First sin???

[Touma]

It is commonly said that Adam and Eve eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil constituted the first sin, bringing it into the world.

Here is my question: Can one sin without knowing the knowledge of evil?

This seems like a pretty straight forward question. I'd say "no". If I never knew the knowledge of what is evil, then I would not sin, correct?

SO, if Adam and Eve had no prior knowledge of what evil is, that is, to sin, then how did they make the choice to sin, ie disobeying God's direct order to not eat from that tree?

I hope this question makes sense! Thanks =)

 

[holyrokker]

Yes, a person can sin without having knowledge of what is evil.

Sin isn't a violation of a law. Sin is an attitude of selfishness. It's a placing of personal preference over others.

In Adam's case, it was placing his own desires over God's directive.

Sin is born within a person. The outward act is the result of a preferred choice.

A person can sin without breaking the law. In fact, a person can perfectly keep the law, yet still be sinfully wretched in her/his attitude.

Romans 2:14-15 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

 

[heymikey80]

Sin is missing the mark -- sin is not doing what you should, whether you know you should or not.

 

[elopez]

Here is my question: Can one sin without knowing the knowledge of evil?

Yes. One can still sin without knowing they are indeed sinning. Just like a mentally handicap man can still commit a crime without knowing what it is he is actually doing. That doesn't mean he should be held responsible for his behavior though, as it is an entirely other ordnance to be held accountable for something one has no knowledge of being wrong.

So, if you mean to ask your original question then yes, but that doesn't mean one can be held accountable for what they don't understand as evil or immoral.

 

[Abraham Garrett]

Pardon me, but I feel that the question you are asking is not answerable. Allow me to explain why.

The Lord gave us all the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. Some know it as "common sense" or "a conscience". Each and every one of us chooses on a daily basis whether to do the right thing, or not to. Each of us is born with this knowledge, even before my eyes were opened and I learned of the Lord, I still knew what was right and what was wrong. It is a gift from the Lord that He, in His wisdom, grants to every last one of us.

Sin is, as has been said previously, a wilful act. Adam and Eve, knowing that God had ordered them not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, chose to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. Your question is, in my opinion, not answerable because they already knew that it was wrong, just as we will all know that our actions are the wrong ones. Sometimes, however, our mortal brains are not fast enough to know this before the fact, and this is where the Lord should be asked for His forgiveness. If He chooses to forgive our misdeed, no sin is committed. And He would only not forgive if we are not genuine in our repentance, which our conscience would only allow if the deed was not sinful in nature.

To put it more simply - assume that you have done something wrong. Either you realise the deed is wrong, you pray, you repent, and are forgiven in the Lord's wisdom, and so have committed no sin. Or, though the deed may have been wrong, you realise that it was not sinful, and pray joyfully to the Lord that your experience may improve your judgement for the next time.

 

[ptomwebster]

It is commonly said that Adam and Eve eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil constituted the first sin, bringing it into the world.

Here is my question: Can one sin without knowing the knowledge of evil?

This seems like a pretty straight forward question. I'd say "no". If I never knew the knowledge of what is evil, then I would not sin, correct?

SO, if Adam and Eve had no prior knowledge of what evil is, that is, to sin, then how did they make the choice to sin, ie disobeying God's direct order to not eat from that tree?

I hope this question makes sense! Thanks =)

Adam's ('eth-'Ha'adham) sin was disobedience to God's command.

Gen 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
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.

Gen 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?

Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 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.
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Gen 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.
Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

"The tree of the knowledge of good and evil" was not a fruit tree, by the way, and Eve did not eat an apple.

 

[branchofthevine]

Adam's first sin was Listening to his wife who incited him to sin, and not actually eating the fruit which was his second sin. (Genesis 3:17)
17 And to the man he said, “Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree"

 

[ptomwebster]

Adam's first sin was Listening to his wife who incited him to sin, and not actually eating the fruit which was his second sin. (Genesis 3:17)
17 And to the man he said, “Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree"

NO! God never commanded Adam to "not listen to your wife." God's command was:

"Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
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.

 

[Touma]

The question I was asking was this: Before eating of the tree, we knew not evil, meaning we knew not how to sin. If they had no knowledge of sin, how would they have the desire or idea of rebellion against God?

 

[Edwards1984]

The question I was asking was this: Before eating of the tree, we knew not evil, meaning we knew not how to sin. If they had no knowledge of sin, how would they have the desire or idea of rebellion against God?

Well, the philosophical answer might be that God permitted them the ability to sin against Him, or permitted them the ability to engage in sin. We see some of this in the account between Eve and the snake, for: 1) she engages with the serpent in dialogue, rather than continually going to the word of God as Christ did in the desert; 2) it is said that she "saw that the tree was good for food" and found it "a delight to the eyes," and from the words of the serpent decided that "the tree was desirable to make one wise" (Gen 3:6), which would not be possible if one were a robot designed to always be perfect.

This falls back a little bit in some of the previous responses, which are that just because you are ignorant of the identity of sin does not mean you are not incapable of performing or being guilty of sin.

 

[Touma]

Well, the philosophical answer might be that God permitted them the ability to sin against Him, or permitted them the ability to engage in sin. We see some of this in the account between Eve and the snake, for: 1) she engages with the serpent in dialogue, rather than continually going to the word of God as Christ did in the desert; 2) it is said that she "saw that the tree was good for food" and found it "a delight to the eyes," and from the words of the serpent decided that "the tree was desirable to make one wise" (Gen 3:6), which would not be possible if one were a robot designed to always be perfect.

This falls back a little bit in some of the previous responses, which are that just because you are ignorant of the identity of sin does not mean you are not incapable of performing or being guilty of sin.

Thanks.