Adam & Logic, 2nd Edition

[grannymh]

Thanks for the links

The first one is what I was trying to understand too, the tree being called both Good and Evil not just Evil.

Having written various posts on Adam, I recently spent a bit of time thinking about the general theme of Adam and Eve posts. As a result, my post 196 is an eye opener.

There is no doubt that Adam’s human position is in the midst of a healthy discussion. That is fine with me. Consequently, I can cut back posting in good faith since I have already posted sufficiently from my point of view.

 

[simpleas]

The main article in the first link provided good food for thought. I was mainly interested in the definition of the word yada, and I think the concerns at the end of the article are easy enough to resolve. Man knew good before the Fall in that there was nothing else to know before then. But he did not know good as an identifiable reality separate from anything else. The word “good” only takes on meaning-we only “know that we know it”-when it’s opposite, evil, is also known.

Yes, comment 47 was interesting-I hadn’t read it before you mentioned it. We’d probably all agree that the act of eating the fruit was itself the assertion by man that he could be God. By that act he was already determining morality for himself; he knew right from wrong better than God; man could be his own god IOW. And I’ve felt for a long time that perhaps the first human judgement, as “gods”, was in determining that their own bodies were “bad” in a sense, worthy of being ashamed of. As soon as their eyes were opened it may’ve been painfully obvious by their bodies that they were creatures, and not God, and we’ve been hiding those bodies ever since. Denial of the truth and living with contradiction became a way of life for man rather than accepting it-we weren’t/aren’t ready to accept our true status so easily. And God temporarily accommodates this new, unnatural, situation, this loss of innocence until innocence is ultimately regained, by forming clothes Himself for the man and woman. Just an opinion-one of many, I suppose-Augustine had a significantly different one.

But while eating of the tree was indeed the first act of moral self-determination for man, I no longer believe that this was what the name of the tree was intended to imply-I don’t think the tree could’ve been alternatively named something like “The Tree of the Determination of Good and Evil”, IOW. I think that the name of the tree means what it sounds like it means, and with the meaning Genesis seems to support, when we understand the term “yada” in the way the article tells us is a very common usage: to know by experience.

Thanks.
I slightly understand what you mean about their eyes being open and knowing that they were creatures, but then being ashamed of their bodies? God tells them not to disobey his command because it would cause death, but they wouldn’t know what death is because they haven’t experienced it yet (bodily or physcially)O.S was this disobedience, and by it man then starts to reject his own creaturely status, because he realises that he isn’t a God? He was made in the image and likeness of God but was similar to other creatures (physically).
Satan tells him he will be a God through the act, so he would have know he wasn’t a God before the act…

 

[grannymh]

I am looking for a human interpretation of these words in the second chapter of Genesis. “…you are surely doomed to die.”

(Possible information source. Romans 6: 23; CCC 1008; tools of rational thinking)

 

[rinnie]

So Adam has all that you say from the beginning of his existance, he sounds very intelligent, most highly intelligent people I know only grow in intelligence by aquiring knowledge. So this leaves me with two questions :

How could Adam being highly intelligent knowing Good and evil, prefer to trust someone other than his God, as he knows God is good and the evil will be the bad?

Did Adam need to experience Good and Evil in order to be perfected at some point?

I think you missed the whole point. Let me ask you how can people today trust someone other then God…? As you stated.

People choose to disobey God and it ends up in disaster.

Adam and Eve did not get thrown out because of their sin, they never repented.

Adam blamed Eve, then when that didn’t work he blamed God. Eve blamed the devil. I love this part Sorry I can’t help myself, but here I go…

Wait for it>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>…

EVE WHAT HAPPENED? THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT!

 

[rinnie]

Thanks.
I slightly understand what you mean about their eyes being open and knowing that they were creatures, but then being ashamed of their bodies? God tells them not to disobey his command because it would cause death, but they wouldn’t know what death is because they haven’t experienced it yet (bodily or physcially)O.S was this disobedience, and by it man then starts to reject his own creaturely status, because he realises that he isn’t a God? He was made in the image and likeness of God but was similar to other creatures (physically).
Satan tells him he will be a God through the act, so he would have know he wasn’t a God before the act…

Think about it the devil is the master of deceit. He said you Won’t die. Adam and Eve did die, but not a physical death.

Sin is death of the soul. They separated themselves from God.

Their sin was 2 things, They disobeyed God with their own free will, and they wanted to replace God and do it their way.

SO God said Go for it. You are on your own, if you think you can do better, you fend for yourself. Its an EYEOPENER if you truly think about it.

We have the same choice today.

 

[grannymh]

Adam and Eve did not get thrown out because of their sin, they never repented.

Interesting *human *interpretation !!!

However ------
It is not Catholic teaching.

 

[grannymh]

Think about it the devil is the master of deceit. He said you Won’t die. Adam and Eve did die, but not a physical death.

Sin is death of the soul. They separated themselves from God.

Their sin was 2 things, They disobeyed God with their own free will, and they wanted to replace God and do it their way.

SO God said Go for it. You are on your own, if you think you can do better, you fend for yourself. Its an EYEOPENER if you truly think about it.

We have the same choice today.

What ??? Emphasis mine.
“SO God said Go for it. You are on your own, if you think you can do better, you fend for yourself. Its an EYEOPENER if you truly think about it.”

Thank heavens that is **not **Catholic teaching.

 

[simpleas]

I think you missed the whole point. Let me ask you how can people today trust someone other then God…? As you stated.

People choose to disobey God and it ends up in disaster.

Adam and Eve did not get thrown out because of their sin, they never repented.

Adam blamed Eve, then when that didn’t work he blamed God. Eve blamed the devil. I love this part Sorry I can’t help myself, but here I go…

Wait for it>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>…

EVE WHAT HAPPENED? THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT!

I think I’ve missed more than the whole point…

We aren’t talking about people today, we are talking about the first two humans who knew only Good, they had never sinned, so were in friendship with God.

They didn’t get thrown out because of sin? I think it was because of their disobedience…

Yes they blamed each other, and that makes them sound very childish.

 

[simpleas]

Think about it the devil is the master of deceit. He said you Won’t die. Adam and Eve did die, but not a physical death.

Sin is death of the soul. They separated themselves from God.

Their sin was 2 things, They disobeyed God with their own free will, and they wanted to replace God and do it their way.

SO God said Go for it. You are on your own, if you think you can do better, you fend for yourself. Its an EYEOPENER if you truly think about it.

We have the same choice today.

Where are these words written in Genesis?

 

[Aloysium]

. . . What has been omitted is a really deep study of the author’s angle.

I believe it is time for me to study Adam from God’s position and how the author related that position to human readers.

:twocents:

The universe is pretty spectacular. On top of everything else, “my existence” repeated in many billions of separate, individual variations, together, loving God and one another, thereby constituting His holy Church in time and eternity, is even more so.
This all reflects God’s nature not only as Creator, but as Being, Beauty, Truth and Love Itself.

As the Father gives Himself to the Son, Who in turn gives all He is to the Father - we were created to fulfill this image.
We are His children, not simply creatures.
He created us with the capacity to love, to return to Him the love through which all has come into being.

The Word which brought the universe and we ourselves into being,
is also the word whereby God, unfathomable mystery,
is made known to us
in history through scripture and,
at the centre of time, through His becoming flesh as Jesus Christ.

God speaks to us in Genesis,
revealing the Word in the the creation of the heavens, the earth and man.
It tells of how, as result of our choice in Adam,
we damaged our bond with God and
are unable by our own powers to extricate ourselves from sin and its consequences.
It points to the incarnation of the Word, whose sacrifice on the cross has freed us from the bondage of death.

Jesus as man and God is
the Door through which God reaches out to us, and the whereby
we come to know the Father and enter into the filial relationship that He wills for us.

We are the prodigal son; Jesus is the Way back, that we might not perish.

 

[fhansen]

Thanks.
I slightly understand what you mean about their eyes being open and knowing that they were creatures, but then being ashamed of their bodies? God tells them not to disobey his command because it would cause death, but they wouldn’t know what death is because they haven’t experienced it yet (bodily or physcially)O.S was this disobedience, and by it man then starts to reject his own creaturely status, because he realises that he isn’t a God? He was made in the image and likeness of God but was similar to other creatures (physically).
Satan tells him he will be a God through the act, so he would have know he wasn’t a God before the act…

We all experience shame-and we take it for granted. But Adam & Eve didn’t even *know *they were naked prior to the Fall. Shame of the body, natural as it may seem to us-is unnatural in the pre-Fall world of innocence. God made nothing bad-or evil-and yet we often treat His creation as such, as if to judge something bad that He made good. Maybe man’s new-found “knowledge”, sophistication, and freedom weren’t so great after all. Maybe it was closer to slavery, sometimes hiding from even ourselves the truth of who we are. Anyway, it points to quite a contrast in the before and after A & E as I see it.

 

[simpleas]

:twocents:

The universe is pretty spectacular. On top of everything else, “my existence” repeated in many billions of separate, individual variations, together, loving God and one another, thereby constituting His holy Church in time and eternity, is even more so.
This all reflects God’s nature not only as Creator, but as Being, Beauty, Truth and Love Itself.

As the Father gives Himself to the Son, Who in turn gives all He is to the Father - we were created to fulfill this image.
We are His children, not simply creatures.
He created us with the capacity to love, to return to Him the love through which all has come into being.

The Word which brought the universe and we ourselves into being,
is also the word whereby God, unfathomable mystery,
is made known to us
in history through scripture and,
at the centre of time, through His becoming flesh as Jesus Christ.

God speaks to us in Genesis,
revealing the Word in the the creation of the heavens, the earth and man.
It tells of how, as result of our choice in Adam,
we damaged our bond with God and
are unable by our own powers to extricate ourselves from sin and its consequences.
It points to the incarnation of the Word, whose sacrifice on the cross has freed us from the bondage of death.

Jesus as man and God is
the Door through which God reaches out to us, and the whereby
we come to know the Father and enter into the filial relationship that He wills for us.

We are the prodigal son; Jesus is the Way back, that we might not perish.

I like what Grannymh is thinking though :

I* believe it is time for me to study Adam from God’s position and how the author related that position to human readers*

Mostly the author relating the story to the readers. It’s like going back in time and imagining the writer contemplating how to put into words the story as he knew it of creation.

 

[simpleas]

We all experience shame-and we take it for granted. But Adam & Eve didn’t even *know *they were naked prior to the Fall. Shame of the body, natural as it may seem to us-is unnatural in the pre-Fall world of innocence. God made nothing bad-or evil-and yet we often treat His creation as such, as if to judge something bad that He made good. Maybe man’s new-found “knowledge”, sophistication, and freedom weren’t so great after all. Maybe it was closer to slavery, sometimes hiding from even ourselves the truth of who we are. Anyway, it points to quite a contrast in the before and after A & E as I see it.

Yes I agree about all being made good. All the way through the bible writings there has always been Good and Evil, we never have experienced life any other way. A&E were the only two people whoever lived that at one time lived in peace and harmony, its like a reminder to people that we are good, can be good, because we once were that way…

 

[simpleas]

So Yada being a new word for me to learn, I have been thinking on it some more. Yada means alot more in hebrew, than the word know does in english. A&E came to yada Good and Evil, the word yada being so broad is used alot throughout the bible for many of the prophets in their search and knowledge of God.
God wants us to know him, yada him, not just the intellectual knowledge which we all can learn, differently of course, but we also need to know, yada, God in a personal way, so that we know his ways and can then live in his ways.

So if eating from the tree was disobedient as we have come to learn it, why would knowing Good and Evil be wrong, if it seems to give a deeper knowledge of God, that we, by growing spiritually come to know, yada, God at a higher level?

It is easy in a way to think that the act was wrong, the choice was wrong, against Gods command, which I’m not denying, but I’m not making sense of the word Yada as it means so many ways in which to know God. And God wants us to know him in all those ways.

Thoughts?

 

[grannymh]

So Yada being a new word for me to learn, I have been thinking on it some more. Yada means alot more in hebrew, than the word know does in english. A&E came to yada Good and Evil, the word yada being so broad is used alot throughout the bible for many of the prophets in their search and knowledge of God.
God wants us to know him, yada him, not just the intellectual knowledge which we all can learn, differently of course, but we also need to know, yada, God in a personal way, so that we know his ways and can then live in his ways.

So if eating from the tree was disobedient as we have come to learn it, why would knowing Good and Evil be wrong, if it seems to give a deeper knowledge of God, that we, by growing spiritually come to know, yada, God at a higher level?

It is easy in a way to think that the act was wrong, the choice was wrong, against Gods command, which I’m not denying, but I’m not making sense of the word Yada as it means so many ways in which to know God. And God wants us to know him in all those ways.

Thoughts?

Briefly. Knowing good and evil is part of human nature. Adam knew the goodness of God and because he has a rational soul, he can figure out what the absence of God would be like.

To assure that all humankind could know the difference between good and evil – there is only one Adam and only one first family, Adam and Eve.

God’s command was not against knowing good and evil.

God’s command involved the impossibility of two equal Gods.

 

[grannymh]

I believe it is time for me to study Adam from God’s position and how the author related that position to human readers.

Looking at God’s position, we find the necessity that there is only one God, our Creator.

Looking at the Hebrew position, affirmation of the essential truth of One God has to be up front in human history. The way to identify an infinitely powerful God is to refer to one of God’s attributes such as omniscience. Omniscience is reasonable because human nature has a rational intellect and a natural curiosity. From God’s position, the desire and subsequently a free choice action for human omniscience would naturally be forbidden by God.

Adam was created in God’s image and was established in God’s friendship. As creature, Adam could not be a second God. Therefore, Adam had to live in free obedience to God.

 

[fhansen]

So Yada being a new word for me to learn, I have been thinking on it some more. Yada means alot more in hebrew, than the word know does in english. A&E came to yada Good and Evil, the word yada being so broad is used alot throughout the bible for many of the prophets in their search and knowledge of God.
God wants us to know him, yada him, not just the intellectual knowledge which we all can learn, differently of course, but we also need to know, yada, God in a personal way, so that we know his ways and can then live in his ways.

So if eating from the tree was disobedient as we have come to learn it, why would knowing Good and Evil be wrong, if it seems to give a deeper knowledge of God, that we, by growing spiritually come to know, yada, God at a higher level?

It is easy in a way to think that the act was wrong, the choice was wrong, against Gods command, which I’m not denying, but I’m not making sense of the word Yada as it means so many ways in which to know God. And God wants us to know him in all those ways.

Thoughts?

It’s wrong from the perspective of the created being because evil is anything that lies outside the perfect will of God. All disharmony/injustice, all of the worst atrocities-man’s inhumanity to man- that are experienced in this life, along with the small, everyday evils, are the result of disobedience of God’s will. Nothing good can be brought forth from evil by the human who commits it; our ends never justify the means.

**1753 A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving). **

But *God *can take lemons and make lemonade. So from His perspective it’s “right” to allow the evil that humans commit in order to bring about an even greater good. The good that can come out of evil, in God’s creation-in us-is that we come to know good, we come to identify goodness, so that, ultimately, we reject it’s opposite: evil, unlike Adam did in the beginning, and run to goodness alone, the ultimate Good, God, Himself. And we have to realize that the evil that comes from man’s rejecting God can only be triumphed over by God; once man separates himself from God then how does he find his way back, how does he become “unlost” in the sea of sin/evil he’s immersed himself into?

The question comes down to, ‘With all the knowledge Adam was given, could he still learn more, could he still grow in knowledge, and, most importantly perhaps, in wisdom? Did he really know the evil he was committing, and getting himself and the rest of humanity into as a result? Could he have had a change of heart-a metanoia-since then? Could Adam be changed in his will, the seat of his sin? Could he have gained something, IOW, contributing to a greater perfection, than he had before?’

 

[fhansen]

From post 189

Starting over…

The basic reason for the first three chapters of Genesis was to preserve Divine Revelation given to the Hebrew people who were living in a world filled with paganism in some form. Preserving Divine Revelation is also a responsibility of the Catholic Church as evinced in Chapter 14, Gospel of John.

Divine Revelation begins with the existence of God as the Creator. (Information source. Genesis 1:1; Genesis 1: 26-27) The universe with all its beauty and wonder pales in comparison with the unique beauty and wonder of the first human person, biblically known as Adam. This leads to the magnificence of the relationship between all humanity, in the person of Adam, and true Divinity. (Information source. Genesis, chapters 2 & 3, especially Genesis 3:15) The author of those revealing chapters was given the task of explaining humanity and divinity at the dawn of human history.

One of the important facts was the fact that there is one God Who is completely unlimited in power. Natural observation demonstrated that humans were not the same as the one God because they were limited by death. Yet, being limited by death, humans could interact with unlimited God. (Information source. Hebrew Scriptures gathered into the Old Testament; John 3: 16 often cited as the summary of the New Testament.) The explanation for the puzzle that limited humans could interact with unlimited God is given in Genesis 1: 26.

Divine Revelation was not completed in the first three chapters of Genesis. Therefore, we need to look at Catholic doctrines about human nature, including its goal to be in joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision. (Information source: CCC 356; CCC 1730)

As we proceed, we find the Logic of Adam.

Links to Catholic teachings.

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

I’m sure we all agree that even though man was 1) made in the image of God, 2) given certain gifts including reason, sentience, free will, knowledge, a conscience, moral integrity, and 3) intended by God to become even more like Himself (divinization, theosis), man could never be God; the distinction between Creator and created is and will always be absolute.

And we can also agree that, by eating of the fruit of the tree, man was attempting to be God. Eve saw that the fruit was pleasing to the eye and good for gaining wisdom. Does this mean that omniscience was the main thing she was after? Could the tree be renamed “The Tree of All-Knowingness” or “The Tree of Omniscience”? This wouldn’t be a new theory but it’s one I don’t particularly agree with at any rate, for reasons already given.

Aside from the meaning of the name of the tree, a related issue that seems to be on the table involves Adam’s culpability-how perfect or absolute was his knowledge and/or wisdom especially in terms of human morality? How different from ourselves was he? Should we be able to identify with him to any great degree-even in his pre-fallen state? Adam knew what the boss said, but he apparently didn’t yet know for sure that the boss was the Boss-and why it was good for the Boss, and not Adam, to be the Boss.

Theologians have established a simple fact: Adam sinned because he *willed *to sin. Sin is in the will. Maybe that fact should be too obvious to mention, I don’t know, but as far as I do know they haven’t traveled much beyond that point, to answer the question, “Why did Adam will to sin?” But in any case I believe that God’s been about the business of helping man, without forcing him, to not will to sin, to will rightly, to agree with *His *will IOW, since the beginning of creation.

As a side note, the interesting and perhaps ironic thing is that, in trying to be more than himself, Adam actually became less. And his sin echoes in and around us. The catechism teaches that man conceived a distorted image of God, and I think this distortion carries through in many areas of our lives: in the less than humble manner in which we deal with each other due to our perception of who God is. Jesus came to reveal the true face of God. When* we* play God, however, we tend to be downright mean; man’s “godhood”, or approximation of it, is made up of sheer pride, while God is pure love. With an inordinately superior self-concept we end up being self-righteous, arrogant, aloof, angry, impatient, all the opposite traits from those listed in 1 Cor 13 as defining love. As we grow in the knowledge of God, OTOH, we find that He’s kind, patient, not angry, peaceful, merciful- humble, even.

We all know good and evil everyday that we live in this world, and it becomes more apparent as we grow older; physical evil along with the worst kind of evil, moral evil or sin, can both help bring us to finally recognizing our dependency on God. Both can help teach us that we’re not the Boss, but moral evil, especially, with its source in human pride, most effectively demonstrates why humans are not, and should not, be the Boss.

 

[Richca]

So Yada being a new word for me to learn, I have been thinking on it some more. Yada means alot more in hebrew, than the word know does in english. A&E came to yada Good and Evil, the word yada being so broad is used alot throughout the bible for many of the prophets in their search and knowledge of God.
God wants us to know him, yada him, not just the intellectual knowledge which we all can learn, differently of course, but we also need to know, yada, God in a personal way, so that we know his ways and can then live in his ways.

So if eating from the tree was disobedient as we have come to learn it, why would knowing Good and Evil be wrong, if it seems to give a deeper knowledge of God, that we, by growing spiritually come to know, yada, God at a higher level?

It is easy in a way to think that the act was wrong, the choice was wrong, against Gods command, which I’m not denying, but I’m not making sense of the word Yada as it means so many ways in which to know God. And God wants us to know him in all those ways.

Thoughts?

The first few chapters of Genesis are so very interesting and enlightening. The tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil are also very interesting subjects and they are a part of the Genesis story of Adam and Eve for obviously a good reason as the writer of Genesis was working under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
A good study of the meaning of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil should include not only modern biblical exegesis but especially what the early fathers of the church had to say about it as a number of them were outstanding in their knowledge of Holy Scripture and of the catholic faith. We could also include here doctors of the church such as St Thomas Aquinas in whom the gift of wisdom of the Holy Spirit is so manifest and who had such a great knowledge of the teaching of the fathers of the church, the Holy Scriptures, as well as philosophy.

I think the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is so called because by eating of its fruit against God’s command, Adam and Eve then knew sin or moral evil first hand or by experience. The knowledge of sin or moral evil by experience is not the kind of knowledge God wants us to have, indeed, He commands us not to sin.
Where it is written that Eve saw the tree as desirable for gaining wisdom, this was a deception by the devil when he said “God knows well that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, who know good and evil.” Aquinas says that the tree of knowledge of good and evil did not have the power to cause knowledge. As human beings naturally desire to know, the devil lied and tempted Eve that by eating of the fruit of the forbidden tree, she would gain the perfection or totality of knowledge which the scripture refers to as the knowledge of good and evil. The only knowledge Adam and Eve came to know from eating of the forbidden tree was the knowledge of sin or moral evil and disobedience and the good of obedience from experience.

Where it is written, “Then the LORD God said: See! The man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil!” Biblical exegetes say this is like an ironic statement from God and I think it can mean either of two things. First, God does not know moral evil or sin firsthand nor can He, so its like an ironic statement alluding to the devil’s deception to Eve of knowing good and evil and becoming like gods. Or two, if God’s statement alludes to the perfection or totality of knowledge, this is also ironic, as creatures cannot attain to the perfection or totality of knowledge as God.

In the Douay-Rheims Bible at the Annunciation of the birth of Jesus from Mary in the first chapter of the gospel of Luke, verse 34 reads “And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?” The word “know” here means Mary has had no sexual relations with a man, she was a virgin. In the same way, our Blessed Lady does not know sin or moral evil as she is sinless. However, nobody can say that our Blessed Lady does not know the difference between good and evil or the good of obedience to God’s command and the evil of disobedience or sin for a reading of just the fall of Adam and Eve, not to mention the history of the Israelite nation, can give a person a knowledge of the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience. Our Blessed Mother’s knowledge and wisdom far surpasses any other human or angel yet she is without sin. In the same way I think, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden is so called because God gave Adam and Eve a command not to eat of it and by eating of it, Adam and Eve became to know sin; a knowledge God does not wish us to have. For sinning does not perfect our nature and love for God, but corrupts it. However, because of God’s love for human beings and because of His infinite mercy and power, He is able to draw good out of evil.

 

[fhansen]

The first few chapters of Genesis are so very interesting and enlightening. The tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil are also very interesting subjects and they are a part of the Genesis story of Adam and Eve for obviously a good reason as the writer of Genesis was working under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
A good study of the meaning of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil should include not only modern biblical exegesis but especially what the early fathers of the church had to say about it as a number of them were outstanding in their knowledge of Holy Scripture and of the catholic faith. We could also include here doctors of the church such as St Thomas Aquinas in whom the gift of wisdom of the Holy Spirit is so manifest and who had such a great knowledge of the teaching of the fathers of the church, the Holy Scriptures, as well as philosophy.

I think the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is so called because by eating of its fruit against God’s command, Adam and Eve then knew sin or moral evil first hand or by experience. The knowledge of sin or moral evil by experience is not the kind of knowledge God wants us to have, indeed, He commands us not to sin.
Where it is written that Eve saw the tree as desirable for gaining wisdom, this was a deception by the devil when he said “God knows well that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, who know good and evil.” Aquinas says that the tree of knowledge of good and evil did not have the power to cause knowledge. As human beings naturally desire to know, the devil lied and tempted Eve that by eating of the fruit of the forbidden tree, she would gain the perfection or totality of knowledge which the scripture refers to as the knowledge of good and evil. The only knowledge Adam and Eve came to know from eating of the forbidden tree was the knowledge of sin or moral evil and disobedience and the good of obedience from experience.

Where it is written, “Then the LORD God said: See! The man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil!” Biblical exegetes say this is like an ironic statement from God and I think it can mean either of two things. First, God does not know moral evil or sin firsthand nor can He, so its like an ironic statement alluding to the devil’s deception to Eve of knowing good and evil and becoming like gods. Or two, if God’s statement alludes to the perfection or totality of knowledge, this is also ironic, as creatures cannot attain to the perfection or totality of knowledge as God.

In the Douay-Rheims Bible at the Annunciation of the birth of Jesus from Mary in the first chapter of the gospel of Luke, verse 34 reads “And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?” The word “know” here means Mary has had no sexual relations with a man, she was a virgin. In the same way, our Blessed Lady does not know sin or moral evil as she is sinless. However, nobody can say that our Blessed Lady does not know the difference between good and evil or the good of obedience to God’s command and the evil of disobedience or sin for a reading of just the fall of Adam and Eve, not to mention the history of the Israelite nation, can give a person a knowledge of the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience. Our Blessed Mother’s knowledge and wisdom far surpasses any other human or angel yet she is without sin. In the same way I think, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden is so called because God gave Adam and Eve a command not to eat of it and by eating of it, Adam and Eve became to know sin; a knowledge God does not wish us to have. For sinning does not perfect our nature and love for God, but corrupts it. However, because of God’s love for human beings and because of His infinite mercy and power, He is able to draw good out of evil.

Thank you, I agree with this. And I was going to ask where to find your reference to Aquinas on the tree but I found it in his Compendium of Theology:

**This state enjoyed by man depended on the submission of the human will to God. That man might be accustomed from the very beginning to follow God’s will, God laid certain precepts on him. Man was permitted to eat of all the trees in Paradise, with one exception: he was forbidden under pain of death to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eating of the fruit of this tree was prohibited, not because it was evil in itself, but that at least in this slight matter man might have some precept to observe for the sole reason that it was so commanded by God. Hence eating of the fruit of this tree was evil because it was forbidden. The tree was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil, not because it had the power to cause knowledge, but because of the sequel: by eating of it man learned by experience the difference between the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience.
**