Two Trees
“Who in his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree” (1 Peter 2:24).
In studying the teachings of the Old Testament, we learn from them, sometimes by way of contrast, and sometimes by way of comparison.
A striking illustration of this fact is found in Genesis 2:9, “And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the Tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of knowledge of good and evil.”
And in Acts 5:30, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a Tree.”
And in 1 Peter 2:24, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the Tree.”
Being of an inquiring mind, we ask, Why should the cross of our Lord be spoken of as a Tree? Surely there must be some deeper meaning than that which appears on the surface. Could it be that the deeper meaning, suggested to us by the holy Spirit, was to go back to Genesis 2:9, and compare and contrast, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree on which our Lord was crucified?
CONTRASTS
(1) We look first at the points of contrast. We note that the First Tree was planted by God. “And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden … out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree” (Genesis 2:9). But the second tree, the tree to which our Lord was nailed, was planted by man. It was human hands which devised, provided, and erected that cruel tree on the hill of Calvary.
(2) The first Tree was pleasant to the eyes. “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof” (Genesis 3:6). Just what this “pleasantness” consisted of we do not know. But the record seems to indicate that this tree was an object of beauty and a delight.
What a contrast from the second Tree! Here everything was hideous and repellant! The suffering Savior, the vulgar crowd, the taunting priests, the two thieves, the flowing blood, the hours of darkness (Matthew 27:45). Nothing was here to please the eye.
The first Tree was “pleasant to the eyes.” But concerning the one on the second Tree, it is written, “They saw in him no beauty that they should desire him. For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him” (Isaiah 53:2).
(3) We see that God forbade man to eat of the first Tree. “Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eastest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Genesis 2:17). A Divine prohibition was placed upon the fruit of this tree. But again, how different from the second Tree! How startling the contrast. There is no restriction here. In this case man is freely invited to draw near and eat of the fruit of this tree! The sinner is bidden to “Taste and see that the Lord is good” (Psalms 34:8). God says, “I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage” (Matthew 22:4). All of this refers to the nourishing blessings which come to us from our Savior who died on the second Tree. For we are comparing that fruit which hung on the trees; a comparison of the fruit on the tree of knowledge with Jesus, as the fruit that hung on the cross.
Because God forbade man to eat of the first Tree, Satan uses all of his powers to get men to eat of it. Contrariwise, because God now invites men to eat of the second Tree, Satan uses all his powers to prevent men eating of it. Is not this another contrast marked out for us by the holy Spirit? Through eating of the first Tree, the curse descended upon our race with all its attendant miseries. But by eating of the second Tree comes life and salvation. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you” (John 6:53). As by the act of “eating” man lost his life, so now by an act of “eating” man obtains life. In John 6:54 Jesus said, “Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day.”
(4) Adam, through eating of the first Tree, was cast out of Paradise. While on the cross, our Lord said to the thief, Thou shalt be remembered by me in my kingdom, it will be paradise, when it is established. Because I have provided the ransom price for you and the other thief and for all men, you shall be admitted to Paradise!
RESEMBLANCE
Considering points of resemblance between the two Trees, we observe the following.
(1) Garden. Both trees pertain to a garden. The first Tree was in the garden of Eden. The second Tree was by a garden which is unnamed. “Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid” (John 19:41). Is it possible that we are told this, for the reason that we should connect the two trees? Is there a striking point of analogy, that both the death sentence on the first Adam, and the death resting place of the last Adam, are in a Garden?
In connection with both Trees we find the words “in the midst.” “The Tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil” (Genesis 2:9). The word “and” connects the two trees together and intimates their position in the midst of the garden. In like manner we also read concerning our Savior, “They crucified him, and two others with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst” (John 19:18).
(2) Thorns. Part of the curse upon Adam was “Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded … thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee” (Genesis 3:17, 18). As Jesus hung upon the second Tree, he wore a crown of thorns, which reminds us that this part of the curse as well would be removed by our Lord’s suffering and death.
DOUBLE CONDEMNATION
Our thoughts turn to Galatians 3:13, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, ‘Cursed is every one that hangeth on a Tree.’ ” Jesus had to die on the cross in order to redeem Israel, for the Law stipulated that the worst offenders would hang on a Tree (Deuteronomy 21:22).
Jesus, who died on a Tree for our sins
Here is a comment from Studies in the Scriptures (Volume 5, page 430), “Christians who had been Jews and had therefore been under the Law Covenant, had not only been purchased from under its sentence, but were also released from its dominion.”
It is not that the Law was evil, but that, because of imperfections of the flesh, the Israelites violated its commands, and therefore came under the condemnation of the Law. “I was alive without the Law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death” (Romans 7: 9, 10).
Thus the Jews needed to be specially redeemed from that curse as well. Three things were required for this. (a) Jesus had to be a perfect man, an “anti-lutron” or corresponding price, equal to Adam. (b) This man must be a willing sacrifice, and a Jew obedient to the Law. (c) And he must be hanged upon a Tree, which he was by virtue of his crucifixion.
CROSS AND TREE
There are many prophecies in the Old Testament concerning our Lord’s suffering and death on the cross. Isaiah 53 is one of the more prominent of these. None say specifically that Jesus would be crucified upon a tree. However, Psalms 22:16 says something which is uniquely compatible with his crucifixion. “For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.” You do not pierce hands and feet if you intend to stone a prisoner. So it may be reasonably inferred that this text indicates Jesus would be crucified, and not stoned to death.
Psalms 34:20 suggests the same. “He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken.” This is consistent with crucifixion, but not as well with stoning.
The Jewish nation needed something more than the rest of mankind. For them it was necessary that Jesus, a Jew under the Law, meet the Law’s extreme limits. He must hang from a tree.
Several scriptures come to mind regarding the Cross and the Tree. So to confirm our thoughts that using the words Cross and Tree are synonymous, we refer to Acts 5:30, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a Tree.” Here the Greek word for Tree is xulon (Strong’s Concordance word number 3586). This is so also in the texts following.
“We are witnesses of all thing which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a Tree [xulon]” (Acts 10:39).
“When they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the Tree [xulon] and laid him in a sepulchre” (Acts 13:29).
“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the Tree [xulon]” (1 Peter 2:24).
“To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the Tree [xulon] of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God” (Revelation 2:7).
“In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the Tree [xulon] of life and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:14).
“Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the Tree [xulon] of life and may enter in through the gates into the city” (Revelation 22:14).
The word Tree or Trees is used literally hundreds of times in the Old Testament and the New. The word for a literal growing tree in the Greek is dendron (Strong’s 1186). Christ was not hung upon a literal tree. He was hung upon a cross. The word for cross in the Greek is stauros. So why did the writers in the New Testament use a completely different word, xulon, when referring to the cross, as they have in the examples listed above?
A noted Messianic Jewish believer, Dr. David H. Stern, sums it up best. “Jesus was not hanged on a Tree, but on a stauros (Strong’s 4716), a cross. The word xulon was used instead of stauros in these different places because all of them quote or allude to Deuteronomy 21:22, 23, where the Hebrew word etz (Strong’s 6086) is normally rendered into the Septuagint Greek as xulon. Both Hebrew etz and Greek xulon can mean tree, wood, stake, etc., depending on the context. If Luke had meant a tree and not a stake, the Greeks had a word for it, dendron, which he could have used, but did not.”1
ABRAHAM
When Abraham received three angelic visitors in the plains of Mamre, “he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, and said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the Tree” (Genesis 18:2-4).
How suggestive are the last words of this quotation. Why should we be told that Abraham invited his three visitors to rest “under the tree,” unless there is some typical meaning to his words? The Tree, we have seen, speaks of the cross of Christ, and it is there that “rest” is to be found.
Verse eight of the passage says, “And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them, and he stood by them under the Tree, and they did eat” (Genesis 18:8). Eating was an act of fellowship, here and elsewhere in Scripture. It is the cross of Christ which is the basis of our fellowship with God. How striking, too, is the order. First resting under the Tree, then eating, or fellowship.
SWEETENING THE WATERS
Waters of Marah, sweetened
“And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter … and [Moses] cried unto the LORD; and the LORD shewed him a tree, which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet” (Exodus 15:23-25). Comment is almost needless, the type is so apparent. Here again, the Tree typifies the cross of Christ and it was our Lord who, by going down into death, sweetened the bitter waters for us.
The Jews tradition is that the wood of this tree was itself bitter.2 Yet it sweetened the waters of Marah, as the bitterness of Christ’s sufferings and death sweetens the memory of his sacrifice.
Furthermore, it is only as we apply the principles of the cross to our daily life, that the “Marahs” of our wilderness experiences are transmuted into “waters that are made sweet.” We think of Philippians 3:10, “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death.” This is our highest desire and how remarkable is the order of the scripture presentation on trees. First, the Tree is seen as the place of the curse. Second, the Tree is seen as the place where rest is found. Third, the Tree is seen as the principle motivation of our lives!
ELIM
We remember that at Elim, the Israelites had good water, and enough of it. There were twelve wells of it (Exodus 15:27). So we see that God may, for a time, order his people to encamp by the waters of Marah, yet that shall not always be their lot. Let us learn both how to be abased, and how to abound. Whatever be our lot, through this land of pilgrimage, we must remember that we are here for just a short time, and here we have no continuing city. Let us appreciate all the benefits and mercies on our behalf. Let us not murmur, but rejoice. Let us be patient through adversity, trustful, thankful. For God is ever with us.
– Bro. L. P. Davis, Jr.
(1) Editor’s note: According to Vine’s Dictionary xulon means “a piece of wood, or anything made of wood.” This definition helps in under- standing why the New Testament sometimes uses xulon in place of stauros.
(2) Editor’s note: If the “wood” was “breccia,” calcified wood, it would be calcium oxide, which is bitter, but which will neutralize the sulfates that make Sinai-peninsula water bitter. Sinai water is rich in sulfates; sodium sulfate is “Glauber’s salt,” a strong cathartic.