Bible Question: What was the First Sin?

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.

things to note:
"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). sin causes seperation from God
ROMANS 6
19I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. 20When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. 21What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in[b] Christ Jesus our Lord.we all know that we all die physically. the death that is stated in the bible many times, is never designated. so to point that it is only physical would be wrong. but pointing the possibility of that is merely judgment. look at it this way. we obviously know that adam and eve did not drop dead the second they ate the fruit, and we know that there are two types of death (which coincidentally are not always distinguished in the bible), so if they didn't drop dead, and God said you shall DIE, he's pointing at Spiritual death (based on the seperation from God that sin causes).1)it's quite simple to understand once you know that:
2)all beings and entities die, and
3)following the path of righteousness leads to eternal LIFE.
the opposite of LIFE is DEATH. Edited by Mikael Fivel, : didnt' mean to hit submit. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

what i meant by GOD TOLD HER... was that she was informed that God had stated... and that changes nothing. she knew.
if my wife calls my boss, and my boss tells me that she wants me to grab dinner on the way home, SHE TOLD ME TO, he informed me. the command came from her, through my boss to me.Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

those who read this:
ephesians 4
18They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

and the death we're talking about is IN SIN...
colossians 2
13When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature,[a] God made you[b] alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

and that reply does not belong on this thread, in fact, it has nothing to do with it. and you're quoting a passage that includes a command that was given as an order to SOMEONE else to RETAIN purity within a nation because a plague fell on the people... not all of us.
it doesn't matter what your or my belief is. this forum is arguin biblical text, and you should strive to find BIBLICAL answers. Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

right but that doesn't change anything. in fact, the first four books of the bible are books of the old law of moses. paul wasn't even a part of the bible until the first century. he was (and you might know this) acutally a fundementalist christian HATER, he stoned christians, hated and persecuted them. his words also identify with people much more differently than God's.adam and eve didn't need to know that there was a spiritual death or a physical death. all they knew was basic. "you can have anything of these trees and bushes, JUST NOT THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE", easy to identify with them, wasn't it? God never created man perfect, in fact, all that is stated is "Very Good". Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.

The serpent never stated himself as an authority figure.
and even if you don't know the definition of the word OBEY, it's still clear that when you're told NOT to do something, don't do it. God was the only one handing out orders, the serpent merely deceived eve.

i was never trying to change the subject, and honestly i don't know why you seem to be pinning that one me. i was trying to make sure that the thread stayed on topic, and i also followed up on the tangent brought to attention.

how did you know to listen to your parents when you were a child? i bet you knew what NO meant, right? this is the relationship between God and adam. if you want to use LOGIC for this discussion here you go:
if there are only four beings in this discussion (adam, eve, God and the serpent) and the two adam and eve are merely childlike in mentality know ing nothing at all then the first thing to happen is a being called God steps in and says "you may eat of any tree, except for the one in the middle" and he's the only one who ever said anything like that... who ELSE is the authority figure... when the serpent confronted them, he even pointed the fact that was God was authority when he stated that the fruit will make you LIKE God. it never said they would BE God. and God probably had a different plan for adam and eve, had they not eaten the fruit... point being in this whole chapter is that the relationship between God and man changed, and it made God have to set up two different covenants with his people. the first is old testament commandments, very easy, strict instructions, JUST LIKE ADAM AND EVE. later, he instated the new law, which Jesus ordained all throughout the four books of the Gospel. and no... knowledge does not bring you closer to God... obeying his commandments is EVERYTHING. that's thrown everywhere in the new testament. the parable of the slave becoming master and master becoming slave. numerous scriptures that state "what is it to gain earthly possession but lose your soul?". "The wisdom of man is foolishness to God" all these things in the new testament CLEARLY, CLEARLY state that OUR knowledge and wisdom are nothing when it comes to salvation.

"There are no contractual obligations on either side."
sure there were. "you may eat of any tree in the garden", "but you must not eat of the tree in the middle" sounds like it to me. God supplied him what he needed to carry out his work in the garden, hence why he needed a helper. adam has duties to perform, otherwise he wouldn't need eve, and in return God gave them food and a place to live.
and maybe you should read this: paul tells us of the future in 2 timothy 3
1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God” 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth”men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.their knowledge didn't bring them anywhere near God, it caused selfishness - and the truth which is stated in verse 7 isn't truth of anything pertaining to worldly knowledge, it's truth of God's word. 2+2=4 is truth, but not the truth that gets you nearer to God.
and really, knowing WHAT sin IS, and knowing what it looks like, and staying away from it is far more important to the truth of God's word than who committed it first.

Where do you get that Adam's and Eve's knowledge brought them selfishness?
i never did... you took that out of 2 Timothy where paul is saying that the people IN THE LAST DAYS were... *and going on* don't take that out of context."God providing Adam with the necessities of life hardly constitutes a covenant. He does that for everybody."
yes, and thats our covenant with him... he provides, WE give back (through faith and works by faith)! he gave to adam, adam had duties.if you're only going to use genesis to explain genesis, you are using blind knowledge. this is the beauty of the Bible, it explains itself over to affirm the importance and clarity of its subjects."Why not? Why wouldn't practical truths about God's creation bring us closer to God? How does "closer to God" have any meaning except in practical terms?"
truths about God's CREATION wont' bring you closer to Him... truths about GOD as a being will. and what better way to know him than to read Jesus' words, he is God, afterall! and why not argue God's words? the bible clearly says we should test ourselves on these things. it's healthy to question what you believe, otherwise you're a lemming.

and i answered... read my post again please. ONCE AGAIN, read my post over... i'm quoting you and answering on the next line. a covenant is an agreement between two people... In the bible, God's promise to the human race
Covenant - definition of covenant by The Free Dictionary blind knowledge is using knowledge that does not strive to find another source that would affirm the text in question. by reading Jesus' words, HE IS GOD! new testament is FILLED with his writings. four different people wrote books on him for it. Paul preached Jesus' words the best! then if you're going to ask about the being of God, expect to get an answer about Jesus! i find it funny that you're going off on a tangent about other people's theologies when you tell me not to get off topic! kinda cute how you go off topic by saying stay on topic. i do, every day i read this forum. so thank you! i simply feel like people around here don't give enough credence to the Bible's REAL meaning, and in a lot of cases, the people who stand up for the bible and give Biblical evidence for Biblical arguments are shot down. so go ahead and say "stop that right now!" again, because if you look at what people have said to me and other biblical Christians around this thread, we're not treated well when presenting our side of the story.Edited by Mikael Fivel, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed quotes. Mikael, use the peek button to see how we make quotes. It looks much nicer.

no agreement between God and Adam? there's no agreement between a two year old and his parents either. but its still a covenant whether the kid understands them or not, if he obeys, they will reward.test the passage, yes, but using non-contextual jib-jab what we call logic, no. our human logic varies every 5-10 years... people's ideas change, its what happens. you're testing a book that has NOT changed in 2000 years with logic that never stays the same, hence no solid answer for more than what, a year or two? how about making something permanent?i never discounted anybody's theology, but if you want me to go into them, sure i will. good, i like that. discussion is good. you're simply shooting me down. oh really? i never said i was in here to teach you a thing or two, not once. i'm saying "if you're going to argue a biblical subject, USE THE BIBLE" and that goes for studying it, and looking for historical relevance ('cause the bible is moreso history than theology). and so far all i'm hearing is I THINK I THINK I THINK... instead of using CONTEXT. here's a brilliant example of the importance of context...
say we're arguing whether or not my ball is red based on the sentence "a ball with shades of red"... when really, if you look at surrounding sentences it says "mikael was painting a ball with shades of red and decided he wanted blue instead", turns out we're not talking about the ball... its about the painting!arrogance huh? "take the beam out of your own eye" sound familiar?
you stand up for the bible? show me scripture that affirms your point of view on this subject and i'll show you mine. Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed quotes. Mikael...use peek feature and see how quotes are made

you COULD if you wanted, but then again God never said "you will drop dead the second you eat it" he said "you will surely die", no time frame was ever established. and just because there wasn't one established doesn't discount an alternative. we simply don't know. but when you look at the next 65 books in the bible, it's pretty clear that he didn't mean 'death on the spot'.