Genesis 2:9

Every tree. In the preparation of man’s wonderful abode attention was given to ornamentation as well as to utility. Every species of vegetation that could minister to his needs and his pleasure was provided. Flowers, trees, and shrubs regaled his senses with their fragrance, delighted his eye with their exquisite form and enchanting color, and pleased his palate with their luscious fruit. For all time, Eden became man’s highest concept of earthly excellence.

The tree of life also. The sequence in which these words appear, as if they were an afterthought, seems strange to us in a modern language. This has led some critical scholars to claim that the last half of v. 9 is either a later addition or a corruption of the original. But this arrangement, which seems unusual when translated into English, is common in Hebrew. It provides no excuse whatever for doubting the purity of the text as we have it. For example, ch. 12:17 reads literally, “The Lord plagued Pharaoh with great plagues, and his house.” Other examples of the same sentence structure, though not so recognizable in the English version, may be found in Gen. 28:14; Num. 13:23; Deut. 7:14.

In eating of the tree of life Adam and Eve were to have the opportunity of expressing their faith in God as the sustainer of life, just as by keeping the Sabbath they demonstrated faith in and allegiance to their Creator. To this end God had endowed the tree with supernatural virtue. Its fruit being an antidote for death and its leaves for the sustaining of life and immortality, men would continue to live just so long as they should eat of it (8T 288; PP 60).

One of the trees was called the tree of “life,” literally, “the life,” hachayyim. The fact that this word is plural in form is explained by recognizing it as a plural of abstraction, the definite article indicating that this tree had something to do with “the” life as such, that is, that life would be obtained or preserved through the use of its fruit. However, the other trees of the garden being “good for food” were also destined to sustain life. If one tree is distinguished from the others by the extraordinary name “tree of life,” its fruit must have had the purpose of sustaining life in a way differing from and exceeding in value that of the other trees. The statement that the eating of the fruit of this tree would enable man to “live for ever” (ch. 3:22) shows that the value of this tree was entirely different from that of the many other useful trees of the garden.

The name of the second tree can more accurately be translated “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” “The” before the word “knowledge” signifies that the tree could not provide any and every kind of knowledge, but only a certain sad knowledge of “evil” in contrast with “good.”

The names of these trees are important. In both cases the word “tree” is connected with abstract terms, life and knowledge. This provides no reason for declaring that these two trees did not exist, but attributes to them, rather, spiritual implications. Although the “ark of the covenant” was a real piece of temple furniture, it too received a name that had religious import. The blood of atonement spilled by the Saviour on our behalf was also a very real substance. The two trees must likewise be considered as actual trees that had significant purposes to fulfill, these physical and moral purposes being indicated by their names.