FAQ

It is obvious that an unambiguous, uniquely correct answer to such a question likely cannot be given. Nevertheless…

Undoubtedly, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil planted in the garden of Eden, the eating of whose fruit is forbidden, becomes a subject of testing for man. But it is worth looking at this narrative in its context. The second biblical account of the creation of man (and the narrative of the fall continues exactly this one) speaks of the meaning of human existence, intentionally digressing from the chronology of events. Therefore, we can think that the sacred writer is speaking about man in general, about each of us. And, consequently, to each (and not only to the first) man the commandment is given not to eat of the fruit of this tree. The key word for understanding this narrative is freedom. It is about man being given a real choice: to trust that God is right (and not eat from this tree) or not to trust, and, accordingly, to break the commandment.

If this tree were not there… The subjunctive mood is probably inappropriate here: the biblical narrative does not speak of what could or could not have been, but simply depicts the fact of the establishment of man's spiritual freedom by the means inherent to it. There is the will of the Creator concerning how man should live so that our life may be filled with eternal fullness and meaning. This design implies that we accept the moral world order (the "scale" of good and evil) as God established it, without trying to redefine it (to "master" or "know" it in the language of the sacred writer). The design implies that we choose this freely, out of love for God, and not as programmed automatons. This personal freedom is an incredible (incomprehensible even to the sacred writer) gift of the Creator to man, constituting the essence of our likeness to God. If there is no freedom, then we are no different from the apes, from which, it seems, the Creator "manufactured" our body.

The biblical narrative thus says that God, having created man, placed him in extreme closeness to Himself, so that even power over good and evil, over what is considered good and bad, what ought and ought not to be, is accessible to us. "You have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings…" (Psa 8:6), as Scripture says. The acceptance of God's statutes regarding good and evil for man essentially turns out to be the acceptance of God Himself as the Source and Lord of life. In this regard, commentators usually note that the fulfillment of the commandment "you shall not eat of it…" requires faith, that is, trust that God is good and desires our good. Therefore, the planting of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil puts us in a situation where we need to believe or not believe. Without this it would be very easy for us, but we would not be like God, that is, we would not be free persons if the possibility of not believing were not real.

Finally, many commentators draw attention to the fact that the command "not to eat of the tree…" is the first (and at that moment the only and all-encompassing) commandment of the Creator to man. This is His Word to us, calling for a dialogue. Speaking about how we answer this call, the sacred writer simply states a sad fact…

I will add to all this one more important aspect. Strictly speaking, the situation described in the 2nd chapter of the book of Genesis implies not so much the choice to "eat or not to eat," but the choice between the tree of power over the world order, and the Tree of Life. According to the generally accepted interpretation of the majority of the Church Fathers and authoritative church thinkers, the Tree of Life is a symbol of the Son of God Himself. However, it is also often seen as a symbol of the Tree of the Cross, on which God, out of love, gives us His life without reserve.