[The Blitherer]

At the point that man became conscious of good and evil, or, if you will, at the point that man became "as one of us."

That is a good argument, but unfortunately it doesn't take into account the very crux of the Fall, which is man's choice to disobey God. If man simply became "aware" of good and evil, and did not choose it, then there is no argument for the Fall, which is central to Christian theology.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

It's interesting though that at the points of man's "fall," God expresses concern that may will become as God. Can something that made us more God-like actually be a fall?

[atlaw]

Actually, you have identified one of the thorniest Biblical issues -- one that has defied all efforts at easy or simplistic resolution.

The "choice" to disobey God was made by a naive man, and the simplistic notion that it was mere disobedience of a given order (pre-supposing that the nature of the order itself was somehow irrelevant) carries with it the equally simplistic notion that God is, or was prior to the "awakening" of man, a mere dictator or eternal theater director.

It is, after all, only with the cessation of naivete (the "fall" as you put it) that man became capable of knowing, or distinguishing, good from evil and God from serpent. "Choice" is indeed a lesson of Genesis 3. But the effectively preordained "choice" of an ignorant and all too easily deceived man to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not the heart of that lesson.