THE TREE OF DEATH
(A Commentary on the Christian Teaching Called "Man's Free Will")
It has often been said that man has free will. The Bible message in a nutshell (Gospel) is never complete unless one points out that man has free will – the choice to follow God or not. It is even emphasized that God loves us so much that He wouldn't violate our free will. He didn't create humankind to be robots, but as free beings that can express love and respect or contempt and disdain towards their Creator.
Yet many a time, as people try to draw near to God and understand His will for man, the perennial question often pops up: Where exactly in the Bible is the free will of man mentioned? We have a reference in the Bible for almost every teaching we believe, except for this one. The three other exceptions I can think of off hand would be: The Trinity (God being in three persons), the Bible as the Word of God (meaning, the Bible as the final authority in matters of faith), and the Second Heaven as the dwelling place of God's Archenemy Satan. (These topics are dealt with some place else but I deal only with man's free will in this post.)
The concept of free will becomes much highlighted when we run into passages that say, "You have been predestined…," or, "God chose you before the beginning of time…," and "… for by grace you have been saved, through faith, not by works, so that no one can boast." Yes, there are many others in the Book, any respectable theologian or Bible teacher can quote for you from the top of their heads. These verses seemingly imply that we believers didn't have a choice in this ball game. We were chosen, and for no reason. The theological belief eschewed towards this end is commonly called "Calvinism."
The other extreme, emphasizing the free will of the individual is commonly called "Arminianism." The extreme doctrine of this school of thought is what we commonly term as "saved by good works." Now this goes clearly contrary against the Ephesians 2:8,9 passage that says we are saved by grace, through faith, and not by works. Thus, I believe that the doctrine or teaching of being "saved by good works" is really wrong. Of course, there's that verse which says, "work out your salvation with fear and trembling," which supports this view. However, I look at that passage more of a working together with God because it is Him who "causes us to will and to act," so we do not fall away and lose our salvation before the day of reckoning comes. Working together with God who inspires or causes you to be good still requires a choice on your part although God very much influenced the choice.
As for illustrations, free will would be seen in the stories of:
1. Orpah and Ruth. Orpah, just like Ruth, was a Moabitess who married into a Jewish family who had a strong belief in God. Just like Ruth, she was widowed – both their husbands died. When the famine in Israel had passed, their only surviving Jewish relative, Naomi, their mother-in-law, decided to go back to Israel. Orpah and Ruth were both encouraged by Naomi to go back to their own people and remarry. Orpah was persuaded. Ruth wasn't. Both Orpah and Ruth must have seen the reality of the presence of God and have tasted His goodness in the home of Naomi and their ex-husbands. But only Ruth was persuaded enough, enough to leave behind her own people and be a foreigner among the people of Israel, the people of Yahweh. Both had free will, both had choices.
2. Lot and Abram. In obedience to God's voice, Abram moved from his own people of Ur of the Chaldees (the Arameans), to the land God called him to go, a foreign land far away. Tehra, his father, was also persuaded, and went with him, so did Sarai, his wife, and Lot, his nephew, son and heir of Haran, his dead brother. Haran also had daughters named Milcah and Iscah. Milcah married her uncle, Abram's other brother, Nahor. Milcah, Nahor (and presumably Iscah), were left behind in Ur of the Chaldees. (Note: By "presumably" I mean it is not mentioned in the Bible account but it can be deduced from the story.) Now we know that later, based on the account of the lives of Jacob, Rachel and Laban, the descendants of Nahor became the people known as the Arameans who spoke Aramaic and they worshipped other gods (idols), not Yahweh, the God of Abram. At this juncture, we see that they all had free will, to believe in what Abram said to be God's voice: "Go to a land you do not know," or not. Abram was the prophet who spoke the word of God to them. They had the free will to believe or not. Terah, Abram's dad was persuaded enough to go. So were Lot, Abram's nephew, and Sarai, Abram's wife. But Nahor, Milcah and Iscah were not. They chose to stay.
3. Eli and Saul. Eli was the high priest in Shiloh when God spoke to him through the young boy Samuel. God told Samuel in an audible voice that He would punish Eli for failing to restrain his sons from desecrating the temple of God by doing fornication while at the same time serving at the altar of God. When Samuel told him about it, at his own insistence, he didn't repent. God actually gave him a chance to repent by using the young boy Samuel as a prophet to speak to him of the coming wrath of God. But he chose to leave things as they were. He didn't get into sackcloth and ashes to fast, pray and humble himself, as David, the man of God would have done if spoken such a strong word by a prophet. His reaction in our language today would be: "So be it."
In the same way, when Saul, the first king of Israel, disobeyed God he was told by the prophet Samuel, then already full of years, that God was going to judge him. In the same way, he was given a choice. But he chose to let things be; he refused to repent. There was no sackcloth and ashes, no praying, no fasting, no humbling. His reaction was, "Pray to your God for me." He didn't even consider Yahweh his own God! In fact, later on, when Samuel was already dead, in desperation, he even went to a witch to "bring up" the spirit of Samuel, to know the outcome of the final battle he was facing. Divination – consulting a witch, and geomancy – communicating with the spirits of the dead, are both clearly against the commandments of God. Both acts are tantamount to rebellion, and both acts Saul actually committed on different occasions. Saul had free will. God revealed Himself to him through the prophet Samuel and through extraordinary events in his life when he tasted the goodness of God. He was made king even though, in his own estimation, he came from the smallest clan of the smallest tribe of Israel. He knew he was most unlikely to be leader but God chose to bless him by making him one. Yet, he still did not choose God to be his God, he did not pray to Him, he always depended on the prophet Samuel to pray in his behalf. He did not cultivate a personal relationship and knowing of God that in the end, it showed him out and he lost everything. He had a choice, a free will. He could have chosen God to be his God but he didn't.
The same thing can be said about Judas or even, debatably, king Solomon.
And how about Adam and Eve then, where it all begun? Did they have free will?
According to the creation account in the first 2 chapters of Genesis, God made everything good, even very good, before He finally created Adam. God even planted a garden for Adam to stay in. In the garden were supposed to be every nice-looking tree that bore delicious fruits for him to eat. And right in the center of the garden, the centerpiece, I suppose, were the two trees - the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Now God told Adam that if he eats from this latter tree, he would surely die. So, basically, that was the tree of death. Just as there was the tree of life, so there was the tree of death. I believe God had hoped Adam would choose to remain in His life. In the latter part of the Bible story, Jesus came and he was described as "life" Himself: e.g. "He who has the son has life, he who does not have the son of God does not have life," "I am the way, the truth and the life…," "In Him was life; and the life was the light of men," etc. For that reason many argue that Jesus Himself was actually there in the garden, as the tree of life. Thus, in the same way that through the Lord's Supper we Christian believers now partake of Jesus' flesh and blood, that we may have life, Adam also partook of Him whenever he ate from the tree of life. So, there, bright as the contrast of night and day, is the free will of Adam. He was free to eat from both trees. He had a choice – life or death. The trouble with the tree of death was that it was deadly poison; one couldn't try it, even just once, without being killed. And curiousity did kill the rat!
---------------------------------
:-) Cheerio!
Tree and sunset image from http://www.bibleexplained.com
