22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Having finished this it says, "Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing good and evil." [ Gen. 3:22 ] By saying that "he has become like one of us," Scripture also revealed symbolically something about the Trinity. But at the same time God was actually addressing Adam ironically, seeing that Adam had been told, "you will become like God, knowing good and evil."
However, although Adam and Eve became aware of both these things from eating the fruit, prior to the fruit they were in practice only aware of the good, hearing about evil by report, but after eating it there was a change, so that they only heard by report of the good, whereas they tasted evil in practice. For the glory in which they had been wrapped left them, and the pains which had previously been kept away from them now dominated them.
"And now, lest he stretch out his hand and take from the fruit of the Tree of Life as well, and eat it and live for ever..." [ Gen. 3:22 ] For if he had the audacity to eat of the Tree of which he was commanded not to eat, how much the more would he make a dash for the Tree concerning which he had received no commandment? But because it had been decreed against them that they should exist in toil and sweat, in pains and pangs, God, who when they were still free from the curse and clothed in glory was prepared to give them immortal life, now that they were clothed in the curse, kept them back from eating of the Tree of Life, lest by eating of it and living forever, they would have to remain in a life of pain for eternity.
God's intention, then, was that this life-giving gift, which they would have received from the Tree of Life, might not be turned to misery and actually harm them even more than what they had acquired through the Tree of Knowledge. For from the Tree of Knowledge they had acquired temporal pains, whereas the Tree of Life would have made those pains eternal. From the Tree of Knowledge they had acquired death which would release them from the bonds of their pains, whereas the Tree of Life would have made them entombed all their lives, leaving them forever tortured by their pains. So it was that God kept them back from the Tree of Life, for it was not appropriate, either that a life of delight should be provided in the land of curses, or that eternal life should be found in the transient world.
Had they eaten, however, one of two things would have happened: either the sentence of death would have been proved false, or the life-giving characteristic of the Tree of Life would have been proved not to be genuine. In order, therefore, that the sentence of death might not be annulled, and the life-giving characteristic of the Tree might not be proved false, God kept Adam at a distance from it, lest he suffer loss from the Tree of Life as well, just as he had already been harmed by the Tree of Knowledge.
God said, “Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” Even though by saying, “He has become like one of us,” he symbolically reveals the Trinity, the point is rather that God was mocking Adam in that Adam had previously been told, “You will become like God, knowing good and evil.” Now even though after they ate the fruit Adam and Eve came to know these two things, before they ate the fruit they had perceived in reality only good, and they heard about evil only by hearsay. After they ate, however, a change occurred so that now they would only hear about good by hearsay, whereas in reality they would taste only evil. For the glory with which they had been clothed passed away from them, while pain and disease that had been kept away from them now came to hold sway over them.
If Adam had rashly eaten from the tree of knowledge he was commanded not to eat, how much faster would he hasten to the tree of life about which he had not been so commanded? But it was now decreed that they should live in toil, in sweat, in pains and in pangs. Therefore, lest Adam and Eve, after having eaten of this tree, live forever and remain in eternal lives of suffering, God forbade them to eat, after they were clothed with a curse, that which he had been prepared to give them before they incurred the curse and when they were still clothed with glory.
See again God's considerateness. "the Lord God said," the text says, "'Lo, Adam has become like one of us in knowing good and ill." ' Do you see how remarkable is the ordinariness of the expression? Let us, however-, take it all in a sense befitting God. You see, the intention at this point is to remind us through these words of the deception practiced on them by the devil through the instrumentality of the serpent. I mean, that was when that creature said, "'If you eat, you will be like gods,'" and they presumed to taste it in the hope of achieving this equality. Hence also God wanted again to make them ashamed, to bring them to a sense of their- sins and to show them the gravity of their disobedience and the excess of the deception, said, "'Lo, Adam has become like one of us.'" Great is the reproach in this sentence, capable of touching the heart of the transgressor. Was this your reason, he is saying, for despising my commandment, that you had notions of equality? Lo, you have become what you expectedÐor rather, not what you expected but what you deserved to become."'Lo,'" he says, "'Adam has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.'" This, in fact, is what the guileful devil said to them through the serpent, that " 'your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil.'"
"'Now there is a risk that at some time he may put out his hand and pick fruit from the tree of life, eat it and live forever.'" See here, I ask you, the l.ord's loving kindness. I mean, we must study the saying precisely so that nothing concealed under the surface can escape us. When God gave Adam the command, he bade him abstain from nothing, with the single exception of that tree, and when he presumed to taste it he received the sentence of death; he made this clear to him in giving him the command in case he should break it, though he had given him no express instructions about the tree of life. I mean, since he created him immortal. as I see it and you can understand, it would have been possible for Adam, if he had wanted, to partake of that tree along with the others, a tree that was able to provide him with endless life hence he was given no instruction about it.
If, however, someone of a meddling nature should enquire why it was called the tree of life, let him learn that it was not possible for human beings to discern all God's works precisely by following their own reasoning. The Lord, you see, decided that the human being created by him should have some practice in disobedience and obedience while living in the garden, and decided to provide examples there of these two trees, one of life, the other of death (so to say) in the sense that tasting it and breaking the command brought death on him. So when by partaking of this tree he became liable to death and subject in the future to the needs of the body, and the entry of sin had its beginnings as the result of which death also was fittingly provided for by the Lord, no longer did he allow Adam in the garden but bade him leave there, showing us that his sole motive in doing this was his love for him.
To learn this precisely, we must read again the words of Sacred Scripture. "'Now there is a risk that at some time he may put out his hand and pick fruit from the tree, eat it and live forever.'" In other words, since he had given signs of considerable intemperance through the command already given him (he is saying) and had become subject to death, lest he presume further to lay hold of this tree which offers endless life and go on sinning forever, it would be better for him to be driven from here. And so the expulsion from the garden was a mark of care rather than necessity. Our Lord, you see, is like this: he reveals his care for us in punishing no less than in blessing, and even his punishment is inflicted for the sake of admonition. Because if in fact he knew that we would not get worse by sinning and escaping, he would not have punished us; but to check our decline into greater evil and to stem the tide of wickedness, he applies punishment out of fidelity to his own loving kindness which is exactly what he did in this case: in his care for the firstformed human being he bade him be driven out of the garden. "The Lord God sent him out of the garden of delight to till the soil from which he was taken." See here once again, I ask you, the precision of Sacred Scripture: "The Lord God sent him out of the garden of delight," the text says, "to till the soil from which he was taken." See, he puts the sentence into effect, driving him out of the garden of delight and obliging him to till the soil from which he was taken. It was not without purpose that he said, "from which he was taken." It was that he might in this work have a constant reminder of his humiliation, and be in a position to know that his subsistence derived from that source, and the composition of his body originally came from the soil hence, he says, till the soil from which he himself was composed. He had said as much also in the sentence, "'In the sweat of your brow may you eat your bread.'" Accordingly at this point also he says the same thing in the phrase, "to till the soil from which he was taken."
It is now necessary to say why, even though man did not receive the knowledge from the tree, it is called “the tree that gives the knowledge of good and evil;” for it is not a trifle to learn why a tree has such a name. In fact the devil said, “On the day when you eat of the fruit of the tree, your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil.” How can you maintain, you ask me, that it did not provide him with the knowledge of good and evil? Who said, in fact, that it provided him with this knowledge? The devil, you will answer. So do you put forward the testimony of the enemy and the conspirator? The devil said, “You will be gods.” Did they really become gods? Therefore, since they did not become gods, they did not receive the knowledge of good and evil either. For the devil is a liar and never speaks the truth. In fact the Gospel says, “He never stays in the truth.”
And how will that statement of the Lord stand, after the sin of the first man: “Behold, Adam is become like one of us, knowing good and evil?” For he must not to be thought to have been such before the sin that he was wholly ignorant of good. Otherwise, it must be admitted that he was created like an irrational and senseless animal; and this is quite absurd and foreign to the Catholic faith. No, rather, according to the pronouncement of the most wise Solomon, “God made man right,” that is, to enjoy continually the knowledge of good alone. But they sought many thoughts. So they were made, as it was said, “knowing good and evil.” After the fall, therefore, Adam conceived a knowledge of evil, which he did not have. But he did not lose the knowledge of good, which he did have.
And He said: Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing good and evil. On this St. Augustine comments: "Since, he says, it is said in any manner and in any way, God nevertheless declared, it should not be understood otherwise, that He said 'one of us,' except that the plural number is taken on account of the Trinity, just as it was said 'Let us make man,' just as also the Lord about Himself and the Father said: 'We will come to him and make our abode with him' (John 14). Therefore it was repeated upon the head of the proud one by which outcome he desired what was suggested by the serpent 'You will be like gods.' Behold, he says, Adam has become like one of us. For these words are of God, not so much insulting him, as deterring others from being proud in that way; for the sake of those for whom these words were written: He has become, he says, like one of us, knowing good and evil. What else should be understood except that an example of instilling fear was proposed? because not only did he not become as he wanted to become, but he did not even maintain what he had become. On this point elsewhere: 'Nor are they the words of God confessing,' he says, 'but rather reproaching.' Behold, Adam has become like one of us, just as the Apostle says: 'Grant me this wrong' (II Cor. 12:13), surely he wants it to be understood from the contrary."
"Now, therefore, lest he stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat and live forever, the Lord sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to till the ground from which he was taken. The above words are God's; but this action followed because of those words. For alienated from the life he would have received with the angels if he had kept the commandment, but also from the life he was leading in the paradise, in a certain happy state of the body, he necessarily had to be separated from the tree of life, whether because that happy state of the body would continue through it with visible matter by invisible virtue, or because in it there was also the visible sacrament of invisible wisdom. He had indeed to be alienated from there, either as already dying or even as excommunicated, just as also in this paradise, that is, in the Church, men are accustomed to be removed from the visible sacraments of the altar by ecclesiastical discipline."
[AD 373] Ephrem the Syrian on Genesis 3:22
However, although Adam and Eve became aware of both these things from eating the fruit, prior to the fruit they were in practice only aware of the good, hearing about evil by report, but after eating it there was a change, so that they only heard by report of the good, whereas they tasted evil in practice. For the glory in which they had been wrapped left them, and the pains which had previously been kept away from them now dominated them.
"And now, lest he stretch out his hand and take from the fruit of the Tree of Life as well, and eat it and live for ever..." [ Gen. 3:22 ] For if he had the audacity to eat of the Tree of which he was commanded not to eat, how much the more would he make a dash for the Tree concerning which he had received no commandment? But because it had been decreed against them that they should exist in toil and sweat, in pains and pangs, God, who when they were still free from the curse and clothed in glory was prepared to give them immortal life, now that they were clothed in the curse, kept them back from eating of the Tree of Life, lest by eating of it and living forever, they would have to remain in a life of pain for eternity.
God's intention, then, was that this life-giving gift, which they would have received from the Tree of Life, might not be turned to misery and actually harm them even more than what they had acquired through the Tree of Knowledge. For from the Tree of Knowledge they had acquired temporal pains, whereas the Tree of Life would have made those pains eternal. From the Tree of Knowledge they had acquired death which would release them from the bonds of their pains, whereas the Tree of Life would have made them entombed all their lives, leaving them forever tortured by their pains. So it was that God kept them back from the Tree of Life, for it was not appropriate, either that a life of delight should be provided in the land of curses, or that eternal life should be found in the transient world.
Had they eaten, however, one of two things would have happened: either the sentence of death would have been proved false, or the life-giving characteristic of the Tree of Life would have been proved not to be genuine. In order, therefore, that the sentence of death might not be annulled, and the life-giving characteristic of the Tree might not be proved false, God kept Adam at a distance from it, lest he suffer loss from the Tree of Life as well, just as he had already been harmed by the Tree of Knowledge.