Dist. 23, Divisio Textus
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/2/d/23/q/bon-sent-II-d23-divisio
----------------------------------------
### COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XXIII.
### *On the permission of the first temptation on the part of God.*

> *Furthermore it is wont to be asked why God [permitted] man* etc.

### DIVISION OF THE TEXT.

Above the Master treated of the fall of the first parents in their relation to the devil who tempts and to man who transgresses; in this part he treats of the fall of the first parents in their relation to God who permits. And because it is not equitable to permit that one who is unaware should be circumvented by a crafty one, therefore, in order that it may be shown that the first permission was just, this part has two [sections]. In the first he determines why God permitted man to be tempted. In the second he determines how much and what sort of habit of knowledge he gave him, at the place: *And indeed according to the soul* etc.

The first part remaining undivided, the second is divided into two parts. In the first he determines in what manner man had knowledge — whether through teaching and study, or through a divine gift. In the second he determines of what things he had knowledge, at: *And the first man before the fall was endowed with a threefold knowledge*. And that part has three [sections]. In the first he determines what sort of knowledge he had of created things. In the second, what sort of knowledge he had of God, at: *Likewise the knowledge of the Creator* etc. In the third, what sort of knowledge he had of himself, at: *Further his knowledge of himself* etc.

### TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.

For the understanding of this part a question arises here on two heads, according to the two things on which the whole intention of the distinction principally turns.

First it is asked about the permission of the first temptation.

Second it is asked about the knowledge of the first parents.

About the first three things are asked.

First it is asked whether God ought to have made man unconquerable, or such that he could be conquered.

Second it is asked whether God ought to have permitted man, whom he foreknew would be conquered, to be assailed through temptation.

Third it is asked whether the struggle of temptation ought to be desired by just men.

---