伊甸園聖殿
The Temple of Eden
作者：Tony Reinke 譯 岑躍環/誠之 校。譯自：http://tonyreinke.com/2015/11/05/the-temple-of-eden/
https://yimawusi.net/2021/03/26/the-temple-of-eden/
 
在格雷格·畢爾（Greg Beale）的《聖殿與教會的使命：關於神之居所的聖經神學》（暫譯；The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God）一書中，作者認為伊甸園是第一座原型聖殿（archetypal temple）。他提出了在伊甸園與後來的會幕或聖殿結構之間，在概念和用詞上的14個相似之處。
In his book The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God, Greg Beale argues that the Garden of Eden was the first archetypal temple. He provides 14 conceptual and linguistic parallels between Eden and future tabernacle/temple structures.
 
以下是我對他這14個主要觀點的簡要總結。
Here are my brief summaries of his major points.
 
一、伊甸園是上帝的同在的獨特場所。伊甸園是上帝與人同行的地方，與之相似的便是之後提及的會幕。（比較：創三8與利廿六12；申廿三14；撒下七6-7）
1. The Garden as the unique place of God’s presence. Eden was the place where God walked back and forth with man, paralleled this with later references to the Tabernacle (Gen. 3:8 with Lev. 26:12, Deut. 23:14; 2 Sam. 7:6–7).
 
二、伊甸園是首位祭司居住的地方。亞當被安置在伊甸園，耕種並看守（cultivate and keep it，創二15[新譯本]）。單獨來看，「耕種」（cultivation）具有明顯的農業意義。但這個命令（「耕種與看守」[cultivate/keep]也可以翻譯為「服事與守衛」[serve/guard]）在舊約其他地方也曾出現，用來形容祭司的工作（參：民三7-8，八25-26，十八5-6；代上廿三32；結四十四14）。因此，「在創二15，亞當的職責不只是在伊甸園土地上從事簡單的農活。在後來以色列聖殿中祭祀的職責，明顯地包括防止（guarding）不潔之物進入的責任（參：民三6-7、32、38；十八1-7）。這職責似乎與亞當有關，特别是考慮到那埋伏在園子的周圍、後來進入園子的不潔之物時」（p. 69）。
2. The Garden as the place of the first priest. Adam was placed in the garden to “cultivate and keep it” (Gen. 2:15). Taken alone, “cultivation” has obvious agricultural meaning. But this pair of terms (“cultivate/keep” also translated “serve/guard”) is used elsewhere in the OT to describe the work of the priest (Num. 3:7–8; 8:25–26; 18:5–6; 1 Chr. 23:32; Ezek. 44:14). Thus “the task of Adam in Genesis 2:15 included more than mere spadework in the dirt of a garden. It is apparently that priestly obligations in Israel’s later temple included the duty of ‘guarding’ unclean things from entering (cf. Num. 3:6–7, 32, 38; 18:1–7), and this appears to be relevant for Adam, especially in view of the unclean creature lurking on the perimeter of the Garden and who then enters” (69).
 
三、伊甸園是守衛天使第一個看守的地方。在罪進入園子之後，亞當、夏娃被禁止接近生命樹，有基路伯把守。這表示亞當的工作不只是耕種——他應當保護園子遠離罪惡和不潔（對比：創三24與出廿五18-22；王上六29-35，八6-7；結廿八14—16，四十一18）。
3. The Garden as the place of the first guarding cherubim. After sin was introduced into the garden, Adam and Eve are barred from the tree of life by cherubim. This reveals that Adam’s work included more than gardening — he was to protect the garden from evil and uncleanness (Gen. 3:24 with Ex. 25:18–22; 1 Kgs. 6:29-35, 8:6–7; Ezek. 28:14–16, 41:18).
 
四、伊甸園是第一座燈台的坐落之處。很可能，生命樹提供了直接擺放在至聖所之外的燈台的模型（出廿五31-36）。
4. The Garden as the place of the first arboreal lampstand. Likely, the Tree of Life provides the model for the lampstand placed directly outside the holy of holies (Ex. 25:31–36).
 
五、伊甸園是以色列聖殿中花園意境的雛形。舊約記載了聖殿擁有植物圖案、花園式的特點（王上六18、29、32；七20-26、42、47；結一8-11；詩七十四3-7；五十二8；九十二13-15；哀二6；賽六十13、21）。
5. The Garden as formative for garden imagery in Israel’s temple. Temple references in the OT possess botanical, garden-like features (1 Kgs. 6:18, 29, 32; 7:20–26, 42, 47; Zech. 1:8–11; Ps. 74:3–7; 52:8; 92:13–15; Lam. 2:6; Isa. 60:13, 21).
 
六、伊甸園是第一個水源地。同樣，末時的聖殿（the eschatological temple），其特徵也是水的來源（對比：創二10與結四十七1-12；啓廿一1-2）。
6. The Garden as the first source of water. Like Eden, the eschatological temples feature a source of water (Gen. 2:10 with Ezek. 47:1–12; Rev. 21:1–2).
 
七、伊甸園是出產寶石之地。注意在伊甸園中的寶石與後來的會幕或聖殿的材質之間的相似性（對比：創二12與王上六20-22；出廿五7、11-39；廿八6-27，代上廿九2）。
7. The Garden as the place of precious stones. Note the correlation between precious stones in Eden and the building materials of the later tabernacle and temple (Gen. 2:12 with 1 Kgs. 6:20–22, Ex. 25:7, 11–39; 28:6–27; 1 Chr. 29:2).
 
八、伊甸園是首座高山坐落之地。伊甸園坐落在一座山上（結廿八14、16），就像錫安山（出十五17）和末日的聖殿那樣（結四十2，四十三12；啓廿一10）。
8. The Garden as the place of the first mountain. Eden was situated upon a mountain (Ezek. 28:14, 16) just like Mount Zion (Ex. 15:17) and the eschatological temple (Ezek. 40:2; 43:12; Rev. 21:10).
 
九、伊甸園是第一個智慧之所。「在至聖所存放律法（律法帶來智慧）的約櫃，呼應了伊甸園裡的分别善惡樹（這也帶來了智慧）。觸摸約櫃和吃分别善惡樹的果子都導致死亡。」（p.73-74）
9. The Garden as the first place of wisdom. “The ark in the holy of holies, which contained the Law (that led to wisdom) echoes the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (that also led to wisdom). Both the touching of the ark and the partaking of the tree’s fruit resulted in death” (73–74).
 
十、伊甸園是第一個入口朝東之地。像之後的會幕或聖殿都是從東邊進入（對比：創三24與結四十6）。
10. The Garden as the first place with an eastern facing entrance. Like the future tabernacle and temples, Eden was entered from the east (Gen. 3:24 with Ezek. 40:6).
 
十一、伊甸園是含有三個部分的聖潔建築物（a tripartite sacred structure）的一部分。創世記二章10節記載「有一條河從伊甸流出來，灌溉那園子 」。這節經文清楚地將伊甸從園子中分別了出來。在這裏，畢爾證明了伊甸園、並與之毗連的花園，「形成了兩個不同的區域」（p. 74）。他在這裡看到聖潔的三個程度，與聖殿的整體結構相似，包括了：1、園子以外的地方（外院）；2、園子代表一個神聖的地方（聖所）；3、伊甸園，上帝居住的地方（至聖所）。
11. The Garden as part of a tripartite sacred structure. Genesis 2:10 reveals that “a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden.” This reference formally distinguishes Eden from the garden. From this Beale builds the case that Eden and its adjoining garden “formed two distinct regions” (74). He sees here tripartite degrees of holiness, similar to the temple complex, comprised of (a) the region outside the garden (the outer court); (b) the garden representing a sacred place (the holy place); and (c) Eden, where God dwells (the holy of holies).
 
十二、以西結把伊甸園視為第一座聖殿。在以西結書廿八章13-18節，先知描繪了許多伊甸園與以色列的會幕或聖殿之間的相似之處。具體來說，先知提到伊甸園像一座聖殿，描繪亞當穿戴得如同祭司一樣（13節）。「因此，以西結書廿八章18節很可能是正典聖經中，將伊甸園稱為聖殿最明顯的一個地方」（p. 75-76）。
12. Ezekiel’s view of the Garden of Eden as the first sanctuary. In Ezekiel 28:13–18 the prophet draws a number of parallels between Eden and Israel’s tabernacle/temple. Specifically, the prophet references Eden as a sanctuary and pictures Adam dressed as a priest (v. 13). And “Ezekiel 28:18 is probably, therefore, the most explicit place anywhere in canonical literature where the Garden of Eden is called a temple” (75–76).
 
十三、古代近東對於廟宇的觀念與花園式的特點相近。「在古代近東，花園通常是廟宇建築的一部分」（p. 76）。
13. The Ancient Near Eastern concept of temples in association with garden-like features. “Gardens not untypically were part of temple complexes in the Ancient Near East” (76).
 
十四、早期猶太教認為伊甸園是第一座所聖殿。畢爾從猶太非正典文獻中找出證據，進一步證明，「猶太教也以各種不同的方式，將伊甸園理解為第一座所聖殿，符合上述的舊約證據。」（p. 27）。
14. Early Judaism’s view of the garden as the first sanctuary. Beale provides evidence from the non-canonical Jewish literature to further prove that “Judaism in various ways also understood the Garden to be the first sanctuary in line with the above Old Testament evidence” (27).
 
結論：「前述創世記第二章中的伊甸園與以色列的帳幕和聖殿相似之處的累積效應，表明伊甸園是第一座原型聖殿，以色列所有的聖殿都是按照這座聖殿建造的。」（p. 79-80）。
Conclusion: “The cumulative effect of the preceding parallels between the Garden of Genesis 2 and Israel’s tabernacle and temple indicates that Eden was the first archetypal temple, upon which all of Israel’s temples were based” (79–80).
欲更多了解這些概念和用詞上的相似之處，請閲讀該書66-80頁的內容。
Read more on these conceptual and linguistic parallels on pages 66–80 of Beale’s The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God.
 

另參：詞條 「 聖殿 」 一文。

按：改革宗出版社已於2016年出版本書的精簡版，God Dwells Among Us: Expanding Eden to the Ends of the Earth。麥種傳道會也即將出版本書的中文版（暫譯：《聖殿與教會的使命》）。

耶穌與在東門發火焰的劍Jesusand the Flaming Sword at the East Gate

作者：Nicholas T. Batzig   譯者: 駱鴻銘

http://feedingonchrist.com/jesus-and-the-flaming-sword-at-the-east-gate/

http://www.crtsbooks.net/blog/post/2015/03/16/%E8%80%B6%E7%A9%8C%E8%88%87%E5%9C%A8%E6%9D%B1%E9%96%80%E7%99%BC%E7%81%AB%E7%84%B0%E7%9A%84%E5%8A%8D.aspx

關於記錄在聖經裡的上帝偉大的工作，其細節完全不是隨意編造的。從最早記錄在救贖歷史裡的啟示開始，耶和華在救贖歷史的範圍裡、就埋下了許多將來要作為「定時炸彈」的細節。在一個細節被深深扎在讀者心中之後，當我們在閱讀這個榮耀的救贖啟示展開的書頁時，就必定會觸發另一個相關的定時炸彈。這些定時炸彈中最早的幾個之一，是被放置在伊甸園東邊入口的，在基路伯手中的發火焰的劍。正如之前幾個帖子所提到的，伊甸園是上帝與持有祂形象的人共同居住的花園-聖殿。就最完整和最真實的意義來說，它是上帝在地上的居所。當亞當和夏娃悖逆上帝，其中的一個後果就是他們從伊甸園被放逐出去（創三20-24）。墮落的意思是，這個世界的花園-聖殿必須被潔淨。聖經其餘的部分就是在教導我們，人如何能再次獲得進入這個天上聖殿的通道，好住在上帝的同在之中。當然，這只有在我們的罪被歸到基督身上，而且祂身體的殿，藉著在十字架上落在祂身上的流血審判得到潔淨後，才會發生。（關於被釘十字架是聖殿被潔淨，請看這裡，這裡，和這裡。）有趣的是，關於這把發火焰的劍的聖經神學，以及救贖歷史裡提到的東邊，會幫助我們更明白要回到上帝身邊所必須發生的事。以下是一些有關發火焰的劍，以及這個東邊的門，在上帝為人類打開回到祂的同在中的道路，並且永遠與祂同住的工作中，其意義的聖經神學發展。

There is absolutely nothing arbitrary about the details pertaining to the great works of God recorded in Scripture. From the earliest recorded revelation in the history of redemption, the Lord gave tiny details that were meant to serve as “time-bombs” planted into the field of redemptive history. After one detail was firmly fixed in the mind of the reader, it was meant to trigger other related time bombs as we read through the pages of the unfolding of this glorious redemptive revelation. One of the earliest of these time bombs was the allusion to the flaming sword in the hand of the cherubim placed at the East gate of Eden. As has been noted in previous posts here, Eden was the Garden-Temple where God dwelt with His image bearers. It was, in the fullest and truest sense, the dwelling place of God on earth. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, one of the consequences was that they were exiled from the Garden (Genesis 3:20-24). The fall meant that the Garden-Temple of this world had to be cleansed. The rest of the Scriptures are teaching us how man will again be given access to enter into the Heavenly Temple to dwell in the presence of God. This, of course, will only happen definitely when our sin was imputed to Christ and the Temple of His body was cleansed through the blood judgment that fell on Him at the cross. (For a fuller development of the crucifixion being Temple cleansing see this, this and this). Interestingly, the biblical-theology of the flaming sword and references to the east in redemptive history help us better understand how the way back to God must occur. Here are some of the biblical-theological developments regarding the significance of the flaming sword and the East Gate in God’s work of opening the way for man to come back into His presence to dwell with him forever:

發火焰的公義之劍

The Flaming Sword of Justice

亞當和夏娃犯罪之後，上帝「在伊甸園的東邊安設基路伯和四面轉動發火焰的劍，要把守生命樹的道路」。這把劍是代表所有亞當的後裔，當他們企圖藉著他們自己的努力，尋找一條歸回上帝、歸回生命之路時，將要落在他們身上的上帝的公義。愛德華滋（Jonathan Edwards）闡釋了這點。他寫道：

After Adam and Eve sinned, God “placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.” The sword represented the justice of God that would fall on any of Adam’s descendants who sought to find their way back to God and to life by their own efforts. Jonathan Edwards expounded on this when he wrote:

因此，當他們企圖要靠自己得著永生，是多麼地虛空和危險的事。有許多人，不顧上帝公義和伸冤的怒氣所發動的四面轉動的發火焰的劍，努力想要尋找一條來到生命樹面前的道路。許多人很勇敢，想要靠他們自己的名，靠他們自己的公義。對那些靠基督的名前來的人而言，劍已經不復存在；但是對那些靠自己的名前來的，一把發火焰的劍仍然在等候著他們。（註1）

Hence how vain and dangerous are their attempts that are attempting to get eternal life themselves. There are many that, notwithstanding the flaming sword of God’s justice and vindictive wrath that turns every [way], are endeavoring to find out ways to come at the tree of life. Many are bold to come in their own names and in their own righteousness. [There is] no sword for them that come in Christ’s name, but a flaming sword still for them that come in their own names.1

在摩西之歌裡，我們再次學到上帝的公義之劍。這次，它提到了上帝會如何對待那些恨祂和反對祂的人。就在帶領他們前進，去得迦南地為業之際，耶和華告訴以色列人：「我憑我的永生起誓：我若磨我閃亮的刀，手掌審判之權，就必報復我的敵人，報應恨我的人。」（申三十二40-41）

In Moses’ song, we learn again of the sword of the Lord’s justice. This time, it is in reference to what the Lord will do to those who hate and oppose Him. Just before leading them forward to take possession of the Land, the Lord told Israel, “As I live forever, If I whet My glittering sword, and My hand takes hold on judgment, I will render vengeance to My enemies, and repay those who hate Me” (Deut. 32:40-41).

羅伯森（O. Palmer Robertson）根據後來在漸進啟示的展開裡所提到的，解釋這裡提及的「耶和華的刀」的象徵性意義。他寫到：

O. Palmer Robertson explains the symbolic significance of this reference to “the sword of the Lord” in light of subsequent references to it in the unfolding of progressive revelation when he writes:

受到了盟約誓言的約束，耶和華必須用祂的劍來擊殺所有的惡人。當約書亞正在盤算他如何進攻耶利哥城之際，耶和華的這把刀，在耶和華軍隊的元帥手中已經預備好了（書五13）。這把刀也成為基甸喊叫攻打米甸人的戰役的主要特色（士七20）。在約翰啟示錄的天啟異象中，那位名為上帝之道的，揮舞著兩刄的劍，攻擊列國（啟一16，二12、16，十九15、21）。這把末世性的劍，和彌賽亞君王的「鐵杖」結合在一起，成為制服列國的工具（啟十九15；參：詩二9）。（註2）

Bound by the oath of the covenant, the Lord must employ his sword to slay all the wicked. This sword of the Lord appears readied in the hand of the captain of the Lord’s host as Joshua contemplates his attack on Jericho (Josh. 5:13). It became the central feature of Gideon’s battle cry against the Midianites (Judg. 7:20). In the apocalyptic visions of the Revelation of John, the one whose name is the Word of God brandishes a sharp double-edged sword that strikes the nations (Rev. 1:16; 2:12, 16; 19:15, 21). This eschatological sword joins the “iron scepter” of the messianic king as an instrument for subduing the nations (Rev. 19:15; cf. Ps. 2:9).2

儘管有這些提到耶和華要在祂的仇敵身上執行祂審判的地方，在先知文學裡有一個重要的地方，提到上帝公義的劍會落在彌賽亞身上，好拯救上帝的百姓。既然我們都配得上帝的審判，我們找到一處經文，說到基督所要扮演的代替性角色，為我們擔當上帝的審判——被丟在「刀劍」這個圖像之下——就是很合適的。在撒迦利亞書十三章7裡，我們讀到：

While in all of these places to the Lord executing His judgment on His enemies, there is one significant place in the prophetic literature in which the sword of God’s justice will fall on the Messiah for the salvation of God’s people. Since we all deserve the judgment of God it is only fitting that we would find a passage that speaks of the substitutionary role that Christ would play in taking the judgment of God for us–thrown under the figure of the “sword.” In Zechariah 13:7 we read:

萬軍之耶和華說：

刀劍哪，應當興起，

攻擊我的牧人和我的同伴。

擊打牧人，羊就分散；

 Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,

Against the Man who is My Companion,

Says the Lord of hosts.

Strike the Shepherd,

And the sheep will be scattered;

耶穌在祂被賣、帶來祂的受難的時刻，明確地把這個預言指給祂的門徒看。當大祭司前來捉拿祂，耶穌告訴祂的門徒：「今夜，你們為我的緣故都要跌倒。因為經上記著說：我要擊打牧人，羊就分散了。」（太廿六31）耶和華的刀劍要落在祂的牧人/同伴身上的預言，是祂的怒氣要在十字架上傾倒在基督身上的預言。耶穌通過了上帝公義的發火焰的劍（亞十三7），這是在花園-聖殿的東邊入口，由基路伯和發火焰的劍所代表的（創三24）。它們各自在救贖歷史裡佔有一席之地，幫助我們填補上帝應許要做的事的這幅圖畫。上帝的兒子投身於這場對抗撒但、罪、死亡的戰爭中——擔當上帝審判的發火焰的劍的怒氣——好為我們打開歸回到上帝的同在的道路。

Jesus explicitly pointed His disciples to this prophecy at the hour of his betrayal leading to His sufferings. When the chief priests came to take him, Jesus told his disciples, “All of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night, for it is written: ‘I will strike the Shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered’ (Matthew 26:31). The prediction of the LORD’s sword falling on His Shepherd/Companion is a prediction of His wrath being poured out on Christ at the cross. Jesus passes through the flaming sword of God’s justice (Zech. 13:7) which was itself represented by the cherubim standing with flaming swords at the east entrance to the Garden-Temple (Gen. 3:24). Each of them takes their place in redemptive history to aid us in filling in the picture of what God was promising to do. The Son of God entered into the battle against Satan, sin and death–bearing the wrath of the flaming sword of God’s judgment–in order to open the way back to the presence of God for us.

愛德華滋提到透過福音的鏡片來閱讀創世記三章22-24節的意義。他寫到：

Jonathan Edwards noted the significance of reading Genesis 3:22-24 through the lens of the Gospel when he wrote:

基督保證要帶領我們回到生命樹，而且祂走在我們前面。基督自己被那發火焰的劍所擊殺；而這把劍，在擊殺了以我們的名出現的、具有無窮價值的上帝的兒子之後，讓這件事上得到了完全的執行。當它讓基督的血流出，就完成了它所有的工作，在這之後，它就被撤去了。而基督從死裡復活，祂自己是一位神而人者，就走在我們前面；而既然這把劍已經被撤去，已經完成它的工作，在擊殺了基督之後，在那裡就沒有工作要做了。如今已經沒有刀劍了，對那些在基督裡的人來說，通往永生的道路已經開通，沒有障礙了。（註3）

Christ undertook to lead us to the tree of life, and he went before us. Christ himself was slain by that flaming [sword]; and this sword, having slain the Son of God appearing in our name, who was a person of infinite worthiness, that sword did full execution in that. And when it had shed the blood of Christ, it had done all its work, and so after that was removed. And Christ arising from the dead, being a divine person himself, went before us; and now the sword is removed, having done its execution, already having nothing more to do there, having slain Christ. There is no sword now, and the way is open and clear to eternal life for those that are in Christ.3

安·可貞（Ann Cousins）精彩地捕捉到撒迦利亞的預言。在她所作的詩歌裡，她這樣寫到：

Ann Cousins captured so well what Zechariah was prophesying when she penned the words of her hymn, “O Christ What Burdens Bowed Thy Head:”

耶和華吩咐刀劍興起，

喔基督，它興起是為攻擊你；

你的血滅此火刃，

你的心是它刀鞘；

都是為我，使我平安；

為我平息此刃。

Jehovah bade His sword awake;

O Christ, it woke ’gainst Thee!

Thy blood the flaming blade must slake;

Thine heart its sheath must be;

All for my sake, my peace to make;

Now sleeps that sword for me.

（譯按：這首詩歌錄於聖徒詩歌73—哦，主，甚麼使你頭垂？O CHRIST, WHAT BURDENS BOWED THY HEAD；中文詩歌沒有選譯這段，筆者自譯）

伊甸園東

East of Eden

這裡提到東邊，和亞當夏娃被驅逐到花園-聖殿的東邊這個事實，也有聖經神學上的關聯。在這個聖經主題的發展中，我們在以色列歷史裡，有關他們在征服應許地的支派戰爭中與會幕的關係裡，發現到這些暗示。在數點各支派的人數之後，耶和華告訴摩西和亞倫，按照耶和華所決定的各支派的位置，讓各支派紮營在會幕四周。從各支派來的勇士，分別駐紮在會幕的北邊，南邊，西邊和東邊。上帝自己會住在祂百姓中間。這也是一幅基督要降臨和同在的圖畫。當耶穌降臨時，福音書作者經常記錄到祂「在他們中間」。即使當祂被釘十字架時，祂也是被掛在兩個強盜當中。使徒約翰這樣說到：「耶穌在中間」（約十九18）。約翰也在啟示錄裡告訴我們，基督（羔羊）位在天上的中央，坐在上帝的寶座上。所有得贖之人圍繞著寶座，向祂唱讚美歌。基督的會幕住在祂百姓當中。

There is also a biblical-theological correlation between the reference to the East and the fact that Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden-Temple, “east of Eden.” In the development of this theme in Scripture, we find allusive allusions in the history of Israel with relation to the Tabernacle their tribal warfare in conquering the land. After numbering each of the tribes, the Lord told Moses and Aaron to set the tribes around the Tabernacle of meeting, according to each of their respective places determined by the Lord. The men of war from each tribe would position themselves north, south, west and east of the Tabernacle. God Himself would dwell in the midst of His people. This too was a picture of the coming and presence of Christ. When Jesus came the Gospel writers frequently record that He was “in the midst.” Even when He was crucified, He was placed between two thieves. The apostle John puts it this way: “and Jesus in the center.” John also tells us, in Revelation, that Christ (the Lamb) is the center of heaven, as He sits on the throne of God. All the redeemed surround the throne and sing His praises. The Tabernacling Christ dwells in the midst of His people.

在曠野漂流時，當各支派被安排在會幕四周，猶大被吩咐要駐紮在會幕的東邊（民二3）。在朝向恢復伊甸園和上帝的同在的墊腳石中，東邊（或東門）代表回去的道路（創二8，三24）。當亞當和夏娃犯了罪，他們被逐出花園。有兩個基路伯，帶著發火焰的劍被安設在伊甸園東邊（創三24），把守回到上帝居所之路。基督，猶大支派的獅子，是再次打開這條路的那位。祂是通往上帝同在的唯一道路，因為祂就是上帝的同在。每當舊約提到聖殿東邊的門，總的來說都會提到猶大的位置。

When the tribes were positioned about the Tabernacle during Israel’s wilderness wandering, Judah was commanded to camp on the east side when the Tabernacle. In the stepping stones toward the restoration of Eden and the presence of God, the east side (or East Gate) represents the way back (see Gen.28; and 3:24). When Adam and Eve sinned, they were cast out of the Garden. Two cherubim with flaming swords were placed at the East of Eden (Gen. 3:24), guarding the way back to the dwelling place of God.  Christ, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, is the One who opens that way up again. He is the way to the presence of God, because He is the presence of God. Whenever the east gate of the Temple is mentioned in the Old Testament, it is generally mentioned with reference to Judah’s place.

在民數記二章3節，我們首先發現到上帝首次給了有關猶大支派的指示，並且給了這個支派在戰爭中的一個特殊地位：「在東邊，向日出之地，照著軍隊安營的是猶大營的纛。有亞米拿達的兒子拿順作猶大人的首領。」為了叫以色列確保回到上帝同在的道路，他們必須履行征服的使命，並確立上帝在耶路撒冷的居所（即會幕和聖殿）。為了達到這個目標，猶大是首先出戰的（士一1-3）。這是基督，猶大支派的獅子，征服上帝的敵人，確保屬靈產業的一幅圖畫。

In Numbers 2:3 we discover that God gave instruction concerning Judah first, and gave the tribe a special placement for the battle: “On the east side, toward the rising of the sun, those of the standard of the forces with Judah shall camp according to their armies; and Nahshon the son of Amminadab shall be the leader of the children of Judah.” In order for Israel to secure back to the presence of God, they have to fulfill the conquest and establish the dwelling place of God (i.e. the Tabernacle and then the Temple) in Jerusalem. To this end, Judah is the first to go to battle (Judges 1:1-3). This was a picture of the conquest of God’s enemies and the securing of the spiritual inheritance by Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah.

此外，會幕也是朝向東邊，日出之地。祭壇是會幕裡第一件神聖的陳設，這是因為要進入上帝的同在，沒有獻祭是不可能的。當祭司為了早晨的獻祭要進到會幕時，日頭應該已經照在祭壇上，祭物要被獻給上帝。這似乎有兩個理由：首先是日頭會照在打開回到上帝同在的道路的那物之上；其次，日頭本身是公義的太陽的一個預表，聖經說它的出現，「其翅膀有醫治之能」（瑪四2）。這就是為什麼會幕要面朝東邊可能的理由。

Additionally, the Tabernacle also faced toward the east, the place to the rising of the sun. The alter was the first piece of sacred furniture in the Tabernacle and it was so because the way into the presence of God was not possible without the sacrifice. When the priest came into the Tabernacle for the morning sacrifice, the sun would have shone on the alter on which the sacrifice was being offered to God. There seems to be two reasons for this: The first is that the sun would shine on the very thing that opened the way back to the presence of God; and second, the sun was itself a type of the Sun of Righteousness who is said to “rise with healing in His wings” (Malachi 4:2). This is probably the reason for the Tabernacle facing toward the east.

正如上帝把基路伯放在伊甸園的東門，基路伯也被繡在掛在會幕和聖殿裡，擋住進入至聖所的道路的幔子上（出廿六31）。這是要提醒他們，進入至聖所的道路還沒有完全顯明。每當以色列人讀到關於基路伯被繡在聖所的幔子上，他們就應該要記得被安設在花園-聖殿的入口，那帶著發火焰的劍的基路伯，擋住了進入上帝同在的道路。

Just as God placed cherubim at the east gate to the Garden of Eden, so cherubim were sown into the veil that hung in the Tabernacle and Temple blocking the way into the Most Holy Place (Exodus 26:31). This was a reminder that they way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest. Whenever the Israelites read about the cherubim sown into the veil of the Temple, they should have remembered the cherubim with the flaming sword place at the entrance to the Garden-Temple, blocking the way back to the blessed presence of God

在舊約的先知文學裡，主要的復原暗示，也和會幕的東邊，和聖殿的「東門」有關。在以西結有關新聖殿的預言裡（結四十～四十八章），東門是這個末世性的上帝居所最突出的焦點。這門平時必須關閉，只有君王可以進入（結四十六1-8）。君王（明顯是指彌賽亞，見但九25）要帶著燔祭進入（結四十六12）。祭物一旦獻上，我們就發現到，「殿的門檻下有水往東流出（原來殿面朝東）；這水從檻下，由殿的右邊，在祭壇的南邊往下流。」（結四十七1）這水是象徵性地代表聖靈，是在整本第四福音書裡，我們的主所熟悉的（約四10，七37-39，十九34）。猶大在整個舊約中都在「東邊」，預表著救贖主，以及祂為我們打開的、通向上帝同在的道路（來六19-20）。

One of the principle restorative allusions in the OT prophetic literature also has to do with the east side of the Tabernacle and “East Gate” of the Temple. In Ezekiel’s prophecy of the New Temple (Ez. 40-48)  the “east Gate” is the prominent focus of the the eschatological dwelling place of God. It is the gate that is shut so that no one but the Prince can enter in (Ez. 46:1-8). The Prince (i.e. a clear reference to the Messiah, see Dan. 9:25) enters with the burnt offering (Ez. 46:12). Once the sacrifice was offered we find that “there was water, flowing from under the threshold of the temple toward the east, for the front of the temple faced east; the water was flowing from under the right side of the temple, south of the altar” (Ez. 47:1). The water is a symbolic representation of the Holy Spirit, as our Lord intimates throughout the fourth Gospel (John 4:10; 7:37-39; 19:34). Judah being at the “east” throughout the OT typifies the Redeemer and His work opening the way into the presence of God (Heb. 6:19-20) for us.

第二個亞當，耶穌基督，為祂的百姓通過了上帝怒氣的發火焰的劍。當祂身體的幔子（來十10）在十字架上被審判而撕開，聖殿的幔子就從上到下被撕成兩半。祂步出墳墓，進入新生，在那裡，祂的門徒遇見天使，手中不是拿著發火焰的劍，而是說著：「祂不在這裡，照祂所說的，已經復活了。」（太廿八6）耶穌已經為所有信祂的人開了一條又新又活的，回到上帝同在的路（來十19-20）。

The second Adam, Jesus Christ, passed through the flaming sword of God’s wrath for His people. The veil was torn in two from top to bottom when the veil of His flesh (Heb. 10:10) was torn apart in judgment on the cross. He the stepped out of the tomb to newness of life where His disciples were met by Angels, not holding a flaming sword, but saying, “He is not here. He is risen, and He said.” Jesus has made a new and living way back into the presence of God for all who will believe in Him (Hebrews 10:19-20).

註：

 1. Edwards, J. (1999). East of Eden. In M. Valeri & H. S. Stout (Eds.), Sermons and Discourses, 1730–1733 (Vol. 17, p. 346). New Haven; London: Yale University Press. For a further doctrinal and pastoral treatment of the flaming sword see Jonathan Edwards’ sermon “East of Eden.”)

2. O. Palmer Robertson TNICOT: The Books of Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman’s, 1990) p. 253

3. Edwards, J. (1999). East of Eden. In M. Valeri & H. S. Stout (Eds.), Sermons and Discourses, 1730–1733 (Vol. 17, p. 347). New Haven; London: Yale University Press.

从圣经神学看伊甸园裡的两棵树ABiblical Theology of the Trees of the Garden

作者：Nicholas T. Batzig   译者：骆鸿铭译自：

http://feedingonchrist.com/biblical-theology-trees-garden/

http://www.crtsbooks.net/blog/post/2015/02/23/%E5%BE%9E%E8%81%96%E7%B6%93%E7%A5%9E%E5%AD%B8%E7%9C%8B%E4%BC%8A%E7%94%B8%E5%9C%92%E8%A3%A1%E7%9A%84%E5%85%A9%E6%A3%B5%E6%A8%B9.aspx

在圣经记载的一开始，有两棵树佇立在上帝以盟约和人打交道的中心：分别善恶树和生命树。这两棵树远非神话的虚构，而是伊甸园裡真正存在的树——正如伊甸园裡其他的树一样。上帝并未给这两棵树有什麼神奇的法力，好像从它们本身可以对我们的先祖传送出能力（ex opere operato；译按：by the work performed, 意思是：本身就有事效）一样。不是的。上帝把这两棵树分别出来，只是為了要让它们成為象徵，好代表一种它们本身以外的事实。正如洗礼和圣餐一样，这两棵树也是圣礼。它们指向超越它们本身的事实。虽然它们本身没有任何能力可以传递任何东西，然而，上帝已经赋予它们属灵的意义，好叫它们可以表徵出祂和亚当所立的约，并且以这两棵树為印记。我们不能低估它们的重要性。我们只能用第三棵树——十字架，即我们主耶穌基督的死亡之所——来解释。十字架既是分别善恶树，也是生命树。主耶穌恢復了亚当所失去的，包括道德上的正直与生命。请思考以下有关分别善恶树与生命树的圣经神学观点：At the outset of the biblical record, two trees stood at the center of God’s covenantal dealing with man–the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life. Far from being mythological concepts, these trees were–in a very real sense–just like any other trees in the Garden. God did not invest these trees with magical power to confer something out of their own resources, ex opere operato,  to our first father; rather He set them apart to represent a reality beyond themselves and to stand in the place of that for which they had become symbols. Like baptism and the Lord’s Supper the two trees were sacramental. They pointed to a reality beyond themselves. Though they had no power within themselves to confer anything, nevertheless, God had so invested them with spiritual meaning so that the covenantal arrangement into which He entered with Adam was signified and sealed with these trees. Their significance cannot be underestimated. They can only now be explained in light of a third tree–the cross on which our Lord Jesus died. The cross is both the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life. Jesus restores what Adam lost both with regard to moral uprightness and with regard to life. Consider the following biblical-theological aspects of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life:

分别善恶树The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

廿世纪的改革宗神学家范泰尔（Cornelius Van Til）解释了分别善恶树的本质。他写道：Cornelius Van Til helpfully explained the nature of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil when he wrote:

上帝在许多树中拣选了一棵树，并且「专横地」告诉人不要吃这棵树上的果子。……如果分别善恶树和其他的树在本质上有什麼不同，它就失去了它原本的作用。这棵被拣选的树必须和其他树具有相同的本质，这个诫命才有可能显得「专横」。因為要让超自然看起来是超自然，自然必须看起来是真正的自然。除非我们按照自然的原样来认识自然，否则我们也无法按照超自然的原样来认识超自然。要有真正的例外，首先必须要有规律。（註1）God chose one tree from among many and “arbitrarily” told man not to eat of it…If the tree of the knowledge of good and evil had been naturally different from other trees it could not have served its unique purpose. That the commandment might appear as purely “arbitrary” the specially chosen tree had to be naturally like other trees. For the supernatural to appear as supernatural the natural had to appear as really natural. The supernatural could not be recognized for what it was unless the natural were also recognized for what it was. There had to be regularity if there was to be a genuine exception.1

这棵树（分别善恶树）表徵人所可能得到的后果——藉著顺服，或藉著悖逆；它是一个暂时的考验（probation）。霍志恆（Geerhardus Vos）解释到：This tree was a symbolic representation of what man could attain to, either by obedience or disobedience; it was a probation. Geerhardus Vos explained:

1. 藉著这棵树可以显明，可以让人清楚知道，人是否会陷入邪恶的状态，还是会在永远不变的良善状态中得到坚立。1. By this tree it would be made known and brought to light whether man would fall into the state of evil or would be confirmed in the state of immutable goodness.

2. 藉著这棵树，本来对人类来说只是在观念上的邪恶，可以成為一种实际的知识。或者，因為他还维持在一个未曾堕落的状态，藉著胜过诱惑，仍然可以得到更清楚的洞见，认识到邪恶的本质就是违背上帝的律法和漠视上帝主权的能力，因而同样可以对永恆不变的道德良善有著最高等的知识。（註2）2. By this tree man, who for the present knew evil only as an idea, could be led to the practical knowledge of evil. Or also because he, remaining unfallen, would still, by means of temptation overcome, gain clearer insight into the essence of evil as transgression of God’s law and disregard of His sovereign power, and likewise would attain the highest knowledge of immutable moral goodness.2

霍志恆在其他地方解释了撒但如何试图要歪曲分别善恶树的意义。他写到：Vos explained elsewhere how Satan sought to pervert the meaning of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil when he wrote:

我们必须把这棵树真正的目的，和那诱惑人的撒但在创世记三章5节所赋予它的解释区分开来。撒但的解释有两重涵义：首先，这棵树本身具有魔法的能力，可以传递善与恶的知识。这是把这整件事情的水平，从敬虔和道德的层次，降低到异教魔法的领域。其次，撒但是从嫉妒的动机来解释这个禁止令的……再次说，上帝在创世记三章22节所说的，是在暗指诱惑者所作的这个欺骗人的解释。那是一个反讽。（註3）From the true conception of the purpose of the tree we must distinguish the interpretation placed upon it by the tempter according to Gen. 3.5. This carries a twofold implication: first that the tree has in itself, magically, the power of conferring knowledge of good and evil. This lowers the plane of the whole transaction from the religious and moral to the pagan-magical sphere. And secondly, Satan explains the prohibition from the motive of envy. … Again, the divine statement in Gen. 3.22 alludes to this deceitful representation of the tempter. It is ironical.2

正如霍志恆所说的，亚当的确获得了善恶的知识，然而，他是从成為邪恶的立场而得到的，并且因為是与他所行的邪恶成為对比，才记得什麼是良善。他是从邪恶这边，经歷到善恶的亲身知识。倘若我们以创世记一到三章作為起点，然后思考人蒙召要作判断的所有时机（即：在各种处境中决定什麼是善恶），我们很快会发现到，在人天然的状态裡，他总是倾向於选择邪恶，而不是良善。当耶和华藉著先知耶利米来评判以色列人的作為时，这是祂的结论：「耶和华说：我的百性愚顽，不认识我；他们是愚昧无知的儿女，有智慧行恶，没有知识行善。」（耶四22）稍后，主说到以色列人，他们「乃是恶上加恶，并不认识我。这是耶和华说的」（耶九22）。人所缺乏的良善的知识，就是认识耶和华的知识。先知书裡有许多类似的经文，说到耶和华控告人，包括祂的百姓以色列，从来没有学会行善。当然，我们知道，这是因為即使是在旧盟约裡的有形教会，仍然有许多人的心没有得到重生。当我们接近那第二棵分别善恶树——即十字架，我们的主耶穌代替我们而死的地方——时，就看到他们所行的邪恶之路的顶峰。Adam did indeed attain to the knowledge of good and evil, but, as Vos noted, he attained it from the standpoint of becoming evil and remembering the good in contrast to the evil he performed. He gained the experiential knowledge of good and evil from the evil side. If we make Genesis 1-3 our starting point, and then consider all the occasions in which man is called to make judgments (i.e. to decided between good and evil in each and every situation) we soon discover that he is always prone to choose the evil over the good in his natural state. When the LORD comes to assess Israel’s actions through the prophet Jeremiah this is what He concludes: ” For My people are foolish, they have not known Me. They are silly children, and they have no understanding. They are wise to do evil, But to do good they have no knowledge (Jeremiah 4:22). A little later on the Lord says of Israel, “‘they proceed from evil to evil, And they do not know Me,’ says the LORD.” It was knowledge of the LORD that was the knowledge of good that men lack. There are many similar verses in the prophets, in which the LORD brings the charge that men, including His people Israel, had not learned how to do good. Of course, we know that this is because even within the visible church of the Old Covenant most did not have regenerate hearts. We see the culmination of their evil ways as we approach the second tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil, namely, the cross on which our Lord Jesus died in our place.

在主耶穌被卖、并且被带到人间的审判官面前的那一夜，在祂解释，祂总是在公开的场合教导——这证明了祂的正直——之后，其中的一个差役用手掌打他。耶穌对他说：「我若说的不是，你可以指证那不是；我若说的是，你為什麼打我呢？」（约十八23）主耶穌是在说明，分别善恶的知识一直在发挥作用，而很明显地，当人在做与良善有关的决定时，每次都会不理性地选择邪恶。祂是所有真正善恶知识的源头。祂拒绝邪恶，选择良善。祂完成了第一个亚当所未能完成的。在我们的脑海裡，这应该是很明显的，即耶穌是那唯一的良善，正如祂是唯一的道路、真理、生命一样。所有与耶穌有关的事都涉及到良善和真理。但是这也正是使人心的邪恶彻底浮现到表面来的原因。再也没有比十字架更好的例子了。On the night when our Lord was betrayed and brought before earthly judges, He was struck by one of the soldiers after He explained that He always taught publically–thus vindicating His uprightness. To the soldier that struck Him Jesus replied, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if good, why do you strike Me (John 18:23)?” Jesus was showing that the knowledge of good and evil is always active and that it is evident that men will irrationally choose evil every time they make a decision in relation to the good. He is the source of all true experiential knowledge of good and evil. He rejected the evil and chose the good. He did what the first Adam failed to do. Now it should be evident in our minds that Jesus is the Good, just as He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Everything that involves Jesus involves the Good and the True. But this is precisely what causes the evil in man’s heart to surface so radically. There is no greater example of this than at the cross.

十字架变成了那棵分别善恶的「树」（彼前二24；和合本译為「木头」）。在加略山上，犹太人和罗马人（代表所有的世人）做出了最邪恶的决定。他们喊叫说：「钉祂十字架！钉祂十字架！」从他们的脸上，那位神圣的判官显明了一个被邪恶所蒙蔽的世界，以及祂对这等邪恶的判决。但是就在那裡，那位没有罪的，為我们成為罪，好叫我们可以在祂裡面成為上帝的义（译按：林后五21）。约瑟的话从来不曾如此响亮：「从前你们的意思是要害我，但上帝的意思原是好的」（创五十20）。The cross becomes the “tree” (1 Peter 2:24) of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. At Calvary the Jews and Romans (representative of all men) make the ultimate decision for evil. In the face of their crying, “Crucify Him, crucify Him,” the Divine judge shows to a world blinded by evil, His verdict on that evil. But it is there that the One who did no evil was made sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. The words of Joseph never rang so loudly, “You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good” (Gen. 50:20).

被掛在树上的那位，恢復了良善的知识——对那些信靠祂的人而言——即亚当选择邪恶时所失去的。上帝已经选择要翻转这种情况，藉由被掛在树上的那位，在拥有祂形象的人身上，甚至包括我们的主耶穌基督，要恢復亚当所失去的一切。没有其他的树可以如此完整地彰显出善与恶的知识。这是最终的考验。如今，我们要如何回应上帝关於这棵树的吩咐，是唯一要紧的事。The One who hung on the tree restores the knowledge of the Good–to all those who trust in Him–that Adam lost by choosing the evil. God has chosen to reverse, in His image bearers, all that Adam lost by means of the One who hung on this tree, even our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other tree that so fully manifests the knowledge of good and evil. This is the final probation. What we do with God’s command concerning this tree is the only thing that matters now.

生命树The Tree of Life

生命树也是圣礼——象徵人可以进入到的永生。人倘若遵行了与分别善恶树有关的考验，就可以进入到这个永生裡。亚当，上帝的儿子（路三38），因為吃了分别善恶树上的果子，因此弃绝了我们吃生命树上果子的权利。基督，那第二个亚当，藉由被掛在受咒诅的树上，赐给我们来到生命树前面的管道。傅格森（Sinclair Ferguson）的解释很有帮助。他解释了第一个亚当和他所吃的那棵树上的果子之间的关係，以及第二个亚当和祂所吃的那棵树上的果子（从属灵的意义来说）之间的关係。他说到：The tree of Life was also sacramental–symbolizing something of the eternal life that man could have entered into if he had obeyed with regard to the testing of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam, the son of God (Luke 3:38), forfeited our right to the Tree of Life by taking the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Christ, the second Adam, gives us access to the Tree of Life by hanging on the cursed tree. Sinclair Ferguson helpfully explains the relationship between the first Adam–and the Tree from which he ate–and the second Adam–and the Tree from which He ate (spiritually)–when he said:

耶穌在客西马尼园受到试探，使得祂祷告说：「倘若可行，求你叫这杯离开我。然而，不要照我的意思，只要照你的意思」，祂说这话的本质是什麼呢？这是完全圣洁的渴望。任何其他的渴望都是污秽的，不敬虔的。為什麼呢？因為一个圣洁的人从来不会有想要经歷被上帝弃绝的希望、渴望，或筹算。在我们主耶穌神圣的人性中，祂从来不会想要处在这样的境地中，使祂要喊叫：「我的上帝，我的上帝，為什麼离弃我？」What was the nature of Jesus’ temptation in the Garden that made Him say, “Let this cup pass from Me–that’s My desire”? That was a perfectly holy desire. Any other desire would have been an unholy and godless desire. Why? Because a holy man can never have any wish or desire or purpose to experience a sense of divine desolation. It was not within our Lord Jesus’ holy humanity to ever desire to be in a position where He would cry out, “My God, I am forsaken by You. Why?”

在客西马尼园，因著耶穌灵魂的圣洁，迫使祂向父神说：「我不要那棵树」。祂这样做是為了解除亚当和夏娃在伊甸园裡所作的——因為在伊甸园裡的那棵树是用相同的词汇来描述的——与其他树完全没有两样。倘若你经过那棵树，上面不会有弯曲的枝子写著：「我很丑，不要吃我。」树上的果子也不会说：「我很可怕；不要吃我。」去读创世记第三章开头，你会看到圣经是以和其他树同样的方式来描写这棵树的。因此，不是这棵树本身有什麼特别，使亚当可以说：「噢，我不想要这棵树」。The holiness of the soul of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane was compelled to say to the Father, “Not that tree;” and in doing so He was undoing what Adam and Eve, in the Garden of Eden, did–because the tree in the Garden of Eden is described in exactly the same terms as any other tree–there’s no other difference. If you had walked past that tree there was no crooked branches saying, “I’m ugly; don’t touch me.”  There would have been nothing about the fruit saying “I’m horrible; don’t eat me.” Just read the opening of Genesis 3 you’ll see that tree is described in terms of its nature exactly the same way as every other tree is described. So there was nothing in that tree itself that make Adam say, “Oh, I don’t want that tree.”

亚当蒙召要做的，是说：「那棵树本身没有什麼理由会让我说我不想要吃它，只除了上帝说过『不要吃它』以外。因此，在这点上，我必须俯伏在上帝面前，并且说：『我信靠祢』，即使我裡面所有的冲动都告诉我，『这棵树的果子看起来绝对是很甜美的』。」这是很明显的，因為上帝不会骗人，明明看起来很好吃，但是吃起来却有剧毒……因此，彷彿是说，在人类歷史这个奇怪光谱的另一端，耶穌是在面对另一棵树，而这整棵树——和伊甸园的那棵树来对比——都在对人说：「你不会想要得到我」，而祂的天父说：「我要你吃这树上的果子，你要这麼作，单纯是因為我是你的父亲，我吩咐你要用这种方式来拯救世上的男女。因此，耶穌啊，喝完这杯吧！」这整件事的奇妙之处在於（希伯来书继续说到那些哭喊和眼泪），耶穌吃了加略山的树的苦果，饮尽它最后的苦渣。这就是保罗為什麼会说：「祂存心顺服，以至於死，且死在十字架上」的原因。（註4）What Adam was called to do was to say, “There is no reason in that tree itself for me to say I do not want it–except God has said, “Don’t touch it.” And so, at this point, I have to bow before God and say, “I trust you” even though everything in me says, “That tree looks absolutely delicious.” That’s actually obvious because God would not deceive a human being by making a tree that looked delicious and yet tasted poisonous…And so, as it were, on the other end of this strange spectrum of human history Jesus is facing another tree, and everything about that tree–in contrast with the tree in the Garden of Eden–is saying “You do not want me,” and His Father is saying, “That’s the tree whose fruit I want you to eat, and to do it simply because I’m Your Father, and I’m commanding You to save men and women in this way–So Jesus, take the cup.” And the wonder of it all is (and Hebrews goes on to speak about those loud cryings and tears), is that He took the bitter fruit of Calvary’s tree and consumed its last bitter dregs. That’s why Paul said, “He became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.3

傅格森如此继续展开这个论点：Ferguson continues to develop this in the following way:

新约圣经对这个事实没有太多著墨，即伊甸园的那棵树，和基督被钉在十字架上的那棵树之间是有关联的。圣经只说到，因為在这棵树上所发生的事，人只要来到这棵树的面前，咒诅就会落在耶穌身上；然后，在旧约圣经裡内置了这样的律法，即被掛在树上的就是被上帝咒诅的——保罗在加拉太书三章3节具体说到这点……是要表明，「耶穌没有被人用石头打死不是偶然的」。基督是如何死的，具有巨大的神圣意义。这解释了祂為何会被钉死在十字架上，而不是以其他方式受死…… The New Testament doesn’t make much of the fact that there is a connectedness between the tree in the Garden of Eden and the tree on which Christ was crucified except that we do have Man coming to the tree and the curse falling upon Him because of what happens at the tree; and then there is, inbuilt into the Old Testament law, that the man who hangs on a tree is accursed of God–and Paul picks that up…in Galatians 3:13 to say quite specifically “It’s not accidental that Jesus was not stoned to death.” There is a huge divine significance in the manner in which He died. That’s another exposition of why it is that He dies by crucifixion and not by any other way…

如此，这其中的平行处乃是根植於保罗在罗马书五章12-21节的观念——我认為这是腓立比书二章5-11节背后的观念——即第一个亚当是悖逆的；第二个亚当是顺服的。第一个亚当努力要争取与上帝同等的地位；第二个亚当，祂本与上帝同等，却不坚持自己具有特殊的地位，反而倒空自己，取了奴僕的形象——以人的形式出现——祂死了，不仅死了，更是特别死在十字架上。（註5）That parallel then is rooted in the notion of Paul in Romans 5:12-21–I think it lies behind Philippians 2:5-11–that the first Adam is disobedient; the second Adam is obedient. The first Adam grasps at equality with God; the second Adam who possesses equality with God doesn’t count it a thing to be made a special consideration for Himself but humbles Himself, takes the form of a servant–being found in human form–He dies, and not just dies, but specifically dies the death of the cross.4

清教徒神学家华森（Thomas Watson）总结了这整件事，他对比了亚当「拿起、吃了」上帝吩咐他不要吃的那棵树上的果子，而基督也「拿起、吃了」上帝吩咐祂要吃的那树上的果子。基督如今在祂所设立的主餐中，吩咐祂的子民要「拿起、吃了」这棵树上的果子。十字架，就这个词真正的意义来说，对那些吃了它的果子的人而言，就是真正的「生命树」。基督使生命的果子可以產生出来，好叫我们可以藉著选择那良善的（即：基督），并且拒绝邪恶，而亲身经歷到、学习到善恶的知识。在荣耀之中，所有信靠基督的人，要藉著吃喝祂而永远吃那生命树上的果子（啟二7，廿二2）。我们会恢復对於善恶的知识，好叫我们可以从此选择那良善的，而拒绝邪恶。愿我们都可以藉著信心在基督裡被上帝寻著，好叫我们的知识是与第一个亚当因為吃了上帝吩咐他不要吃的那棵树上的果子所带给我们的知识完全相反的知识，也让我们可以认识到如今我们可以拿起来吃的生命树上的果子的祝福。The Purtian, Thomas Watson, summed up the whole matter by drawing a contrast between Adam “taking and eating” from the tree of which he was commanded not to eat, and Christ “taking and eating” from the tree of which he was commanded to eat. Christ now commands His people to “take and eat” from this tree in the institution of the Supper. The cross is, in the truest sense of the word, “The Tree of Life” for those who eat of its fruit. Christ has caused the fruit of life to be born that we might experientially learn the knowledge of Good and Evil by choosing the good (i.e. Christ) and rejecting the evil. In glory, all those who have trusted in Christ will eat of the Tree of Life forever by feeding on Him forever (Rev. 2:7; 22:2). We will have the Knowledge of Good and Evil restored perfectly so that we will every choose the good and reject the evil. May we be found in Christ by faith so that we may know the reversal of all that the first Adam brought upon us by taking from the tree of which God commanded him not to eat, and that we might know the blessing of now being able to take and eat of the Tree of Life.

註：

1. An excerpt taken from Cornelius Van Til’s article, “Nature and Scripture,” in The Infallible Word.

2. Geerhardus Vos (2012–2014). Reformed Dogmatics. (A. Godbehere, R. van Ijken, D. van der Kraan, H. Boonstra, J. Pater, & A. Janssen, Trans., R. B. Gaffin, Ed.) (Vol. 2, pp. 28–29). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

3. Vos, Geerhardus  Biblical Theology (1948), pp. 27-33.

4. Sinclair Ferguson “Why the God-Man?” from the 2011 Ligonier Ministries National Conference (at the 53:33 mark)

5. Ferguson “Q & A” from 2011 Ligonier Ministries National Conference (beginning at the 31:34 mark).