The Pleroma (11) - Charles H. Welch

No.11. Two attitudes to the curse -

Civilization or Redemption. 

While it is the responsibility of the teacher to deal with positive truth rather than pursue all the possible and impossible side lines of controversy, we must not forget that occasionally the purpose of grace is served by pausing in the pursuit of truth, in order that a necessary warning may be given. So the Apostle, in Col. i. 28, combines ‘warning with ‘teaching’ and in II Tim. iii. 16 ‘instruction’ is associated with ‘correction’. It is sometimes as important, when giving directions, to warn not to turn to the left, as it is to instruct to turn to the right. 

If the pleroma is God’s consequent reaction to the failure brought about by the enemy, and if the attack of the enemy is characterized by deceit and counterfeit more than by open warfare, it should not surprise us to discover early in the record of truth, that an attempt was made to substitute a false pleroma for the true. 

When Jude wrote in his epistle of the prophecy uttered by Enoch, he is careful to designate him as ‘the seventh from Adam’, the reason being that there was another of the same name in the line of Cain. This was a part of the deceiver’s attempt to foist a substitute for truth upon the earth. 

The A.V. margin of Gen. iv. 17 draws the reader’s attention to the fact that the Hebrew is chanock and as there is no such note at Gen. v. 18 he may suspect that the names are not identical. The same spelling is employed in Gen. iv. 17 as in Gen. v. 18, and when the genealogy is repeated in I Chron. i. 3, it is spelt henoch. 

To Enoch in the line of Cain was born Irad which is similar, though not identical with Jared, the son of Mahalaleel (Gen. v. 15). The difference between these two names is that of one letter, Irad employing one letter more than Jared in the original. Another pair of names that suggest substitution is Methusael (Gen. iv. 18) & Methuselah (Gen. v. 21), which differs only in the conclusion of the word. At the close of Cain’s line is Lamech, whose boast introduces the words ‘sevenfold’ and ‘seventy and seven fold’ (Gen. iv. 24), while Lamech the father of Noah, lived “seven hundred, seventy and seven years”. There is sufficient superficial likeness in these names to suggest intention, and that intention coming through the line of Cain would be evil. 

The record of Cain’s descendants opens with a reference to the curse that had fallen upon the earth (Gen. iv. 11) and Cain’s attempt to palliate the effects of the curse is CIVILIZATION, “He builded a city” (Gen. iv. 17). Lamech, the descendant of Seth also speaks of the curse which rested upon the ground, but instead of attempting to minimize the curse by human expedients, he looked for ‘rest’ through the ministry of his son Noah, whom he so named, because the word means ‘comfort’ or ‘rest’. Lamech looked to REDEMPTION where Cain looked to civilization. 

The first cities of the Bible are associated with evil and rebellion. 

(1) Enoch, the city built by Cain after the curse (Gen. iv. 17). 

(2) Nineveh, the city built by Nimrod, the mighty Rebel (Gen. x. 11). 

(3) Babel, the city and tower built in rebellion (Gen. xi. 4). 

(4) Sodom, the city which was destroyed by fire (Gen. xix. 24). 

Meanwhile Abraham had left Ur of the Chaldees, and had become a pilgrim and a stranger, dwelling in tents, having here ‘no continuing city’ but seeking ‘one to come’ (Heb. xi. 10, 16; xiii. 14). 

Let us ponder the record of Lamech, his reference to Noah and his typical work of deliverance. The primary significance of the Hebrew preposition min, translated 

‘because’ in Gen. v. 29, is that of ‘a part or portion’, hence something arising out of, or caused by, anything, as for example Israel who sighed ‘by reason of’ the bondage they endured (Exod. ii. 23). Lamech had no doubt but that the ‘work and toil’ which life imposed, was ‘because’ of the curse that had fallen upon the ground. 

The story of Gen. i.-ix., from Adam to Noah, is bounded by references to the “ground”, Hebrew adamah. 

A | i. 26. “Every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth (ground).” 

   B | ii. 5. “There was not a man to till the ground.” 

* * * * * * * 

A | ix. 2. “All that moveth (creepeth) upon the earth (ground).” 

   B | ix. 20. “Noah began to be an husbandman (lit. a man of the ground).”

In between these two sets of references is the curse, the flood, and the new start under Noah. The impression which this survey leaves in the mind is that Lamech was right. Not the building of a city, but the building of an Ark was God’s pleroma to fill the gap or rent occasioned by the curse. The way of Cain is still markedly different from the way of Abel. 

The parallels between Adam and Noah are so many and so clear, that the reader who once perceives them cannot avoid the conclusion that with Noah, God was making a new start. 

Before setting out the parallel passages, we note one or two more features of interest concerning Lamech. 

“In naming his son Noah, Lamech emphasized his felt need of rest. Noah is derived from nuach which means ‘to be at rest’, and occurs in Gen. viii. 4, ‘and the ark rested in the seventh month’. Again in Exod. xx. 11, ‘for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day’. When we read in Gen. viii. 9, ‘the dove found no rest’, the word is manoach, or in viii. 21, ‘the Lord smelled a sweet savour’, the word ‘sweet’ is nichoach, and literally the passage reads, ‘a savour of rest’. 

Thus it will be seen that for God as well as man there is a place of rest, and that rest is Christ, of whom Noah and the ark are prophetic. 

Lamech in naming his son said, ‘this same shall comfort us (nacham, or give us rest) concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed’. The word rendered ‘toil’ is twice rendered ‘sorrow’ in Gen. iii. where the curse is first pronounced, ‘I will greatly multiply thy sorrow’, and ‘in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life’ (verses 16, 17). The words ‘work and toil’ may be a figure, meaning very grievous work; the work and the toil are clearly specified as being the work and toil of the hands, and in connection with the ground, that under the curse yielded but thorns and thistles of itself, and bread only by ‘sweat of face’. 

Lamech, ‘the seventh from Adam’, in the line of Cain, has three sons, one (Jabal) kept cattle, and so continued in the work of the ground, but Jubal was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ, and Tubal-cain an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron. It would appear that the veneer which has spread over the curse, and which is variously named culture, civilization, etc., to-day, was originated by the sons of Lamech in Cain’s line; the Lamech who begat Noah, however, is in direct contrast, he does not appear to have attempted to evade the weary toil that must be experienced by those who, by sweat of face, eat the bread that is produced by the ground that is cursed. Lamech longed for rest, but he did not accept the vain travesties of Cain’s descendants. There are many to-day who, surrounded by the comforts and inventions of man could scarcely believe that there is truth in the record of the curse on the ground. The products of the earth and sea are brought to their door; no thought passes through their mind as to the sorrow and the toil that someone, somewhere, must endure to provide them with the necessities of life. Lamech knew no such deadening influence; the toil of his hands was hard and wearying because of the ground that the Lord had cursed. A friend writing recently gave an unconscious echo of Lamech’s words, saying, "When one, from the back of the land, sees the toil of man and beast, there come to the lips no more fitting words than, ‘Even so, Come, Lord Jesus’. " 

Harps and organs, however, melodious and charming, brass and iron, modeled and designed into the most wonderful of machines and inventions, though they may ‘prove’ to the natural man the upward development of man’s attainments, afford no rest for those in whose hearts the truth of God abides.Rest for them is found in the true Noah, whose witness and whose experiences testify of the resurrection, and a new heavens and a new earth,wherein dwelleth righteousness.” (From Volume VIII of The Berean Expositor, pages 101-103). 

Let us now set out the evident parallelism that the record of Genesis provides between the lift story of Adam and that of Noah. 

---------------------

(From The Berean Expositor vol. 42, page 232).
http://charleswelch.net/BE%20Vol%2042%20Final.pdf

------------------

Greater Riches than the Treasures in Egypt (3)

by Charles H. Welch

No.3. The only ground of boasting 

(I Cor. i. 31; iii. 21 - 23). 

In the preceding article we were concerned largely with the faction and division that raised the party cries ‘I am of Paul, I am of Apollos’ etc., and realized that this party spirit is in mind right through the section, Paul, Apollos and Cephas being mentioned by name in the closing verses of chapter iii. 

‘Glorying’ or ‘boasting’ falls into two main groups, namely, those things in which the believer can boast, and those things in which he cannot or must not boast. Those references which do not fall under one or other of these categories will need to be considered separately. 

(1) Legitimate grounds of boasting for the believer. 

This list can be headed with the words of I Cor. i. 31:

“He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.” 

The only true ground of boasting or glorying for a sinner saved by grace is expressed in the words of Gal. vi. 14: 

“But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

It is the characteristic of the true believer that he is one that: 

“Worships God in spirit, boasts or glories in Christ Jesus, and has no confidence in the flesh” (Phil. iii. 13). 

This boasting, while it may be expressed in faltering tones here and now, will be fully expressed in the day of redemption, 

“that I may rejoice, boast or glory, in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain” (Phil. ii. 16). 

This relation of the apostle’s “boasting” in that day, with the faithfulness of those believers who came under his care, is more fully announced when he said:

“For what is our hope, or joy, or crown or rejoicing (or glorying)? Are not ever ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at His coming?” (I Thess. ii. 19). 

When the Apostle would bring the first great section of Romans to a conclusion, which he does in Rom. v. 1-11, he writes his exultant praise around three occurrences of kauchaomai thus: 

A1 | 1, 2. BOASTING in hope. 

     B | 3-. Not only so. 

A2 | -3-10. BOASTING in tribulation also. 

     B | 11-. Not only so. 

A3 | -11. BOASTING in God. 

The interposition of the ‘glorying in tribulations also’ brings us to another aspect of truth. It must not be assumed from the rigorous denial of all grounds of boasting in self and the flesh, that Paul was austere or unsympathetic in his dealings with fellow believers—the opposite is the truth. He finds some grounds for thanksgiving in the opening salutation of the epistle to the Corinthians, even though the bulk of the epistle exposes such aberration and folly as to cause the Apostle to weep. After all that he has said to the contrary he said he would ‘boast’ in himself, but not in his prowess his wisdom, his success, but in his infirmities! 

“He said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee; for My strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me . . . . . for when I am weak, then I am strong” (II Cor. xii. 9, 10). 

He who could glory in tribulations and infirmities as did the Apostle, was no defeatist or cynic; he was an exultant believer delivered once and for ever from the vanity of self-justification, and could, from that standpoint, see that even his own acknowledged frailty but emphasized the power of Christ upon him. In much the same way, the same Apostle who resolutely set aside all boasting in self and in men, could punctuate II Cor. vii.-ix. with this boasting in the generosity of the Corinthian church.

“Great is my boldness of speech toward you, great is my glorying of you: I am filled with comfort, I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation” (II Cor. vii. 4). 

Other references to the same theme are II Cor. vii. 14; viii. 24 and ix. 3, 4. But in all this the discerning reader will see that there is no boasting in the flesh. To this end, the concluding verse of II Cor. ix. should be pondered. When he had said all that could be said about the liberality of the Corinthians and their magnificent response, he gives the whole passage a significant turn at the end by saying: 

“Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable Gift” (II Cor. ix. 15). 

Similarly when Paul said that he had whereof he could boast through Jesus Christ, it was ‘in those things which pertain to God’, which the context reveals to be the grace given to him as the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles (Rom. xv. 15-20). In like manner, in the self-same chapter of Galatians where he writes ‘God forbid that I should boast’ he says “But let every man prove his own work and then shall he have rejoicing (or a ground of boasting) in himself alone, and not in another. For every man shall bear his own burden (or allotted task, pack or load)” (Gal. vi. 4, 5). 

(2) The Apostle has brought together a series of reasons to show that boasting in human merit, when the subject is related to sin and salvation, is entirely excluded. 

Again we can head this list with quotations from the passages in Corinthians that are before us: 

“That no flesh should glory in His presence” (I Cor. i. 29). 

“Therefore let no man glory in men” (I Cor. iii. 21). 

In his two fundamental epistles, namely Romans and Ephesians, while the dispensations differ and the sphere of blessing differs, they are in accord regarding the question of boasting in self. Having brought the great question of justification by faith without the deeds of the law to its triumphant conclusion in Rom. iii. 19-26, he puts the question and supplies the answer. 

“Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith” (Rom. iii. 27). 

In like manner, in Ephesians, he speaks of salvation and boasting: 

“By grace are ye saved through faith: and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. ii. 8, 9). 

The classic example of Abraham occupies a large portion of the opening section of Rom. i. 1 - v.11, and there we read:

“What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?” (Rom. iv. 1). 

All that Paul has said is summed up in the words of I Cor. i. 29 “That no flesh should glory in His presence”. 

It might be well if we remember that enopion “In His Presence” is translated “in His sight” in Rom. iii. 20: 

“There shall be no flesh justified in His sight” (Rom. iii. 20). 

The intensive form katenopion and its usage makes any boasting in the presence of God, excepting boasting in the Lord, impossible. The word occurs but five times. Two references deal with witness (II Cor. ii. 17; xii. 19), the remaining three with complete and unconditional acceptance. 

“According as He hath chosen us in Him, before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame BEFORE Him” (Eph. i. 4). 

“In the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in His SIGHT” (Col. i. 22). 

What more fitting conclusion to an article like this can there be than the doxology of the epistle of Jude: 

“Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless BEFORE THE PRESENCE of His glory, with exceeding joy, TO the only wise God our Saviour, be glory, and majesty, dominion and power both now and ever. Amen.” (Jude 24, 25). 

---------------

(From The Berean Expositor vol. 41, page 115).

http://charleswelch.net/BE%20Vol%2041%20Final.pdf

---------------

Greater Riches than the Treasures in Egypt (2)

by Charles H. Welch

No.2. The setting of our key texts 

(I Cor. i. 30; iii. 21 - 23). 

In our approach to the N.T. and to the apprehension of all for which we have been apprehended of Christ Jesus, our attention was directed to the words of Paul in his letter to the Corinthians (I Cor. i. 30 and iii. 21-23). There is so much in these two passages, that we shall be compelled to halt and weigh them over in the balances of the Sanctuary before passing on to other and similar passages. Indeed we may well discover, that by the time we have considered these two passages, together with their parallels in other epistles, that there will be very little left to say. In order to appreciate the Apostle’s conclusions as set forth in these two extracts from I Corinthians, we must acquaint ourselves with the context, then examine the A.V. translations and make any adjustments that fuller light and accurate scholarship indicates, and finally to consider each term or phrase as so many steps leading to the Divine goal. In the present study, let us endeavour to place Paul’s conclusions in their true relation with the context. 

The first Epistle to the Corinthians owes its origin, humanly speaking, to five allied causes: 

(1) The report of the household of Chloe. 

(2) A common report concerning their morals. 

(3) A letter from the Corinthians. 

(4) A special error in doctrine—the resurrection. 

(5) The collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem. 

The epistle follows the order of these five features, chapters: 

i. - iv. deal with divisions in the church. 

v., vi. deal with immorality in the church. 

vii. - xiv. deal with the letter from the church. 

xv. deal with the subject of resurrection. 

xvi. deal with the collection for the saints. 

The structure of the epistle follows this fivefold subdivision of theme, but puts the emphasis on certain features that might otherwise be overlooked. 

I Corinthians as a whole 

A | i. 1-9. Waiting for the coming of the Lord. 

    B | i. 10 - iv. 21. “IT HATH BEEN DECLARED UNTO ME.” 

        C | v. 1 - xiv. 30. The body, physically, spiritually, ecclesiastically. 

    B | xv. “I DECLARE UNTO YOU.” 

A | xvi. Maranatha. The Lord cometh. 

It will be seen that after a salutation or introduction of the epistle to the church as a whole, with a stress upon the place that the hope of the Lord’s return should have in their lives (I Cor. i. 7-9), the Apostle immediately plunges into the problems that threatened the spiritual life of the Corinthians by the words “it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you”. We must not for a moment think of these members of the household of Chloe as tale-bearers, but rather that by dint of personal probing and questioning, Paul had unearthed the confused state in which the church of the Corinthians had been thrown by their divisions, their laxity of morals and their doctrinal errors. 

The great Rabbi Hillel said “Many fathers, much strife”, and Paul’s own expression “Though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers”, seems to point to the cause of divisions among them. He feared that when he did come among them that there might still be “debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings and tumults” (II Cor. xii. 20). It had become evident that the coming of Apollos to them, instead of proving an unmixed blessing, had been used by the evil one to sow discord. Paul had designedly used simple language when among them, owing to their predilection to “excellency of speech and of wisdom” (I Cor. ii. 11), in order that their faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. As a result, some of the Corinthians, disappointed and possibly rebuffed by the Apostle’s attitude, spoke of his personal appearance as ‘mean’ and of his speech as ‘contemptible’ (II Cor. x. 10). Apollos was mighty in the Scriptures, and fervent in spirit, and had been much blessed by the ministry of Aquila and Priscilla, so that he “helped them much which had believed through grace” (Acts xviii. 27). Apollos moreover was ‘eloquent’ logios and this gift may have been seized upon by some of the Corinthians as a weapon with which to beat Paul. 

“Apollos, who had followed him, though an able man, was an inexperienced Christian, and not only by the natural charm of his impassioned oratory, but also by the way in which he entered into subtle refinements so familiar to the Alexandrian intellect, had unintentionally led them first of all to despise the unsophisticated simplicity of St. Paul’s teaching, and next to give the rein to all the skeptical fancies with which their faith was overlaid . . . . . St. Paul could not but see the most extravagant exaggerations of his own doctrines—the half-truths, which are ever the most dangerous of errors” (Farrar, Life and Work of Paul). 

While naturally there was a Greek element in the church of Corinth, a company who could be reminded that they were “Gentiles, carried away by these dumb idols, even as ye were led” (I Cor. xii. 1), there was a strong Jewish section who also could be reminded by Paul “how that all our fathers were under the cloud and in the sea” (I Cor. x. 1, 2). 

The Judaic Christians who came armed with ‘letters of commendation’ (II Cor. iii. 1) from the twelve at Jerusalem, would naturally be most acceptable to the Jewish section of the church, with the consequence that the emergence of a party that favoured Apollos, drove the Jewish section to range themselves under the name of Peter, or apparently as they preferred to call him, Cephas, avoiding even the Gentile name which the Lord had given to him. Already at Corinth there had been invidious comparisons made between the apostleship of Peter and of Paul, to which allusions can be found in both epistles addressed to the Corinthians. Reluctantly, the Apostle wrote: “I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles. But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge . . . . . are they Hebrews?” (II Cor. xi. 5, 6, 22), and so, added to those who raised the party cry “I am of Apollos”, was sounded the equally mischievous cry “I am of Cephas”. 

Later, when he does refer to Apollos, he most nobly places Apollos upon an equal footing with himself saying: 

 “Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed . . . . . I have planted, Apollos watered: but God gave the increase, so then neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase” (I Cor. iii. 5-7). 

“These things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes: that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up FOR ONE AGAINST ANOTHER” (I Cor. iv. 6). 

To such, Paul wrote the words already cited: 

“Therefore let no man glory in men. For ALL THINGS ARE YOURS, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come: ALL ARE YOURS: and ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s” (I Cor. iii. 23). 

--------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 41, page 113).

--------------

The Pleroma (10) - Charles H. Welch

No.10. Behold the fig tree, and all the trees. 

The reader may at times have wondered why the whole issue of life and death should have ‘hung upon a tree’ in the garden of Eden, and as the choice of this emblem manifests something of the wisdom and knowledge of the Lord, it may not be amiss if we turn our attention to the place that ‘trees’ occupy in the working out of the purpose of the ages. 

It is only within our own times that the extensive importance of trees to the well being of the world has been recognized as the following extracts will show: 

“Every moment that he draws breath here below man is dependent on the grass of the field for his very being. Sir Thomas Browne knew this and pointed it out in Religio Medici. ‘All flesh is grass, is not only metaphorically, but literally true; for all those creatures that we behold are but the herbs of the field digested into flesh in them, or more remotely in ourselves’. In the fourth chapter of this present book, Mr. Baker puts the same thought into a few words ‘Thus the tree, with the help of plant life, controls the food supply and life of man and of the animal kingdom’. 

A great deal of Mr. Baker’s writing in all his books has been concerned with the disasters that follow when man forgets that he is not the world’s master, but one of many tenants. The tenants are animate and inanimate—or so we chose to call them, though the animation of a tree is an inescapable thing, and some trees take on the proportions of majestic personality. But, call them what we may, the further we go into the matter the more deeply we apprehend that men and trees, grass and birds, the beasts of the field and all living things are held in a balance that may not lightly be disturbed . . . . . We find in this book some truly terrifying pictures of man flying in the face of Nature, ruthlessly uprooting and burning the very stuff that holds the world together: and no less terrible pictures of Nature making her implacable reply. Man strips the forests of China: Nature swirls away in the Yellow River every year 2,500,000 tons of the soil on which man might live. Man strips the western prairies to the bone; Nature hands him a dust bowl . . . . . When improvidence goes so far that one edition of an American newspaper consumes twenty-four acres of forest, it is not difficult to imagine a too-near time when the plight of those Negroes (a tragedy on the Gold Coast) shall be the plight of millions of mankind. Only knowledge, implementing a rational co-operation with Nature, can avert such a disaster; and I am not aware of any writer today who spreads that knowledge more fruitfully than Mr. St. Barbe Baker” (Howard Spring). 

A distinguished engineer some twelve years ago, warned America that unless something drastic and immediate was done to prevent the squandering of the soil, that America had not another 100 years before it of virile national existence. Another authority as late as 1946 pointed out that one-eighth of the crop land of the U.S.A. had been ruined by erosion, another eighth almost ruined, on a further quarter erosion is at work, and that in 100 years from now the United States will not be able to sustain a living man. 

Mr. St. Barbe Baker says: 

“The red lights are against us in our reckless career. To continue to rape the earth and fight for dwindling supplies of food and timber, spells destruction . . . . . Let us remember that the empires of Babylon, Syria, Persia and Carthage were destroyed by the advance of floods and deserts caused by the increasing clearing of forests for farmland.”

Much more to the same effect could be quoted, but what has been given is sufficient, not only to emphasize the extreme importance that must be attached to trees in their influence upon climate, soil and fertility, but to reveal once more to our wondering eyes, how completely abreast of the times is the Word of the living God. He knew what man is but now learning through centuries of folly for food or ill man’s destiny was intimately associated with trees. 

When the great day of the Lord shall come and judgment is about to fall on the earth we read: 

“Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads” (Rev. vii. 3). 


When the storm breaks, we read: 

“The first angel sounded . . . . . and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up” (Rev. viii. 7). 

Again when the bottomless pit is opened and the scourge of supernatural locusts is let loose on the earth, we read: 

“And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads” (Rev. ix. 4). 

From whence came this knowledge of the superlative value of trees but from the Lord Himself?

The wisdom of Solomon is proverbial, and it is written that his wisdom excelled that of all the children of the east country and of Egypt, and of what did Solomon speak? 

“And he spake three thousand proverbs, and his sons were a thousand and five, and he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall” (I Kings iv. 29-34). 

The book of Psalms opens with the blessedness of the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, and says “He shall be like a tree planted by rivers of water” (Psa. i. 3). Jeremiah uses the same figure to describe the man whose hope is in the Lord (Jer. xvii. 8). 

Much has been said by adverse critics of the Bible concerning the barbarity of the wars that are described in its pages, but moderns could learn with profit the humanitarian law of Deut. xx. 19: 

“When thou shalt besiege a city a long time, in making war against it to take it, thou shalt not destroy the trees thereof . . . . . thou shalt not cut them down to employ them in the siege (for the tree of the field is man’s life)” (Deut. xx. 19). 

Here again the recognition of the extreme value of trees in the law of Moses anticipates modern science by centuries. The purpose of the ages may be said to hang upon three trees: 

The Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 
The Tree upon which Christ was crucified. 

The Tree of Life. 

The curse came in with reference to the first, and it is written ‘no more curse’ when the last is made accessible. The middle one, the cross, is where Saviour was made a curse for us, as it is written “Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree” (Gal. iii. 13). 

The book of Proverbs uses the figure of the “Tree of life” four times, and indeed speaks of a tree in no other way. There are two other occurrences of the Hebrews ets but these are translated ‘wood’ in relation to a fire. 

Wisdom. “Happy is the man that findeth wisdom . . . . . she is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her” (Prov. iii. 13-18). 
Righteousness. “The righteous shall flourish as a branch (for ‘leaf’). The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life” (Prov. xi. 28-30). 
Desire. “When the desire cometh, it is a tree of life” (Prov. xiii. 12). 
Heading. “A wholesome tongue is a tree of life” (margin: The healing of the tongue) 

(Prov. xv. 4). “The tongue, as a healing thing” (Miller’s translation). 

These, together with Gen. ii. 9 and iii. 22, are all the passages of the O.T. that speak of the Tree of Life. To these we may add the three references that are found in the Revelation. 

“To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God” (Rev. ii. 7). 

“In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river was there the tree of life . . . . . the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Rev. xxii. 2). 

 “Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life” (Rev. xxii. 14). The texts read ‘Wash their robes’ instead of ‘do His commandments’ stole ‘robe’ instead of entole. 

It will be seen that the tree of life does not stand for life in the abstract but in its outgoings. Wisdom that is held fast, righteousness that bears fruit, a healing tongue, and a fulfilled desire. 

Let us now turn to the record of Gen. ii. and iii.: 

“The tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil” (Gen. ii. 9).


“Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it” (Gen. ii. 17). 

It will be observed that the tree of life is said to have been ‘in the midst of the garden’. Now when the woman refers to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, she says “Of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden” which means either that the two trees stood together, side by side, or that the two trees must be considered as representing one thing from two aspects. 

How was it that neither Adam nor his wife partook of the tree of life? There was no prohibition, but two things seem clear from Gen. iii. 22: 

(1) Man had partaken of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 
(2) He might then have gone further and have taken of the tree of life, but was prevented. A flaming sword was placed at the east of the garden to keep the way of the tree of life. 

Let us summarize what we have elsewhere discovered regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. An undue emphasis upon evil is untrue, there should be as much stress laid upon the word ‘good’, and if every ‘good’ is balanced by an ‘evil’ and this is known, no thought of temptation, a bait or a snare is tolerable. Angels evidently know ‘good and evil’ and a comparison of II Sam. xiv. 17 and 20, will show ‘good and evil’ is synonymous with ‘all things’, and it is obvious that if one knew all that is good and all that is evil, he would have all knowledge.

That there were two trees in the midst of the garden, Gen. ii. 9, iii. 3 and iii. 22 make clear, but if we confine ourselves simply to ‘trees’ and pay no regard to meaning or typical teaching, of what interest can two trees planted centuries ago, be to us? It is what those two trees stand for, and the consequences of Adam’s attitude to the Divine prohibition that bears upon us all. How can we explain why it was that man in his innocency, did not put forth his hand and eat of the tree of life, and live for ever? What was to stop him? 

In our endeavour to find a reasonable explanation of this somewhat strange fact, our mind returns to the group of references to the tree of life in Proverbs. We observe that the coming of ‘desire’ is likened to a tree of life (Prov. xiii. 12) and that this word ‘desire’ is a translation of the same Hebrew word that comes in Gen. iii. 6 “pleasant (margin ‘a desire’) to the eyes”. We also note that ‘the desire accomplished is sweet to the soul’ (Prov. xiii. 19). We learn that ‘the desire of the righteous shall be granted’ (Prov. x. 24) and that ‘the desire of the righteous is only good’ (Prov. xi. 23). 

All desires, however, are not good, nor can their attainment be likened unto a tree of life. Some desires are but ‘coveting’, as Prov. xxi. 26 (margin) will show. Wisdom also is associated with the tree of life in Proverbs (iii. 13-18), and it will be remembered that when the woman saw that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she succumbed to the temptation. The word translated ‘wisdom’ in Prov. iii. 13 is defined by Wilson as among other things, ‘the discrimination of good and evil’. In following the ‘desire’ and seeking to be ‘wise’ our first parents did not fulfil one other condition indicated in Proverbs. They were not ‘righteous’ (Prov. xi. 30) for in taking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil they transgressed. It would appear that so far as the typical teaching is concerned, what needed two separate trees to set forth the truth, can be represented in the spirit by two aspects of the same action. 

Had our first parents obeyed God, desire would have been righteous and the tree of life would have been taken; but inasmuch as they disobeyed, desire was unrighteous and death came in its train. There is much more that lies behind the references to these two trees; but we shall be unable to include one or two equally important references if we stay longer. 

A tree is associated with the bearing of a curse (Deut. xxi. 23) and so points on to the ‘tree’ upon which the Saviour died the just for the unjust (Gal. iii. 13). In three passages in the Acts the cross of Christ is spoken of as a ‘tree’ (Acts v. 30; x. 39; xiii. 29), and is so called by Peter in his epistle (I Pet. ii. 24), who never mentions the word ‘cross’ once. Paul in Galatians speaks both of the ‘tree’, as it touched the Jew under the law, and the ‘cross’ as it touched Gentiles by nature. 

The ‘healing’ that is associated with the tree of life (Rev. xxii. 2) and the ‘healing’ brought about by the ‘tree’ shown to Moses (Exod. xv. 25) alike point to that salvation which was accomplished by the cross, for the word ‘salvation’ soteria is derived from sozo which is often used to speak of “healing” or making “whole” (Matt. ix. 21; Acts iv. 9, 12). 

When the prophet would describe the blessed change that will take place when the day of glory dawns, he finds the imagery of the trees at his hand. 

“For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace . . . . . all the trees of the field shall clap their hands. Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree” (Isa. lv. 12, 13).

“The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree and the box together . . . . . and I will make the place of My feet glorious” (Isa. lx. 13). 

“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose” (Isa. xxxv. 1).

“Until the spirit be poured upon us from on high and the wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be counted for a forest” (Isa. xxxii. 15). 

“He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit” (Isa. xxvii. 6). 

Here then is another pleroma, a story of grace and glory caused by the trees of Scripture. Like the Apostle in another context, we are obliged to write ‘time would fail me’ to speak of the symbolism of “The Fig, the Vine and the Olive”, of the ‘uncorruptible’ or aseptic (LXX) trees from which the Ark was made (Exod. xxv. 10), or what is implied by the promise “as the days of a tree are the days of My people” (Isa. lxv. 22), or the ‘two olive trees’ of Zech. iv., or the parable of Jotham of Judg. ix. Neither can we ponder the question of resurrection with Job (xiv. 7), the pictures of antichristian pride assembled by Ezekiel (xxxi.), nor the vision of the great tree granted to Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. iv.), but if the reader will but explore these sylvan stretches of inspired imagery, a wealth of refreshing truths will be gathered as from a veritable “tree of life”. 

------------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 42, page 227).

------------------