The Human Fall
Order The Master Plan $17.95 website special!!
Chapter Two
The Meaning of Eating the Fruit
Genesis reveals that God had placed a mysteriously desirable fruit “in the middle of the garden.” This is the fruit that is the object of God’s commandment. It is the fruit that creates the context for Adam and Eve to exert the control of righteousness.
Genesis 3:1-4
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
“You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
What is the nature of this fruit? What could it be? An apple? An orange? Perhaps, even, a mango? Believers debate and divide between applists, orangists, mangoists, and figists. We could suggest an ecumenist solution: the fruit was a fruit salad. But, sadly, that would probably not suffice to turn the tide toward the ideal of “same mind and judgment.”
Some argue that the meaning of the fruit is insignificant and that the only salient point is that Adam and Eve disobeyed God’s commandment. This would not be wrong on its face; however, there are degrees of disobedience. For instance, I asked my son to mow the lawn. He did not. This infraction would be far less than others that come to mind (especially in today’s world).
Adam and Eve’s act of “eating the fruit” had the effect to change their very nature and status with regard to their relationship with God. It transcended their earthly life and passed on death to all their descendants. This was something far more serious than eating the Hostess Twinkee that Dad was hiding in the fridge.
In terms of degrees of sins and their consequences, Paul affirms the idea.
I Corinthians 6:16, 18:
“Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is written ‘the two will become one flesh.’. . .Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body”
Could this be an indication that the fruit is something more than any ordinary fruit?
Some believe that the placing of the fruit was a test from God. Many point to the example of how God tested Job. But for God to test Adam as he tested Job would be inconsistent with the love relationship in which God was engaged.
There is a very significant difference between Adam, before the fall, and Job. Adam, before the fall, is in the state of sinlessness and is within the parameters of God's love. Job, unlike Adam, is born with the sinful nature and in need of salvation. God needs to test sinners. Adam was not yet a sinner, he was a pure child of God.
God giving the commandment, therefore, was not a test, but a responsibility. God was giving Adam the opportunity to share in God’s role by joining with Him in the responsibility to exert control over self. That is, Adam would play a key role in the government and discipline over self. Fulfilling this role would give Adam the moral base for his freedom and thus open the potential for Adam to inherit God’s love.
The key is in understanding the difference between a “test” and a “responsibility.” You test someone to evaluate whether he can assume a responsibility. God was not testing Adam; he was fully entrusting him with a portion of responsibility: to assume the role of “co-creator.”
Another indication that the fruit was something more than a regular fruit is by the intensity of their desire for it. They were willing to risk their lives to eat it. Remember, God told them that of any other tree they could freely eat, but of the single tree they could not eat.
Do you think that you could be tempted to risk your life to eat something when hunger was not involved at all? Even satan knew he would have to wait for Jesus to fast for 40 days before his temptation to turn the stones to bread would wield any influence. The list of things that one desires more than life itself is a rather short one. I doubt that desire for a literal fruit makes the list.
Jesus indicates a deeper root to sin.
Matthew 15:11-19
“What goes into a man's mouth does not make him unclean, but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him unclean. . . .” Peter said, “Explain the parable to us.” “Are you still so dull?” Jesus asked them. “Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man unclean. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are things that make a man unclean.”
Genesis reveals that God had placed a mysteriously desirable fruit “in the middle of the garden.” This is the fruit that is the object of God’s commandment. It is the fruit that creates the context for Adam and Eve to exert the control of righteousness.
Genesis 3:1-4
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
“You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
What is the nature of this fruit? What could it be? An apple? An orange? Perhaps, even, a mango? Believers debate and divide between applists, orangists, mangoists, and figists. We could suggest an ecumenist solution: the fruit was a fruit salad. But, sadly, that would probably not suffice to turn the tide toward the ideal of “same mind and judgment.”
Some argue that the meaning of the fruit is insignificant and that the only salient point is that Adam and Eve disobeyed God’s commandment. This would not be wrong on its face; however, there are degrees of disobedience. For instance, I asked my son to mow the lawn. He did not. This infraction would be far less than others that come to mind (especially in today’s world).
Adam and Eve’s act of “eating the fruit” had the effect to change their very nature and status with regard to their relationship with God. It transcended their earthly life and passed on death to all their descendants. This was something far more serious than eating the Hostess Twinkee that Dad was hiding in the fridge.
In terms of degrees of sins and their consequences, Paul affirms the idea.
I Corinthians 6:16, 18:
“Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is written ‘the two will become one flesh.’. . .Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body”
Could this be an indication that the fruit is something more than any ordinary fruit?
Some believe that the placing of the fruit was a test from God. Many point to the example of how God tested Job. But for God to test Adam as he tested Job would be inconsistent with the love relationship in which God was engaged.
There is a very significant difference between Adam, before the fall, and Job. Adam, before the fall, is in the state of sinlessness and is within the parameters of God's love. Job, unlike Adam, is born with the sinful nature and in need of salvation. God needs to test sinners. Adam was not yet a sinner, he was a pure child of God.
God giving the commandment, therefore, was not a test, but a responsibility. God was giving Adam the opportunity to share in God’s role by joining with Him in the responsibility to exert control over self. That is, Adam would play a key role in the government and discipline over self. Fulfilling this role would give Adam the moral base for his freedom and thus open the potential for Adam to inherit God’s love.
The key is in understanding the difference between a “test” and a “responsibility.” You test someone to evaluate whether he can assume a responsibility. God was not testing Adam; he was fully entrusting him with a portion of responsibility: to assume the role of “co-creator.”
Another indication that the fruit was something more than a regular fruit is by the intensity of their desire for it. They were willing to risk their lives to eat it. Remember, God told them that of any other tree they could freely eat, but of the single tree they could not eat.
Do you think that you could be tempted to risk your life to eat something when hunger was not involved at all? Even satan knew he would have to wait for Jesus to fast for 40 days before his temptation to turn the stones to bread would wield any influence. The list of things that one desires more than life itself is a rather short one. I doubt that desire for a literal fruit makes the list.
Jesus indicates a deeper root to sin.
Matthew 15:11-19
“What goes into a man's mouth does not make him unclean, but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him unclean. . . .” Peter said, “Explain the parable to us.” “Are you still so dull?” Jesus asked them. “Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man unclean. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are things that make a man unclean.”
