Is there Biblical support for the concept of "Original Sin"?

And I suppose without disobedience we wouldn't have true free will....

You have all presented your case for why original sin should be questioned and why the Bible can and should be read in context. The conclusion, if accepted, is itself disturbing.1) If there is no such thing as original sin, why did Jesus need to come and why all the hoopla about Him coming back? The whole idea of God blessing us seems to have less need..less meaning now.But that's not a huge problem. It just means that we now must be more personally responsible.However....2) IF God lied in the story, what possible analogy or reasoning would that even correlate with? My conception of God is as a Being who cannot lie. Jesus even said that the devil was the "father of lies." The plain reading of this text distorts and challenges the meanings that I learned. Its almost as if the day I learned that God could lie, I myself began to die. If I cant trust the Bible and the God of the Bible, whom can I trust?

No. I believe in a God of no limits. God can certainly do anything.A God who is both good and bad is a shocker, however. Its like growing up in an abusive family. You cant trust your parent, so you must fend for yourself. The relationship with that parent is scarred perhaps for life. It was never supposed to be this way with God.

Critics would argue that you cannot know GOD except by reading of His character in the Bible (or god book or your choice) As Christians, we believe in one GOD and in Jesus Christ. That goes for most of the "club christians" that you refer to.Lets say we were given this gift to know right from wrong, good from bad, that demands personal responsibility, as you say. When we then go to church to commune with our brothers and sisters, can we sing to and truly worship a God whom we don't know?And since we were taught to believe in a book that is the Word Of God, how would we in any way be able to connect to God if the book itself were believed to be human opinions and interpretations?Anyone could claim to know God with no credentials.

OK. In conclusion, no., There is no Biblical support. Critics may argue that one needs to have the Holy Spirit in order to understand the Bible in context, but I will agree that plain reading of the text is arguably an effective way to support a discussion.

Yes, actually. My point is that it would be quite disturbing to some if the Bible was proven to be a collection of fables and human interpretations. Man writing about man. Man writing about our idea of God relating to man. Critics would say that interpreting the story teaching us what it means to be human is a celebration of humanism and not God nor Christ. Sin is a separation, a loss of awareness of the divine nature potentially given to us. Of course, that's another chapter of another club.