Between 2 Trees

Situated in the middle of The Garden was a tree that had so much to offer. Its palatable fruit was not only appetizing to the eye, but also whoever partook of it would live forever. God called it the Tree of Life and there were no restrictions in place to prevent the Garden’s inhabitants from eating of it. Yet for some reason it never piqued the interest of Adam or Eve to enjoy it’s fruit.

There was however another Tree that God did place restrictions on, the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil. This was a tree that could destroy because it brought awareness, facts, and revelation. While those aren’t intrinsically bad, they pertained to a consciousness that neither Adam nor his wife had. The Tree’s fruit brought insight that gave way to corresponding responsibility. Left alone, a blissful ignorance could be enjoyed, but Eve’s naivety and Adam’s rebellious quest for this knowledge was to both of their detriment.

God did not want them to have this understanding because He knew all of the effects that would follow. I believe strongly that God took note of their apparent disinterest in the Tree of Life. Had there been a consumption of these fruits combined, it would have proven fatal to humanity. God did not want them to possess Eternal Life, a consciousness of Right & Wrong, and the ability to choose one or the other. Though once accessible, following the humanity's fall, the Tree of Life became immediately off limits. It would vanish without a trace until the pass of several millennia. John would write in Revelation 2:7 that it resided in the middle of God’s paradise and it’s purpose John declared in Revelation 22:2-3:

“In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him”

Back to the other Tree

As the fruit’s power began to take control, effort was put forth to offset it’s effects. The figs sewn together for aprons would have covered them from waist down only. This might have been enough to appease their conscious, but in God’s eyes it WASN’T ENOUGH. By God’s standard Adam & Eve would be need to be CLOTHED. They had made a partial covering, but God would clothe them.

Here in 2006, we are in between Trees. We struggle with the effects of the Tree they weren’t supposed to have while we are in pursuit of the Tree they could have had. Until that Tree becomes again available, God has clothing for us also. But beware:

“Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin:” Isaiah 30:1

Humanity has not strayed much from the direction of its ancestors. The current mind-set is still obsessed with Knowledge but doesn’t seem to have an appetite for Life. As we strain our eyes to focus on what we crave, we always manage to find a way to get it. But when awareness comes, we will need to seek to be fully clothed instead of partially covered from its effect. I close with Paul’s words:

"For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.” 2 Corinthians 5:2-4

God's Impartiality

"After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;" -Revelation 7:9

In the opening text, John describes an assembly of redeemed people. This innumerable assembly transcended every demographic barrier. He saw them stand before the Supreme Throne indicating their right to stand in proximity to the King of Kings. He saw them stand before the Lamb which signified the imputation of righteousness to their life and salvation also. There were not any restrictions placed upon these people, no biased treatment because of gender, race, age, or native language.

Notice John's demographic account of the saved believers:

1. They were from all nations
2. All kindred & people (Races & Tribes).
3. And tongues or the diverse in their spoken language

The result of Romans 10:13's promise fulfilled: "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." This verse is an Old Testament reference by Paul declaring God's impartiality towards those who can be saved. The term 'whosoever' encompasses all therefore salvation is available to all. Thank God for that!

It's no great observation that this is the hour for deft pursuit of political correctness. Every realm of society is constantly assailed to provide a common platform on which all may stand. Any deviation from this line will bring an outcry of discrimination, or favoritism or whatever. Outside of good intent this logic has not always been beneficial, providing more annoyance than anything else it seems.

It seems these constraints should aid in removing the age-old venom of partiality and the verdict is still out on if it will or not. Obviously, partiality has a lot to do with preference and opinion; so calling partiality a venom may seem nonsensical. However, focusing on what the Bible phrases as 'respect of persons' offers an additional view of partiality.

At least 4 times in the New Testament the phrase 'respect of persons' (Partiality and prejudicial favoritism) is affirmed to not be a characteristic of God. Also, James in his epistle commanded the church:

''My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.'' James 2:1

Plainly he instructed them: Don't possess or embrace the Christian faith in one hand while holding partiality and prejudicial favoritism in the other. This combination is intolerable. ''For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.'' Romans 10:12

Again, there isn't anything wrong with personal preference or favorites. But when it comes to the way people in and outside of the church are treated by the church, there must not be 'respect of persons'. When James addressed this situation, it was an era of thought when wealth and possessions indicated God's favoritism. It's the same irrational attitude that is a primary component of the Prosperity Message. The Tele-Evangelists and ostentatious pastors of many so-called ''mega-churches'' thrive on this ideology to vindicate their 'blessings'.

It's unfortunate to hear statements by professing Christians, unintentional or otherwise, made that affirm this thinking. It's a blatant denunciation of 3rd world Christian churches as well as modern day persecuted churches that are in hiding just to keep in existence. Paul addressed this in 1 Timothy 6:5-6 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. But godliness with contentment is great gain.

This same mindset Jesus dealt with in Matthew 19:23-25:

'Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?'

Their surprise was not that riches could hinder salvation but rather that riches were equated with having God's favor. But the fact is God does not just retain favor and blessing for a select few. And Divine Destiny (predestined salvation) is erroneous also, the church collectively is predestined but there is not a predetermination upon each individual. Until the Lord returns, its still "whosoever will" !

The church must maintain an attitude of inclusiveness and never exclusiveness. If we cease to function as a color-blind, impartial, and approachable church, we will fail miserably. As long as there is opportunity to reach someone for Christ, we must do so apart from of any predisposition that would be 'respect of persons'. It's not an attribute of God and it can't be in the church either!