• Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    What’s with the weird italics and random faint superscript letters? I’m not well versed on that sort of thing, but linguistically it makes no sense that I can see…? I assume some sort of index or something for the superscript but it also has numerical superscript…?

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      translation notes I’m guessing

      “that yields seeds” could be “which yields seeds” or “doth yield seeds” or “yielding seeds” or “seed yielding” etc

  • s@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    So technically who is to blame for the fig tree that bore no fruit as mentioned in Mark 11:12–25 and Matthew 21:18–22?

    • caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 month ago

      In the Apocrypha, childhood Jesus got mad at another kid and turned him into a tree.
      Now, I’m not saying they’re the same tree. But I am saying I can do whatever I want in my own headcanon.

      2 And when Jesus saw what was done, he was wroth and said unto him: O evil, ungodly, and foolish one, what hurt did the pools and the waters do thee? behold, now also thou shalt be withered like a tree, and shalt not bear leaves, neither root, nor fruit.

      http://www.gnosis.org/library/inftoma.htm

      • Vardøgor@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        not exactly, we say fruiting bodies to be easier to describe, but you can’t botanically be a fruit without being a plant. plus spores aren’t seeds. fungi are more closely related to us than fruit!

        i wonder if any distinction was made that long ago too though, or if mushrooms would’ve been included in the original context 🤔