Commentary on Genesis (Complete Edition). Martin Luther
Читать онлайн книгу.is in fact, a kind of statement by contraries, as they term it in the schools; or, according to another term of theirs, an addition by opposition. And yet as man was created in the image of the invisible God, by this sublime fact is signified in obscure figure, as we shall hereafter hear from Moses, that God would reveal himself in this world in the Man, Christ. These seeds as it were of the greatest and most marvelous things, did the prophets diligently search out and gather from the divine historian Moses.
Part II. Paradise
I. V. 8. And Jehovah God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
Here rises before us a whole sea of questions concerning paradise. In the first place, the word itself, whether it be Hebrew, Chaldean or Persian, for I do not think it is Greek, though Suidas endeavors to discover a Greek origin, is rendered by the Latins hortus, "a garden." This garden, Moses says, was planted BE EDEN, in Eden. For this name of the place is not appellative or descriptive, as our translation renders it, "paradise of pleasure." EDEN does, indeed, signify pleasure or delight, and from this name of the garden is doubtless formed the Greek word adona, but the preposition being here added to it plainly proves that Eden is in this place to be taken for the proper name of a place; which is further proved by the particular description of the place, for the garden is said to have been to the eastward of it. Our translation renders it a principio, "from the beginning," which is also a bad version of the expression. For the original term is MIKKEDEM, which does not properly signify "from the beginning," but "in front," that is according to our mode of expression and meaning, "toward the East." For the original word is an adverb of place, not of time.
Hence there arises here another matter of dispute, as to where paradise is. Commentators puzzle and rack themselves on this point in an extraordinary manner. Some will have its situation to be under the equator between the two tropics. Others say it must have been a more temperate atmosphere, to cause a place to be so richly and abundantly productive. But why should I proceed? Opinions upon the subject are beyond number. My short and simple reply to them all is, that every question upon a place or thing which no longer exists, is idle and useless. For Moses is here describing things which occurred before the Flood and even before sin was in the world. Whereas, we have to deal with things as they were and are since the sin of Adam and since the Deluge.
My belief is therefore that this spot of earth was called Eden, either by Adam or in the time of Adam, on account of that astonishing productiveness and that delightful pleasurableness, which Adam experienced in it, and that the name of a place so delightful, remained with posterity long after the place itself was lost and gone. Just as the names of Rome, Athens and Carthage exist among us at this day, though scarcely any traces of those mighty states and kingdoms can now be discovered.
For time and the curse which sins merit consume all things. When therefore the world with all the men and beasts upon it was destroyed by the Flood, this noble and beautiful garden perished also, and all traces of it were washed away from the face of the earth. In vain therefore do Origen and others enter upon their absurd disputations. The text moreover says that this garden was guarded by an angel, lest any one should enter it. Even if this garden therefore had not perished by the curse which followed, as doubtless it did, yet man's entrance into it is thus absolutely and forever prevented, as is indicated by the guardian angel's flaming sword. Its place can nowhere be found. This latter answer concerning the curse might be given to all questioners and disputers, though the former argument concerning the inevitable consequences of the Deluge, I deem less imaginative and more conclusive.
But what shall we say to that text of the New Testament, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise," Luke 23:43? And to that passage also, "He was caught up into paradise," 2 Cor. 12:4? I have no hesitation whatever in affirming that Christ did not go with the thief into any corporeal place. For that point is made quite plain from the case of Paul, who says, "that he knew not whether he was in the body, or out of the body," verses 2 and 3. Wherefore my opinion is that in each case by paradise is meant that condition or state in which Adam was, when in paradise, full of peace and rest and safety, and full of all those gifts of blessedness, which are enjoyed where there is no sin and no death. As if Christ had said, today shalt thou be with me in paradise, free from sin, and safe from death. Just as Adam in Paradise was free from sin and from all death and from all curse. Thus I believe paradise to be a paradise state. Just as the Scriptures, when speaking of the bosom of Abraham, does not mean the very fold of the robe which covered the bosom of Abraham, but descriptively that life or state of life in which the souls of the departed enjoy the heavenly life, and the peace and rest which "remain for the people of God," Heb. 4:9.
Wherefore my testimony concerning this text is, that Moses is here giving us an historical description and informing us that there was a certain place toward the East, in which there was a most beautiful and fruitful garden. For, as I have before said, the Hebrew expression MIKKEDEM properly signifies a place, not a time, as our version improperly renders it. Hence it is usual with the Hebrews to call the East wind KADIM, a dry cold wind which parches the fields. In that region of the world therefore was paradise or a garden, in which there were no teil-trees, nor oaks, nor scarlet-oaks, nor any other trees that were barren, but the richest and noblest fruits of every kind and trees of the noblest description; such as we now deem those to be which bear cinnamon and the richest spices. And although all the rest of the earth was cultivated, for there were as yet no thistles nor thorns, yet this place had its far higher cultivation. This Eden was a delightful garden, exceeding in cultivation and fecundity the whole earth besides. Though all the rest of the earth, if compared with its present miserable condition, was itself a paradise.
It was in this garden, which he himself had planted with such peculiar care, that the Lord placed man. All these things, I say, are historical. It is idle for us therefore to inquire at the present day, where or what that garden was. The rivers, of which Moses afterwards speaks, prove that the region of its situation comprehended Syria, Mesopotamia, Damascus and Egypt, and it is in the midst of these as it were that Jerusalem is situated. And as this garden was destined for Adam with his posterity, it is in vain for us to imagine it to have been a confined garden of a few miles extent. It was doubtless the greater and better part of the earth. And my judgment is, that this garden continued until the Deluge; and that before the Flood it was protected by God himself, according to the description of Moses, by a guard of angels. So that I believe it to have been a place well known to the posterity of Adam, though inaccessible to them. And my opinion is, that it continued thus known until the Flood utterly destroyed it and left no traces of it remaining. Such is my mind on this subject. And such is my reply to all questions which over curious men would move concerning a place, which after the sin and the Deluge had no longer any existence or trace of former existence.
Origen however is dissatisfied with any view of the extent of the garden of Eden, corresponding to that which I have taken. His opinion is that the distance of the rivers ought by no means to determine the dimensions of the garden. But he is thinking all the time about such gardens as we now generally cultivate. Hence he has recourse in his usual way to an allegory. He makes paradise to represent heaven; the trees, angels; and the streams of rivers, wisdom. But these triflings are unworthy a divine. They may perhaps not be unbecoming an imaginative poet; but they are out of place in a theologian. Origen bears not in mind that Moses is here writing a history; and that, too, a record of things, now long ago passed away.
After this same fashion do our adversaries absurdly dispute at the present day holding that the image and similitude of God still remain, even in a wicked man. They would, in my judgment speak much nearer the truth, if they were to say that the image of God in man has perished and disappeared; just as the original world and paradise have done. Man in the beginning was righteous; the world in the beginning was most beautiful. Eden was in truth a garden of delight and of pleasure. But all these things were deformed by sin and remain deformed still. All creatures, yea even the sun and the moon, have as it were put on sackcloth. They were all originally "good," but by sin and the curse they became defiled and noxious. At length came the greater curse of the Flood, which destroyed paradise and