A Biblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden (Part 1)

There has been no shortage of writing on the nature of the two trees in the center of the Garden of Eden. From the earliest time in New Testament church history, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life have been understood to be fundamental elements of human history. While there is no shortage of writing about these trees there is, nevertheless, much disagreement as to their precise purpose in Paradise. There is, perhaps, no more helpful treatment on the trees of the Garden than that found in Geerhardus Vos’ Biblical Theology.

When he came to treat the subject of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, Vos explained that the tree served a twofold purpose. First, it was meant to be a probation–to test Adam’s obedience to his Creator. Satan would turn the test into a temptation thus making it a temporary probation. Second, it was meant to give Adam the knowledge of Good and Evil. If Adam obeyed he would learn the evil from the prospect, and in contrast to, having chosen the good. If he disobeyed, he would have learned the evil by experience and would know the good, remembering what he once was, in contrast with having chosen the evil. Vos explained this in the following manner:

To attain to a knowledge of good and evil is not necessarily an undesirable and culpable thing. It could happen in a good way, in case man stood in probation, no less than in an evil way, in case man fell. The name is neutral as to its import. That this is so frequently overlooked is due to the prohibitive form which the probation-test assumed. Because man was forbidden to eat of the tree associated with the knowledge of good and evil, it has been rashly assumed that the knowledge of good and evil was forbidden him. Obviously there is in this a confusion of thought. The prohibitive form of the test has quite a different cause, as will be presently shown.

If now we inquire how the maturity designated as ‘knowledge of good and evil’ was to be attained, either in a desirable or in an undesirable sense, regard must be had first of all to the exact form of the phrase in Hebrew. The phrase is not ‘knowledge of the good and the evil’. It reads, literally translated: ‘knowledge of good-and-evil’, i.e., of good and evil as correlated, mutually conditioned conceptions. Man was to attain something he had not attained before. He was to learn the good in its clear opposition to the evil, and the evil in its clear opposition to the good. Thus it will become plain how he could attain to this by taking either fork of the probation-choice. Had he stood, then the contrast between good and evil would have been vividly present to his mind: the good and evil he would have known from the new illumination his mind would have received through the crisis of temptation in which the two collided. On the other hand, had he fallen, then the contrast of evil with good would have even more vividly impressed itself upon him, because the remembered experience of choosing the evil and the continuous experience of doing the evil, in contrast with his memory of the good, would have shown most sharply how different the two are. The perception of difference in which the maturity consisted related to the one pivotal point, whether man would make his choice for the sake of God and of God alone…

From the true conception of the purpose of the tree we must distinguish the interpretation placed upon it by the tempter according to Gen. 3.5. This carries a twofold implication: first that the tree has in itself, magically, the power of conferring knowledge of good and evil. This lowers the plane of the whole transaction from the religious and moral to the pagan-magical sphere. And secondly, Satan explains the prohibition from the motive of envy. … Again, the divine statement in Gen. 3.22 alludes to this deceitful representation of the tempter. It is ironical.¹

It is interesting to note that it was Satan’s purpose to lead man to believe that the tree had in itself a magical power of conferring knowledge of good and evil. Vos elsewhere noted, as did Calvin, that the two tress in the midst of the Garden were sacramental. It is important to see that Satan was, from the beginning, trying to get man to misunderstand the nature of a sacrament, and to look to them as the thing in itself, working, as it were, ex opere operato.

Adam did indeed attain to the knowledge of good and evil, but, as Vos noted, he attained it from the standpoint of becoming evil and remembering the good in contrast to the evil he performed. If we make Genesis 1-3 our starting point, and then consider all the occasions in which man is called to make judgments (i.e. to decided between good and evil) we soon discover that he will always choose the evil over the good in his natural state.

When the LORD comes to assess Israel’s actions through the prophet Jeremiah this is what He concludes: ” For My people are foolish, they have not known Me. They are silly children, and they have no understanding. They are wise to do evil, But to do good they have no knowledge (Jeremiah 4:22).” A little later the Lord says of Israel, “they proceed from evil to evil, And they do not know Me,” says the LORD.” It is knowledge of the LORD that men lack. This knowledge is the knowledge of good. There are many similar verses in the prophets, in which the LORD brings the charge that men, including His people Israel, had not learned how to do good. Of course, we know that this is because most of the visible church did not have regenerate hearts. We see the culmination of their evil ways as we approach the second tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil, namely, the cross on which our Lord Jesus died in our place.

On the night when our Lord was betrayed and brought before human judges, He was struck by one of the soldiers. Explaining that He always taught openly, and that He never said anything in secret, He was vindicated His uprightness. To the soldier that struck Him, Jesus replied, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if good, why do you strike Me (John 18:23)?”

The knowledge of good and evil is always before us, and, it is evident, natural men will inevitably and irrationally choose evil each and every time they make a decision. We must understand that Jesus is the Good, just as He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Everything that involves Jesus involves the Good and the True. But this is–more than anything else–what causes the evil in man’s heart to surface. There is no greater example of this than at the cross.

The cross is the “tree” (as spoken of by Peter in 1 Peter 2: ) of the knowledge of good and evil. At Calvary the Jews and Romans (representative of all men) make the ultimate decision for evil. In the face of there cry, “Crucify Him, crucify Him,” the Divine judge shows to a world blinded by evil, His verdict on that evil. But it is there that the One who did no evil was made sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. The words of Joseph never rang so loudly, “You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good.” The One who hung on the tree restores the knowledge of the Good that Adam lost by choosing the evil for all those who trust in Him. God has chosen to reverse, in His image bearers, all that Adam lost by means of the One who hung on this tree, even our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other tree that so fully manifests the knowledge of good and evil. This is the final probation. What we do with God’s command concerning this tree is the only thing that matters now.

¹Vos, Geerhardus, Biblical Theology (1948), pp. 27-33.

photo by garry61

This entry was posted on Friday, February 6th, 2009 at 8:16 am and is filed under Biblical Imagery. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.