Literal interpretation of Tree of Life? etc

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_Sully
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If Adam and Eve had not eaten of the Tree of Knowledge and resisted Satan’s temptation of them and later ate of the Tree of Life–would it have been a good thing?

Would it have been the most perfect thing?
 
Jerry-Jet said:
If Adam and Eve had not eaten of the Tree of Knowledge and resisted Satan’s temptation of them and later ate of the Tree of Life–would it have been a good thing?

Would it have been the most perfect thing?
Click to expand...
And further down the line, could one of their decendents have fallen, corrupting only part of the human race, or was the test in Eden a once and for all thing?

LT
 
scottm said:
No it doesn’t.
When I said that you need to learn grammar, I was not talking about your typing. Your typing is fine. Not a problem. I was talking about similes and metaphors (hence the link to wikipedia). You’re asking questions about figures of speech.

Every figure of speech has a literal meaning.

What is the literal meaning of the Tree of Life?

That is my question. There must be a literal meaning.

What is the literal meaning?

The Church teaches that there are four senses of the Bible. First is the literal sense.

I think we agree that there are many figures of speech.

I am asking: What is the literal meaning of those figures?
Click to expand...
 
If I understood St. Thomas correctly. If I correctly recall from memory, the Tree of Life is not a physical tree.

The Summa is so complex that I dare not say much more.

However, my weak memory says he taught that it was an immaterial reality.

I mean the “ifs” and the “weak memory.”

I am not looking for the allegorical meaning.

I am not looking for the anagogical meaning.

The moral I hope to understand better, too.
 
scottm said:
No it doesn’t.
You’re asking questions about figures of speech.
Click to expand...
I am not trying to prove anything.

I am trying to comprehend.

I do understand figures of speech, at least an average understanding.

Concerning the figures of speech, when we hear about the two witnesses as trees I am wondering about how to use the figures of speech.

Are the two witnesses the primary analogate?

Are the physical trees the primary analogates?

I believe that the two witnesses are the primary analogates.

St. Paul clearly teaches that the invisible is understood by the visible.

But still, which is the primary analogate?

When we say God the Father. I am a father. God is the primary analogate.

Perhaps one can use this principle for the witnesses and the trees.

Please hear: I said believe. I mean this in the sense of not knowing. I mean this in the sense of: “still pondering.”

Again, figures of speech have literal meanings: What is the literal meaning of the Tree of Life?

scottm

Thank you for your help! I truthfully mean it. Thank you for your time and help.
 
I don’t know if I’m being helpful or not, but I always just assumed the ‘tree’ part was allegorical… 🙂
 
scottm said:
I didn’t advocate a “one size fits all,” but the admonition that Genesis can’t be literal is such an idea, and it will always result in Kings and Samuel and the Gospels being non-literal as well, because they contain the same genre of writing. When you have the same type of writing, the same rules must apply. Therein is the rub. Perhaps you are not consistently applying the same rules of interpretation to all books within a given genre.
Click to expand...
I am going to stay with my earlier post. You may have confused genre with style. If it makes you happy you are welcome to your opinion.
 
I believe the Tree of Life is real.

I believe the Tree of Life is an internal reality for our inner person.

I believe the Tree of Life is literally God’s grace in the souls of Adam and Eve.

This is a personal thought.

I am not a scholar or a saint.

I am searching for an understanding of God’s infinite and eteranl love and beauty.

I am trying to long for His happiness.

I hope I am not scolded.

If you wish to correct me, be gentle, please.

However, I do welcome other ideas and thoughts.

Thank you.
 
Seamus_Sully said:
I believe the Tree of Life is real.

I believe the Tree of Life is an internal reality for our inner person.

I believe the Tree of Life is literally God’s grace in the souls of Adam and Eve.

This is a personal thought.

I am not a scholar or a saint.

I am searching for an understanding of God’s infinite and eteranl love and beauty.

I am trying to long for His happiness.

I hope I am not scolded.

If you wish to correct me, be gentle, please.

However, I do welcome other ideas and thoughts.

Thank you.
Click to expand...
HAHA! The creed of Seamus Sully! The Sullian Creed! :rotfl:
 
From St. Augustine’s The Literal Meaning if Genesis, Book 8, Chapter Four

Hence, there was a tree of life no less than the Rock which was Chrsit, and God did not want man to live in Paradise without the mysteries of spiritual things made present in material things. Man, then, had food in the other trees, but in the tree of life there was a sacrament. And what did it signify except wisdom, of which is was said, “She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her,” just as it was said of Christ that He is a Rock pouring forth water to all who thrist for Him?

This gives me a good solid answer. I had read it twice before but had forgotten it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top