(Continued from page 79.)

Chapter III.

Man unfallen in the Garden in Eden

In Gen. 2:8 we read, "And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there He put the man whom He had formed." While the historical narrative is strictly true, is there not an allegorical meaning in it as well ? I think there can be no question of it. It is important, however, that we should impose upon ourselves a rigid rule. We must not interpret a parable arbitrarily, nor allow mere imagination in allegorizing, but look for Scripture interpretation. What is there in Scripture, then, to guide us in allegorizing the account of the garden in Eden ?

First, there is this well known characteristic of the Old Testament, that it gives the truth, not in fulness, but in germ. This is so generally recognized that we frequently hear the expression,"The Old Testament in the light of the New." We hear it commonly remarked, "In reading the historical records of the Old Testament we are in the midst of types and shadows." The New Testament itself tells us the things that happened to Israel were for types (i Cor. 10:n). Peter even speaks of the word of prophecy being made plainer, or clearer, by the transfiguration on the mount (2 Pet. i:19. See Greek).

But further:we know the Greek word for Paradise represents the Hebrew word for garden; and in 2 Cor. 12:2, 4, Paradise is called "third heaven" -the home and dwelling place of God. There is
no difficulty there fore, in seeing in the garden of Eden (the place which God prepared for Adam. whom He had made in His likeness) a reflection or shadow of the home of God. But while this may be granted, it may be asked. Even so could Adam have understood it thus ? Was it possible for him to see in that garden a type or figure of heaven ? Could he read in it a parable and say, This is a picture of the home of God ? I reserve the answer until we have looked at the account of God's ways with him.

In verse 9 we read:"And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food." It was the provision God made for man, as suited for his earthly existence. As belonging to, and part of the old creation, man is a creature of tastes, appetites, desires. He did not become such through his fall; he was so originally-God made him so. Hence, in Gen. i:29 and 2:9, we see how God provided for the cravings that were natural to man as God had constituted him. He needed food, drink, sleep and other things-inherent and sinless infirmities- cravings, we may call them, divinely implanted in his nature. What a lesson of the goodness, care, and love of God we may read in the abundant provision He has made for the needs and desires of the creatures He had brought into being!

Verse 16 tells us that man was given free use of all that God had provided for his sustenance and pleasure. No limitation was put on the satisfaction of these desires. But had man no cravings beside what we may call his earthly appetites ? Did he lack in spiritual aspirations for the things of the spiritual sphere with which he was connected by the very spirit which was in him ? If he had a super sensuous nature (which he had, as we have seen) did he not then have also super sensuous cravings? If by means of the body his spirit took its part in his corporeal life, must there not have been also a longing for the body to have part in the life for which his spirit capacitated him ? Surely, aspirations natural to the spirit there must have been; and if the body, even when sinless and not yet mortal, was a limitation to the activities of the spirit, must there not have been in his spirit the longing for the spiritualization of the body ? We cannot think of man – otherwise than having longings also for things in the sphere of his spirit as well as for those linked with his body.

We have mentioned God's provision for the bodily needs; was there also provision for the spirit's needs? We find there was. The tree of life in the midst of the garden, if not the actual provision, was a shadow of it. Parabolically God was saying to Adam, I have anticipated and provided for the aspirations of the spirit which is within you. By the tree of life God was giving a hint of One, out of the very bosom of humanity, to be a Fountain or Source of life to men. What a beautiful picture of the incarnate Son of God this tree of life is! We have seen that God had formed man of the dust of the ground; now we see that He not only made to grow "every tree pleasant to the sight and good for food," but " the tree of life also in the midst of the garden"-a picture surely of the one only Man who could say, "As the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself."

The incarnate Son of God is the real Tree of Life. As supernaturally born into the world He had human, dependent life; He is a Man sprung up out of humanity. As the divine, eternal Son He has independent, divine life-essential, intrinsic life:it is both divine and human; both independent and dependent in the incarnate Son of God. Thus He is the Fountain of life for men. He is the Source of the life which applied to the soul makes it a quickened soul, and applied to the body makes it a spiritualized body.

Now Adam had the privilege of eating of the tree of life. He was as free to eat of it as of the trees that were good for food. But what was the significance of this privilege ? What was the lesson Adam was to learn from this ? In providing the tree of life, and giving Adam liberty to eat of it, God was teaching him that the condition in which he was by creation was not the perfected condition for which he was destined; it was a hint of a higher position and condition; it suggested the prospect of a higher life than the life he then possessed. The human earthly life he had by creation was necessarily temporary and to pass away, though not necessarily by dissolution-by death. As Adam came from the hand of his Creator he was not a victim of sin, and so not a subject of death. He was an earthly living creature in whom was a capacity for life of a higher order-a basis for exaltation to a higher sphere of being.

I must here emphasize, as just said, that Adam as originally created was not subject to death; his body was not mortal-not designed for dissolution. He was so constituted as to be capable of death, yet not as an absolute necessity. But if capable of death he was also capable of exaltation without dissolution. Now the tree of life was a reminder to Adam of his capability of exaltation to a higher sphere of existence with a higher character of life.

Keeping in mind man's constitution, and remembering that originally he was not a victim of sin or a subject of death, it is impossible to resist the conviction that in the tree of life God was inviting Adam to choose the higher life of which it was a distinct hint. He was setting before him a fulness of life-life in perfection; and the question was, Will he choose it for himself ? Will he choose for himself the destiny God has in mind for him, to be exalted to a higher position ? Will he choose to be transferred out of the condition in which he is-a condition necessarily to pass away-into a condition of permanence suited to the spiritual sphere with which by his spirit he is linked, and the exaltation to which he has been designed ?

I may be told I am treating the tree of life as if there was some mysterious virtue in it. (This indeed is the thought many have.) 1 answer, No, not in the tree itself. But if Adam had availed himself of his privilege to eat of it, he would have set to his seal that the testimony of God is true. By it God was testifying to the incarnate Son-was offering life in Him. Though Adam was in a very suited condition for life here on the earth, he was not for life in heaven. For this he needed life in Christ- in the incarnate Son of God-the designed Head of new creation. The tree of life was God's witness to man's need for the higher sphere. It was a promise of life in Christ. True there was a veil, but even so it was a testimony to Christ. Had Adam received the testimony, signifying his reception of it by eating, of the tree, it would have been a new birth-a quickening with the life that is in the Son, a divine, eternal life. When the body would have been quickened, I do not pretend to say, but with the quickening of his soul he would have received the guarantee of the quickening and spiritualization of his body.

Before we leave the subject of the tree of life another consideration needs to be noticed. In his original constitution man could not be transferred into the sphere of the spirit. To enter that sphere and take part in its things he needed to be spiritualized. He could not enter God's home in the condition in which his corporeal frame then was. God could visit him in his earthly home, but he could not be with God in heaven. Whenever God visited the creature made in His likeness, they could converse, they could commune together:chapters i:28-30; z:16, 17; 3:Bare illustrations of this. But the communion was necessarily limited. It was in relation to the things pertaining to the sphere in which man was able to participate-his pleasures, his food, his responsibilities. But in the tree of life God was giving a hint at least of what was necessary for man in the home of God. Even as unfallen, to enter there he needed to be born from above. To become a dweller in the home of God he must be quickened with the life of the Man that is of heaven. Not only must that life be applied to the soul, but to the body also. To be in the dwelling place of God as complete man, man's corporeal nature must be spiritualized.

To what extent Adam understood all this it is hot for me to say. All I say is, God was giving him various hints of it, and these hints must have made some impression on his mind. It is true the life God was hinting at needed to be illuminated, and the illumination came in due time; but in these ways of God with Adam in the garden He was instructing him concerning the life, the higher life, which it was His purpose and desire to confer on him. He was pointing him to life in a changeless and enduring form, and giving him the opportunity of deciding for himself whether he desired it. Thick as was the veil as yet over it all, we cannot but believe that through it some light was seen. C. Crain

(To be continued.)