The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil According to the Holy Scriptures

In this terrestrial and corporeal place, Paradise, that tree was planted of which we are speaking at present, namely the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The open letter of Holy Scripture again convinces us of this in Gen. 2, v. 9: And the Lord God brought forth of the ground every tree, pleasant to the sight, and good for food: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. And so, no one can doubt the existence of this tree, since besides the other wood and trees placed in Paradise, Scripture makes special mention of this one as well. And whatever the adversaries may understand by this tree, they will nevertheless confess that this very thing existed in Paradise. By the very fact that they raise a question about it, they seem to suppose its existence, unless they prefer to dispute so bitterly and institute a question about nothing, and about that which never existed. Why this tree was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, we shall say below. For the present, it suffices for us that it truly existed in Paradise, just as the literal sense of Scripture openly indicates.

The tree of the
knowledge of
good and
evil was a
true tree.

Just as the existence of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is certainly derived from Scripture (§ 3), so from its open letter and the straight connection of the text with the context, it is certainly shown that this tree was a tree in the true sense, that is, a certain corporeal and woody substance bringing forth its fruits at stated times, such as we are accustomed to call a tree. For if we look at the words of Scripture, they make no distinction between the production of other trees and our tree; and just as others are expressed by the name of wood original: "lignorum", so also this one: And the Lord God brought forth of the ground every tree, pleasant to the sight, and good for food: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2, v. 9). Since, therefore, Scripture modifies nothing concerning this tree of the knowledge of good and evil, without urgent necessity or reasonable cause, we must not add, except, or modify anything, which necessity or reasonable cause is certainly not found here; nay rather, by taking another way of understanding, we would again slide into very many absurd and exotic things, as we shall see in the course of this matter. Then, if we attend to the context, just as God granted the fruits of other trees to the first man for eating and driving away hunger, so He also prohibited him from eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, where the open letter of eating is expressed everywhere, which in these circumstances cannot be understood as any other substance than the eating of fruit from an arboreal substance, which is clearly and openly posited everywhere and always. And God commanded him, saying: of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat: but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat (Gen. 2, v. 16 and 17). We therefore rightly assert with the open letter of Scripture that this tree of the knowledge of good and evil was a true tree. It follows, says the Great Aurelius St. Augustine in book 8 of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, chapter 6, number 12: that we may see concerning the tree of the knowledge of discerning good and evil. Truly this tree was visible and corporeal, just like the other trees. Therefore, it is not to be doubted that it was a tree. So, without any doubt, Augustine asserts that this tree was a true tree, just like the others planted in Paradise, with whom it is certainly not permitted for us to doubt, but rather we must confess with Scripture and Augustine that this tree of the knowledge of good and evil both existed in Paradise and was a true tree. (a)

(a) A certain French Anonymous likely referring to a specific contemporary critical scholar or freethinker denies the nature of a true tree to this tree, and asserts it to have been the very use of matrimony, because Scripture speaks allegorically according to the custom of the Egyptians: Behold his words from the German version, which alone I have at hand: When Moses has used figures and allegories here, this must not surprise us at all. One should only remember that this famous lawgiver was raised among the Egyptians. This was a nation that represented all things under hieroglyphs. Therefore, did Moses, as a Prophet sent by God (§ 1), write according to the mode he learned from the Egyptians, or according to that which the Holy Spirit dictated and inspired in him? Since this speech is not about the word of man but about the word of God revealed to us. But this Deist prefers to build his assertion on uncertain histories and narrations of fallible men and the fables of Poets, rather than on the terse and pure word of God: rather than on the doctrine hitherto customary and unblemished in the Church: rather than on the firm interpretations of the Holy Fathers, by which this tree is expressed as having been a true tree. But I am not surprised; immediately at the threshold our Anonymous chose a path different from the aforementioned: for thus he speaks on folio 2: Let us therefore use all our reason, let us remove ourselves from the theological thorns and thistles, and seek the sad source of this dangerous sin... May one not, to remain a good Christian, dare to remove oneself just a single step from the uncertain and often even dangerous paths of the theologians. Otherwise, Scripture does not indeed indicate the species of the tree and fruit, but only calls it a tree according to the norm of the other trees placed in Paradise, which terse letter of Scripture the Holy Fathers also follow, nor do they detain themselves with vain and useless hypotheses and assertions drawn from their own brains. And what good or utility would have come to faith or good morals if Scripture had also denoted this tree and its fruit in species? Is it not sufficient for the clear intelligence of the faithful that Scripture speaks of this tree in the same way as it does of the other trees, so that by this reason we might be able to discern in what our first parents sinned, and what kind of precept it was, and concerning what, that God imposed upon them in Paradise? It is better, says St. Augustine in book 8 of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, chapter [?], to doubt about occult things than to litigate about uncertain ones.