“I believe there is a reason God tells us of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden. Also His admonition not to eat thereof, lest we would surely die.”
So what you are saying is god left a loaded .45 on the table in reach of people that knew no sin, therefore innocent.
“Every human being now has that knowledge in them.’
Do you mean after he told those innocents what would happen,or before?
“It is a fundamental problem, because that ability to discern good and evil, is too easily confused as a counterfeit substitute for our direct relationship with God through faith in Christ. As soon as we slip into that reliance, instead of through faith in Christ first, we fall out of fellowship with Him.”
Are you saying that you have no proof of god? Proof always denies the need for faith like “checks in the mail.”
“It manifests the nature of sin.”
What is the biblical definition of sin?
“One step removed, morality can either be used as a counterfeit substitute for being in fellowship with Him, or it can scar us into legalism and good works without faith, which are simply good for nothingness in His Plan.”
How do you prove what you claim to be true, true?
Just curious.
(Jumping in here) you might say so, with explicit instructions not to pull the trigger, while proving no restrictions on the other guns, as such would have only positive effects.
Do you mean after he told those innocents what would happen,or before?
The ability to discern good and evil was present from the beginning. A+E were innocent but not unable to make moral choices, though they never knew guilt, and were given vast freedom, with only one solitary prohibition. For the freedom to choose is meaningless unless there is something to choose btwn. Yet were there no subversive temptation, it is unlikely they would have sinned.
But as the original leftist Liberal, the devil seduced Eve with the Victim-Entitlement Mentality, asserting that God was treating her unjustly with His prohibition, as He had no right to keep this certain knowledge of Good and Evil from her.
Meaning this was a demand for God to Share the Wealth, which was the premise of the Devil in the first Occupy Movement, that of the devil presuming to sit in the position of God (the administration building to the Presidency), climbing up "some other way" than that which is lawful. (Is. 14:14; Jn. 10:1; cf. 2Tim. 2:5; Rv. 3:21).
Even then saw the fruit was good to eat, and attractive to the eyes, and to make her wise, and so she ate, and enlisted Adam in sin, who was not deceived but simply went along with his wife. And as they were given stewardship of the earth, by getting their "vote" the devil gained power as the god of this world" system.
That discourse is certainly not what you expected, but there was more to this event than meets the eye. And as the devil yet craves the worship only God is worthy of, then he mainly seeks to obtain it by proxy servants, who likewise employ the seductive (because of man's strong sense of justice) Victim-Entitlement Mentality to obtain power, yet in the end only they reign in power and wealth, perhaps with a few avid supporters.
I will leave the rest of your post to the OP whom presented statements you addressed.
Only the arrogant, i.e. those who place themselves ahead of God, mistakenly think they need to have His existence proven to them.
Re your rhetorical questions.
"So what you are saying is god left a loaded .45 on the table in reach of people that knew no sin, therefore innocent."
No. I'm saying no such thing, nor making such additional implications. God gave a command not to eat from a particular tree in the Garden of Eden. Since God does nothing that is good for nothingness, there is a reason why He communicated this to man.
The additional information you have added implies many things, none of which were implied by God in His original command.
Do you mean after he told those innocents what would happen,or before?The fruit taken was from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Prior to that consumption, they had not eaten that fruit, so they didn't have it in them. Obviously they gained the knowledge after they had eaten the Fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
"Are you saying that you have no proof of god? Proof always denies the need for faith like “checks in the mail.”"
Non sequitur. Proof or rationalism doesn't out-trump faith. 2 different systems of perception. Rationalism is possible though faith in Christ, but rationalism doesn't provide faith. Faith is more.
"What is the biblical definition of sin?"
Sin is missing the mark of God's Plan.
These are consequential from study of Bible Doctrine. You might find a study of Harmartiology to help in your understanding of these issues.
I am making a simple observation, which is frequently overlooked regarding original sin. It didn't exist in man prior to original sin. God communicated something to man when He gave the command not to eat the Fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. He added, "lest you shall surely die".
This is an incredibly important observation. The beauty of God's Plan is that we were condemned before we are saved. It happened as a consequence of having the Knowledge of Good and Evil in us. It is now part of every homo sapien, which wasn't how God had created us.
We are condemned today because of this, and we are saved when we have saving faith (which He provides).
Too many believers confuse morality with "being good" and "Goodliness" as being one with God.