Where the Heart Lies
“but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’ ” Genesis 3:3 NASB
Middle – Only one tree was in the middle of the Garden—the Tree of Life (Genesis 2:9). At least that’s God’s perspective on the matter. But it’s not the woman’s point-of-view. Her focus is on something else. Do you know why?
The first few chapters of Genesis set the stage for all the rest of the Bible. These opening chapters provide us with the fundamental questions and answers of life. One of these questions is this: What matters most to you? What are you really concerned about?
The story on the Fall is subtle. It contains clues, oddities, reminders and unwritten questions that prod the reader (or listener) to dig much deeper. It is not a Sunday School story. One of those subtle clues is found in the difference between God’s priority and the priority of the couple. In God’s world, the Tree of Life is in the center of the Garden. In Havvah’s world, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is in the center (Hebrew: tôk). How does this shift of geography reveal something about the human condition?
The question is not just exegetical. It’s fundamental to our way of viewing the world. We might desire the Tree of Life to be in the center of our Garden, but we usually act as if the way to get to the center of the Garden is via the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In other words, we think that life comes through choosing our own way. Havvah doesn’t choose to eat from the Tree in order to replace God. She chooses to eat from the Tree because she thinks that this will help her fulfill her role as ‘ezer kenegdo. In other words, she thinks she can improve on God’s design by determining good and evil for herself. She isn’t trying to replace God. She’s trying to assist Him. The desire is to be like God, not to be God. Havvah’s route to life goes through the Tree of experiencing good and evil. God’s route to life circumvents that option.
This leads us to ask: “What is the purpose of the two trees?” If we approach the text with a Greco-Roman worldview, we will think that the commandment prohibiting eating from the Tree is restrictive. That’s what Greco-Roman rules are—restrictions of our freedom to choose. So the Tree becomes a test of obedience. It functions as the focal point of compliance. But the Hebraic worldview is different. Commandments are not restrictions. They are life itself. The purpose of the commandment about the Tree is not to prevent us from experiencing. It is to protect us from experiencing. The Tree represents a life-threatening experience and the commandment is God’s way of warning us to stay away. The purpose of the commandment is good for us (as Paul later notes). But because it focuses attention on the subject to be avoided, it acts like the pink elephant. And for Havvah, this means that this particular Tree takes center stage. For God it’s just one more thing in the Garden of Delight; a warning sign posted somewhere in the Garden. For Havvah it’s the most important thing because it carries the mystic of forbidden. Isn’t that what we all deal with? “What would it be like to just try that forbidden thing, just once, just to see how it feels?”
The Tree gives the knowledge of good and evil but does not give us the difference between right and wrong. Adam already knew the difference between right and wrong. He had to, or the commandment wouldn’t be effective. What he knew is that what God asked was right, and what God forbade was wrong. What he didn’t know was what it was like to make that determination. In fact, making that determination is divine work, not human calculation. Human beings are not equipped for this job. And God knows that, so He provides instructions to keep us safe in an environment where disastrous choices abound.
Does the serpent tell the truth when he says, “you will be like gods”? Yes, he does. The problem is that human beings aren’t designed to be like gods. Trying to be like gods kills us. The Genesis account is a story that instructs us about the foolishness of thinking we can be divine. It’s not about what we aren’t allowed to do. It’s about what’s safe to do. Some things just aren’t safe for us.
Topical Index: Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, middle, tôk, focus, Genesis 3:3
I have wondered about the character of God as we on this planet know it; all those hundreds of Names – descriptions of His character – such as Saviour; Redeemer; Protector. Most of the characteristics we know Him as are not applicable to any situation other than the dangerous and deadly one we are in. Did He even have those characteristics before we needed them?
Was our choice at the Tree a choice that affected – CHANGED – Him, too? Is this what love is? A two way street? Would a Greek agree?
Did our choice to allow danger for us plunge Him into danger, too? Is this what we need, with David (“against Thee, and Thee only, have I sinned”), to really repent to Him for?
This is one that is difficult for me to wrap my head around. That the very story of “The Garden” and “The Fall” may not be what I have always thought they were is kinda jaw dropping! I am not really surprised as so much of what I thought I knew has already been changed but this one is just different somehow.
However, I can see in human nature the tendency to think we can be divine (didn’t the Greeks/Romans do that all the time) when in reality we fall way short. Stewards of all He created, that is still our job as far as I know. He is ruler and Lord of All and we serve Him and each other, right?
But then we just resist the notion that we are really children and God puts warning signs on stuff that’s bad for us to protect us. Aren’t we wise enough to know this ourselves? Guess not if what Skip lays out above is true! How many times do we hear someone say “don’t tell me what to do?” Seems we are still kicking against the goads!
Again something that makes me consider things differently now.The subtle difference between what we’re allowed to do and what is safe to do could be life changing I think.
I could never wrap my mind around the physical aspect of the Garden story, I could only accept it as symbolic and for me it still is. Gen. 3:19 suggests that people were created mortal, (God created a tree of life). Immortal people have no need for a tree of life. Our mortal bodies were all formed “from the earth” same as Adam and Eve while our immortal bodies were created in heaven and there we were given life, ready to become one new man someday.
Only the male seed can “create” a man or a woman, a 50/50 chance and God gave this role to Adam. Only a woman can give birth and does. There are reasons why we use such terms as mother earth, or give ships that carry men the names of women who will “bear” them, and mother nature from whom all the goodness of the earth gives birth, and father time – death, the grim reaper.
This is not to suggest that Adam and Eve were not real people, or that Melchizedek was not either, we just don’t know who they were. Either way they do point to truths beyond themselves, which is the essence of mythology. Humans are essentially bi-symmetrical beings both physically and emotionally with the capacity for emphasis in either direction each way and Adam and Eve are archetypes of us all. The bible itself neither supports nor denies the specifics of how God went about creating both the cosmos and humans, it simply says that He did.
That in and of itself is good enough for me.
Just a note. Remember that the woman was not created from the same material as the man. And that the idea of immortal “bodies” created in heaven leans toward a dualism not found in the Tanakh
Ooooo- what could THIS MEAN?!? Please expound!!!
Hi George. You wrote “Gen. 3:19 suggests that people were created mortal, (God created a tree of life). Immortal people have no need for a tree of life”
There is another possibility…
When you flip a coin, while in the air, is it heads? is it tails? Neither… until it drops and lays flat on the ground.
Adam and Eve, where they mortal? where they inmortal? Neither… until they chose to eat a fruit from the “Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil” instead of the “Tree of Life”…
I like how you said it Alfredo. Freewill is potential….for death or for life. And freewill needed both Trees to be present. How much love is God….! To not be afraid to give those in His image that extraordinary potential and provide opportunity for life again to us… by dying? Those angelic beings who chose the wrong, were not afforded that opportunity. Blessings. FJ