ate
         | the fruit, they awakened. They desired to wear clothes, possess
         | things, have children, etc.
         | 
         | What we learn from this is that knowledge is not good or bad;
         | it's how we use it that makes the difference. And from the
         | standpoint of an "awakening" and mystical experience, the
         | connection to psilocybin deserves further study.
        
           | iammisc wrote:
           | Except, this is a christian fresco, and this is not how
           | Christianity interprets the Genesis story. I understand that
           | Judaism was the source religion of Christianity, but the two
           | religions are substantially different. Christianity has very
           | different interpretations of the Old Testament compared to
           | the Jews.
        
         | amanaplanacanal wrote:
         | The gnostic view is that the tree opened people up to the
         | knowledge that the creator of earth was a flawed god, and not
         | the good one up at the top of the heirarchy. In my
         | understanding.
        
       | codetrotter wrote:
       | I've long been thinking about how things like this are in the
       | Bible:
       | 
       | > They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each
       | appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel ... Their
       | rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes
       | all around.
       | 
       | -- Ezekiel 1:15
       | 
       | And I've been thinking, that these kinds of things could have
       | their explanation in people having ingested plants or been stung
       | by insects or something, that altered their perceptions of
       | reality. Or even maybe just hallucinating because of hunger, or
       | from having been born with a brain that was producing these types
       | of hallucinations on its own.
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | You mean the Ophanim? Be not afraid, my child. https://i.kym-
         | cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/878/385/a57...
        
           | codetrotter wrote:
           | Yup, that's the one they talk about in Ezekiel 1:15 quoted
           | above. And there are others too.
        
         | runawaybottle wrote:
         | Dear friend, they were simply drinking. You don't need
         | hallucinogenics to ramble with ecstasy, just a few drinks.
        
       | maxk42 wrote:
       | Amanita muscaria do not have three branches supporting the cap.
        
       | elwell wrote:
       | The serpent wrapped around the tree indicates that this is to
       | represent the _Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil_ , not the
       | _Tree of Life_. So, even if this were depicting hallucinogenic
       | mushrooms, if anything it would mean that Christians viewed them
       | as forbidden.
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | Yeah, the article mixes up the two trees, which doesn't bode
         | well for the rest of it.
        
         | hbosch wrote:
         | As soon as I saw the "snake", I made the assumption on my own
         | that this was just a crudely drawn tree with the dots
         | representing fruits/"apples" as the story is commonly known.
         | 
         | Stretching this into an article about psychedelic mushrooms is
         | quite a reach.
        
       | newdude116 wrote:
       | This is a bad drawing of Silphium
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silphium#/media/File:Silphium....
        
       | cratermoon wrote:
       | There are several problems with this article. To start with, it
       | mixes up the Tree of Life[1] and the Tree of Knowledge of Good
       | and Evil[2].
       | 
       | Second, the Genesis story is Jewish, and predates Christianity by
       | _at least_ five if not ten centuries. And most importantly, early
       | Christians were Jews first. Post-Pauline times, pagan or Gentiles
       | in the Roman empire did join the growing movement that was soon
       | to be called Christianity, but they were weren 't dragging in any
       | pagan rituals they may have had prior to their conversion. Three
       | hundred years later, with the conversion of Constantine and the
       | co-optation of Christianity for Roman imperial designs, certain
       | pagan rituals and practices were papered over with Christian
       | beliefs (cf Easter, Christmas), but not the other way around.
       | 
       | 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_life_(biblical)
       | 
       | 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_the_knowledge_of_good_...
        
         | iammisc wrote:
         | > cf Easter, Christmas
         | 
         | There is no evidence of roman paganism being the _origin_ of
         | either holiday. Easter and Christmas were celebrated before the
         | romanization of Christianity. The only thing that was added
         | were pagan symbology to the existing feast days, which is
         | typical, as the church is happy to incorporate pagan
         | traditions. The issue here is that in America we see a myopic
         | view of Christianity from Europe. We note that during Easter,
         | many European pagan symbols are incorporated, and mistakenly
         | apply that to all Easter celebrations.
         | 
         | In reality, Christianity is not a european religion. In other
         | centers of christianity, like Ethiopia, the Middle East, and
         | India, European pagan symbology for easter was not adopted
         | until recently. For most of history, there would either have
         | been local rituals incorporated, or none at all.
         | 
         | This does not contradict the fundamental idea of Easter or
         | Christmas though, because the Church _explicitly_ desires that
         | local rituals be incorporated. Catholic missionaries are happy
         | to include anything non-contradictory with the Christian
         | religion into Catholic practice. For example, it is the
         | official policy of the church, after much deliberation, and
         | much back and forth, that Chinese Catholics who desire to do
         | their ancestor veneration rites are allowed to do so, with
         | certain changes made to ensure that the rites fit the Catholic
         | understanding of prayers to ancestors. But for the most part,
         | Catholic Chinese are allowed to partake in these confucian
         | rituals, and can even do so in the context of Catholicism.
         | There is no contradiction.
         | 
         | To support my claims, here is an article on a traditional Syro-
         | Malabar (Indian) Catholic celebration of easter. The Syro-
         | Malabar Church has existed for 2000 years since the times of
         | Thomas. If easter was a European pagan incorporation, we'd
         | expect to see lots of European pagan symbology, like Easter
         | bunnies, eggs, etc. Except we don't. The traditional syro-
         | malabarese feast is a celebration of passover, but with Indian
         | food instead of the middle eastern stuff.
         | 
         | https://homegrown.co.in/article/802431/a-traditional-easter-...
         | 
         | That is not to say that European traditions haven't been
         | incorporated (american cultural hegemony is an unstoppable
         | force), but the rituals that are traditional are nothing close
         | to them.
         | 
         | I can speak to this myself, as an Indian Catholic. I didn't
         | know what the Easter bunny did (apparently he brings candy to
         | little American boys and girls? -- I was clearly short-changed
         | and am still somewhat bitter haha) until middle school.
         | Although my family mentioned the Easter bunny in passing, it
         | was not part of our celebrations at all. Although we dyed eggs
         | with other people in our church because that's what they did,
         | we didn't really do it at home. It was just a social thing.
        
           | cratermoon wrote:
           | > The only thing that was added were pagan symbology to the
           | existing feast days, which is typical
           | 
           | Yes, that's exactly what I said: papered over.
        
           | wut-wut wrote:
           | Ha! Bitter.
        
           | Talanes wrote:
           | It also comes down to a matter of linguistics. English
           | uniquely changed the name of the holiday to match up with
           | local celebrations. If you're not thinking to hard about it,
           | it's very easy to go from "Easter is named after a forgotten
           | pagan goddess" to "The entire Easter tradition is stolen from
           | old pagan rituals."
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | That's right. In most of the world, easter is referred to
             | as some derivative of 'Paschal', which is the adjectival
             | form of Easter in English.
             | 
             | For example,
             | 
             | French: Paques Spanish: Pascua Romanian: Pasti Russian:
             | paskha (Paskha) Chinese: fuhuojie (resurrection festival)
             | Danish: paske
             | 
             | Only the german languages adopted a Germanic goddess name
             | due to the coincidental timing.
        
               | Talanes wrote:
               | >Only the german languages adopted a Germanic goddess
               | name due to the coincidental timing.
               | 
               | And not even one anyone actually remembered, just one
               | whose name was still around to denote that time of year.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | Minor49er wrote:
         | > The Genesis story is Jewish, and predates Christianity by at
         | least five if not ten centuries. And most importantly, early
         | Christians were Jews first.
         | 
         | Just thought this contradiction was amusing.
        
           | cratermoon wrote:
           | How so? Jesus and the apostles, or any historical figures
           | which they inspired, didn't think of themselves as
           | "Christian", nor did they even imagine they were creating a
           | new religion. They were Jews who didn't toe the Second Temple
           | Judaism line.
        
             | _-david-_ wrote:
             | According to the Bible, Christians started using the word
             | Christian to describe themselves while the Apostles were
             | alive (Acts 11:26). Prior to this they generally would
             | refer to themselves as followers of The Way. The idea that
             | they didn't think of themselves as Christian is incorrect.
        
           | pulse7 wrote:
           | There is no contradiction here: Jews (descendants of Judah,
           | son of Jacob=Israel) were living at least 15 centuries before
           | Jesus Christ. Jesus was also a Jew and his first followers
           | were also Jews, later non-Jews (=pegans) joined the
           | "movement"...
        
         | colechristensen wrote:
         | They're talking about a late thirteenth century fresco in
         | France, not Roman art by protochristians in the first few
         | centuries CE. As christianity spread or was forced across
         | europe, there was plenty of mixing religions.
         | 
         | But this whole thing is a pretty big stretch, you can't tell if
         | it's a tree or a mushroom then maybe it's just the artist
         | wasn't the greatest and trying to shoehorn psychedelics into it
         | isn't at all a worthwhile way to spend your time.
        
           | ARandomerDude wrote:
           | > maybe it's just the artist wasn't the greatest
           | 
           | This seems likely, especially given that Eve's thighs are
           | larger than her torso in the painting.
        
             | cratermoon wrote:
             | thicc
        
           | PhasmaFelis wrote:
           | Yeah, the guy drew Eve with no breasts and what appear to be
           | gills running up to her collarbone. I don't think we can
           | safely assume that anything in the image is an accurate
           | representation of a real-world object.
        
           | 1MachineElf wrote:
           | Analysing the fresco leaves us with more questions than
           | answers. Is there a connection between 13th century
           | Christianity and psychedelics? How far back could such a
           | connection go? What would such a connection mean for us
           | today? Maybe the artist's fresco would have sent a clearer
           | message if they hadn't eaten so many mushrooms before making
           | it.
        
           | cratermoon wrote:
           | Yes but the article doesn't speculate on the practices of
           | late 13th century French Christians, it's speculating that
           | the mural is referring to "early Christians" depicting a
           | story that "Christianity itself had derived from a fertility
           | cult whose members ingested hallucinogens". How late middle
           | ages Christians knew so much about 1st century
           | protochristians is left unexplained.
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | > Second, the Genesis story is Jewish, and predates
         | Christianity by at least five if not ten centuries.
         | 
         | This is silly. Its shared by a number of religions since
         | abrahamic religions generally have a common root.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | The root of Judaism.
        
         | piptastic wrote:
         | From your linked source on the Tree of the knowledge of good
         | and evil:
         | 
         |  _Alternatively, some scholars have argued that the tree of the
         | knowledge of good and evil is just another name for the tree of
         | life._
        
           | xyzelement wrote:
           | There are probably "some scholars" that have argued for just
           | about anything, but certainly the majority of knowledge on
           | these treats them as different topics.
        
             | cratermoon wrote:
             | Exactly. Some "scholars" say that Genesis, along with the
             | other four books of the pentateuch, was literally written
             | by Moses and recounts actual facts as they happened.
             | Wikipedia's NPOV utterly fails on topics like faith and
             | belief.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | Note, it would be against wikipedia policies to say "Some
               | scholars say X". You're not supposed to use weasel words,
               | and npov does not mean you have to give equal weight to
               | all.
               | 
               | Case in point, wikipedia doesn't say that some scholars
               | believe genisis was written by moses. Instead they say:
               | 
               | "Tradition credits Moses as the author of Genesis, as
               | well as the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most
               | of Deuteronomy, but modern scholars, especially from the
               | 19th century onward, see them as being written hundreds
               | of years after Moses is supposed to have lived, in the
               | 6th and 5th centuries BC.[7][8] Based on scientific
               | interpretation of archaeological, genetic, and linguistic
               | evidence, most scholars consider Genesis to be primarily
               | mythological rather than historical. Biblical literalists
               | do interpret it as actual history, giving rise to beliefs
               | such as Young Earth creationism."
               | 
               | Which seems entirely fair to me.
        
               | cratermoon wrote:
               | "Tradition credits" seems like as much weasel words as
               | "some people say". Whose tradition? Since when? Where
               | does the tradition come from?
               | 
               | > Note, it would be against wikipedia policies to say
               | "Some scholars say X"
               | 
               | But.. that's exactly what the linked wikipedia article
               | says! I'm not vested enough to care to change it, but if
               | you're right, that is a violation of policy.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | I think its pretty clear in context that they mean the
               | traditions of the people who view the book as holy,
               | particularly Jews and Christians. They go in more detail
               | if you click the link.
               | 
               | The big difference is that "Some scholars believe X" and
               | "Some scholars believe not X" are basically true for most
               | X. The traditional view of Jews & Christians being that
               | moses wrote genisis is a fact about the world. It can be
               | either true or false. They either believed that
               | traditionally or they did not. Both it and its negation
               | cannot both be true.
        
               | carlmr wrote:
               | >The traditional view of Jews & Christians being that
               | moses wrote genisis is a fact about the world. It can be
               | either true or false. They either believed that
               | traditionally or they did not. Both it and its negation
               | cannot both be true.
               | 
               | How so? If there was more than one early Jew/Christian
               | they could have held different beliefs about that. If you
               | want to be exact, you can't state any facts about the
               | beliefs of somebody, living or dead. And if there's more
               | than one person you can't say they all held the same
               | belief.
        
         | pmoriarty wrote:
         | _" the Genesis story is Jewish, and predates Christianity by at
         | least five if not ten centuries"_
         | 
         | But the fresco the article is about is from the 13th Century.
         | Christians at that time or even earlier might have re-
         | interpreted the Genesis story in light of psychedelic
         | experiences.
         | 
         | However, on the subject of psychedelic use in early Judaism,
         | there is an interesting article titled _" Strange Fires Weird
         | Smokes and Psychoactive Combustibles Entheogens and Incense in
         | Ancient Traditions"_[1]:
         | 
         |  _" The incense cults of Israel have been the subject of a wide
         | variety of theological and academic treatments. Researchers
         | have speculated on the use of entheogens of a variety of
         | species in the Bible (Shanon 2008; Merkur 2000; Allegro 1 970)
         | as well as linking a shared entheogenic heritage with Persia in
         | such crucial texts as the Book of Ezra, which sheds much light
         | on foreign influences on Jewish cultic practices (Dobroruka
         | 2006). A number of scholars have discussed the psychoactive
         | incense used in the temple with various theories as to
         | ingredients (Ruck, Staples & Heinrich 200 I ) and cannabis has
         | been suggested as the kaneh bosom (appearing throughout the Old
         | Testament with the first mention in Exodus) that eludes --
         | along with the other ingredients of the holy incense --
         | positive or at least complete identification (Benet 1976). ..._
         | 
         | ...
         | 
         |  _The exact recipe of the Old Testament incenses (Levitical and
         | foreign), if there ever was an official recipe that persisted
         | with exact continuity, will likely never be known. Some of the
         | ingredients may be deduced from other examples in the ancient
         | world of incense cults and their psychoactive aromatics. A
         | starting point would logically be Egypt, from which the
         | Israelites made their Exodus, and their various temple incenses
         | and magico-medical fumigants, which included benzoin, cannabis,
         | Hyoscyamus, bitumen and arsenic sulphide (Shehata 2006).
         | Psychopharmacologists link Egyptian plants found in the various
         | Greek writings and Egyptian medical papyri with the soma /haoma
         | of the ancient world and Peganum harmala, which is still used
         | as a magical incense to this day. Linked with the nybt of the
         | Papyrus Ebers (Flattery & Schwartz 1 989) Peg anum is also
         | mentioned by Dioscorides as being used by ancient Syrians as
         | besasa, or "Plant of Bes" and that it was burned in Egypt
         | before the statue of Bes. The ancient kyphi has been speculated
         | by some scholars to have contained cannabis as well as other
         | psychoactive plants such as Acarus calamus and from sixteen to
         | fifty other ingredients, many of which are unidentified."_
         | 
         | [1] - https://sci-
         | hub.tw/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/...
        
           | cat199 wrote:
           | have no doubt that some christians likely dabbled with these
           | things, as did their jewish forbears, and certainly some
           | sects of paganism where this was explicitly
           | allowed/incorporated
           | 
           | but it's one thing to acknowledge these various strands as
           | ever having existed, and quite another to take fragmentary
           | evidence out of context and use it as a basis to spin a whole
           | narritive that all of the historical understanding is somehow
           | fundamentally incorrect, and that there is some 'hidden
           | teaching' (which incedentally and conveniently is almost
           | always more permissive w/r/t intoxication/sexuality)
           | 
           | there's also the detail that this misunderstanding is also
           | predicated on a false notion that medieval people were as
           | hostile to medicinal plants as we have become after the
           | advent of the pharmaceutical industry - if these plants are
           | not 'evil' and 'suppressed', then it is less 'shocking' and
           | 'world changing' to find references to them in what we might
           | think are surprising places to our modern mind
        
           | FridayoLeary wrote:
           | But incense was only burned in the temple, with no one around
           | to enjoy it, so what's your point exactly?
        
           | cratermoon wrote:
           | I saw a Ron Howard movie that starred Tom Hanks which told me
           | the Holy Grail is really a metaphor for the descendants of
           | Jesus and Mary Magdalene. I read a book by Immanuel
           | Velikovsky that told me that around the 15th century BC, the
           | planet Venus was ejected from Jupiter as a comet or comet-
           | like object and passed near Earth. Venus is made of up
           | hydrocarbons which spewed out and fell to earth, turned to
           | carbohydrates and fell as manna, then Venus on a later flyby
           | caused the earth to stop turning (and the sun to appear to
           | stand still) and the walls of Jericho to fall. Somehow, not
           | only did Joshua and his armies not get knocked flat on their
           | asses when the earth stopped, but the entire earth did not
           | become magma as the energy of rotation turned to heat.
           | 
           | People have been speculating about the "science" of the bible
           | since the scientific method was a thing, and there's a
           | shitload of absolute insane woo.
        
       | b3morales wrote:
       | > Eve's ribs are bold slash marks, as if the artist wanted her to
       | appear almost skeletal.
       | 
       | The artist probably wanted to highlight the fact that there are
       | an even number of them, in contrast to Adam's odd number, since
       | the story is that one of his was taken (to make Eve).
        
       | JohnJamesRambo wrote:
       | I guess I've never given much credence to this theory. Why would
       | they beat around the bush and use symbols and other words for it.
       | Why wouldn't they just say "eat this mushroom"? Was there even a
       | stigma against it back then?
        
         | swayvil wrote:
         | Maybe societies of scholars reject empirical input.
         | 
         | I've seen such.
         | 
         | The "religious institution" becomes all about authoritative
         | literature.
         | 
         | Consuming it, digesting it, debating it. Who's read the books.
         | Who hasn't read enough books. Who's the top certified holy-
         | book-interpreter.
         | 
         | An airtight power hierarchy.
         | 
         | Real experience just threatens the bubble.
        
         | amanaplanacanal wrote:
         | The idea that there is secret knowledge that only the elect
         | should know goes back to classical times, and probably to the
         | time the old testament was put together. So it might not have
         | to do with stigma per se.
        
           | iammisc wrote:
           | Catholicism has no concept of the elect, at least not in the
           | way you describe it.
        
             | amanaplanacanal wrote:
             | It's entirely possible for people who call themselves
             | Catholic to have beliefs that are not in accordance with
             | official dogma. And Catholic dogma is not a static thing,
             | either, though some pretend it is.
        
               | iammisc wrote:
               | It absolutely is, but the idea he put forth... that the
               | elect (presumably meaning those who are getting into
               | heaven) are deserving of secret knowledge is not really
               | something that anyone can say ever existed in the church.
               | They had a whole separation and heresy to address that.
        
               | amanaplanacanal wrote:
               | Which "he" do you mean here?
        
               | Natsu wrote:
               | I believe they're referring to amanaplanacanal who
               | appears to be describing Gnosticism, which was rejected
               | as a heresy early in the Church's history.
        
             | 52-6F-62 wrote:
             | Of course they do: the priesthood. The Vatican itself
             | restricts access to its own archives.
        
               | _-david-_ wrote:
               | Non-priests view the archives frequently and there is a
               | slow process of digitizing them now. It just so happens
               | that the Vatican has some of the oldest documents still
               | in existence and don't want them damaged by people or
               | light.
        
               | iammisc wrote:
               | That's not the elect as you described. Priests are no
               | more deserving of heaven than any other baptised
               | catholic.
               | 
               | The 'knowledge' in the archives is not religious in
               | nature. You don't need to have access to it to know God
               | or achieve the ultimate goals of catholicism.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | You are not even replying to the same person. I think
               | you're being a little over-literal here.
        
               | Natsu wrote:
               | The 'elect' as a Christian concept is a bit different
               | from ordinary uses of the word. In context, the concept
               | from Calvinism seemed to be under discussion until
               | someone came into the discussion using 'elect' in the
               | normal meaning.
               | 
               | So I think it's important to keep track of which
               | definition of 'elect' is in use here or you'll just be
               | talking past each other without realizing that you're not
               | talking about the same concept at all:
               | 
               | https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-
               | calvinism-700356
        
       | oxymoran wrote:
       | The notion that scholars have "debunked" the mushroom hypothesis
       | is ludicrous given that they don't postulate a hypothesis that is
       | any more reasonable. The idea that it is a "stylized" tree seems
       | preposterous to me given each branch ending in a cap. If it was
       | just the top, ok. But every branch? It looks like a clump of
       | mushrooms growing out of the ground, Occam's razor and what
       | not.That doesn't mean it's a magic mushroom, but maybe mushrooms
       | had some sort of significance to the artist/church/region etc.
        
       | buovjaga wrote:
       | Arguments against Christian mushroom trees:
       | 
       | The Fungi-Pareidola of The Psychedelic Gospels by Chris Bennett
       | https://www.cannabisculture.com/content/2021/08/05/__trashed...
       | 
       | Mushroom Trees Debunked by Thomas Hatsis
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrfeNp1FSUY
       | 
       | I remember Hatsis elsewhere referring to a chemical study of the
       | pigments used in the Plaincourault fresco revealing the red was
       | originally green. I can't find the mention atm.
        
       | iammisc wrote:
       | The main problem of this article is that it uses modern cultural
       | and artistic norms to interpret ancient art.
       | 
       | Traditional Catholic and Christian iconography was not meant to
       | be accurate, but rather to symbolize meaning.
       | 
       | For example, in my church, the priest recently pointed out there
       | is a dog in every single stained glass window depicting scenes of
       | Jesus's life. In particular, the dog is a dalmation.
       | 
       | If we were to apply this same line of reasoning in the article to
       | these windows, we'd be forced to make ridiculous conclusions that
       | Catholics of 20th century Portland believed Dalmations were holy
       | holy dogs alive at the time of Christ.
       | 
       | In reality, the dalmation is a symbol of St Dominic (it's a
       | dominican church), whose mother had a dream she gave birth to a
       | dalmation (St Dominic) with a torch in his mouth who lit the
       | world on fire. The symbology is obvious, since Dominic, founder
       | of the Order of Preachers, did indeed spread the gospel message
       | throughout large portions of the world at the time. The dalmation
       | symbolizes St Dominic's following of Jesus's example. At no point
       | is any of the art intended to be realistic.
       | 
       | So if that's true of 20th century Catholic art, made by people
       | alive at a time when art is expected to portray reality, then
       | even more so should we not interpret this fresco as realistic,
       | since it was made at a time when people couldn't even paint
       | realistically (perspective was an enlightenment / renaissance
       | invention IIRC).
        
         | some_hacker33 wrote:
         | Why are you still giving money to the catholic church?
        
         | pmoriarty wrote:
         | _" At no point is any of the art intended to be realistic."_
         | 
         | Well, except that, say, Jesus is supposed to be Jesus. Adam and
         | Eve are supposed to be Adam and Eve. The garden in which Adam
         | and Eve are depicted is supposed to be the Garden of Eden in
         | the Bible. In the various depictions of the Last Supper, Jesus
         | is depicted as having supper with his disciples, and that is
         | supposed to depict exactly that. Jesus is shown as breaking
         | bread in those paintings, just as he does in the Biblical
         | story, etc, etc, etc...
         | 
         | Not to say there isn't a lot of symbolism in Christian art, but
         | it's not all symbolic.
        
           | iammisc wrote:
           | I suppose it's realistic in the sense that Christ is depicted
           | as a human as are adam and eve, instead of something else,
           | but there is no presumption that christ _actually_ looked
           | like the way he was drawn.
        
       | pmoriarty wrote:
       | There's an interesting talk[1] about this and other images that
       | show evidence of psychedelic use in early Christianity.
       | 
       | [1] - Starting at around 9'50" in "Psychedelics - In Spirituality
       | and Religion (by Aware Project)"
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEkF2ER0Zwc
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | It makes sense.
       | 
       | Mushrooms (and some other devices) are how you see God etc.
       | 
       | I mean, it wasn't always just about reading old books. It had to
       | start somewhere. With some kind of real observation.
       | 
       | And studying that stuff without the shrooms etc. Well, that's
       | like studying microbiology without a microscope.
        
       | hospadar wrote:
       | Wow mostly unrelated, I had no idea that _Amanita Muscara_ was
       | considered to be psychoactive (usually is described as poisinous
       | in field guides). Also frequently considered to be edible (after
       | treatment) in some places. Fascinating!
       | 
       | (for those unfamiliar, the amanita genus as a whole contains a
       | variety of extremely toxic mushrooms and is often avoided by
       | novice edible collectors for that reason)
       | 
       | See also:
       | https://www.bayareamushrooms.org/education/further_reflectio...
        
         | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
         | This is a far cry from an evidence-grade source, but
         | https://ambrosiasociety.org/ is a pretty wild site to explore.
         | 
         | Someone has put quite a lot of work into mapping the phenotypic
         | traits of Amanita Muscara onto Christian iconograhy (the lamb
         | of god being the wooly mycelium, and the living cup having to
         | do with the way it colonizes wooden containers, etc). They've
         | also got instructions on preparing it for consumption.
        
         | tmountain wrote:
         | It's been suggested (but not proven) that amanita muscara
         | inspired portions of Christmas mythology (Santa, flying
         | reindeer, etc).
         | 
         | https://www.npr.org/2010/12/24/132260025/did-shrooms-send-sa...
        
         | Trasmatta wrote:
         | FWIW, I wouldn't recommend trying to get high off of Amanita
         | Muscaria. By all accounts it can be a rather unpleasant (and
         | long) high. Best to stick with psilocybin.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-10 23:02 UTC)