Knowing good and evil

Gen 2:17  but from the tree of the knowledge of goodH2896b and evilH7451b you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

What exactly is "the knowledge of good and evil." Whatever it is, it was not something ¹Adam and Eve originally possessed or experienced.

Hopefully, the following analogy may be helpful.

Just as loving ^[1]parents bring a child into the world and nurture it, so did God with Adam and Eve. In the same way, a child has no concept of what it's like to no longer have parents caring for them (no more than a fish would know what it's like to be out of water), Adam and Eve had no concept of what it would be like to no longer be connected to God and under his personal care and direction. Once they did, they started to experience "evil." Before that, they only knew good.

The all-too-common rebellion and [2] pulling away of adolescents from their parents is not unlike what Adam and Eve did in the garden. They rebelled from dependence and trust in God and decided they could be like God in a way they were never designed to be and call their own shots, i.e., become their own god. They chose to believe (without proof) that they knew what was better for them than God (even though God alone is all-knowing). Much like what kids do with their parents as they get older. 

As a child develops and matures, they often begin to take for [3]granted the care of their parents, not recognizing how beneficial it is; believing they can better care for themselves. The same happened to Adam and Eve regarding God.

Yet if we have truly loving, wise, and caring parents, they always know us in a way we don't know ourselves (we all have blind spots). Spiritually and emotionally healthy parents usually know us better than we know ourselves. Of course, there are many parents who themselves are not emotionally or spiritually healthy and give a child a good reason to "jump ship."

They also desire something we want or need. If nothing else, their love and desire are normally for our best. It is expressed differently as we age but is always there. 

Plus, we will always be our parents' child, and they will always be the cause (humanly speaking) of our existence. Therefore, an emotionally mature parent will always desire and seek our best. The story of the prodigal son comes to mind. No matter how rebellious his son was, the love of his father never waned. The father looked for his son's return, even in his son's rebellion. So much so, he spotted him coming home when He was still far away; i.e. he was eagerly looking and hoping for his return. 

And lastly, good and loving parents will have acquired greater wisdom through life experience. They simply have been around longer and know more about how things work because of the life lessons they have gone through. 

Of course, all these things are true with God but on an infinitely higher level. In this sense, even the most perfect parents will never be like God.

So why the rebellion?

We know what we know, but it's what we don't know that often "eats at us" -- we don't like being finite and having to trust. We like being in control and independent. We may be tempted to think, what if I can do things better than God (or my parents in the case of a child) or we may even be convinced we can -- even though we have no actual evidence through life experience. Taking this posture is one of faith.

When you stop to consider this regarding God, it is the height of arrogance. How could Adam and Eve ever know all things or be the provider and sustainer of all things -- and therefore know what was best for them compared to God? Wasn't this exactly the question and point God made with Job who went through such great pain.  

Possibly we have an example here of the expression "familiarity breeds contempt." Adam and Eve had regular access to God, so their participation in fellowship with him was a common experience. God was always available. They had never experienced a time he was not a part of their lives. Possibly over time they took him for ^[3]granted and lost sight of how great he truly was (maybe the extent of his greatness could not have been fully appreciated unless contrasted with no longer participating in it. Like the brightness of a light is most evident the darker the night. For more on this click here). 

We are curious creatures in that we do not fully appreciate the good we possess or experience until we no longer have it. It's as if we must lose something of value first before we can fully appreciate and value it for it's actual and true worth or be truly grateful for it (the ^[4]greater the value the more significant the loss but also the greater the potential learning opportunity and appreciation for what has been lost. For more on this click here). 

What exactly is good and evil?

From the verse at the beginning of this article, here are the definitions found in the original Hebrew. Emphasis my own:

Good - H2896b  טוֹב - tob  (375a); from H2895; a good thing, benefit, welfare: — enjoy *(1), good (66), good thing (3), good things (2), goodness (1), graciously (1), happiness (1), happy (1), pleasant (1), prosperity (8), richer (1), well (1), what is good (1), what is good (4).

H2895  טוֹב - tob (373b); a prim. root; to be pleasing or good: — any (1), did well (2), done well (1), fair (1), go well (1), good (1), good (5), high (1), merry (3), please (2), pleased *(2), pleases (4), pleases *(2), pleasing (1), well (8), well-off (1). 

Evil - H7451b  רַע - ra  (948c); from the same as H7455; evil, distress, misery, injury, calamity: — adversity (7), calamity (4), disaster (2), evil (94), harm (2), harmful (1), hurt (1), ruin (3), surely (1), trouble (2), unpleasant (1), wickedly (1), wickedness (1).

H7455  רע - rôa‛BDB (Brown-Driver-Briggs') Definition:1) badness, evil 1a) badness, bad quality 1b) wilfulness 1c) evil, badness (ethical) 1d) sadness

Based on the context of this verse we could sum these definitions up as follows:

Good - God himself and all the benefits, provision, and pleasure that come with knowing him and being with him.

Evil - Injury or harm (e.g. death) that comes due to the absence of God and all the good things he provides. 

Before man's rebellion, it doesn't say they did not know good, it says they did not know good and evil i.e. good in contrast to evil. Adam and Eve obviously experienced good because they walked with God and enjoyed the garden. They also enjoyed the companionship and joy of union with ^[5]each other. 

The bottom line... they only knew good, not evil. They only knew of his total care and provision. They had no concept of what it would be like to lose him or his ^[6]provision. They had nothing to compare and contrast this provision and good to in their personal experience (Possibly Adam's seeing the animals having partners when he did not have one, came close to this. But this wasn't harm or loss but something lacking and may have been a greater concern of God's than Adams). 

All they knew about evil is what they were told i.e. the day they ate they would die. They had no concept of pain, death, loss, distress, misery, injury, calamity, adversity, disaster, harm, hurt, ruin, trouble (knowledge of evil) because they had never seen or experienced any of it. What they did know however was God said it was not a good thing and they were asked to trust and believe this warning (a kind of promise in reverse if you will) from God. They chose to experience this 1st hand instead of trusting God's warning.

However, they definitely knew what good was (even though they had nothing to contrast it with). It was what they were experiencing daily. With a little deductive reasoning it could be argued they could have at least concluded evil was certainly not the same as good and possibly the opposite of it. Enough, you would think, to deter them from wanting to know what it was with certainty, through first-hand experience. Regardless, God said do not eat. That should have been (in their eyes) and was (in God's eyes) sufficient. 

What is interesting is when tempted, Eve (with Adam right beside her) bought into the promise of being like God versus the promise (warning) that they would die if they ate. She (and Adam) definitely chose between these two very contrasting and competing options offered by two completely different sources, God (the Creator) vs the ¹serpent (a mere and inferior creature to Adam much less to God). 

Some might argue that it's unfair for God to expect them to heed his warning without knowing the full meaning of it. However if one fully trusted God, this should and would be sufficient. Trust was unavoidable regardless. They simply wound up trusting the wrong party i.e. they trusted the creature (ultimately themselves i.e. their own understanding vs God's explanation, encouraged by the suggestion of the serpent) vs the Creator. 

We can only conclude that the primary point of the instruction by God to not eat of the forbidden tree was to trust (not doubt or question) God in those instructions. It was a warning they were expected to believe and heed regardless of whether they ^[6]fully understood or experienced first hand what evil was or was not (isn't this often the very case now? Aren't we often called to trust God even when we don't always understand). 

But why trust? The fact is man will never know all things apart from God simply because he is finite and God is infinite. To say it another way, man was never intended to be all he was designed to be apart from God and his dependence on (trust in) him. 

Man will always need to depend on God for true knowledge simply because God is infinite and we are not...something that sticks in our crawl even today if we are honest. The heart and essence of the desire to "be like God" was (and is) a rejection of this dependence and the necessity to trust. 

It is this very disposition of independence that God is reversing in and through Christ. Ironically, he uses pain and suffering (evil) from our attempts at inappropriate independence, to do so. 

God uses evil for good

Now that we experience loss, the ongoing lesson God seeks to instill in all of us (using our loss to aid in this) is all we are and have - all good - comes from God. So even though evil is not good, the harmful consequences/loss of our pulling away from God is the means of helping us to understand a vital reality; distrust of (independence from) God is bad and trust of (dependence on) God is good. To say it another way, all good comes from God, all bad is due to the absence of God. Evil is incorporated to aid us in seeing this. Or as I once heard it said, "if God could not use evil for good, evil would not exist"(source unknown).

Knowing that all good is in God alone and only comes from him is the simple reality of how things are and how our world was and is designed to operate. He alone is God, the provider and sustainer of all things. When God calls us to recognize this, he is not on an ego trip, he's seeking our good. It simply is the reality of how things are; what is; how things are designed to operate and how they operate best when adhered to i.e. God is the giver and sustainer of all things, so if you wish to live life fully as intended, live life according to God's design-will. In doing so you will find the greatest meaning purpose and joy simply because this is who we are and who God is. Believe it or not. 

Posts on related topics:

What occurred at the fall? 

How does God use evil for our good? 

The greater the evil the greater the opportunity for healing/grace.

Why is there ¹pain, suffering and evil?

________________________________________

^[1]Of course the analogy breaks down in that the gap of understanding, wisdom and love between God and mankind is beyond comparing to that of our earthly parents. God is perfect. Our own or any earthly parent is not. God alone is perfect in love, wisdom and he alone has total ability (is "all powerful") to put all his other attributes fully into play i.e. he alone is able to fulfill all his promises and insure we experience his love and wisdom to the fullest extend possible; human parents are not e.g. a human parent can't absolutely insure a particular outcome or prevent irreparable destruction due to a child's poor choice, or use our bad choices for our good, whereas God can and does use all things to bring about our ultimate good when we are His child.

^[2]Leaving our parents is not necessarily a bad thing if we leave in a posture of fullness and not in order to find it i.e. we don't leave to "get away" from our parents but to honor them. When we do, we seek to pass along and multiply what we received from them, thereby bringing them honor. Possibly this would have occurred if Adam and Eve had not rebelled. They were, after all, originally mandated to be fruitful and multiply before the fall. 

I am also aware some who read this may not relate at all to what it's like having loving parents or possibly the support of biological parents. 

What if you didn't have such perfect parents growing up? Most of us don't.

The good news is if you are his child you have a perfect parent now. 

If you are not his child, he offers to be for you what you never had. 

When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take me up. Psalm 27:10 (KJV) 

(CEV)  Even if my father and mother should desert me, you will take care of me.
(ERV)  Even if my mother and father leave me, the LORD will take me in.
(ESV)  For my father and my mother have forsaken me, but the LORD will take me in.
(GNB)  My father and mother may abandon me, but the LORD will take care of me.

^[3]Taking for granted the goodness of God and the blessings Adam and Eve experienced may have actually been the true "original sin" or at least the soil out of which it sprang. The eating of the fruit was merely the outward evidence of an inward disposition that had developed and already existed, whether only for a brief moment before the eating... or developed over a more extended period. 

Though there is no indication of an extended period of time regarding this decline in disposition, this alone does not mean it didn't exist. The bible is often very concise and only touches on key points in conveying the most important events that may have occurred over an extended period of time, such as Lot's wife turning to salt. (This is believed by some commentators to be the natural result of exposure to the air of the very salty Dead Sea after she died from the heat of burning sulfur, instead of a sudden event as depicted in the Hollywood version). We also see this in the gospels when one gospel will have a more concise explanation of an event and another a more extended version.

What we do know is both trees were there from the beginning and were also next to each other in the center of the garden where neither could be missed or avoided. It is probably safe to assume they ate from the tree of life and possibly often over a period of time since they were allowed to eat of all tree's except the one forbidden. And since the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was right there next to the tree of life, you can be sure they passed by it often and likely saw it often if not continuously since it was in the center next to the tree of life. This could have very well resulted in questions arising over time about the forbidden tree and if it was really all that bad. 

The fact that Eve said they also could not touch the tree suggests touching it had crossed her mind or possibly Adam added this caution to insure Eve would not even go near it at all. If so, why would Adam give this added instruction, assuming he did? Maybe he himself had felt the allure of the tree? Since we don't know, we can only speculate within the boundaries of scripture and that is all this indented comment is; speculation. But certainly questions worth considering. A question we will likely get an answer to now but get when we set into eternity. 

Gen 3:6  So when (however long that took. It appears to all be within a brief period, if not in the moment itself) the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 

The availability of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was simply the opportunity and means of displaying their trust in God or taking God for granted and the resulting distrust and ingratitude.

^[4]The reality is complaining about what we do not have or what we lost is to not understand everything we are and have is a gift from God to begin with, not a right or something we are owed, have earned or that is deserved. 

This is not to say however, God does not want us to have these things. If he did not, he would have not given them to begin with.    

^[5]Possibly they lost sight that the joy of their relationship as husband and wife was a gift from God as well and therefore they thought their relationship would be just as good without God as it was with Him i.e. since they had each other, they didn't need God, not realizing that the actual joy they found in each other was by and from God indirectly. To say it another way, they had not experienced evil therefore they had no concept of what loss felt like.  

^[6]God allowed man to continue having access to and enjoying his creation. What does this say to us about how we handle others in terms of showing kindness and doing good deeds for them in their rebellious independence from God i.e. what can we learn from God who allowed Adam and Eve to continue to participate in the good gifts of life (creation) even in their rebellion? Wouldn't he have been justified in letting them die immediately on the spot? In the earliest records in scripture we see grace towards God's rebellious image bearers; we see God seeking them out and hinting of a future provision while providing for their immediate need. God is good and loving even in our rebellion. 

Yet, after their rebellion, God did not allow access to the garden itself for their own good. God already knew man would abuse the creation and use it to maintain his independence from him. So being put out of the garden [which is the location of the tree of life and where God manifested his earthly presence at that time] and experiencing the curse of thorns and thistles due to Adam's breaking away from God, was God working for their ultimate and eventual good.

It appears that knowing evil was a necessary part of more fully appreciating and enjoying good. In truth evil accentuates the beauty of good as long as we do not allow it to embitter us to the point we no longer can trust in good again.  

^[6]We see no indication of God explaining evil or death to Adam (Eve found out of God's warning from Adam, since she was created after the caution was given). We simply see God cautioning Adam of it.

However we must remember God himself knew good and evil (Gen_3:5,22) so this knowing in itself could not be wrong or bad (at least not for God) as there is only goodness in God. This knowing by God was simply an awareness of harm and death in contrast to goodness and the bliss of love between the Father, Son, and Spirit. 

The knowing of good and evil may not in itself have been Adam and Eve's problem either but rather how they acquired that knowledge was i.e. they obtained it illegitimately by going against God's warning. Possibly if Adam and Eve proved they were able, God would have eventually allowed them to know both but only when He knew it was best. 

But we may wonder how and when did God ever have first hand knowledge and experience harm or loss i.e. evil?

The possible explanation is God is everywhere present as well as all knowing. This not only addresses the spatial but also the temporal i.e. It applies to time as well as location. 

There is no time with God. Everything is in the present for him i.e. everything simply is for him. This seems to be God's point when Moses asked God what to tell Israel to call him. God simply said tell them "I AM" sent you. God is. There is no "it will be one day" or "it was a long time ago" with or for God in the ultimate sense. Everything already is for God, always has been and always will be throughout eternity. Hard to grasp but this is a key difference between the infinite and the finite. All of history and all future events as well as present experience and observation is not something that occurs in a linear progression for God (even though he somehow really and truly stepped into time through creation and the incarnation and now fully and gladly participates in it. But this addresses Gods experiencing time. It does not mean he is limited or constrained in his infinite knowledge by it). 

To say it another way, time is a part of the created order, it is not an inherit part of God. Before God created, God is; there simply is no time for God. God can and certainly does participate in time but it only became so when he created things that operate in time, not before. And it is only because he willingly chose to participate, not because he had to as we do. Once God created, not only the material world came into existence but also time itself began as a part of it, for the first time. His participation in time reached its pinnacle when God the Son took on flesh and walked among his creatures and creation.

What is intriguing is in a very real sense, once we step into eternity, we too will no longer be restrained by time as we now are (though we may very well continue to experience and participate in it). 

To get a little sense of what it might be like to not participate in time, think of the expression "time flies" when we are engaged in something we enjoy. It is the enjoyment itself that is our focus not time. If we had no restraints of the ebb and flow of energy and resources, we would be oblivious to time. This may give us some idea of what things are like for God and will be like for us as well. Once we enter into eternity, time will no longer matter to us in the same way it does now since those things we usually associate with time will no longer exist i.e. it may be an aid but not a burden.

______________________________________________ 

Footnotes:

¹though it is something that God possessed:

Gen 3:22  Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—”

(GNB)  Then the LORD God said, "Now these human beings have become like one of us and have knowledge of what is good and what is bad. They must not be allowed to take fruit from the tree that gives life, eat it, and live forever."

If this is a quality of God himself, it cannot be bad or he would not possess it. The issue is it was not suitable for Adam and Eve to possess, at least in their current state of spiritual immaturity.

²It is worth noting, Adam being the last thing created, did not observe the rest of creation when it occurred. He came in after the fact. So his believing other creatures were created by God was a posture of faith, not first hand observation and experience i.e he did not see God create anything other then Eve herself (and even then he was asleep when she was created).

As a separate point from the above, He did participate in a kind of creative process by God having him name the animals. Nevertheless he had to accept God created everything simply because God said he did. Adam was not a first hand witness to it. There were many things about God, Adam was expected to accept solely by faith.

God binds himself to time

Christ honoring his Father by becoming a man, stepping into time, and taking on the suffering of this broken world, allowed him to act on his eternal love for the Father in a way he had never done before. He not only demonstrated his love for us as needy and lost rebels but also demonstrated his love for his Father in a new and unique way. 

Not because the Father needed proof of his Son's love, or Christ needed to prove His love for the Father, but so the Son could demonstrate the greatness of his Father and his love for him ¹in a way he had not before. 

We get a hint of the uniqueness of this when we are told that Christ "learned obedience through the things he suffered." - John Piper suggests (and I agree), this was not Christ going from disobedience to obedience, but Christ going from untested obedience to tested obedience - Christ's love for the Father was put to task, if you will, for the first time in a new and unique way. His temptations and choices were very real with real significance. 

It was this same love that moved God to create us, then restore us even after we set aside and abandoned our love and trust in him. 

The love of Christ was so great (for both his Father and us), Christ gave up the preciousness of his full glory and communion with his Father and set it aside (for a ³time) so he might bring others into that same eternal union, communion, and glory he knows and has known from all eternity past. 

And in so doing he now also knows the joy of honoring and pleasing his Father in a way he had not before by seeing this love received and rejoiced in by others (others outside of the Father, Son, and Spirit); a love drawn out of others for his Father, made possible only because of the sacrifice he made. Christ gave up something of that which was most precious to him (the constant, unobstructed, uninterrupted love of his Father) so others might also have it (John 15:11;17:13; Matthew 25:23). And in giving it, he found (finds) great joy (Hebrews 12:2)

As the Father sends me so I send you

  

In the same way that Christ demonstrated his love for the Father by his actions, our showing love by our actions is the clearest way of expressing our love for him and others. Words are important, but actions give evidence of the love we speak of. This is why Christ asked Peter three times to feed his sheep if Peter truly ²loved him. Don't just say you love me, Peter, show me. This is also why we are told that if we love Christ, we will keep his commandments. True love always results in actions.

Before the actual act of the incarnation, love ⁴involving sacrifice by Christ was only a thought that had not been acted out and expressed in the way it was; a thought in the mind of God (as Father, Son, and Spirit) from all eternity past that took place at a specific time in a way it had not occurred before the actual event. There was real action in real-time. Since everything is present to God and known by him this may be hard to fully grasp but is nevertheless clearly what occurred. 

The timeless God for the first time, somehow limited himself in and by time, ⁵entering into and participating in time itself. God for the first and only time, interjected himself into his creation (and specifically toward us, his image-bearers) through Christ and inextricably bound himself to it (us) in love from that point on and for the rest of eternity. Christ has a body he did not have before the incarnation - a ⁶glorified body but a body just the same. A permanent change he willingly partakes in for the honor of His Father and us. 

John 17:5  And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence (again) with the glory that I had with you before the world existed. 

John 17:22  The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 

John 17:24  Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world. 

For a fuller discussion on God taking part in creation through the incarnation click here. 
____________________________________
Footnotes:

¹When love is true it moves one to act on behalf of the one(s) loved.  Acting in love is the completion of it i.e. perfect love is not just a feeling or only words, it is more. It is acting out and upon those feelings. If there is no action there is no true (perfect) love. 

²Christ kept asking Peter regarding agape, not phileo, with which Peter kept responding...

Joh 21:15  So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love G25 Me more than these?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love G5368 You." He (Jesus) said to him (Peter), "Tend My lambs." 

Jesus asked (3x) "do you agapao me..." 

G25 - ἀγαπάω - agapaō; of unc. or.; to love: - beloved (8), felt a love for (1), love (1), love (75), loved (38), loves (20).

Peter kept answering (also 3x) "You know that I phileo you..."

G5368 - φιλέω - phileō; from G5384; to love:

Thayer Definition:
1) to love
1a) to approve of
1b) to like
1c) sanction
1d) to treat affectionately or kindly, to welcome, befriend
2) to show signs of love
2a) to kiss
3) to be fond of doing
3a) be wont, use to do

³Even though the length of time Christ suffered wasn't eternal, it was infinite i.e. the depth of his suffering made up for the length i.e. it was equivalent to the eternal suffering he spared others from; the extent of his suffering was the equivalent to all suffering throughout eternity for all those who receive him. This was because of the extent of His suffering i.e. losing the infinite wealth and glory of His being for a short time was as great as losing a smaller amount of wealth by a large number of beings for eternity. It had to be in order for His sacrifice to be accepted as a sufficient exchange of life for the death He spared us from. And Christ may experience some loss throughout eternity in being not just God but also a man i.e. he will experience some form of limitation as the God/man that he didn't experience when He was the infinite Son of 

God of all eternity past. Yet he may also experience some kind of gain by being able to continue to participate in creation as a man - albeit a glorified one. 

⁴Possibly this is what is meant by God "knowing good and evil." Because God is not restricted to or by time regarding his knowing all things, in a very significant way (if not in real actual time) he and the Son also knew of the death of the Son prior to it actually happening, while still really and truly participating in this at the time it occurred. We get a hint of this when we are told that Christ "...was slain before the foundation (i.e. creation) of the earth..."

⁵Which tells us how much God values His creation...so much so He gladly took on qualities of creation - i.e. time - to bring to us eternity. This merging of creation with eternity also occurs when God units heaven with earth for all eternity. God loves and values His creation.

Rev 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. 2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”

⁶This is very significant on many levels. One is our new glorified body will be the same glorified body Christ now has. Christ's glorified body allows him to be fully God in a way he was in His pre-incarnated state i.e. His former glory as God the Son has not only been restored but I think we have good reason to think it's also been enhanced. The body Christ now has is the same kind of body we will have. We will never be God but we are like God - in Him image. The significance of this may be far greater than we can now comprehend. 

Only God is good

We often hear the expression "he is a good person" or "they are good people." But what exactly is a good person; what makes us truly good?

Good people are "plugged in" people; people plugged in to God the Father, the source of all goodness.

We not only know this from scripture in general, but the following passage may give us the most striking example.

"And a ruler asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone." Luk 18:18-19 

This is a very curious statement. Christ seems to suggest that he himself has no goodness ("...why do you call me good…"); only his Father ("...God alone..." ) is good. However, we are told elsewhere that Christ was without spot or blemish i.e. he had no sin. Christ too is perfect and good, not to mention coequal with the Father. So exactly what is Christ saying here?

Some might argue that this was actually a roundabout way of making a claim to be God himself, since we know elsewhere in scripture that he, too, is good. So when he said God alone is good, since he himself was (and is) God, he was referring to himself. And though he certainly was God the Son, this doesn't seem to be his point since he speaks of God in contrast to himself ("...no one...except God..." who was his Father, distinct from him as the Son). 

I think the essence of what Jesus was suggesting is all goodness, even his own was (is) by virtue of his being in ^[1]relationship with his Father, the source of all goodness i.e., Christ was not saying he was (is) not good but rather his own goodness was the fruit of his relationship with his Father. To say it another way the goodness of Christ was a genuine and real goodness but also a goodness ^[1]derived from being in union (one) with his Father, who is good. 

Keep in mind we are told Christ was the radiance and only expression of the glory of God, and the exact representation and perfect imprint of His essence... not the other way around i.e. the Son emanates (issues forth) from the Father to put the Father on display. The Father does not emanate from the Son (though he does display himself through the Son). Just as the Spirit issues forth from both the Father and the Son. So in this sense the Father is the source of everything, even the Son i.e. who is ^[2] the only begotten of (eternally comes from) the Father. 

This is not a matter of Christ being created. He is the co-eternal and co-equal God along with the Father and the Spirit. This is about the nature and dynamics of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. 

If this is an accurate interpretation of this passage (and I think it is) and fits the rest of scripture, what is Christ telling us? What is his point?

If Christ, who is perfect, was good by virtue of his union and relationship with the Father, how can we (who are sinful and imperfect) ever hope of being good without that same union and relationship with the Father? Are we not good only by virtue of being plugged into God himself, the source of all goodness?

How do we plug in?

If so, how do we plug-in? By receiving the love of the Father through Christ.

How do we receive that love? By God revealing himself to us in Christ through his Spirit. 

Where does God reveal Christ to us? Initially, and primarily through Christ's incarnation, but now through his word and people, not just any people but people who are also plugged into the God of all goodness.

As a man on earth operating solely in the power of the Spirit, Jesus was our example. He showed us not only what to do but how to do it, i.e. By abiding in the Father's goodness and love.

"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you -- i.e., not only do I love you with the same love the Father has for me, but I love you as I receive it from him i.e. "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you...[in the same way and by means of that same love] "). Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just (in the exact same way) as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love." - Jesus - John 15:9-10

It should be noted that the Father's love of his Son was a fixed reality. This verse, however, suggests the manifestation of that love and Christ's experiencing it was based on his abiding in it through faithfulness (i.e., obedience) to his Father. How much more so it must be for us? 

____________________________________________________________

^[1]  For a fuller discussion God as a being of relationship click here

^[2]  For a fuller discussion on "only begotten" click here

What is our eternal reward?

"...for eternity we are growing in the realization that we need God for everything, and yet in that neediness, we are fully and abundantly satisfied in all he provides." – Kyle Strobel, "Formed for the Glory of God" page 97

Note in the above quote the tension of continued growth in eternity while experiencing complete satisfaction at the same time. How does this occur? 

Strobel explains our understanding of our need for God throughout eternity is always increasing - after all, He is infinite, with no end or bottom and we are like Him with the capacity to experience him with ever increasing fullness. We will therefore never reach the height, width, fullness, or depth of His being. 

Yet, we are also always filled up to our present capacity at any given time. So there will never be a time we are not increasing in our experience of God while being full at the same time. God is not changing or getting bigger, our capacity and experience of Him is. 

But that process begins now. The degree to which we will experience him in eternity is determined by the extent of our faith in Him in this life. When we go into eternity, if our capacity to experience the fullness of God is only a thimble that will be the extent of our experience of Him upon entry. If a bowl, barrel, or an ocean we will experience Him accordingly. We will experience more of Him to the extent we have a larger capacity to experience Him.

Once we go into eternity our understanding of Him will continue to grow. The question then becomes, what capacity do you wish to enter eternity with… that of a thimble, a barrel or even an ocean? 

Either way, there will never be a dull moment throughout all eternity. Things will always be progressing and expanding. Hard to grasp but exciting to consider. 

It begins now...by faith

The realization of our need for God starts in this life at the beginning of our ¹new (spiritual) birth and increases in this life as our trust in God grows. Our experience of God also continues to progress  throughout eternity as our knowledge and communion with God grows.

What we should strive for in this life is greater faith so that we might have a greater capacity to see and experience more of God in eternity. God is our goal and reward i.e. Scripture seems to indicate our ability to enjoy and honor God in eternity will be in proportion to our faith in and faithfulness to Him now. Now we live by faith in ever-increasing degrees. Faith is the means by which we increase our capacity now to enjoy our greatest reward later i.e. God himself!

Whatever satisfaction in God we find now occurs by faith. Satisfaction will continue in the ²next life but firsthand - i e. by direct experience instead of by faith. Now our walk with him involves faith, hope, and love. In eternity faith and hope will no longer be necessary, only love. As we see God and the vastness of God's love more fully our love for him will continue to grow.

And because love will be experienced directly - face-to-face - it will also be full (according on our capacity), uninterrupted, and overflowing. We will be glorified. Our limitations - lack of faith - will no longer exist for we will be like Him and see him as he is in all his glory and love (not  quantitatively but qualitatively i.e. not in completeness but in substance). While faith and hope will cease and are no longer necessary, love remains. 

Mat 5:10  "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 
Mat 5:11  "Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 
Mat 5:12  Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you (what causes their blessed state and makes their reward great is the testing of our faith by means of struggle and persecution). 

Luk 6:22  "Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! 
Luk 6:23  Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets. 

1Co 3:8  He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor (labor inspired or driven by God's Spirit in us vs labor performed for the approval of others and by mere will power i.e. the labor of faith versus the labor of performance. For a further discussion on this click here).  

________________________________

¹the Spirit of God, given at our spiritual birth and now indwelling his children, is our guarantee of better things to come i.e. the fact that we have been given God's Spirit is our guarantee we will be with God in all his infinite glory one day. 

Why? His Spirit can not indwell an unclean vessel. If we have His Spirit we are and must be clean, not because of our efforts or faithfulness but because of Christ's. By this, we know we will be with Him in eternity.

²Not that we do not experience any evidence of this love by tangible provision of material needs now, but these are merely a drop in the bucket to aid us in advancing his purposes now and for our enjoyment i.e. we can not depend on these as proof of God's love. God promises in this world, you will have trouble. Material blessing will ebb and flow; God's love will not. The completed work of Christ, to restore us to the Father in the fullness of his love, is our primary proof of the greatness of that love. There is no greater evidence. 

This is a past historical event with ongoing and expanding benefits both now and throughout eternity. The face-to-face union with Jesus and the overflowing joy/bliss of that union is our primary reward and hope.

Trust...essential to relationship

What is the key to any relationship?

¹Trust.

What is the key to trust?

Knowing (believing) the party you are engaging with truly has your best interest in mind, i.e. they love ²you.

As someone proves their genuine care by their words and actions and is not engaging us simply to get or take something from us, our trust grows. If someone over time demonstrates they are using you, your trust wanes and your caution grows. This takes time because outward actions don't always reveal inward motivation right away.

Some would argue love is the key to any relationship. And this would be true if we weren't so deeply broken and distrusting. 

Love binds a relationship together, but love is not received until we trust the one who offers it. To say it another way, we don't "buy in" to someone's kind gestures and overtures of care if we don't trust they are genuine i.e. that their kindness is really kindness and not a "trap" to allure us into a relationship in order to ³use us.

The problem is you can love someone with everything in you but if the one you love does not trust you (i.e. they think you are trying to use them to get something from them instead of give something to them) your love will not "land" i.e. be accepted. This is why different groups and people responded in an exactly opposite way to Christ e.g. religious leaders vs. the sick and poor.

To illustrate, we are told God so loved the world he gave his only Son, yet not everyone who has been told this is clamoring to pursue or receive God's offer. In fact, most do not accept this offer of love even after it is extended and explained. Why? They don't trust the one making the offer or believe it is true. They are suspicious of God, who is making the offer. They don't believe his claims about himself and about them. They somehow are convinced God does not have their best interest at heart, even in light of this most significant and wonderful evidence.

As an illustration, we likely know of or heard of foster kids being assimilated into a family and how the foster parents' hearts often break trying to convince the child he/she is loved. Why? Because the child brushes off those attempts and will even act out to see if these "parents" still love them in all their ugliness i.e. the child wonders if the new parents really love them or do they simply feel sorry for them or want the child to meet some need in the potential new parents? 

Why is this? They are "jaded" as they say. After being jerked around emotionally by opening themselves up to being loved by other so-called parents, only to have it taken away, they choose not to open themselves up to the possible hurt of losing love all over again.

By God's grace, you can control how you treat others, i.e. treat them in a loving vs. an unloving way. You can not, however, control whether they will receive your love. Only God can open their hearts to receive love. Our loving others may be the means, but when all is said and done, God must open their hearts and eyes to see the love that is there, i.e. his love coming through us to them.

Loving someone is what we are called to do. Being used (abused) by someone is not. 

(We may choose to let someone "use us" for a time so we might win them to Christ, but this is a separate topic). 

Love without trust?

Can you love someone without trusting them? Yes. You can sincerely want what's best for someone ⁴you have no trust in. 

This is where we get confused. We think, how can I forgive someone who is not trustworthy? You can forgive them because you truly care about them. But that does not mean you trust them or should entrust yourself to them. Love should be a given, trust is earned.

This is also true of our relationship with God on both sides. 

As we come to believe God always and only wants what's best for us, our trust grows.

When God sees we genuinely love him for who he is and not just using him to get something else, he trusts us more and entrusts us with more of his blessings, knowing we will use what he gives to love others, thereby honoring him.
______________________________

Footnotes: 

¹Someone would say love is vital, which is ultimately true. However, if the one seeking to love us is not trusted, we will never receive or experience their love. This is true not only from other people but also from God.

²self interest is not the same as selfishness. If you look at every promise of scripture, what is the appeal? These are promises made to you, i.e. self. In fact, self-interest is assumed when we are told to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. It is not condemned but merely appealed to as the standard by which we treat others. 

The issue isn't whether it's valid to care about ourselves, but how is "self" best cared for. Self is not best cared for by self (which is selfishness) but by God. For us to focus on self-caring is bondage, simply because we can never truly provide for ourselves that which we most need...infinite and eternal love and care. To focus on God is freedom because only he alone can love in the way we need and were designed to be loved i.e. with infinite love from an infinite source. 

³If each party is seeking the best of the other, they both will benefit. The key is what drives that action that benefits others. 

To be clear, few relationships are based solely on each party seeking only to give something and not get something. Few (if any) of us are that grounded in our walk with God (and thereby full of his love so that he is our primary source for love instead of our spouse or some other significant relationship)

We get into relationships because we get something out of them. But that is not the same as getting into a relationship to take or demand something from the other. All relationships result in both benefiting or they wouldn't exist. This, however, isn't the issue. The issue is why do people primarily seek relationships, to get or to give.

I would guess many relationships start out more with an eye on getting more than giving. But as each person matures, it shifts in time to giving more than getting (at least by one party), otherwise, it would not likely last.

Any healthy relationship is reciprocal. However, there is a difference between giving and receiving love and giving to get love. Receiving love is vital in any relationship, but it differs from engaging in a relationship for getting or taking. A relationship based solely on getting is classic co-dependence.

A key indicator of the difference is gratitude. One expressing gratitude for the other partner is because they recognize their kindness was a gesture of giving/loving, not taking. 

A key indicator someone is primarily about getting or taking is anger. Getting angry when one does not get what they want, or the other doesn't give them what they demand, is an indication the relationship is not based on love but on what they can get or take out of the relationship.

To say it simply, a truly loving relationship (on both sides) is based on what you give, not what you get. In this kind of relationship, both are still getting but as the fruit of a loving relationship, not the goal. 

⁴You can also extend love to someone who does not trust you, but until there is trust, it will not "land". Loving them over time, however, can build the trust needed for it to finally break through.