I see. Well, we keep waiting for you to avail us of your expertise in this area and provide a translation that is closer to what you insist is the correct one. But nothing seems to be forthcoming.
Anyone can look for themselves on the Bible Gateway website, which provides about 60 different translations:
The only one I could find that seemed to favour your interpretation was the Amplified Version:
22 And the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), knowing [how to distinguish between] good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take from the tree of life as well, and eat [its fruit], and live [in this fallen, sinful condition] forever”
So the way things seem to work here is that whatever “condition” one is in when one eats from the Tree of Life is how one will remain. Adam and Even could then have been eating from it all along in their sinless state, but now God has to stop them from eating the fruit so they don’t stay “frozen” in a sinful state. OK, except, that’s what ends up happening, anyway, until Jesus comes along to provide redemption. Does this mean if they had eaten from the Tree of Life after eating from the Tree of Knowledge, Jesus sacrifice would not have worked? So confusing.
In any event, though I am no Hebrew scholar, I am a bit skeptical that the original text made reference to “Father, Son, Holy Spirit”. Could this particular translation be just a bit tainted by Christian theological presuppositions?
On the other end of the spectrum is this translation called “The Message”, which leave little from for doubt, though I make no claims that this is a definitive translation:
22 God said, “The Man has become like one of us, capable of knowing everything, ranging from good to evil. What if he now should reach out and take fruit from the Tree-of-Life and eat, and live forever? Never—this cannot happen!”
How Christians understand Scripture is irrelevant to this discussion. I am interested in how someone would read this text with no religious preconceptions whatsoever.
No, but they are hardly neutral, either. They tend to believe God would never lie.
Such interpretations would depart wildly from the text.
Not me, but whoever wrote this story. There are lots of stories in which gods come across like jerks. Actually, this would hardly be the most jerkish thing the Old Testament god is described as doing.