Tree of Life

In Genesis it was a tree that produced edible fruit. Anyone that ate of it would have lived forever.
In Proverbs 3 it is wisdom.
In Proverbs 11 it is the fruit of the righteous.
In proverbs 13 it is hope realized.
In Proverbs 15 it is a wholesome tongue.
In Revelation 2 it a tree that produces edible fruit to be eaten by those who overcame.
In Revelation 22 it is a tree that produces 12 manner of fruit that is only accessible to those who do His commandments and is also for the healing of the nations.

 

I believe so...

 

I believe it is a metaphor for several things, including that God gives us life, that we gain eternal life in fellowship with God through Jesus, and that partaking in God's plan for us rather than our own way, is the way of life and not death. So in short, yes, the tree represents a type of Christ.

 

I have never viewed the Tree of life as being a type or representation of Christ. Quite frankly, I do not know why anyone would.

 

The tree of life was an actual fruit bearing tree that God created. It only existed in the Garden of Eden. Because flesh by nature is corruptible, it was the only means for Adam to free from corruption. Adams flesh was corruptible before he sinned, but was kept from it because of his access to this special tree.

I have no reason to think it was a type of Christ. If there is scripture to show that it is I am not aware of it. I see the comparison but don't think it has scriptural backing.

I don't think the tree had anything to do with communion with God, rather it merely made it possible for flesh to be free from corruption.

Here begins my speculation: I think God never intended Adam to live forever in his corruptible body of flesh. Scripture tells us that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. It seems that God wanted to have man exist in a state of temptation (or better yet, testing) for some reason. This reason may have something to do with Satan and the angels that were sent to roam the earth. God may have wanted to put a man in the middle of Him and Satan to defeat Satan on his turf.

I think this is not only an interesting subject, but ont that is very important in understanding God, man, flesh, salvation, and mosty importantly in doing away with the false "sinful nature" doctrine.

 

Cutter,

Trustiti,

This might help you all to understand. Christ speaking...

I have no problem with the analogy at all, or the possibilty of the Tree of Life in the Garden being a "type" of Christ. Seems to be a wonderful picture of Christ.

The similarities are undeniable.

God bless,

Mike

 

Read Rev 22:2... Is that in the garden?

The reason it is viewed as a type of Christ is because of it's saving power. Had Adam of eaten of the tree he would have lived forever. Faith in Christ and you will live forever. Christ is the only way. Now if Christ is the only way and this tree will also save then...

Some also believe the cherub and flaming sword were also removed when the veil was rent in two.

 

No, it is in the new heaven and new earth that God will create. It's leaves will be for the healing of the nations, and I'm not exactly sure what that means.

If it were a type of Christ, why did God NOT want Adam to eat of it and live forever? It is because it was for making his flesh live forever and had nothing to do with "spiritual" life.

Never heard of that one.

 

Sorry, but it didn't. Christ is saying He is a vine. I never ate a vine, and probably never will. Also, he says that those that abide will bear the fruit. Surely we are not to eat our our fruit. I think you are trying to hard to make scripture say something that it doesn't.

And as I said above, if the tree were a type of Christ, why would God NOT have wanted Adam to eat of it.

 

To D28Guy, I agree with what trustitl said in response to your analogies. They are loose and a stretch. I still maintain there is no reason to believe the Tree of Life represented Christ.

 

Where does it say God didn't want man to eat of the tree of life? I believe the time hadn't come for man to obtain eternal life. This would eliminate the entire story of Jesus and give the Father no reason to send his Son. However we know the Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world. Your sequence of events would leave no room for God's mercy, grace and would not leave him worthy of all praise honor and glory. Why you ask, "for His name sake".

Where does it say his flesh would live forever? I know that is a common view that God said he would live forever in the flesh, his sinful state. I believe the tree of life was always intended to provide eternal spiritual life. Also, man's punishment was to till the ground and work for his food. Would this condition be met in the garden?

God is a Spirit and he wants your soul. I don't see why he would want our flesh to life forever and I don't think I would want to live forever in this limited state.

 

"and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden" Gen. 3:22-23

"and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden" Gen. 3:22-23

There is no scripture to support that as far as I know.

Here is the curse on Adam.
Gen. 3:17-20 " And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

He doesn't either. Read I Corinthians 15.

 

This discusion boils down to an interpretation of scripture. You say this live for ever is physical. I say it is spiritual. You obviously have your reasons however, I don't see anywhere else in the Bible to support a physical body living forever. That was not the lesson Jesus brought from on high.

The physical is a realm governed by time. Things age, grow old, decay, "moth ridden" etc... The spiritual realm doesn't have limitations as the spirit should remain as a childs for eternity. This is why I don't accept the view of physical eternal life. Though the garden was physical, the lessons including the fall of man were spiritual. God is spirit. Disobedience is not the physical act, it's the spiritual act. This was one of the major lessons Jesus tried to teach us while he was here yet man continues to see things from a physical perspective.

He said, "say to the mountain be thou removed". You think that is physical?

Look at this lesson real closely...

Mt 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

The Master tried to teach us to get beyond thinking physical, Adam fell before he ever tasted that fruit Just like if you get mad enough to think your brother dead you have committed murder. The same as one who is behind bars.

Lk 12:4 And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

I truly believe God does and has always cared for your soul. Living in the physical forever would really suck with all the baggage that comes with this flesh.