(13) Disobedience. The next scene which the sacred history brings before us is a dark reverse. Another agent comes into the field and success fully employs his arts for seducing Eve. and by her means Adam, from their original state of rec titude. dignity and happiness.
(14) Two Trees. Among the provisions of Divine wisdom and goodness were two veg 'table productions of wondrous qualities and mysterious significancy—'the tree of life in the midst of the garden. and the tree of knowledge of good and evil' (Gen. ii:o). It would add to the precision of the terms, and perhaps aid our understanding of them if we were to adhere strictly to the He brew by retaining the definite prefix ; and then we have 'the tree of the life' and 'the tree of the knowledge.' 'Thus would be indicated the particular life of which the one was a symbol and instrument, and the fatal knowledge spring ing from the abuse of the other. At the same time we do not maintain that these appellations were given to them at the beginning. \Ve rather sup pose that they were applied afterwards, suggested by the events and connection, and so became the historical names.
(15) Tree of Life. \Ve see no sufficient reason to understand, as some do, 'the tree of the life,' collectively, as implying a species, and that there were many trees of that species. The figurative use of the expression in Rev. xxii:2, where a plurality is plainly intended, involves no evidence of such a design in this literal narrative. The phraseology of the text best agrees with the idea of a single tree, designed for a special purpose, and not intended to perpetuate its kind. Though in the state of innocence, Adam and Eve might be liable to some corporeal suffering from the change of the seasons and the weather, or acci dental circumstances, in any case of which occur ring. this tree had been endowed by the bountiful Creator with a medicinal and restorative property, probably in the way of instantaneous miracle. \Ve think also that it was designed for a sacramental or symbolical purpose, a representation and pledge of the life,' emphatically so called, heavenly im mortality when the term of probation should be happily completed. Yet we by no means sup pose that this 'tree of life' possessed any in trinsic property of communicating immortality. In the latter view, it was a sign and seal of the Divine promise. But, with regard to the former intention, we see nothing to forbid the idea that it had most efficacious medicinal properties in its fruit, leaves and other parts. Such were called trees of life by the Hebrews (Prov. :18; xi:3o; xiii :12 ; xv :4)• (16) The Tree of Knowledge. The 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' might be any tree whatever ; it might be of any species even yet re maining, though, if it were so. we could not de
termine its species, for the plain reason that no name, description, or information whatever is given that could possibly lead to the ascertain ment. One cannot but lament the vulgar practice of painters representing it as an apple-tree, and thus giving occasion to profane and silly witticisms.
Yet we cannot but think the more reasonable probability to be that it was a tree having poison ous properties, stimulating and intoxicating, such as are found in some existing species, especially in hot climates. On this ground the prohibition to eat or even touch the tree was a beneficent pro vision against the danger of pain and death.
Should any cavil at the placing of so perilous a plant in the garden of delights, the abode of sinless creatures, we reply, that virulent poisons, mineral, vegetable and animal, though hurtful or fatal to those who use them improperly, perform important and beneficial parts in the general economy of nature.
But the revealed object of this 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' was that which would requite no particular properties beyond some degree of external beauty and fruit of an immediately pleasant taste. That object was to be a test of obedience. For such a purpose, it is evident that to select an indifferent act, to be the object prohibited, was necessary; as the obligation to refrain should be only that which arises simply, so far as the subject of the law can know, from the sacred will of the Lawgiver. This does not, however, nullify what we have said upon the possibility, or even probability, that the tree in question had noxious qualities; for upon either the affirmative or the negative of the supposition, the subjects of this positive law, having upon all antecedent grounds the fullest conviction of the perfect rectitude and benevolence of their Cre ator, would see in it the simple character of a test, a means of proof, whether they would or would not implicitly confide in him. For so do ing they had every possible reason, and against any thought or mental feeling tending to the viola tion of the precept, they were in possession of the most powerful motives. There was no diffi culty in the observance. They were surrounded with a paradise of delights, and they had no rea son to imagine that any good whatever would accrue to them from their seizing upon anything prohibited. If perplexity or doubt arose they had ready access to their Divine benefactor for ob taining information and direction. But they al lowed the thought of disobedience to form itself into a disposition, and then a purpose.