Ambrose of Milan : What is the difference between saying 'ye shall die' and 'ye shall die the death'? We ought to point out that there is nothing superfluous in the command of God. Here is my solution. Since life and death are contradictory ideas, in unaffected language we say 'we live in life' and 'die in death.' But, if you wish, since life causes life, to double the force of the two concepts, the phrase 'he lives a life' is found in legal documents, and, since death causes death, there is the statement: 'He shall die the death.' [ Ezekiel 33:14-16 ] These expressions are not redundant, for life is related to death and death to life, because everyone living no law of this kind are a law unto themselves. They show therefore, four categories: to live in life, to die in death, to die in life, to live in death. Since such is the case, we should put aside prejudices due to use and custom, for usage prescribes that the act of dying should be said without distinction of him who dies by death and of him who does so by his life. Accordingly, the Lord selects two of these four distinctive phrases so as to say that the living live, with qualifications as to whether well or ill, and the dying die, without a seeming difference between a good death and a bad one. There is no precise difference in fact between the kind of life or death here referred to. It could include that of irrational creatures or of tiny infants. Putting aside, therefore, conceptions due to common usage, let us reflect on the meaning of 'to live in life' and 'to die in death' and also 'to live in death' and 'to die in life.' I believe that, in accord with the Scriptures, 'to live in life' signifies a wonderful life of happiness and that it seems to point toward an experience of life's natural functions joined and, by participation, mingled with the grace of a blessed life. This concept, 'to live in life,' means 'to live in virtue,' to bring about in the life of this body of ours a participation in the life of blessedness. On the other hand, what does 'to die in death' mean if not the disintegration of the body at the time of death, when the flesh is devoid of its customary function of carrying on life and the soul is unable to partake in life eternal? There is also the person who 'dies in life,' that is to say, one who is alive in body but, because of his acts, is dead. These are the people who, as the Prophet says: 'Go down alive into hell,' [ Psalms 54:16 ] and she of whom the Apostle speaks: 'For she is dead while she is still alive.' [ 1 Timothy 5:6 ] There remains the fourth category, for there are those who 'live in death' like the holy martyrs who give up their lives so that they may live. The flesh dies, but what is good does survive. Far from us, therefore, be the thought of living as participants in death. On the contrary, we should face death and thus become sharers in life. The saint does not desire to be a participant in this life of ours when he states: 'To be dissolved and be with Christ.' [ Philippians 1:23 ] This has been much better stated by another: 'Woe to me that my sojourning has been prolonged,' [ Psalms 119:5 ] in grief certainly that he is limited by the fragility of this life, since he hopes for a share in life eternal. Wherefore I can, on the other hand, state that, although 'to live in life' is a good thing, 'to live for life' would be of doubtful benefit. One can speak of 'living for life,' that is, for the life of eternity with its struggle with the life of the body. One can also speak of 'living for life' in another sense. Anyone, even a pious person, can have a desire for this corporeal life of ours. We can take the example of one who thinks that he ought to live so virtuously as to arrive by his good actions at a ripe old age. Many people who are in weak health, but who still find life a pleasurable thing, are in this category. Now that we have examined the meaning of the phrase, 'to live for life,' let us now turn attention to the significance of the phrases, 'to die for death' and 'to live for death,' for it is possible to conceive of people who 'die for death' and who 'live for life.' For the person who 'dies for or to death' is one who so lives as to live for the sake of his own soul, because he is not subject to death. We mean by this one who has been loosed from the bonds of grievous death and one who is not bound by the chains of death eternal. He is dead to death, that is, he is dead to sin. He is dead to punishment for whom living is contrary to punishment, that is, when a person lives for punishment he lives for death. Again, one who dies for punishment dies for death. There is also the case of one who, although placed in this life, dies for life. Such was the situation of the Apostle who said: 'It is now no longer I that live, but Christ in me.' [ Galatians 2:20 ] To sin he is dead, but he lives for God, that is, death in him is dead, but living in him is that life which is the Lord Jesus. Good, therefore, is the life of those who live for God and wicked the life of those who live for sin. There is also a middle course of life, as in the case of other living creatures, for which we may cite the Scriptural passage: 'Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind.' [ Genesis 1:24 ] There is also the life of the dead: 'The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob,' [ Exodus 3:6 ] because 'He is not the God of the dead but of the living.' [ Luke 20:37, Mark. 12:26 ] There are those who partake somewhat in both lives, that of the living and of the dead, of whom the Apostle speaks: 'If ye have died with him, ye shall also live with him.' [ 2 Timothy 2:11 ] The same Apostle has said: 'For if we have been united with him in the likeness of death, we shall also be in the likeness of his resurrection also. For we know that our old self has been crucified with him, in order that the body of sin may be destroyed, that we may no longer be slaves to sin, for he who is dead is acquitted of sin.' [ Romans 6:58 ] Just as we have said that there are many forms of life, so, too, we may discover many forms of death. An evil death is recorded in the words, 'The soul that sinneth, the same shall die.' [ Ezekiel 18:20 ] The usual meaning of death appears when we say that a person lived so many years and was laid among his fathers. [ Acts 13:36 ] There is the meaning of death as we have it in the sacrament of baptism: 'For we were buried with him by means of baptism into death.' [ ] Elsewhere we read: 'For if we have died with Christ, we believe also that we shall live together with him.' [ Romans 6:4,8 ] You see how the word 'death' is subject to manifold interpretation, but that this life here is ours to contend with. — On Paradise Augustine of Hippo : Without good reason certain writers are deeply puzzled when they seek to discover how the tree of the knowledge of good and evil could have been so called before man broke God's commandment by touching it and from experience discerning the difference between the good that he lost and the evil that he committed. Now, this tree was given this name so that our first parents might observe the prohibition and not touch it, taking care to avoid suffering the consequences of touching it against the prohibition. It was not because they subsequently went against the commandment and ate the fruit that the tree became the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Even if they had remained obedient and had taken nothing against that commandment, it would be correctly called by what would happen to them there if they had taken the fruit. — ON THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF Genesis 8.15.33 Augustine of Hippo : God, referring to the forbidden fruit, said to the first man whom he had established in paradise: "In the day that you shall eat of it, you shall die the death." His threat included not only the first part of the first death, that is, the soul's deprivation of God; not only the second part of the first death, that is, the body's deprivation of the soul; not only the whole of the first death in which the soul, separated from both God and the body, is punished; but whatever of death is up to and including that absolutely final and so-called second death … in which the soul, deprived of God but united to the body, suffers eternal punishment. — City of God 13.12 Bede : On whichever day you eat from it, you shall surely die. He did not say, if you eat, you shall be mortal, but on whichever day, he said, you eat from it, you shall surely die. For man died in the soul when he sinned, because God, who is the life of the soul, departed from him, through whose desert the death of the body followed, with the soul departing from it, which is its life, and which death first happened to the same man when he reached the end of the present life not long after he ate the forbidden. It can also be understood that that day in which they sinned brought death upon them, as the Apostle laments saying: For I delight in the law of God according to the inner man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death (Romans 7:22)? For it is not enough for him to say: Who will deliver me from this mortal body, but from this body of death, he says. As indeed also this: The body is dead because of sin (Romans 8:10); nor did he say there, mortal, but dead, although indeed it is mortal because it is to die, it is not to be believed that those bodies were such, but though they were animal, not yet spiritual, yet not dead, that is, which it must needs be that they should die, which happened on that day when they touched the forbidden tree. — Commentary on Genesis (Hexaemeron) Cosmas Indicopleustes : When God said: In what day thou eatest of the tree, thou shalt surely die, he pronounced him to have become mortal, for we see that he did not die immediately according to the threat, so that it is evident the words hinted this: Immortal though thou art, thou shalt become mortal. — The Christian Topography, Book 5 Ephrem the Syrian : Having spoken of the introduction of Adam into Paradise and the reason God brought him there, Scripture turns to describe the commandment which was laid down for him, as follows: "And the Lord God commanded Adam, saying: 'You may indeed eat of all the trees in Paradise, but of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat; for on the day you eat of it you will certainly die.' " [ Gen. 2:16-17 ] This commandment was a light one, for God had given him the whole of Paradise and held back from him but a single tree. If one tree sufficed for someone's sustenance, and many trees were withheld from him, there would still be relief for his distress, seeing that there still existed food for his hunger. But where it is a case of God's giving him many trees when one would have been sufficient, this means that if transgression takes place, it is not as a result of any real need, but because of contempt. So God withheld from him a single tree, hedging it around with death, so that even if Adam were to fail to keep the law out of love for the Lawgiver, at least the fear of death that surrounded the tree would make him afraid of overstepping the law. Jerome : (Verse 17) But on whatever day you eat from it, you shall surely die. Symmachus interpreted it better, saying, you shall be mortal. — Hebrew Questions on Genesis Philoxenus of Mabbug : Adam and Eve, so long as they lived in simplicity, and so long as the faith which was in them had not been made gross through corporeal passions, immediately they heard the command of God they received it, and kept it. For God said to Adam, "Thou shalt not eat; and if thou eatest, thou shalt die; but if thou keepest the command I will give thee everlasting life." And by faith Adam received the command, and kept it, and in his simplicity he did not judge the command. Now when the counsel of the Enemy came and found simplicity, it taught craft and cunning, and sowed in that one simple thought, another thought which was its opposite, in order that he who was one man, and was wholly and entirely sincere in his simplicity, might be divided into two thoughts—the willing and the unwilling, the judging and the being judged, and the being in doubt whether he would do the command or not—and the counsel which the Enemy brought to that childlike and simple man made him to be a judge of God's command to him. Now Adam did not prosper in his judgment because it had destroyed his simplicity, for he stupidly thought it meet to listen to an enemy rather than to a friend, and to one who killed rather than to one who could make alive, and to one who taught wickednesses rather than to one who had been to them a teacher of good things. So long as they existed in their simplicity they hearkened unto the voice of God, but as soon as they wished to act cunningly they became receptacles of the counsel of the Calumniator; for cunning is at the side of Satan, and simplicity is with those who belong to Christ. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 4 -- On Faith: First Discourse on Simplicity Philoxenus of Mabbug : Whosoever feareth God taketh heed not to transgress the boundary of the faith of God, and whosoever believeth in God himself draweth nigh to the fear of God, and the man, in whose soul the fear of God dwelleth, himself becometh a watchful guardian of all the commandments. Adam believed in God, and he was not afraid of God; he believed that He was, and he received from Him the law which He delivered into him. And because he cast out the fear of God from his mind, he forsook the faith, and trod the law under foot. For He that ordained the law involved the commandment with fear: "In the day that thou eatest of the tree, thou shalt die the death." And because Adam had cast out from him that fear, he believed the crafty one instead of God, and trod under foot the law which had been ordained by the Judge. And not only Adam did God surround with fear that it might be a fence for the keeping of His commandments, but in all generations, to all the commandments which He ordained did He unite fear. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 6 -- First Discourse on the Fear of God Tertullian : The law, however, which you find fault with, and wrest into a subject of contention, was imposed on man by Goodness, aiming at his happiness, that he might cleave to God, and so not show himself an abject creature rather than a free one, nor reduce himself to the level of the other animals, his subjects, which were free from God, and exempt from all tedious subjection; but might, as the sole human being, boast that he alone was worthy of receiving laws from God; and as a rational being, capable of intelligence and knowledge, be restrained within the bounds of rational liberty, subject to Him who had subjected all things unto him. To secure the observance of this law, Goodness likewise took counsel by help of this sanction: "In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." For it was a most benignant act of His thus to point out the issues of transgression, lest ignorance of the danger should encourage a neglect of obedience. Now, since it was given as a reason previous to the imposition of the law, it also amounted to a motive for subsequently observing it, that a penalty was annexed to its transgression; a penalty, indeed, which He who proposed it was still unwilling that it should be incurred. Learn then the goodness of our God amidst these things and up to this point; learn it from His excellent works, from His kindly blessings, from His indulgent bounties, from His gracious providences, from His laws and warnings, so good and merciful. — Against Marcion Book II