Genesis 2

“And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’”

Genesis 2:16-17

More than any other place in the Bible, Genesis reveals so much about us and God without saying much about why. I’ve thought a lot about the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” lately. What is significant about it? Why did God set it aside and command that it not be eaten from? Why did He put it in the garden at all?

There are a lot of questions, and how we answer them have a lot of implications. I’m going to attempt to formulate some thoughts about them, but I am not answering them definitely. As I mentioned, at best I can call myself an amateur theologian, but not in regards to the Old Testament. Any thoughts you guys have would be helpful, and any other thought-provoking questions you have would also be welcomed.

So, the first question: What is significant about the “tree of knowledge of good and evil? I don’t think there is any difference between this tree and any other in the garden on any sort of physical level. I think God just chose that tree, not because something was special in it, but because He decided to choose one, and that happened to be it. Therefore, it was, in a sense, an arbitrary choice. He could have chosen any tree in garden for this purpose, probably with the exception of the tree of life. I would initially think that there is something special about the tree of life, since it is again mentioned in Revelation 22 as being in heaven and having some part of healing. Unless that imagery is entirely symbolic (which I doubt), there probably is something special about that tree that would not allow itself to be used for some other purpose.

Questions two and three: Why did God set it aside and command that it not be eaten from? and, why did He put it in the garden at all? These are much more intricate questions, because what we are really asking here is, What was God’s role in/relationship to the Fall? There’s a lot we have to think about. First, we know that God knew there would be a Fall – otherwise it would have been pretty hard to plan the redemption before Creation (unless we want to reduce God to Dr. Gregory House who treats a diagnosis based on an educated guess). But this isn’t enough – God ordained that there be a Fall, for otherwise it wouldn’t have happened (for a great discussion, in my opinion, on the sovereignty of God, read the appropriately titled The Sovereignty of God by Arthur Pink). So, did God author sin? Clearly we cannot draw that conclusion. As Pink might say, He directed sinfulness to His good pleasure without creating the sinfulness in man (see Proverbs 16:9 NASB, for example).

However, we need to analyze Adam. Was he righteous? Well, we can’t say that he was, because before the Fall, he didn’t effectively obey God. Was he sinful? No, because he wasn’t Fallen yet. Therefore, it makes sense to think about Adam as morally neutral before the Fall. He didn’t have the wrath of God on him, nor was he perfectly righteous. In a sense, he was capable of either – for with perfect obedience and no sin, he would be righteous; without perfect obedience he’d be sinful. But, without a command, he could be neither.

So, why isn’t a race of morally neutral creatures ok? What would have happened if there were no commands? After all, Romans 4:15 says, “For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.” What’s wrong with a world of morally innocent creatures?

Again, I’m not sure, but here is what I think: Romans 8:29 (“For those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers.”) and Ephesians 1:4-5 (“even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will.”) hint at it. God did not want morally innocent creatures; He wanted to take a lesser being and transform him into something godlike (if I may, He wanted them to be in the “image of God” in terms of righteousness as well as whatever else that phrase means). Note the italicized phrases in the above verses. You can’t be righteous without obedience, and therefore a Law was required; and since we are mere images of God, a Fall is inevitable; and since His purpose must stand, a Redeemer is necessary.

So why might God want this whole mess? As a result of this whole unfolding, every attribute of God is will be displayed for His own glory. Without sin, there can be no display of grace or justice or jealousy, and a weakened display of His love and truthfulness and goodness and holiness. And God must be primarily for His own glory…and so here we are.

Lord, ultimately I’m taking educated guesses as to Your motives for how You created and developed Creation. I pray that You would correct me if I am wrong, especially if I am diminishing Your glory. May my thoughts be fruitful and develop into a greater adoration of You.

Let me know what you guys think.