The Tree of Life

[theFijian]

Just wondering what peoples views are. Did anyone actually eat of the Tree of Life in the garden?

 

[samaus12345]

Genesis 3:22

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

 

[mark kennedy]

Just wondering what peoples views are. Did anyone actually eat of the Tree of Life in the garden?

Not too much is known about this mysterious tree, the preference is always the literal interpretation but in this case...well...you tell me:

In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. (Rev 22:2)​

It appears at the very beginning and at the very end. If Adam and Eve ever ate from this tree I doubt seriously the effects meant eternal life so the effects of sin would be the same, but.....maybe not. Some scholars have suggested that Adam and Eve were created temporal and had they eaten it would have lived forever, thus the cherubim with the flaming sword after the fall. Hard to say, but if they are under the curse of sin and cannot die, well, all I can tell you is it's a mystery with very few clues.

It's a little like the Ark of the Covenant. Elijah has this vision of the wheels within wheels and these four angles and some other things I have never been able to sort out. At any rate, the Ark is described as being removed from the Temple and in the Revelation it's in the Temple in heaven. There really is no more explanation then that. The Bible is full of things like this, doesn't explain, just puts it out there and just leaves it at that.

I honestly believe if you didn't struggle with believing the Bible when you read it you weren't paying attention. Mind you, that's coming from a fundamentalist, YEC, Protestant Sola Scriputura purist so just cause you believe it doesn't mean you understand it all. There's an expression later in Genesis about Abraham, it says Abraham 'believed the one who made the promise was faithful'. When it comes to this sort of thing I just fall back on trusting the power behind the prophetic utterance and wait patiently for final revelation.

No, I don't think Adam and Eve ever ate from that tree. I don't think they understood fully what the choices were before them, I do know we have the same choice. Life or death, there was never a third option.

May you be filled with the Spirit this Lord's day theFijian.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[dysert]

Genesis 3:22

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

You stopped short. Here's the whole thought:

Gen. 3:22-24:
Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- therefore the LORD God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.

So, no, no one ever ate of the tree of life (yet) because they were cast out and the tree was guarded so no one could get at it.

 

[juvenissun]

Just wondering what peoples views are. Did anyone actually eat of the Tree of Life in the garden?

I think they must have. Adam knows the name of the tree.

If I were in the Garden, I will certainly want to try it. There is nothing wrong to eat it before taking the forbidden fruit. What did Adam find out about it? Nothing. It is just another fruit.

 

[Calminian]

Just wondering what peoples views are. Did anyone actually eat of the Tree of Life in the garden?

Real garden, real tree, real snake, real commandment, real rebellion, real fall, real curse, real savior came in the flesh, real death on the cross for our sins, real resurrection from the dead in 3 days, real ascension into heaven and a real promise to return.

 

[Leggomyegolas]

Real garden, real tree, real snake, real commandment, real rebellion, real fall, real curse, real savior came in the flesh, real death on the cross for our sins, real resurrection from the dead in 3 days, real ascension into heaven and a real promise to return.

 

[Jase]

What was the purpose of the Tree of Life if everything in the Garden was already immortal?

 

[juvenissun]

What was the purpose of the Tree of Life if everything in the Garden was already immortal?

1. It is a creature of God. So, why not put it in the Garden?
2. It gives God a good reason to kick Adam and Eve out of the Garden. What if the tree were not in the Garden? What would God do?

 

[mark kennedy]

1. It is a creature of God. So, why not put it in the Garden?
2. It gives God a good reason to kick Adam and Eve out of the Garden. What if the tree were not in the Garden? What would God do?

What if it's just what it says, what if it's just a tree?

In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. (Rev 22:2)​

 

[Assyrian]

How does the Tree of Life fit with Christian theology? We have everlasting life through Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection, we are told that there is no other way. But the Tree of Life means there is another source of everlasting life. Did God create an alternative source of life, competition for the cross when he planted the tree of life in the garden? If Adam and Eve were expelled to keep them away from an alternative source of life why create this alternative to Jesus in the first place?

 

[juvenissun]

What if it's just what it says, what if it's just a tree?

In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. (Rev 22:2)​

I never think it is anything else but a tree.

 

[juvenissun]

How does the Tree of Life fit with Christian theology? We have everlasting life through Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection, we are told that there is no other way. But the Tree of Life means there is another source of everlasting life. Did God create an alternative source of life, competition for the cross when he planted the tree of life in the garden? If Adam and Eve were expelled to keep them away from an alternative source of life why create this alternative to Jesus in the first place?

There are many trees of life in the Heaven. It is just a good tree God created. In the Heaven, it is probably not a significant thing at all. There is nothing wrong that God put one, or few, in the Garden. Before the sin, there is no salvation problem.

Theologically, the tree gives a good contrast between life and death. Adam sinned, then he has to say bye bye to the tree (life).

(see, literal interpretation is much easier. you don't have to tie the tree to Jesus and get yourself some theological troubles)

 

[Assyrian]

There are many trees of life in the Heaven. It is just a good tree God created. In the Heaven, it is probably not a significant thing at all. There is nothing wrong that God put one, or few, in the Garden. Before the sin, there is no salvation problem.

Theologically, the tree gives a good contrast between life and death. Adam sinned, then he has to say bye bye to the tree (life).

(see, literal interpretation is much easier. you don't have to tie the tree to Jesus and get yourself some theological troubles)

I was looking at the literal interpretation and it is because the tree isn't tied to Jesus, but is a separate source of everlasting life that we get the theological problems.

 

[juvenissun]

I was looking at the literal interpretation and it is because the tree isn't tied to Jesus, but is a separate source of everlasting life that we get the theological problems.

No. It is not a source, because it is not available after the sin.

The only question I am not sure about the answer is Rev. 22:2 ...and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

 

[Johnnz]

There were two choices. Obey God and participate in the life that was there before them, a life here on earth working with God as stewards and priests over creation. That was the tree of life. In Proverbs is is identified with wisdom, who was there active in creation, and a theme picked up by Paul who saw In Christ the embodiment of wisdom. Then it is there again in the new earth in Revelation 22, where there is no longer the other tree.

Thus we can choose to live independently of God, and draw from the wrong tree, one of right and wrong and law, or from our relationship with Jesus who offers is Life - himself. Thus the tree of life represents Jesus ultimately.

John
NZ

 

[Assyrian]

No. It is not a source, because it is not available after the sin.

We were barred from it because it was a source of everlasting life. It is not that God solved the problem, but that there was an issue to start with, the fact that there was, and still exists, another source of everlasting life. That just does not make theological sense.

The only question I am not sure about the answer is Rev. 22:2 ...and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

It is obvious when you understand what tree it is really talking about.

 

[juvenissun]

We were barred from it because it was a source of everlasting life. It is not that God solved the problem, but that there was an issue to start with, the fact that there was, and still exists, another source of everlasting life. That just does not make theological sense.


It is obvious when you understand what tree it is really talking about.

There could be more than two ways to having everlasting life (for example, angels are created to last). But for us, there is only one way. I don't see any theological problem on this.

Based on the same logic, the healing leaves might also mean to be applied to another domain which we are not sure on what it is. My speculation is the domain of Millenniums, which is always a mystery to me.

 

[theFijian]

I was looking at the literal interpretation and it is because the tree isn't tied to Jesus, but is a separate source of everlasting life that we get the theological problems.

The Tree of Life was one of, if not the main catalysts for me coming to reject a purely literal account of Creation. As you correctly point out the literal interpretation just doesn't do the text justice when we look at the tree of life. It ends up as either a quirk or simply dismissed as being unimportant.

Here is an image of Christ in the garden, the garden made by him, through him and for him. Seeing Christ bookending scripture in Genesis and Rev 22 gives scripture a beautiful symmetry; Christ the source of eternal life for his creation and Christ the source of healing for all his creation. Unless we see Christ in the garden, in the midst of his creation I don't believe we really understand the doctrine of Creation.

 

[Assyrian]

The Tree of Life was one of, if not the main catalysts for me coming to reject a purely literal account of Creation. As you correctly point out the literal interpretation just doesn't do the text justice when we look at the tree of life. It ends up as either a quirk or simply dismissed as being unimportant.

Here is an image of Christ in the garden, the garden made by him, through him and for him. Seeing Christ bookending scripture in Genesis and Rev 22 gives scripture a beautiful symmetry; Christ the source of eternal life for his creation and Christ the source of healing for all his creation. Unless we see Christ in the garden, in the midst of his creation I don't believe we really understand the doctrine of Creation.

I like your idea of symmetry between Genesis and Revelation, the beginning of the bible and the end, enclosing the whole bible, not simply the symbolic book of Revelation echoing the symbols of Genesis. There is a river with both pictures of the Tree of Life too. In Revelation the tree is on either side of the river of life and its fruit are for the healing of the nations. In Genesis we are not told the Tree of Life is planted beside the river, but the river is mentioned in the next verse flowing out from Eden and splitting into four to water the whole of the world they knew from Assyria to Ethiopia. What was guarded (shamar verse 15) in Eden was meant for the whole world. We see this fulfilled in Revelation.