Comments on: A Biblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden (Part 1) http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/ Resources about biblical theology and its relation to the theological encyclopedia. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:40:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Travis Finley http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-282 Travis Finley Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:24:21 +0000 http://www.historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/#comment-282 Have you ever thought of asking this question, "Would God eventually have allowed A&E to eat from the TotKoG&E? Have you ever thought of asking this question, “Would God eventually have allowed A&E to eat from the TotKoG&E?

]]> By: In Light of the Gospel » Blog Archive » Historia Salutis Web Site http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-14 In Light of the Gospel » Blog Archive » Historia Salutis Web Site Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:31:33 +0000 http://www.historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/#comment-14 [...] A welcome addition to biblical-theological resources. Nick Batzig, who pointed this new website out, has an article on “A Biblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden.” [...] [...] A welcome addition to biblical-theological resources. Nick Batzig, who pointed this new website out, has an article on “A Biblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden.” [...]

]]> By: Camden Bucey http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-13 Camden Bucey Sun, 08 Feb 2009 22:32:26 +0000 http://www.historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/#comment-13 I don't think Vos and Van Til's presentations are incompatible with each other, but I see a slight difference in emphasis between the two. I think it's important to state that Van Til is very jealous to protect the probationary nature of the tree as well. He oftentimes calls it a "radical test of obedience." But I think for Van Til, the test is initially an epistemological one. Eve didn't allow God to be Lord over her knowledge and she listened to the serpent. After failing to retain an obedient epistemology she failed to be obedient in experience with her outward actions. The radical test of obedience began by seeing if Adam and Eve would obey God for his sake only - to see if they would listen to him or the serpent and ultimately themselves. The epistemological sin and the outward eating of the fruit are of course closely bound up with each other. I don’t think Vos and Van Til’s presentations are incompatible with each other, but I see a slight difference in emphasis between the two. I think it’s important to state that Van Til is very jealous to protect the probationary nature of the tree as well. He oftentimes calls it a “radical test of obedience.” But I think for Van Til, the test is initially an epistemological one. Eve didn’t allow God to be Lord over her knowledge and she listened to the serpent. After failing to retain an obedient epistemology she failed to be obedient in experience with her outward actions.

The radical test of obedience began by seeing if Adam and Eve would obey God for his sake only – to see if they would listen to him or the serpent and ultimately themselves.

The epistemological sin and the outward eating of the fruit are of course closely bound up with each other.

]]> By: Nicholas T. Batzig http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Nicholas T. Batzig Sun, 08 Feb 2009 01:49:23 +0000 http://www.historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/#comment-12 Camden, I'm not sure that they are saying different things. I believe that Vos is focusing on the experiential knowledge of Good and Evil, not the metaphysical knowledge. I am sure that Adam and Eve knew that eating from the tree was evil and that obeying God was good, but it was not until the probation that they would learn, in an experiential way (by means of their actions) the good from the evil. I believe that Vos' understanding serves and protects the probationary nature of the tree. Camden,

I’m not sure that they are saying different things. I believe that Vos is focusing on the experiential knowledge of Good and Evil, not the metaphysical knowledge. I am sure that Adam and Eve knew that eating from the tree was evil and that obeying God was good, but it was not until the probation that they would learn, in an experiential way (by means of their actions) the good from the evil. I believe that Vos’ understanding serves and protects the probationary nature of the tree.

]]> By: Camden Bucey http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Camden Bucey Sat, 07 Feb 2009 18:25:17 +0000 http://www.historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/#comment-10 Van Til interprets the "knowing good and evil" as "judging" between the two. For Van Til, Eve "knew" good and evil when she opted to judge between the serpent's claim and the command given by God. When she entertained an alternative option to the Lord's command, she made herself out to be the judge or knower of good and evil. It's very much an epistemological move. In her own mind, Eve became the ultimate starting point for all knowledge and the arbiter of truth. This is an interesting difference, albeit slight, between Van Til and Vos. Van Til is consciously working in Vos' framework, but Van Til brings an interesting perspective on this issue. Van Til interprets the “knowing good and evil” as “judging” between the two. For Van Til, Eve “knew” good and evil when she opted to judge between the serpent’s claim and the command given by God. When she entertained an alternative option to the Lord’s command, she made herself out to be the judge or knower of good and evil. It’s very much an epistemological move. In her own mind, Eve became the ultimate starting point for all knowledge and the arbiter of truth. This is an interesting difference, albeit slight, between Van Til and Vos. Van Til is consciously working in Vos’ framework, but Van Til brings an interesting perspective on this issue.

]]> By: Historia Salutis Web Site http://historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Historia Salutis Web Site Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:26:11 +0000 http://www.historiasalutis.com/2009/02/06/a-biblical-theology-of-the-trees-of-the-garden-part-1/#comment-9 [...] have recently posted a short article there on the Biblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden. Biblical Theology, John Murray, Sinclair [...] [...] have recently posted a short article there on the Biblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden. Biblical Theology, John Murray, Sinclair [...]

]]>