The allegory has to fit the text right, it seems your merging things together that are not merged in the narrative.
Here’s the thing about allegories: they’re
allegories, not
doctrine itself. The allegory fits the doctrine, not the other way around.
Therefore, we have to understand which parts of the allegory are teaching us the doctrine (which originates with God!) and which are expressions that help us understand the story and help point toward the truth God is teaching us in the narrative. Clearly, we wouldn’t say “the text says ‘talking snake’, so therefore, there must be talking snakes!”… would we?
With that in mind, it’s important – if we are attempting to interpret these passages as ‘allegory’ – to understand what the allegory is telling us. The danger, of course, is treating them in a slavishly literalistic way, while nevertheless claiming that they’re allegorical.
So, here are the questions we face:
- Does God really ask whether Adam will attempt to ‘eat from the tree of life’, or does He already know the answer?
- Does God fear that humans might live forever?
- Does God really fear that humans might ‘become like’ Him?
- Did Adam & Eve already have ‘knowledge of good and evil’, prior to the Fall?
- Did they already have ‘life’, prior to the Fall?
- In the context of the allegory, what does the ‘tree of live’ represent? What does the ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil’ represent? What does it mean, in this allegory, to be ‘banished from the garden’?
I’m not going to make any claims about fruit eaten or uneaten; that, to my mind, is too close to an attempt at a literal interpretation rather than an allegorical interpretation.
Instead, let’s attempt to interpret the allegory. I believe that this will answer your question (or at least, demonstrate that the questions you ask aren’t really relevant to the lessons of the story as presented in Scripture).
First, we would absolutely say that God knows all things; therefore, the “oh noes! people might try to eat the fruit!” description seems clearly to be in service of the story.
Second, the “be like us” line is interesting: isn’t man
already like God, having been made in His image and likeness? What’s at play here isn’t physical immortality, per se, even if that’s the way it’s worked out in the context of the story. Rather, what’s at play is friendship with God and eternal life with Him.
That’s what’s lost here, if we wish to understand the allegory properly.
Now for the interesting part: do Adam and Eve have “knowledge of good and evil”? Do they have “life”? The answer, I’d assert, is a resounding ‘yes’!
Here’s the thing, though: their knowledge of good and evil comes from God – He’s the one who tells them what’s good to do and what’s evil to do. The tree, then, represents mankind’s attempt to appropriate for himself the right to define these things. The story is telling us that this attempt is sinful – it breaks our friendship with God to attempt to ‘play God’ and define our own moralities.
Same thing with ‘life’ – they already
have life! The tree represents the gift of immortality which God gives to mankind. When they refuse / misappropriate the gifts God gives them, the consequence is that they lose access to these gifts.
Therefore, I think that it’s an erroneous approach to ask “did Adam and Eve already eat from the tree of life?”. That takes the allegory too literally. I think I would ask the questions “did Adam and Eve have access to the Tree of Life – albeit at God’s will and direction, and not at their own will – in the garden? Did they lose that access through their sin?” are the ones that the Scriptural account wants us to answer.
And so, the answer is “yes, God provides these gifts to humanity at their creation, to be dispensed at His direction; but, when they sin, humanity loses access to these gifts.”
I think that’s as far as we should take the allegory.
So yes did the tree come from god yes but the tree seems to grant eternal life unconditionally. Its an unconditional gift from god. For if now he eats from the tree of life he will live forever, despite the fact he has sin.
Again, I think that’s taking the allegory in a way it isn’t meant to be understood. Let’s look at it a bit more closely:
Adam and Eve eat from the ‘tree of knowledge of good and evil’, right? If your assertion holds up, then that means that their meal grants this knowledge. Would you conclude, then, that humanity has the “knowledge of good and evil” on its own? Clearly, the answer is ‘no’ – and we have to look no further than the Cain and Abel story (or even, simply, examining Eve’s decision to eat from the tree!) to see that this is the case!
Therefore, even on its own terms, your assertions here don’t seem to hold up to scrutiny. However, I’d still say that the assertions are trying to read too much into the allegory.
You’re welcome!