the Tree of Life

1. I could go either way on that. I would say yes.
2. Maybe it was the way to gain immortality? Think about that for a while and see where it leads.

 

Dunno. It was obviously something real. But a literal tree? Dunno, and it doesn't really matter.

I don't think so. In Rev, it's an analogy. Rev tends to be very nonliteral and symbolic. Use of the tree of life here is an analogy, methinks. But again, as with anything in Rev, it's, at best, speculation.

 

Not!

Nothing speculative about the Great White Throne, Nothing speculative about the Marriage Supper! Many literal events soon to come laid out in the Book of Revelation.

The Tree if Life could only be salvation, so it is very possibbly symbolic of Christ, but then Adam and Eve could have partaken without repentence if it weren't for two flaming swords blocking the way back into the Garden upon their removal.

Simple theology: no other way to gain immortality/eternal life but through Christ, and the only way to Christ is repentence upon conviction and the drawing power from the Holy Ghost.

Much speculation on the exact location of Eden, but no one can be sure, everytime some one gets close they meet a flame or two.

 

It is interesting that Rev. 22:2 says that the 'tree of life' is on both sides of the river.

Does not say trees ans in more than one, but tree, singular. Only one tree.

 

Only one Lord and Savior!!!

 

Amen, Blackbird!

the tree on either side makes one wonder though, is it like one of those giant redwoods with the tunnel through the trunk.

At any rate, thank God for that tree!

 

AMEN!

 

Genesis 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

I only see one sword, not two.

 

Hmmm? I suppose you're right, but where do the cheribim stand? In front or behind the sword that must be shaped like a bowl? Four-square? Either way, man cannot enter until brought there by the LORD.

 

well the Cherubim wouldn't still be there........

The Flood would have sort of wiped out the Garden of Eden anyway.

 

interesting concept, bapmom.

I always thought that because there was no mention of the tree being removed, that it would still be here on earth and guarded still.

But your statement reminds me of one verse.

Genesis 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

The Tree of Life would have been destroyed, so the Tree of Life mentioned in Revelation is an entirely different Tree.

 

Right,

and there is indication that all people in some regular fashion will travel to the New Jerusalem in order to partake of the Tree of Life.....during the Millenium, or after all that and on into eternity. There is one passage in one of the prophetic books describing this.

So Id say its an indication that somehow the Tree of Life continues to give us life somehow forever.

Its all speculation though, of course.

 

I think the tree is a literal tree.
I think it is the same tree that was in the Garden. I believe it was removed to Heaven.
I believe that eternal life is gained by eating the fruit of the tree and only those saved by the blood of Jesus will be allowed to eat from the tree.

"To him who overcomes, I will grant to eat of the tree of life which is in the Paradise of God."

This will not happen in the millenium in the New Jerusalem, bapmom.

The New Jerusalem does not come down until AFTER the earth is destroyed AFTER the millenium.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were gone; and there was no more sea.
2. And I saw the holy town, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, like a bride made beautiful for her husband.


MR