Bible Question: What was the First Sin?

As has been pointed out, you seem somewhat selective when it comes to Bible versions.As can be seen from Blue Letter Bible - Versions, "for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die" is found in the NKJV, NASB, RSV, Webster's, Young's Darby's, ASV, and HNV. It is also found in the JPS and Kaplan Torah.Furthermore, the Targum Onkelos asserts "for in the day that thou eatest of it dying thou shalt die".At least, if one is to believe Lewis Carroll, Humpty-Dumpty paid words extra to mean what he wanted them to mean. You seem to be getting off cheap.

One of the things that I hate more than anything is when someone at work overhears me mentoring someone (usually concerning a divorce situation - that stuff is running wild where I work at) and they later approach me. They usually start off with the "I overheard the advice you were giving so-and-so and it sounded like Christian advice. Are you a Christian?" This is usually followed by the "me too!" routine and then they start telling me how good and holy they are and how they never would allow themselves to get so excited over a football game like I do becuase that's so worldly. They put themselves on a pedestal and try to elevate themselves in my eyes. All I want to do is go get them another piece of that forbidden fruit and say munch away.I'd much rather work with a group of non-christians than the leagalistic head hunter variety that I run into. Actually, that whole "better than you" gig is just a manifestation of the pride that people carry which God says he hates. I have a problem with the issue of pride myself so don't let me make anyone thing that I have that mastered by any call. It's just easier to do my job without having to listen to someone quacking about how holy they are.The first sin commited in the garden was actually the harboring of pride by both Adam and Eve. That's why God judged them both the same. They weren't created perfect, just sinless to start. They were given a sin nature because they were given the opportunity to sin with the choice of produce in the garden section. It would make no sense for God to give them the opportunity to sin without the ability also. The Serpent took full advantage of this with his conversation. The fact that Eve added to the directive given by God means that they had discussed the issue at some length before the encounter with the Serpent. If after such a discussion they had agreed with God's directive, the conversation would have ended with either or both quoteing God and then pressing on. The fact that they were in close proximity to the tree when atleast some of the serpent's conversation happened shows that they had doubts prior to anything the serpent said and this stems from pride.Personally, I think that God would have called them on their pride anyhow just as he called Cain on his. Some say that God set man up for failure by stacking the deck against him, but I look at it more like God was looking for the purest form of worship that could be solicited. If you have a created being that is given a free will, an ability to sin and the tools to commit it, along with a crafty salesman (salessnake) and the created being chooses to forego the sin and worship the creator instead as the creator specifies, then you have genuine love and adoration in the purest form.Since the fall became manifest, God didn't trash the plan of pure worship from his created beings, but now added more value into man by paying for the debt himself. I personallly cannot understand the great value that God sees in us. I love my wife and kids imeasurably. I would instantly give my life to save theirs which is the ultimate act of love according to the Bible. But the Bible says that all the hairs on everyone's head are numbered by God. As much as I love my wife and kids, I have yet to do any more than to curse at the ammount of hair that I have to clean out of the hair brushes stuffed in the left hand drawer in the bathroom sink vanity.

WILLOWTREE responds to me:

quote:

---

God in mercy delayed the penalty of death,

---

Where does it say that? I've read Genesis 2-3 three times just now in order to make sure I didn't miss it and I cannot see a single verse that indicates this.Instead, I find a direct statement from god that says that should Adam eat from the Tree of Knowledge, he would die a physical death that very day. And given Jewish traditions about days, that meant before sunset.Genesis 2:17: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.It is very specific.When Adam hit 500 years old, do you think he wondered just what "in the day that thou eatest thereof" meant?

quote:

---

Adam and Eve BEGAN to die that very day because they were banished from the Garden

---

But that isn't what god said would happen. He said they would die that very day, before sunset, in fact:Genesis 2:17: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.Where do you find the verses that say that god didn't really mean it or that god had a change of heart?

quote:

---

For you to casually accuse God of lying reveals a lack of basic Bible knowledge

---

Incorrect. It is not a casual accusation. It is made with explicit and clear biblical comprehension and understanding.Where do you find the verses that indicate that Genesis 2:17 does not mean a death that very day? It is quite clear:Genesis 2:17: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.Where do you find the verses that indicate that god didn't mean it or had a change of heart?

quote:

---

it is impossible for God to lie.

---

That may be.Have you considered the possibility that the being that is called "god" in the Bible isn't really god?Of course, there is still an unanswered question:Where do we find any indication that god had a change of heart from Genesis 2:17 where it was explicitly stated that should Adam eat from the Tree of Knowledge, he would die a physical death that very day before the sun set?

quote:

---

You do not understand.

---

On the contrary, I understand all too well.You're simply making stuff up.Where is the verse that indicates that god had a change of heart? Genesis 2:17 is clear and explicit: Eat from the Tree of Knowledge and you will die a physical death that day, before the sun set.In fact, Eve seems to think the tree is even worse:Genesis 3:3: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.And yet, she touches it and doesn't die.So we've got two stories here and neither of them turn out to be true. Eating or even touching the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge does not result in death.Where is the verse that indicates god had a change of heart?

quote:

---

God did not want them to eat from the tree because He said so !

---

So why put it where they could get at it? Especially when they had no concept of good and evil and therefore were incapable of comprehending what obedience means and therefore could be guaranteed to eventually eat from it no matter how many times you tell them not to?If you don't want your baby to get at the cookies, you don't put them where the baby can get at them. The baby doesn't know any better. It is your responsibility as the one who does know better to make sure that the baby doesn't get into trouble.

quote:

---

Eve had no business even going near the thing that God said not to have anything to do with.

---

And how is she supposed to know that? She hadn't eaten from the tree yet and thus had no concept of good and evil and that she had no business going near the tree. Who cares that god told her not to? How is she supposed to understand what that means? She hasn't eaten from the tree yet and doesn't understand things like obedience.

quote:

---

God didnt want them to have the knowledge of good and evil because there is no power in that knowledge to choose the good over the evil , the entire record of the O.T. on proves that.

---

That's not what the Bible says. It states directly that eating from the Tree of Knowledge makes one as gods. It states it not once but twice:Genesis 3:5: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.Genesis 3:22: And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:And, in fact, god panics when he finds out that Adam and Eve have eaten from the Tree of Knowledge. All they need to do is eat from the Tree of Life and they will become exactly like god.You claim that I don't know anything about the Bible, but why is it that I am the only one of us who is quoting from it?Where does the Bible say that god had a change of heart regarding the physical death that would happen that very day, in fact before the sun set, should Adam eat from the Tree of Knowledge?------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Lizard Breath writes:

quote:

---

The first sin commited in the garden was actually the harboring of pride by both Adam and Eve.

---

What about the lie god told Adam which got expanded by the time it got to Eve?Adam was told that if he ate from the Tree of Knowledge, he would die a physical death that very day, before the sun set. Eve seemed to think that merely touching the fruit would do it.That wasn't true. Neither touching nor eating the fruit caused death.Doesn't god make the first sin by lying to Adam and Eve?And what pride is there in one who is innocent? Adam and Eve hadn't eaten from the tree, yet, and thus couldn't possibly understand such a thing.

quote:

---

They weren't created perfect, just sinless to start.

---

It's more than that. They weren't just sinless, they were innocent. They were incapable of understanding good and evil because they hadn't eaten from the Tree of Knowledge.

quote:

---

They were given a sin nature because they were given the opportunity to sin with the choice of produce in the garden section.

---

But with no comprehension of good and evil and thus an inherent inability to understand what obedience means, they were destined to eventually eat from the Tree of Knowledge no matter how many times god told them not to.If you were to put a delicate Mhing vase on a wobbly pedestal and then put a toddler that has just barely learned how to walk in the same room, do you really expect that baby to understand what "Don't touch!" means? Do you really blame the baby for knocking the vase over? Or do you blame yourself for putting such a delicate thing where a baby who doesn't know any better could get at it?

quote:

---

It would make no sense for God to give them the opportunity to sin without the ability also.

---

So god set them up to fail and then punished them for their inevitable failure?That's evil.

quote:

---

The Serpent took full advantage of this with his conversation.

---

Incorrect. The serpent simply tells the truth:If you eat from the Tree of Knowledge, you will not die but will have your eyes opened and become as gods, knowing good and evil.The serpent does not tell Eve to eat from the tree. Could you find me the verse in the Bible that says he does?

quote:

---

The fact that Eve added to the directive given by God means that they had discussed the issue at some length before the encounter with the Serpent.

---

Where? Where on earth do you find that verse in the Bible? Again, I've read through Genesis 3 three times just to make sure I didn't miss it and I can't find a single thing in there that even remotely resembles this. The serpent says only two things:Genesis 3:1: Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?Genesis 3:4: And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:3:5: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.That's it. Can you find me the missing verses that show where the serpent had any other conversation with Eve? Can you find me the verses that show anything to justify your claim?You're just making stuff up.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This is simply incorrect and extremely faulty on two accounts.Firstly, nothing is impossible for God, that includes telling lies, if you are saying that YHWH cannot tell lies then you have just proven that YHWH is not God.Anyway, why would it be impossible for God to tell lies?Secondly, the Bible itself informs us that God does indeed lie, albeit to fulfil a plan that God has, but it is a lie nonetheless.1 Kings 22:23 "So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you."You could argue quite fairly that the 400 prophets were used by God to fulfil his purpose of getting rid of Ahab, but God lied nonetheless. You could further argue that God told Micaiah the true prophecy concerning Ahab, this is irrelevant however, as god has still lied to the other prophets.This lying by God actually calls into question the whole prophetic tradition. You clearly do no know Rrhain very well.All this post has done is to expose your own lack of basic biblical knowledge and that your understanding of God is also extremely flawed.Brian

Hi Rrhain,I read your reply to my post so I thought I'd respond to a couple of the points you raise.Quoteing you,

quote:

---

Where? Where on earth do you find that verse in the Bible? Again, I've read through Genesis 3 three times just to make sure I didn't miss it and I can't find a single thing in there that even remotely resembles this. The serpent says only two things:

---

The Bible also never says that God told Eve to stay the heck away from the funky tree in the center. That directive was given to Adam before Eve was created. So how do you suppose she gained the knowledge to respond to the serpent? It was either passed on to her by Adam and since she added to the directive shows that she either didn't understand the directive or felt so indignant of the restriction that she sarcastically added to it, or the serpent told her or by this time there was a sign of "park rules" placed near the main attraction.You also equated Adam and Eve to toddlers as a comparison to their level of knowledge concerning good and evil and obedience. I can't speak dogmatic of this but the Bible does say that God gave Adam full diminion over the earth and charged him with the responsiblilty to care for the garden. So I don't know to what extent full dominion means but if he had control over the forces of the weather and of the earth, he would have had to have been given considerable knowledge of how to use this. It would also make logical sense though not explicitly stated in the Bible that Adam would have had sufficient intellect to converse with God. It would not seem logical for God to create a mental midget and put him in an arena where a poor choice held such high ramifications.The Bible states that when God formed the Garden to put Adam in, the trees were fully formed and already bearing fruit, not freshly planted seedlings and God saying "in about 25 years you are going to have a real feast in this place", so to surmise that God also gave Adam sufficient intellegence without requireing him to live 50 years before he could tell his own butt from a hole in the ground is not unreasonable to me, but I will admit that is my opinion and not Biblical fact.I apoligise for causing you to re-read Genesis several times and in the future I will try to clarify when I am using my own conjecture vs. employing actual Biblical scripture. Again, sorry for the confussion.[This message has been edited by Lizard Breath, 11-25-2003]

Rrhain,The serpent did lie to Eve when he told her that she would not die but have her eyes opened and be like Gods knowing good from evil.First, since he addresses the difference between the two (good and evil) tells me that the subject was of sincere interest to both Adam and Eve. If not, the serpent would have just said "You'll become as God, having your eyes opened and you won't die". Since Eve didn't ask the serpent "What's death, good and evil?" they must have already had sufficient instruction from God as to what those concepts were. The serpent also capitalized on the fact that both Adam and Eve were on a wisdom quest. I surmise this because the Bible says that Eve saw that the fruit was desireable to make one wise, and she chowed.Finally, the serpent told a lie by telling a half truth because once they ate the forbidden fruit, they died a spiritual death. God didn't say that the day you sin you will surely die but the day you eat of the forbidden fruit you will. Adam and Eve tried to hide themselves from God because they were afraid. Afraid of what I don't know but they never questioned God as to if he was going to dust them. All the Bible says is that they were afraid of God because they were naked, not because they thought he was coming to kick some boodiac and take names. But they never experienced communion with God again according to the Bible. If God would have dusted them right then and there, it would not make sence to mention it in Genesis because we would all be from a different set of Adam and Eve 2.1.4 or even later revisions. They both lived for a time, procreated and then died a physical death.No other human according to the Bible ever communed with God the way Adam did until Jesus.

Lizard Breath responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Where? Where on earth do you find that verse in the Bible? Again, I've read through Genesis 3 three times just to make sure I didn't miss it and I can't find a single thing in there that even remotely resembles this. The serpent says only two things:

---

​

The Bible also never says that God told Eve to stay the heck away from the funky tree in the center.

---

Indeed. But she does have this cockamamie idea that if she even touches the fruit, she'll die.Whether or not she got that information from god or from Adam, the fact still remains that Genesis 2:17 is quite explicit: Eat from the Tree of Knowledge and you will drop dead that very day, before the sun sets. It is not a metaphorical death, it is not a "spiritual" death. It is a physical death. It is not a metaphorical day, it is not a "god-time" day. It is before the sun sets.Where did this notion come from? That's right...god. God is the one that tells Adam that he will die a physical death before the sun set if he were to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.But that doesn't happen.So we're left with a couple possibilities:1) God lied.
2) God had a change of heart.Since there is no evidence that god changed his mind and since the Bible directly states that god can and does lie, we are left with the conclusion that god lied to Adam.Since lying is a sin ("Thou shalt not bear false witness"), then god committed the first sin by lying to Adam.

quote:

---

That directive was given to Adam before Eve was created. So how do you suppose she gained the knowledge to respond to the serpent?

---

Who knows? Who cares? The fact remains that Eve's opinion about the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge is false. She will not die when she eats it (let alone touches it). Instead, her eyes will be opened and she will become as gods knowing good from evil.And that's precisely what happens.

quote:

---

You also equated Adam and Eve to toddlers as a comparison to their level of knowledge concerning good and evil and obedience.

---

Oh, you're not about to say that I am somehow indicating that Adam and Eve were idiots, are you?

quote:

---

So I don't know to what extent full dominion means but if he had control over the forces of the weather and of the earth, he would have had to have been given considerable knowledge of how to use this.

---

(*sigh*)Yes, you are.Look, you don't go to your tax attorney for advice about how to do an angioplasty. It isn't because your tax attorney is an idiot. It's because he simply knows nothing about cardiology. You don't ask your cardiologist for advice about how to get rid of the black scale that seems to be infecting your roses. It isn't because your cardiologist is an idiot. It's because he's not a horticulturist. You don't ask your gardner for information about how to build a house. You don't ask your architect for information about how to rebuild an engine. You don't ask your mechanic for information about how to find roots of the Riemann zeta function. You don't ask a mathematician about whether the sauce could stand a rosemary infusion. And you don't ask the chef to do your taxes. All of these people are highly intelligent and amazingly competent in their field, but nobody is an expert about everything.Adam may have been a tremendous farmer, but that doesn't mean he knew diddly about right and wrong.And according to the Bible, he can't because he hadn't eaten from the Tree of Knowledge. In fact, the Bible explicitly points out Adam and Eve's innocence:Genesis 2:25: And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.And let's not forget that the very first thing that Adam and Eve realize once they eat from the Tree of Knowledge, their eyes open, and they become as gods knowing good and evil is that they are naked:Genesis 3:7: And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.There is no doubt. Adam and Eve were not stupid. They were innocent.

quote:

---

I apoligise for causing you to re-read Genesis several times and in the future I will try to clarify when I am using my own conjecture vs. employing actual Biblical scripture.

---

But you didn't answer the question.Where in the Bible do we find the verse that the serpent ever said anything else to Adam and Eve?------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Lizard Breath responds to me:

quote:

---

The serpent did lie to Eve when he told her that she would not die but have her eyes opened and be like Gods knowing good from evil.

---

Um, perhaps you have a different definition of "lie" than I do.My definition of "lie" is something like "deliberately stating something knowing that it isn't true."Now, we have two direct claims in the Bible about what will happen should someone eat from the Tree of Knowledge:1) Death (physical) that very day (before the sun sets)
2) Eyes open and become as gods knowing good and evilAs it turns out, we don't have to wonder about which one will be the right one because we have two examples: Adam and Eve both eat from the Tree of Knowledge.And what happens? Do they die a physical death that very day? No. In fact, their eyes open and they become as gods knowing good and evil.Now, who asserted the first consequence?That's right. God did it.Now, who asserted the second consequence?That's right. The serpent did it.How did the serpent lie?

quote:

---

First, since he addresses the difference between the two (good and evil) tells me that the subject was of sincere interest to both Adam and Eve.

---

Incorrect. The serpent says nothing about the difference between the two. The serpent simply states that god's claim about what will happen if you eat from the tree is false. Then, he states the accurate result.If I tell you that pressing that button doesn't cause instant death but rather discrebulantzes the goboromovitz, do you really have any idea what it does? Oh, it's not going to kill you instantly, that we have established (or, at least, I am telling you it isn't going to kill you instantly), but just because I've told you about it discrebulantzing the goboromovitz, does that really mean you understand what that is?

quote:

---

Since Eve didn't ask the serpent "What's death, good and evil?" they must have already had sufficient instruction from God as to what those concepts were.

---

Why? Why is that the necessary response?When you don't know that you don't know, how do you ask questions?And if loving god and worshipping him means trying to be as much like him as possible, wouldn't finding out that eating something would "make you as gods" be enough? So "being as gods" means "knowing good and evil"...well, I don't know what that means now, but I'll probably know after I eat and god will be so pleased to have me be just like him, so I'll eat.

quote:

---

Finally, the serpent told a lie by telling a half truth because once they ate the forbidden fruit, they died a spiritual death.

---

But there was never any mention by anybody about a spiritual death.And again, you seem to be using a very different definition of "lie" than I am. A lie requires deliberation.What verse tells us that the serpent knew that eating from the tree would cause a "spiritual" death? The serpent was the smartest of any of the animals, but that doesn't make him all-knowing.And yet again, the serpent does NOT tell Eve to eat from the tree. He simply says that the claim by god that one would die a physical death before the sun set is wrong. Instead, your eyes will open and you will become as gods knowing good and evil.That's it.Where is the verse that the serpent knew that there would be a "spiritual" death? Where is the verse that the serpent told Eve to eat from the tree? Where is the verse that the serpent indicated that there wouldn't still be consequences for eating from the tree?

quote:

---

God didn't say that the day you sin you will surely die but the day you eat of the forbidden fruit you will.

---

But that isn't what happened. Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit and they didn't die.God doesn't say how one would die. There is no indication that the fruit was poisoned. It could simply be that god will do the job personally. It could be that the tree is rigged and something about breaking the skin of the apple causes the ground to open and you'll be crushed to death (hey...Genesis is full of miracles.)

quote:

---

Adam and Eve tried to hide themselves from God because they were afraid. Afraid of what I don't know

---

You don't? They directly tell god what they were afraid of:Genesis 3:10: And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.They have had their eyes opened, they know good and evil, they know they are naked, they know that it's shameful and wrong, and god comes looking for them. They don't want to present a shameful and wrong thing to god, so they hide. They are afraid because they are naked.

quote:

---

If God would have dusted them right then and there, it would not make sence to mention it in Genesis because we would all be from a different set of Adam and Eve 2.1.4 or even later revisions.

---

So? Why would it not make sense to mention it? Wouldn't it be prudent to the next generation to know what happened to the previous one and why they were destroyed so that they, too, don't fall into the same trap?

quote:

---

They both lived for a time, procreated and then died a physical death.

---

But Adam (at least) was supposed to have died nearly a millennium ago. God told him directly that before the sun set on the day he ate of the Tree of Knowledge, he would no longer be alive.But he lived.Either god lied or god had a change of heart.Where is the verse that indicates god had a change of heart?

quote:

---

No other human according to the Bible ever communed with God the way Adam did until Jesus.

---

Um...Noah, Moses, Abraham, David.... God seems to like appearing to people quite a lot.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

We know from other parts of the bible that the fall is when sin came into the world and that the fall is considered to be when Eve ate the fruit. You cannot say that God never said that they couldn't touch the tree. In this first part of Genesis there is a definite sense that time had passed between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve and again between this and the fall of man. It also says that God walked with them in the Garden. During all this walking there must also have been talking. God could easily have clarified this command not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil in that time to include not touching. As well, the author of Genesis,(Moses), may have not felt the necessity of adding those little words as it is fairly obvious that the fall into sin is in direct relation to Eve's disobedience to God.As well, all scripture is divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore cannot be wrong or contradict itself. Disobedience to God is the fall of man, not lying.

Quote:
Now, we have two direct claims in the Bible about what will happen should someone eat from the Tree of Knowledge:1) Death (physical) that very day (before the sun sets)
2) Eyes open and become as gods knowing good and evil1.Where in the bible does it say that the death punishment for eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil would be physical? It was a spiritual death, a falling away from God. Also at this point Adam and Eve were to live forever, after eating the fruit they eventually die (yes, physically). In an eternity wouldn't one life span seem like a day?2.The serpent is the great temptor. God does not tempt us to sin and therefore it would make sense that He would not tell Adam and Eve that if they ate of the fruit they would know good and evil. If He had told them this then they would have only eaten of it sooner. Just like when you tell a child not to do something and they have to do it. Adam and Eve were mentally childlike. They would listen to God not to eat of the tree until someone gave them a reason to disobey. God kept that reason from them. Satan tempted them with it.The results of eating of this tree are not Exclusive. They are Inclusive.

Hi ariel. Welcome to EvC.(Before you run screaming in the opposite direction, let me tell you that I'm going to be extra gentle with you - until I have to reload. ) More important, where does it say that the death punishment would not be physical? It seems to me that you're making up a "spiritual death" that isn't even hinted at in the text, just to avoid a contradiction. Nope.Trapped in time as we are, we have no way of knowing what eternity would "seem like". Then why did He specifically tell Adam that it was "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil"? Not much of a way to keep a secret.

quote:

---

Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

---

Speculation. Inadmissible. Satan isn't even mentioned in the story.-------------I could find a lot more to criticize in your short post, but is that enough to get me on your hate list?

---

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

Welcome ariel,Glad you decided to add to our diversity. We have a wide variety of forums for your debating pleasure.As members, we are guests on this board and as guests we are asked to put forth our best behavior. Please read the Forum Guidelines carefully and understand the wishes of our host. Abide by the Forum Guidelines and you will be a welcome addition.In the purple signature box below, you'll find some links that will help make your journey here pleasant.Please direct any questions or comments you may have to the Moderation Thread.Again, welcome and fruitful debating.

---

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate

---

Some people might claim that but it is simply not true. Sin was a part of the world from the very beginning. Except of course, that Moshe probably didn't write any of the bible. Well, I happen to think that the Bible, which is just part of scripture like Huck Finn and Moby Dick, were inspired by GOD, but the Bible certainly does contradict itself. It may well have been inspired but it was written by just plain people, then edited by others, redacted by still more, compiled and rewritten yet again.All one needs to do is to read the first two books, Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are mutually exclusive. If one is literally true, then the other is false.But none of that is related to the topic of this thread. The question is, can a beast sin?Is it possible for an earth worm to sin?That is a key question. Until after Adam and Eve had eaten from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, they had no way of knowing that they should obey God. They were incapable of sinning.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

please don't forget context, people. eve knew not to touch Or eat of the tree. it says in genesis 3:2-3.1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
2 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.' "her converstion with the serpent clearly states that she KNEW that God told her NOT to touch OR eat of the fruit.
so the touching and eating of the fruit is the sin. the reason it is the first sin is because even though they did not know "knowledge of good and evil" they knew this one simple command, DO NOT TOUCH OR EAT. and they did because they were cleverly deceived. and as it is stated so many times in the bible, going against God's commandments is SIN. no change of heart, no lies. and since sin isn't something we are TOTALLY UNABLE TO FLEE FROM ("Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." -james 4:7), there is forgiveness. this is only part of God's master plan he started from the beginning.