The tree under consideration is called the "tree of life" whereby the fruit when consumed gives life. It then became clear to me that Jesus, as presented in the Gospel of John, provides life, appearing a mere 36 times in 32 different verses. Of greater consideration is that it appears 32 times in the first 12 chapters.
The result of Genesis 2 is denial of access to the tree of life, the result of Jesus' coming is access to life, not in the form of a tree, but in the form of Jesus. The reason for the removal of Adam and Eve from the garden was to prevent them from "eating" the fruit that gives life and living forever, the invitation of John 6:41 is to eat and live forever.
I find it irrational that a contemporary reader of John's Gospel can seek to find meaning, true meaning, fulfilling meaning, in the Gospel without also becoming aware of the Old Testament messages. The two walk hand in hand.
Romans 5.18: "Just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men."
ReplyDeleteDo you think that John and Paul are making different emphases while arguing the same point? What I mean is, if asked "why would God do this?" in Romans Paul would say "so that grace may abound". What would John say?
Hey Radical Turnip, To begin to answer I would indicate that in Rom 5:12-21 is a summative review of Romans 1:16-5:11. Thus the ultra condensed language of 5:18 must be heard within a context. The immediate context is a parallel repetition of 5:15-17 with the final result in 5:17 and 21 of those receiving grace reigning in life. With that clarified, it is possible to turn to the comparison of John and Paul. The longer I study them, the more I am convinced of similar ideas communicated in not quite so similar language. To answer your question, I would think that John would have no problem with life reigning as a result of the appearance of Grace and Truth.
ReplyDeleteThe bigger issue is the timing of the story, John attempts to remain pre-resurrection while Paul makes no attempt to be pre-resurrection. Thus the language difference. But compare John 10.10 with this Pauline language of justification. What does it cause you to think about the matter??
In John 10:10, there is a pretty clear polarization, and so I am reminded of the Diagram from Romans with God on one side, and Sin on the other, and Justification being the piercing of the veil that separates the two. Paul (possibly because of his Pharisaic upbringing?) seems to be focusing on righteousness, where John is focusing on Life.
ReplyDeletePaul does talk about life, and it is as you say, he is speaking as post-resurrection, living "in Christ" (I was primarily looking at Collosians 2) whereas pre-resurrection, living "in Christ" would make much sense.
You might also remember from the Pauline diagram that Death inhabits one side and Life inhabits the other. If Jesus came so that we (the plural you now personalized) might have Life, what does that say about the Righteousness of God?
ReplyDelete