So we should read Genesis as stating, "the tree of knowledge of good and adversity"? It is the same Hebrew word in both cases. No, in Isaiah 45 God tells us about the foreground/background dichotomy. He made peace. He formed the light. God is love. At least that is my understanding of Isaiah 45. Which also states...
Isa 45:9 ¶ Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! [Let] the potsherd [strive] with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
We have words in English that have more than one meaning.
No, I think that the translation in Genesis of *evil* for knowing good and evil, is the best one for that passage. I don’t know that forcing that definition into Isaiah is the right one. The other definitions make sense, more sense IMO.
Also, there are other translations of Scripture which use the other meanings. Even in the context of Isaiah 45:9, I don’t see that it justifies charging God with being the creator of evil, as in moral evil. That is something I am NOT comfortable with.
Creating calamity or adversity, which are considered evil, is not the same as claiming that God created moral evil.