Bible Question: What was the First Sin?

How is that possible?Do any of you folk actually read the Bible Fables?It was called the "Tree of Knowledge of good and evil." Until Eve ate from the tree, how could she know not to?Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Because it's the first sin we're talking about. It's a chance to look at what sin really is without all the baggage that you're carrying from "throughout the bible".It has already been pointed out that it makes no sense to call Eve's "disobedience" the first sin, because she had no way of knowing what sin was or even what disobedience was.I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that sin is basically just using our free will.Adam and Eve were created with free will, apparently, though they needed the serpent to remind them that they could use it. They couldn't "knowingly go against" anything because they didn't know - not until they had already exercised their free will.Sometimes when we use our free will, we screw up. That's where forgiveness of sin comes in. God pre-forgives us for our pre-sins because He was the one who made us capable of sinning. He was the one who gave us free will. It would make no sense for Him to punish us for doing what He gave us the authority to do. And it would make no sense for Him to sacrifice Himself to atone to Himself for what He gave us authority to do.So sin has less to do with "knowingly" doing wrong and more to do with making poor decisions. The sin to be avoided is not bothering to consider the consequences of our actions, not reviewing our actions and assessing where we could have done better.We're all sinners because we're not perfect. But the "bad" sin is failure to learn from our mistakes.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Jar,
Gen 3:2-3
The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'"
NIVshe knew not to. and once again, i cannot stress the importance of context and reading the subject enough.

Genesis 2:16-17 - An Unfair Test?Why would God test Adam by placing the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden and then urging him not to eat of it - especially when, according to his divine foreknowledge, he knew he would do just that? What is the point of this whole exercise? What would it prove in the end?The Creator saw fit to set a special test of obedience for the man (and eventually the woman) he had formed. Since Adam and Eve were formed perfect from the hand of their Maker, they were bound by the very laws of their natures to love, honor and obey the One who so endowed them. However, this love, honor and obedience were an untested set of gifts. Therefore, it was necessary to make a trial or test of their obedience if they were to be free moral agents.The test, however, could not be a violation of a moral obligation like those in the Decalogue; it had to be an easy prohibition that would be a suitable test of their fidelity. When free indulgence had been given to them to eat the fruit of all the other trees, the infringement of this injunction would be an act of direct rebellion against a command given by God. The method God chose had to be one of violating what is known as a Positive Law (that is, one that was true merely because God said it was true), or one that appeared to be an arbitrary enactment. The advantage of using a test of such modest means and methods was that, if the mortals had stood some greater test and come out steadfast, they might have expected rewards proportioned to the conflict and have argued that they had earned their own salvation. But the test was simply one of heeding a command from God. It would vindicate God's subsequent actions as well as demonstrate that mortals from the hand of God did possess a certain freedom, for which they would also be responsible.As such, there is nothing absurd or derogatory to the Supreme Being in this test. The perfections of God demand the same from his creatures. But when those perfections are provisionally granted by right of creation, this goodness of God must be further tested before it can be said to exist permanently from that point on.
(from Hard Sayings of the Bible, Copyright © 1996 by Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, Manfred T. Brauch, published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)The fact of the matter is, they sinned against God by eating the fruit. Whether or not it meant the end of the world (which did not seem so, because God told that the coming of Jesus was planned "From the beginning") or making things the way they are now.

You're still not getting the point. How could God "set a special test of obedience" before they knew right from wrong? How can the teacher set a test before the lesson begins? Sorry, that's not a given here. We're dealing with the story as written in Genesis, not with a lot of additions and fabrications. That's not a fact at all. Please address the issue: How could God test Adam and Eve before they were capable of discerning good and evil?(And if you're going to respond to my posts, I'd appreciate you responding to what I post instead of wasting my time with a lot of sermonizing.)

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I think this shows just how thick God is. In high school teaching if we think a student is not going to pass a test we don’t enter them for that test, there’s no point. Since God knew the outcome, the test itself was a waste of time. The only point worth noting is how flawed the creators of the God of the Old Testament were. Almost everything written about Yahweh in the Old Testament just shows how stupid this particular God was. I think the continuous demonstrations of how mentally retarded Yahweh is, is just more proof that the God of the Bible is a literary character in a collection of fairytales. That Yahweh was a bloodthirsty, sadistic, evil tyrant? This is another example of how thick Yahweh was. After Yahweh gets his kicks out of watching Adam shagging the female of each species of animal, good old senile Yahweh finally realises that ”it is not good for the man to be alone”. Whoopee do, for an alleged omniscient being Yahweh is pretty dense, how did He not know this before he made Adam? Yahweh must have been that really slow relation that the other gods of the Canaanite pantheon tried not to mention. Well, this is unbiblical, as the Bible never claims that they were perfect. Why? Personally, when I give someone a gift I give it out of the kindness of my heart, I don’t look for something in return. But good old Yahweh demonstrates once again how selfish he was, a greedy, selfish creature. Yes, set up a test that the moron Yahweh already knew the outcome of, wonderful folk tale. Well, to me, an act of rebellion is wrong, it’s evil, and since neither Adam or Eve had any knowledge of good or evil, then the test was flawed. More evidence that Yahweh is just a character in a folk tale. Mortals? Weren’t Adam and Eve immortal? If they were mortal then what was the point in the punishment? The punishment was that they would die when if they ate the fruit (another Yahweh lie of course), so if they didn’t eat the fruit then I presume that they wouldn’t die. And being unaware that it was wrong not to heed it! I don’t think it vindicates God at all. Keeping a lot of vital information away from the ”mortals’ meant that the test was grossly unfair. I’m afraid there is. This particular creation myth does not show Yahweh in a very good light at all. It makes Him out to be a retarded, evil, bloodthirsty animal. The problems with the logic of the myth are embarrassing. How can you fairly demand perfection from imperfect creatures? Which is an unbiblical claim. Goodness of God! He rigs a test in favour of His huge ego, He creates imperfect beings and expects them to behave perfectly, He lies to them about dying when they eat the fruit, He keeps vital information from them, all this and He knows they will fail the test anyway! To believe that this actually happened is an insult to anyone’s intelligence. The fact of the matter is they had no idea that disobeying was a sin! This isn’t even hinted at. Well Jesus is nowhere at all in the Old Testament, and Jews abandoned their early polytheism during the first millennium BCE, whereas Xianity reverted back to it. So you seriously think that Eve eating a fruit from a tree accounts for all the ills in the world?Have you ever thought that this was the point of the ”fall’ myth all those centuries ago? The Israelite philosophers came up with this fairy tale to explain why there is so much suffering in the world, we really aren’t supposed to take this seriously. It’s a myth, just like Pandora’s Box, or Pan Ku.Brian.

What ever happened to "this isn't a bash thread?" that you said earlier, Ringo? or does it not bother you to watch somebody else' case get treated with udder disrespect and threat, just because the antagonist might share the same opinion as you. I stand on the Bible and will use it in an argument suited for it, such as this one - and it's a shame to think that i might have proposed some helpful evidence. i guess i was wrong. Don't bash on me for "preaching" if you'll let brian do the same, only from a different, and far more condescending view.And Brian, read the Bible. Just read it, don't nit-pick it. follow a story and try to discern what it's saying - not what you want it to say. i'd sit down and quote everything and prove statements against every little point you stated - but it'd do nothing because your post is nothing but hate-speech. You base NO scripture whatsoever in your claims. You make false arguments against my evidence, based on a shifty idea and you dismiss any other views - even if you "listen" to them.Rhetorical questions and attacks on one persons ideas don't prove anything, try providing answers instead of shooting down every proposal with "i think". Try using the Bible to answer a question about the Bible, especially in this case. If the question is "what is the first sin", then the only thing you should be concerned with is the scripture, because it's the only account of such an event. And if you only take pin-prick amounts of scripture and try to answer a question like this, all you get is unanswered questions. You have to look at surrounding evidence.You can't dig out the first 5 pages of a science book and try to explain the equations of quantum physics, you need to find surrounding information. Today's Hermeneutics implies that the most effective way to study a text, from any subject (religion, politics, etc) is to use Context.Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

So here's some context:1 Tim 2:13-14
For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
NIVin conjunction with Genesis 3, all evidence is set:
Eve was deceived and became a sinner when she ate the fruit. She may not have known it then, but she and Adam figured it out when God came around.

Well, I do read it and that's why I know it is full of fairy tales.So, we'll take it a step at a time.You claim that Adam and Eve were perfect creations.I claim that this is unbiblical, and the scripture to support this is:Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. So man is created, then the Bible states:Genesis 1:31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning”the sixth day.Now the Bible says that God thought that everything he had created, including man, was very good .Very good is not perfect.So your claim that Adam and Eve were perfect is not to be found in the Bible.Any problems?Brian.

So what kind of fair test is this?If I set a test for my students and one of the compulsory questions is to critically analyse the wife/sister narratives of Genesis 12:10-20, 20:10-18, and 26:6-11, and they haven't examined these texts in class before, is it fair to include this in their test?Brian.

Yes, like a parrot she could repeat the instructions. Babies can often repeat instructions, but until they can learn right from wrong, they also cannot be held responsible for misbehaving. But until after she ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, she had no way to make any judgments about what is right and wrong.You can pretend if you want that Eve sinned or that there is some Original Sin, but the actual tale simply doesn't back you up.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'm not "bashing" you for preaching. I'm telling you that your preaching is irrelevant. I've heard all the sermons before and they don't make any more sense than they did before.You still haven't actually responded to what I posted.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

"You claim that Adam and Eve were perfect creations."
-NO, I never said that. i quoted another idea out of a book. I personally, and REPEATEDLY said that God himself only said his creations were either "Good" or "very good".But i'm proud of you for actually using scripture to back up a claim. unfortunately you misunderstood the last post that you hounded me for.

Jar,i'll quote this particular section from my last large post.2:16-17 - An Unfair Test?"The test, however, could not be a violation of a moral obligation like those in the Decalogue; it had to be an easy prohibition that would be a suitable test of their fidelity. When free indulgence had been given to them to eat the fruit of all the other trees, the infringement of this injunction would be an act of direct rebellion against a command given by God. The method God chose had to be one of violating what is known as a Positive Law (that is, one that was true merely because God said it was true), or one that appeared to be an arbitrary enactment. The advantage of using a test of such modest means and methods was that, if the mortals had stood some greater test and come out steadfast, they might have expected rewards proportioned to the conflict and have argued that they had earned their own salvation. But the test was simply one of heeding a command from God. It would vindicate God's subsequent actions as well as demonstrate that mortals from the hand of God did possess a certain freedom, for which they would also be responsible.
(from Hard Sayings of the Bible, Copyright © 1996 by Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, Manfred T. Brauch, published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)"And actually, the FIRST thing that happened when i enrolled in a music theory class in college was a test almost everybody flunked at 20-30%, why? Because the teacher HAD to KNOW what we were capable of. To set the standard of his teaching for us, before he actually continued the course. WHY? so that he didn't continually teach us things too far over our heads. So that he could keep us on track with understanding what he taught, and keep us interested in what he was going to teach us later.I'm going to throw out an idea, just a really quick one:
Adam and Eve were created with appearance of age, and we know that (their bodies were matured, but their minds were not), so God had to know just how much they could stand to a simple moral conflict "Don't eat the fruit" before letting them roam free in the garden forever. I get the feeling sometimes that if they had not eaten the fruit, God would have given them something.Reason why i suggest this is because (well, take this into account), God cursed the serpent first because he messed with God's test. The reason why i state that is because the first question God asked when he found the two was "who told you you were naked?". Almost as though he didn't expect them to know, since God was walking around the garden at the time.How many of you have created an experiment in science class? You've got your dish with little proteins and whatnot in their and you wanna watch their reactions over time, right? how about this, when you're not around, your classmate mixes in a bunch of chemicals to your experiment. you get mad at him first, don't you? Then you have to change things around in the dish so that you still get the desired effect over time, but not the way you had originally intended.

Lots of fiction there, but it has nothing to do with what the actual fable says.The GOE story is pretty clear, the fruit was the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Until the characters in the story eat the fruit there is no way they could know that disobedience was wrong.The rest of your fiction simply diminishes God even more.In the Garden of Eden story there is just no indication of any original sin, of any sin actually.If you want to find some "First Sin" you really need to either move outside the Western Canon and include stuff like 1^st. Adam & Eve, or move on to Cain and Abel. If you go to that as the "Original Sin" then there is no general sin at could be passed down to all mankind.The concept of a Fall or Original Sin just doesn't seem to be supportable using the Bible accepted in the Western Canon.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion