First, many Gap Theorists and Preterists believe it was not physical Death that began when Adam eat the forbidden fruit. And they insist that him not dying within 24 hours is proof of that, since God said "in that day". To answer that, I'll quote from Wikipedia.
Robert Alter emphasizes the point that when God forbids the man to eat from that particular tree, he says that if he does so, he is "doomed to die". The Hebrew behind this is in a form regularly used in the Hebrew Bible for issuing death sentences.[4]I also want to address what "Knowledge of Good and Evil" means. First of all it's never called the "Tree of Knowledge" without qualification, it's a certain type of Knowledge.
Also from Wikipedia.
The phrase in Hebrew: טוֹב וָרָע, tov wa-raʿ, literally translates as good and evil. This may be an example of the type of figure of speech known as merism, a literary device that pairs opposite terms together in order to create a general meaning, so that the phrase "good and evil" would simply imply "everything". This is seen in the Egyptian expression evil-good, which is normally employed to mean "everything". In Greek literature, Homer also uses the device when he lets Telemachus say, "I know all things, the good and the evil" (Od.20:309-10).[1]This seems to only further back up the perception that this narrative is vilifying knowledge. But other Bible passages encourage learning, like Paul saying 'Study and be diligent". Or the entire book of Proverbs.
Another detail from Wikipedia.
In Rashi's notes on Genesis 3:3, the first sin came about because Eve added an additional clause to the Divine command: "Neither shall you touch it". By saying this, Eve added to YHWH's command and thereby came to detract from it, as it is written: Do not add to His Words (Proverbs 30:6).I wish I'd known this when I wrote my "Yea Hath God Said" study.
Biblically the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil doesn't come up again outside of Genesis 2 and 3. The Tree of Life does, but still rather rarely.
Most notably is it coming up in Revelation, in chapter 2 verse 7, and a a few times in chapter 22, verses 2 and 14. Where it is seemingly depicted as something only those in New Jerusalem have access to, which becomes the foundation of the Conditional Immortality doctrine.
Problem with that doctrine is as special as the Tree is, nothing here says only those Eating from it live forever. At the same time contrary to popular assumption some access to it may be available to those not permanently living in New Jerusalem. It's leaves are for "the Healing of the Nations", plural, New Jerusalem is one Nation, the Kingdom Jesus rules directly. It could be only Citizens of the City can eat the Fruit, but the Leaves are for all.
Genesis 3:22 implies the Tree of Life could have prolonged Adam's life after he'd fallen. But I don't see that as proof that was it's main purpose. Clinging to this idea frankly can lead to a conclusion that even Yahuah's immortality is dependent on The Tree.
Proverbs (3:18; 11:30; 13:12; 15:4) uses the term "Tree of Life" but in English at least it seems to not be refereed to with a definite article. Most interesting is that Wisdom is called "a Tree of Life". I have been of two minds about who Wisdom is, I've viewed her both as The Holy Spirit, and as Jesus. Since those two are ultimately the same since I believe in The Trinity, that distinction isn't to important.
There are other ways the word translated Life in reference to this Tree has been translated. The same word is used to call Yahuah the Living God in Deuteronomy 5:26. Going back to Proverbs, and the perception that the Genesis narrative is calling knowledge bad. Perhaps the Tree of Life is the Tree of Divine Wisdom.
There is a theory out there that the Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge are the same. Genesis 2:9, could be read that way, as the "and" doesn't have a direct basis in the Hebrew, it could be describing two titles for the same Tree. I at first saw Genesis 3:22 as an obvious problem for that. However the word "also" can also mean again. So maybe it could still be read as referring to only one Tree, and God wanting to prevent continued eating of the Tree while Adam was in his fallen state.
Taken again from Wikipedia.
According to the one-tree theory proposed by Karl Budde, in his critical research of 1883, he outlined that there was only one tree in the body of the Genesis narrative and it qualified in two ways: one as the tree in the middle of the Garden, and two as the forbidden tree. Claus Westermann gave recognition to Budde's theory in 1976.[4]Interestingly the idea of both Trees being the same seems to be the Islamic view.
Ellen van Wolde noted in her 1994 survey that among Bible scholars "the trees are almost always dealt with separately and not related to each other” and that “attention is almost exclusively directed to the tree of knowledge of good and evil, whereas the tree of life is paid hardly any attention."[5]
The Quran never refers to the tree as the "Tree of the knowledge of good and evil" but rather typically refers to it as "the tree" or (in the words of Iblis) as the “tree of immortality”.[18] Muslims believe that when God created Adam and Eve, He told them that they could enjoy everything in the Garden but this tree, and so, Satan appeared to them and told them that the only reason God forbade them to eat from that tree is that they would become Angels or become immortals.
In the Quran Allah does not refer to it directly as the tree of life or immortality. He only referred to it as the tree; Satan was the one who called it the tree of immortality to trick Adam and Eve.I'm not sure entirely what to make of all this. But I feel I have firmly drilled holes in the logic of both Conditional Immortality and the notion that Physical Death was always something Adam was capable of.
If they are the same Tree, why was eating it bad then but not in the Future when we're Resurrected?
Possibly because we'll have been cleansed of Sin in The Blood of Jesus by then. That the "knowledge" in question wasn't knowledge we were never meant to have, Adam and Eve just weren't ready for it yet. Remember God knew what was going to happen.
But I'm still ultimately undecided.
Great Questions! And no one talks about this. I'm convinced that the tree in the middle of the garden (skulon in Greek, Ates in Hebrew) is the tree on which Jesus (the Good in flesh and the Life) was crucified. It is sin to take his Life--the Life. But it is the Grace of God to forgive "the Life." The tree is the door between time and eternity. There we lose our lives and find them in Christ. We gain the knowledge of evil, which is taking the life of Christ, and the knowledge of the Good, which is God giving his own life. At the tree God makes us in his image with faith (The ability to choose the Good, God, in freedom).
ReplyDeletePS another way to speak of this is to say that the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" is the Law--dead law. And the tree of Life is the living law--the life of Christ. We were tempted to justify ourselves with the law (create ourselves in God's image), but God justifies us with the Life of Christ--Christ in me is to live; He is my righteousness, not taken, but given, even fore-given from the foundation of the world. He is the "life-giving" Spirit (1 Cor. 15) who gives his life--the "Spirit is Life" (Romans 8)--on the tree.
ReplyDeleteI don't like that view because I feel that comes too close to Marcionism. My main view has become that the two Trees are the same Tree.
DeleteAre you the actual peter Hiett commenting on my blog?