The Pulpit Commentary — Genesis — Section 125

th~ Indns and the Nile; and Tayler Lewis the ver~• terms of his existence, ho wna under regarding them ns the two sides of the Per- obli~at1on to do, npart n.ltogether from ony Binn Gulf. Sir H. Rawlinson, from a. study spoc1fic enactment which God might enjoin. of the AssJ7ian texts, has pointed out tho As n moral being, ho had the low written on coincidence of the Babylonian region of Kar- his conscience. But, ns if to give a visible dnniyns or G11.rduniyas v.-ith the Eden of the embodiment to that lo.w, a.nd ot tho same Rihle ; nncl tho late George Smith finds in its ti~e t~ test his allegiance to his 11Inkcr's will, four 1;v<'rs, Euphrat!'s, Tigris, Surappi, and which 1s tho kernel of a.11 truo obedience an Ukui, its known fertility, 11.nd its name, injunction wns laid upon him of a. positive Gandunn, so similar to Gan-eden (the gnrden description-But of the tree of the lmow- of Eden), "considerations nll tending to- Iedge of good and evil, thou aha.It not eat of wards the ,-iew that it is the pitradise of it. Speculations ns to what kind of tree it Genesis" (' Chald. Gen.,' pp. 3-305). was, whether_ a vine, o. fig, or n.n a11plo tree, Yer. 15.-Hanng prepared the garden for are more curious than profitablo. 'fhere is man·s reception, the Lord God took the man. no reason to suppose that nny noxious or '' Not physically lifting him up and putting lethiferous properties resided in its fruit. him down in the gnrdcn, but simply exeriing 'l'he death that was to follow on transgression an influence upon him "l\"hich induced him, in was to spring from the eating, and not from the exercise of his free agency, to go. He the fruit; from tho sinful act, and not from went in consequence of a secret impulse oran the creature, which in itself was good. 'fhe open command of his Maker" (Bush). And prohibition laid on Adam was for the time pot him into the garden; literally, caused being a summary of the Divine law. Hence him to rest in it as an abode of happiness the tree was a sign and symbol of what that "nd peace. To dress it. L c. to till, culti- law required. And in this, doubtless, lies the n tc. and work it. This would almost seem explanation of its name. It was a concrete to l,int that the au1·eaa:t1Uof cla.ssica.l poetry representation of that fundamento.l distinc- ,ms but a dream-a reminiscence of Eden, tion between right and wrong, duty and sin, perhaps, but idealised. Even the plants, which lies at the basis of all responsibility. ilowers. and trees of Eden stood in need of It interpreted for the first pair those great cultivation from the hand of man, and would moral intuitions which liad been implanted speedily have degenerated without his atten- in their natures, and by which it was inrended tion. And to keep it. Neither were the they should regulate their lives. Thus it animals all so peaceful a.nd domesticated that was for them a tree of the knowledge of good Adam did not need to fence his garden against and evil. It brought out that knowledge their depredations. Doubtless there is here which they already possessed into the clear too an ominous hint of the existence of that light of definire conviction and precept, con- p-cater adversary against whom he was ap- necting it at the same time with the Divine pointed to watch. will as its source and with themselves as its Yers. 16, 17.-A.nd Jehovah Elohim com- end. Further, it was an inrelligible declai-n- manded the man (Adam), saying. Whether tion of the duty which that knowledge of good or not these were the first words listened to by and evil imposed upon them. Through its man (Murphy), they clearly presuppose the penalty it likewise indicated both tho good person to whom they were addressed to have "·hich would be 1·eaped by obedience and the had the power ofUI1derstanding language, i. e. evil which would follow on transgression. of interpreting vocal soilllds, and representing For in the day that thou eateat thereof thou to his own mind the conceptions or ideas of shalt 1urely die; literally, dying, thou shalt which they were the signs, a degree of in- die. That this involved death physical, Of tellectual development altogether incompa- the dissolution of the body, is indicated by tible with modern evolution theories. They the sentence pronoUI1ced on Adam after he likewise assume the pre-existence of a moral had fallen (eh. iii. 19). That the sentence nature which could recognise the distinction was not immediately executed does . not dis- between "thou ehalt" and "thou shalt not." prove its reality. It only suggests that its Of every tree of the garden thou m.ayest suspension may have been due to some Divine freely eat; literally, eating, thou ehalt eat. interposition. Yet universal experience at- .Adam, it thus appears, was permitted to par- tests that permanent escape from its execu- take of the tree of life ; not, however, as a tion is impossible. Iu the case of .Adam it means of either conferring or preserving im- was thus fe.r put in force on the instant, that mortality, which was already his by Divine henceforth he ceased to be immortal. .As gift, and the only method of conserviDg prior to his fall his immortality was sure, which recognised by the narrati.e was ab- being authenticated for him by the tree of. st-.ilung from the tree of knowledge; but as a life, so now, subsequent to that catastrophe, E)'IllLoland guarantee of that immortality with his mortality was certain. This, more thau which he bad been endowed, and which would immediateness, is what the language implies. rnntini.e to be bis so long as ho maintained For the colll{llete theological signi.licance of hi.B personal integrity. 'fhis, <.,f course, by this penalt;y see eh. iiL 19.  CII, 11, 8-17.] Til~ llOOK 0F GENESIS. H