Interestingly, the Bible does not specify what kind of fruit was on the Tree of Knowledge. The association between the forbidden fruit and an apple was a derivative of later translations.
Imagine the consternation if the claim had become Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden tomato. Then this incessant controversy regarding the tomato's status would take on a biblical dimension... though then perhaps the Mormon claim that the Garden of Eden is to be found in the New World would actually have some credibility. Indeed, answers to some questions are not a matter of intelligence at all. Sometimes it seems to me intelligence is more about knowing what questions to ask in the first place.
That's my 2nd hardest skill when trying to use AI. 3rd hardest is better filtering.
I keep having flashbacks to learning how to use Google effectively.
I'm an arthiest, but I'm in a historically christian society so bible stuff comes up and I often delve in.
Whenever I do look into the bible, it amazes me just how extremely bullshitty vague the bible actually is. I don't understand why people argue about it, or pay attention to past arguments (many famous examples). If I wanted to argue about vague shit I'd be into philosophy or psychology or I could choose any of the many other branches of argument. Humans are not very logical. At least capitalism has a clearer scorecard.
Last nerdsniped look was about Angels due to Scott Alexander:
(The Bible describes very clearly what angels look like. [snip] This is the highest-grade antimeme I feel comfortable using as an example; if you don’t see the fnords they can’t eat you.)