Beautiful Boundaries-Gen. 2:10-17

One of the recent troubling movements afoot in our world today involves a group of people who call themselves sovereign citizens. Those belonging to this group believe themselves to be outside the boundaries dictated by law and order and free to do as they please. In fact, Gavin Long, recent murderer of the three Baton Rouge police officers considered himself a member of this society that is considered by the FBI an existential domestic radical threat. It is, to be sure, a very real anarchist movement that is gaining traction, especially among the up-and-coming generation. A skepticism toward authority and very real hatred for rules is not only characteristic of more radical leaning groups like these; it is becoming the norm in our society.

So how should Christians understand boundaries, rules, authority? Thankfully, the book of Genesis reveals a surprising and often overlooked principle pertaining to this very question. In Genesis 2:10-17 two sets of boundaries are described by Moses as existing before sin even entered into the world. In other words, authority, commands, and boundaries were originally not encumbrances that were required purely to manage chaos, but divinely inspired parameters given to make for the greatest good that was possible in a newly created universe. Let’s learn more as these boundaries are delineated in this passage.

THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES-2:10-14

Scholars tend to view verse 10-14 as an extension of verse 9 as the two describe different components of the garden (verses nine discussed the trees while 10-14 discusses the rivers). It becomes exceedingly clear from this passage that Eden’s garden was rich in minerals and splendidly fertile with flowing waters. The description given here, although complementary to what immediately precedes it, is supplementary material Moses’ used to accentuate “the narrative’s motif of resplendence” (Matthews, 207). Moses will again pick up the train of thought later in verse 15 that he left in verses 8-9.

Rivers were understood as absolutely essential to life in the ancient world. Even to this day, most middle-eastern cities, truly, most major cities anywhere, are built near a flowing water source. Rivers have been and continue to be important for irrigation in farming and nourishment for inhabitants. Nowhere was this more true than in Egypt—the very kingdom the Hebrews had just exited. There, the Nile River was worshipped as a life-giving source. This is why it proved such an incredible tragedy when God used Moses to turn the water of the Nile into blood. Therefore, when Moses suggests that Eden possessed a river that “divided and became four rivers,” he is not just providing an accurate description, but a comparison between the pagan nation they just left and Eden. Not only that, but the comparison also implicates the God who created Eden with four rivers as better than the God’s of Egypt and its single river.

As it pertains to the four rivers mentioned in this narrative, two are well  known while two are not so easily identified understood. The first two “Pishon and Gihon” are hard to pinpoint as there are little to know historical aides that pinpoint exactly where these rivers were—“the name of the first is Pishon, it flows around the whole land of Havilah” (2:11). Though, one might say, the “land of Havilah” should help indicate where this river used to flow, even this is of little to no help as many possibilities for the location of Havilah are possible. However, to focus on the historical/geographic location of these rivers is ill-advised as this is not Moses’ point. Instead, Moses is simply highlighting the richness of the Garden of Eden as witnessed in its multiple water sources and other natural resources—“where there is gold” (2:11).

Moses continues to describe that “the gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there” (2:12). That the gold is “good” is reminiscent of chapter 1 in which everything God created was called “good.” Not only that, but the gold also testifies to God’s excelling provision of the first couple. Why not through a little gold into the mix and some precious stones to an already perfect paradise?

However, the images of “gold” and “onyx” probably called to mind something else for the original Hebrew audience as these two elements were used in the furnishings of the tabernacle and on the priestly garments (Ex. 25:1-9; 1 Chr. 29:2). “Gold overlay finished the sacred furniture of the tabernacle (Exod. 25:11, 17, 24, 31). Particularly important was the ‘onyx’ stone of the priestly ephod, upon which were inscribed the names of the twelve tribes (Exod. 28:9-14), and the onyx of the high priest’s breastplate (Exod. 28:20).” (Matthews, 208). This indicates that even at this early juncture in history, God’s presence was accompanied by precious and powerful elements. In fact, what was prescribed for the temple later is probably a direct reference to the perfection of paradise that is required for a holy God’s presence. When God’s people built a temple, they were building a temporary homage to the Garden of Eden in which God was able to move about freely.

Next, Moses describes the other boundaries of the garden, “the name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates” (2:13-14). Here, again, the second river is unknown to today’s scholarship as is the land that it is said to surround (as there are argument for both an African Cush and a Mesopotamian Cush). However, what is clear is that Moses assumed his audience knew to what area he was referencing. Not only that, but Moses is making a historical claim in identifying these rivers and their respective locations. These were, in other words, real places, not fanciful metaphors.

This is evidenced by the fact that while many are unsure about Pishon and Gihon, there is little to no question concerning the Tigris and Euphrates River as these remain important waterways to this day. In fact, not only are they well known today, but along with the Nile, these two would serve as the future boundaries that were given to the land pledged to Abraham (Gen. 15:18). As these boundaries here were assigned to Eden, successfully marking Adam’s jurisdiction, so too was the Promised Land so marked and consigned to Abraham and his future descendants (the very same descendants to which Moses was originally writing this).

MORAL BOUNDARIES-2:15-17

As one commentator has pointed out, “there is no magic in Eden. Gardens cannot look after themselves; they are not self-perpetuating. Man is placed there to dress it and keep it” (Hamilton, 171). Moses reveals as much when he says, “Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the Garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it” (2:15). In other words, God placed man in a special environment for a special purpose and this purpose involved work. “Work is a God-given assignment and not a cursed condition” (Matthews, 209). It was not until sin spoiled things that a day’s work turned into a daily grind. 

This verse demonstrates that from mankind’s inception, humans were designed to be cultivators and keepers of what God bestowed, busying themselves with the kind of work that makes something great out of something good. Therefore, to refrain from this responsibility when capable or to do nothing with whatever God has richly bestowed is to live in a way that is not only uncharacteristic of a person of God, but uncharacteristic of the human race as originally designed.

Mankind, as it pertains to his time, is to make much out of what God has given. This is the way God intended for mankind to spend his days.

However, another boundary pertaining to mankind involves the moral options he was able to endorse. Because the Garden of Eden was a good place, “The Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘From any tree of the garden you may eat freely’…” (2:16). This is the first of 25 times in Genesis that a command is given. What is important to recall here is that God is incredibly generous with the permission that he gives to Adam. Remember, all of the trees were pleasing to the eye and good for food (see 2:4-9), why not allow Adam free range to partake of these things?

Such an allowance reiterates what has already been so beautifully represented—that God is a gracious God. He created a perfect universe, he grew an amazing garden, and he populated that garden with incredible fruit-bearing trees. All of this he gave to humanity—his most special and unique creation—and said “you may eat freely.” “This strong affirmation indicates that the provision of God for the first couple is plentiful and to be enjoyed liberally by them” (Matthews, 211). As it compares to the next component of the options given to mankind, it is important to recognize that from the beginning, God’s grace far outweighs His prohibitions.

In comparison to all that God allowed, God does withhold one thing from mankind—“but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die…” (2:17). Why does God make this prohibition? Because God was not satisfied with good—He desired something great! A good universe might include a race of people who blindly choose to do good because that is all that they can do. A great universe would include a race of people who freely choose to do good when they have an option to do otherwise.

Notice too, that mankind is the only creature given this kind of moral boundary. This is because of mankind’s uniqueness as being made in God’s image. Because of mankind’s special constitution, humans are moral beings and therefore responsible for making moral decisions. Here, God provides an opportunity for mankind to make the right decision and to make that decision freely. In so doing, God is giving those whom He called “very good” (1:31) the opportunity to be great.

As it has been said—“Good isn’t good enough if it can be better, better isn’t good enough, if it can be great.”

To that end, God gives humanity every reason to obey this command. First, as already revealed, he gives mankind free use of every other tree in the Garden of Eden—only one is withheld. I’m sure that Adam and Eve (who will be introduced in just a few short verses), had plenty to keep them satisfied and occupied, especially considering that this is paradise we are talking about. Second, God gives them the grace of a sharp warning, “for in the day that you shall eat it, you will surely die” (2:17). How is that for a reason not to do something. Though this may seem harsh, what better way would there be for God to keep His people in check than with the threat of death? The threat of death was intended by God to prevent death and keep Adam and Eve from going near this single kind of tree.

Something similar is witnessed when I threaten my children with punishment. The more important the infraction, the more severe the potential punishment—not so that I can see the punishment enacted, but in hopes that I never see the punishment enacted.

So What?

Ultimately, these two sets of boundaries as presented in the Garden of Eden were intended by God to provide not only the best for His greatest ever creation, but to pave the way for the very best from them as well. The garden and the commands both to work and refrain from the tree of knowledge of good and evil demonstrate that even in a perfect world, there are divinely appointed limits. These limits are not intended to keep humanity from knowing abundance. Quite the contrary, they are intended to pave the way for the greatest abundance. Man was designed as a cultivator and a free moral being. Such precious gifts require the boundaries necessary to keep mankind within God’s perfect will.

Applied today, Christians are not those who seek to be their own authority or those who desire unlimited freedom. Instead, Christians are those who submit to the authorities God has appointed. Christians are those who are not advocating for total anarchy but those who are following the Lord’s will and His ideals. After all, a world without fences would be a world riddled with injured or tragically killed children/animals. Thank goodness that God’s Word provides us with the guidelines and boundaries necessary for a meaningful, lasting, and abundant life both for now and forever. To live without boundaries is to live outside of mankind’s design and open the door to all kinds of havoc, just as the victims’ families in Baton Rouge.