Lessons From the Mighty Sequoia

You are here

Lessons From the Mighty Sequoia

Login or Create an Account

With a UCG.org account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up

×

I love trees, but these were more like TREES! This past summer, my family and I took the opportunity to walk among the giant sequoias in King's Canyon National Park in California. While pondering these phenomenal trees, which are a truly magnificent part of God's creation, I thought of a number of spiritual lessons.

But first, consider these key facts regarding the sequoias:

• The scientific name for the sequoia is Sequoiadendron giganteum—the giant sequoia—and they are related to the better-known redwoods.

• Sequoias grow naturally only on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada mountain range, most often between elevations of 5,000 and 7,000 feet. They grow up to two feet in height per year until they reach 200 to 300 feet high—then, like people, they grow outward in girth.

• The average base of a sequoia can be as much as 40 feet in diameter—and a few reach more than 100 feet in diameter.

• The thick, spongy bark can be as much as 31 inches thick.

• Its branches can be up to eight feet in diameter (many of these branches being thicker and longer than an average tree) and can have more than 11,000 cones, ideally dispersing more than 300,000 seeds per year.

• The oldest living sequoia is a tree named the General Sherman in Sequoia National Park (adjacent to King's Canyon). It is more than 275 feet high, has a base diameter of 102 feet, weighs approximately 2.7 million pounds and is estimated to be more than 2,200 years old.

• The giant sequoias are the largest trees measured by total volume (redwoods are taller and the bristlecone pines are older) and are the largest living things on the planet. They can weigh 4,000 tons (eight million pounds) and can have a volume of 30,000 to 50,000 cubic feet (20 Olympic-size swimming pools of water).

Let's now look at some powerful life-lessons we can learn from the mighty sequoia.

Fire is necessary for the sequoia to reproduce.

While the sequoia is massive when fully grown, the cone it produces is only the size of a chicken egg, with seeds smaller than oat flakes (a lesson in itself—compare Matthew 13:31-32). The cone can hang on the tree for years, green and unopened. Even if it falls to the ground it remains unopened until it dries out—and this is where the fire comes in.

When the National Park Service took over the care of King's Canyon Park in the 1800s, they worked hard to prevent forest fires. It was more than 100 years before they discovered they were actually working against the sequoia, because the sequoia needs fire for the cone to open and the seeds to germinate.

Fire is a purifying process even in forests. What looks like a trial for the sequoia is in reality the process they need for future growth. What about you? What fiery trials have you gone through (or are going through) that God is using for your future growth?

The apostle Peter wrote, "Beloved, do not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you; but rejoice to the extent that you partake of Christ's sufferings, that when His glory is revealed, you may also be glad with exceeding joy" (1 Peter 4:12-13).

Fire clears the underbrush so newly germinated seeds can grow.

Since the sequoia can withstand fire that consumes most other trees, it is left standing after the fire is extinguished. As a result, the ground around it is not only cleared for its seeds to germinate, but the ground has also been fertilized with the ashes of those other burned trees and underbrush. The seeds can only grow successfully in full sunlight, free from overshadowing vegetation.

During that fiery process, the sequoia itself is protected. The thick, spongy bark shields it from the tremendous heat of forest fires. In fact, the bark contains tannic acid, a fire retardant used in modern fire extinguishers.

Commonly referred to as the "faith chapter," Hebrews 11 records the stories of many faithful followers of God. Most of them did not have easy lives and faced various faith-testing situations. They are historical examples of people who, like we must today, stood fast in true faith toward God to extinguish those fiery flames (verse 34)—like the mighty sequoia in the natural realm. Faith carries you through the fires of life and helps you grow.

Sequoias don't die of old age—they die from falling down.

The sequoia is so resistant to pests and fire that their most common cause of death is simply falling down. For a tree so massive, how can this be? The answer is that the roots of sequoias only go 6 to 20 feet into the ground, and a sufficient windstorm can topple them, particularly if there is a buildup of ice and snow on the branches.

But sequoias don't typically grow alone. They grow in groves. Even though their roots may only grow 20 feet deep, those roots spread out to cover a wide area—intertwining with other sequoias. Combined together, their roots help them to withstand the winds.

True followers of Jesus Christ need to be well-grounded and rooted deep in God and His Word—and also stand together against the devil and his negative spiritual influence in this world. In advance of Peter's denial of Him the night He was arrested, Jesus told Peter, "When you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren" (Luke 22:32).

We are stronger when we are rooted in the foundation of God the Father and Jesus Christ, standing together with others of like mind.

Sequoias can die from fire—if the fire gets through their protective bark.

The mighty sequoias are unique with their fire-resistant bark, but if there is an opening in the bark or if fire is too close to the roots, then the fire can get inside or underneath the bark. Once fire gets past the bark there is nothing to stop it. The fire won't consume the tree immediately, as there are still the tannins that resist fire, but the fire will smolder, essentially slow-burning the tree from the inside out.

When explorers first found the sequoia, they couldn't believe the size of these incredible trees. They found many massive trunks on the ground, and many of these trunks were hollow. They often used those hollow trunks for shelter and storage—some being large enough for men and horses to stand up in! There are still some trees like this on the ground, and if you walk through them you can see evidence of the fire that consumed the inside.

Negative, emotional and evil spiritual fire for a Christian—or anyone—is dangerous if we allow it to take hold. A Bible proverb speaks of this danger: "Can a man take fire to his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?" (Proverbs 6:27).

Becoming offended, being offensive or harboring hatred, anger or wrong desire is like a slow-burning fire that can consume us from the inside and cut us off from Jesus Christ and His people.

God has "concealed" many wonderful spiritual truths and lessons in His creation for you to seek and find (see Proverbs 25:2). It was truly awe-inspiring to stand in the presence of those giant trees. As we ponder God's creation, let's remember the spiritual lessons we can draw from it—including the lessons from the mighty sequoia.

You might also be interested in...

Comments

  • Dan Dowd

    londonbrandon,
    I appreciate your time in replying, but you are missing the point of my article (which was not even to address any of the issues you bring up). I was struck by the majesty of these trees and saw several spiritual traits I wanted to share with our readers.

    Let me clarify why I stated what I did about Carbon-14 dating and your position on dating by tree rings. The bristlecone pine is the oldest known living tree on earth, so all of the other references you point to are made on assumptions of reproductions or through other traits. My point is not even to dispute the dates you give, but to point out that the scientists who study these things are making certain assumptions - the primary one in the sources you site is that these trees reproduce at a steady rate and consistantly. There is no definitive way to prove this. My answer to you was not to make a "conspicuous effort" to change the topic, but an assumption on my part as to where you were going since I couldn't look at the source you were referencing.

    You stating tree ring ages does nothing to dispell a belief in a "gap theory", a global flood or a 6,000 year old (re)creation. Sorry to bust your bubble, but there will be no consensus with me on your point that tree rings dispell any of those events because (hold on to your hat), none of those events would prevent those trees from being that old even if it could be proven. I suppose this also means that I am simply giving the 'party line' and as such cannot be honestly disquisitive (it is not very nice to ask to engage in a discourse and then state that you don't think I would answer in an intellectually honest way). The simply fact for me is that scientists are making too many assumptions to consider ages (in the example of these trees you bring up) as ancient as they state. Their bias is also clear in wanting to have an ancient timeline that can dismiss God having a hand in the Creation.

    I would encourage to read my article is light of the spiritual point I was trying to make. If you need more, you can search our website and read what the United Church of God has written regarding evolution versus creation from a Biblical perspective. You could then address those authors in light of any scientific discussion you would like to have.

  • londonbrandon

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify my question.

    It may be abundantly clear that there is a lot I don't know but I can't escape the evidence from DENDROCHRONOLOGY... tree ring dating... which does not appear to align with gap theory, a six thousand year old creation, or a global flood (now that you mention it).

    I ask a lot of questions. What's quite sad to me is that in so many cases, I seem to get a 'party line' response that is so... sort of, predictable, that I'm left wondering to what extent it can be honestly disquisitive. I guess since I'm an optimist, I'll keep plugging away and say that...

    It happily sounds like we have the beginning of a consensus. Since I really want to explore the age of trees, and since it appears that I might be on to something... (the facts weren't disputed just the sources questioned, and an apparently conspicuous effort was made to change the subject from dendrochronology to carbon 14 dating) (please correct me on that if needed) I'm thinking that there might just indeed be an honest, courageous answer available.

    My examples were just cut and pasted from Wikipedia. I did explore all of the referenced sources and I hope you will too. It's something I've been looking at for years. Your article refers to the age of Bristlecone Pines... this seems like a good start point.

    Of course there are caveats with carbon dating! But why do you suppose... (say an agnostic Chinese) scientist doesn't just throw it out? Because she recognizes that the age of a certain carbonaceous sample can be easily determined by comparing its radiocarbon content to that of a tree ring with a known calendar age. If a sample has the same proportion of radiocarbon as that of the tree ring, it is safe to conclude that they are of the same age.

    Libraries of tree rings of different calendar ages are now available to provide records extending back over the last 11,000 years. The trees often used as references are the bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata) found in the USA and waterlogged Oak (Quercus sp.) in Ireland and Germany. (ITRDB for example).

    Can we agree to temporarily suspend the corroboration of carbon dating in the Bristlecone and just explore the fact (Hughes and Graumlich YEAR). that the chronology based on the cross dating of Bristlecone pine samples is almost a full 9000 years?

    Thanks again for your time discussing this

  • Dan Dowd

    Londonbrandon,
    I am not sure what point you are trying to make in your post - you seem to be trying to make the point that you don't believe in a recreated earth or the Biblical flood account. You also seem to be pulling your references regarding the various tree ages from some source that is not referenced.

    Please allow me to address what I see as an overriding point of your position. Carbon-14 dating that is used so extensively in scientific dating is very unrelyable past a few thousand years. Carbon-14 dating (to the extent that it is reliable) can only be used on organic matter. While many in the scientific community quote Carbon-14 dates, the reality is that it is most conjecture. Part of the flaw in this dating method is also because the assumption is the the Carbon-14 element has remained absolutely steady and unchanged down through time. The other flaw is that Carbon-14 has not be influenced by outside sources - that is UV light has not changed its level in the natural world, oxygen rates or humidity levels and so forth have not changed its saturation in preserved matter.

    As a consequence, I am very skeptical of Carbon-14 dating past a few thousand years and completely dismiss it past 5-6,000 years.

    If you were striving to make a different point, I would welcome a clearer posting of your thoughts.

  • londonbrandon

    It's ironic that you bring up trees specifically since dendrochronological facts dispute the notion that the contents of the earth were created or re-created six thousand years ago. (Fully anchored chronologies which extend back more than 11,000 years exist for river oak trees from South Germany (from the Main and Rhine rivers) and pine from Northern Ireland for example.)

    Would you not agree that significant evidence against ruin reconstruction theory is found in the many and varied tree studies that have been done? What am I missing?

    Here's a few other examples:

    Clonal trees

    As with all long-lived plant and fungal species, no individual part of a clonal colony is alive (in the sense of active metabolism) for more than a very small fraction of the life of the entire clone. Some clonal colonies may be fully connected via their root systems, while most are not actually interconnected, but are genetically identical clones which populated an area through vegetative reproduction. Ages for clonal colonies, often based on current growth rates, are estimates.[26]

    Name Age (years) Species Location Notes
    Pando 80,000[27] - 1,000,000[28] Quaking aspen
    Populus tremuloides Fishlake National Forest, Utah, United States Covers 107 acres (0.43 km2) and has around 47,000 stems (average age 130 years), which continually die and are renewed by its roots. Is also the heaviest known organism, weighing 6,000 tonnes.

    Jurupa Oak[29] 13,000[30] Palmer oak
    Quercus palmeri Jurupa Mountains, California, United States Quercus palmeri Engelm. = Quercus dunnii Kellogg.[30]
    Old Tjikko 9,550 Norway spruce
    Picea abies Fulufjället National Park, Dalarna, Sweden The tree's stems live no more than 600 years, but its root system's age[31][32] was established using carbon dating and genetic matching.[33] Elsewhere in the Fulu mountains, 20 spruces have been found older than 8,000 years.[34]
    Old Rasmus 9,500 Norway spruce

    Picea abies Härjedalen, Sweden [35]
    3,000[36] - 10,000[37] Huon Pine
    Lagarostrobos franklinii Mount Read, Tasmania, Australia Several genetically identical males that have reproduced vegetatively. Although single trees in this stand may be around 3 to 4 thousand years old, the stand itself as a single organism has existed for 10,000 years.[5]
    [edit]

  • caroleh

    Thank you for this article! My sister told me about it and suggested I read it. It was very interesting and helpful during our current trials. I hope others will find this and benefit from it as well.

  • Join the conversation!

    Log in or register to post comments