I suppose a christian might say the potential for sin was already in the world. So the tree of knowledge/good and evil contained the concept of sin in it which was released when eaten.

Another answer would be,who knows what christianity's ever on about?

Actually doesn't the story say there were plenty of trees they could eat from? Anyway, why would God put that tree there other than to play headgames like a sick person would. Besides, if they didn't kno good from evil, how would they know disobedience was wrong? "I told you so" is very insulting to a person as a reason for something, and even as a child I refused to accept it as such.

I wonder of you and I dear reader; Man and woman--Adam and Eve, were the subject of this story in Genesis. A warning to us from the authors of the book not to become knowledgeable in our world, not to stray from the teachings of our 'makers' as this would lead us away from 'god'.

And if the story weren't metaphor or analogy and were true to the point of an actual tree with actual fruit that if once eaten man were doomed to be born sinful, why even place the temptation ?

There are two ways that ancient religions accounted for sin.  Christianity is the later of the two systems.  In older mythologies, evil was an externally existing thing, sometimes personified in a god, and sometimes just existing as a force in the cosmos.  Humans were caught in a struggle between larger forces -- those of good and evil -- and when bad things happened, it was because of an external force exerting itself on poor little humanity.

When gods became patriarchal, and agriculture turned into big cities, evil became a human trait, something inherently flawed within us, that corrupted the otherwise pristine world outside.

The Adam and Eve story, as it is presented, is incomplete.  In older versions of it, Lilith was the first wife of Adam.  The seemingly arbitrary placement of the tree in the garden is largely because the story has been cobbled together from older stories.  Nonetheless, it represents one of the newer myths, placing blame for evil on man instead of accepting it as part of existence separate from man.

(Of course, if Satan had already sinned against God, one can hardly say that man was responsible for bringing sin in the world.  As I recall, the talking snake appeared before Adam ate the apple.)

When I was a kid, I had a thing for maraschino cherries.  Still do.  Can't stay away from em.  If there's a jar of em around the house, I'm gonna be eating em.  From time to time, my folks would have friends over for cocktails (manhattans, I think), which would mean they would buy maraschino cherries.  My mom would make it clear that the maraschino cherries were not for us (kids), but for the guests.  I remember to this day, eating every maraschino cherry in the house prior to the guests arriving and the aftermath of my actions.  Am I to believe that the whole invitiing guests over for drinks thing was just a set up so mom could have dad beat my ass?  That bitch!

But they did die.  Perhaps mortality was man's intended destiny.  And if not an immediate physical death, they died a spiritual death, a separation from the presence of God, an intimacy with Him, which they had shared prior to the Fall.

Thats a different situation though. There is a purpose behind why the cherries are there. There is no conceivable reason for the tree of life to be in the garden of eden except for the fall of man. God didn't place it there for some of his friends to eat from it. He being omniscience knew that if he put it there man would fall.

In fact there had to be a prior event of Satan (Lucifer) and his angels falling from the way of god as Christianity portrays the snake as him. There is of course no mention of such a war or falling out prior to this event. The Jews wisely saw this and created other books such as The Books of Adam & Eve and Enoch to account for some of this discrepancy. None of those books are in the Canon of Christianity or Judaism, so ends are left loose. The last thing said when god had finished creating it all was that it was very good. Somewhere along the line he deviously designed evil into the equation as he proudly takes credit for it in Isaiah 45:7-"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord God do all these things." Evil begets evil, God indicted himself.

  Yeah LC,  I AM taking sides with the honest snake, god of abe is a lunatic trickster not worth a bit of trust .... In fact,  kill that murderer ! That ain't god I AM god AS YOU , I hope you know ..... 

 .... The bible seems like it was partly inspired as a way for the elders to scare the "kids" into behaving, some what like the "folklore of reincarnation", you better be nice or else ! Santa Clause too ....  What's next ? Science of diet plus exercise, and we are "ONE" , as our brother ancestors, big J/B "intuition" suggested  !   

I AM a bit proud of our J/B !   

  Good Analogy!

Pandora's box is more about how women (and thus trouble) came into the world, but there's certainly a parallel. Both stories are more understandable as metaphors anyway. When you're an infant, you haven't gained knowledge, but once you have the knowledge, you know you're naked, and you have to leave the abundance and protection of childhood. Trying to understand myth literally is far too difficult.

The idea of original sin is so distasteful because it's another mechanism of control. If you're told you've sinned, and the only way to get better is to subscribe to the notion that you have to pay the church to keep you in good stead, that's pretty convenient for the church.

I can't believe you're saying all this stuff about that make-believe tree, lol. And I never knew this god had a mind?

I'm not trying to sound mean or anything; But the next time you think of The Apple Tree Of Knowledge just stop and really think about the whole fable and how ridiculous it all sounds.

If someone walked up to you and asked you why do we pass away, or why women have menstrual cycles? Please tell me you wouldn't bring up this storying about a man and a woman on an apple hunt...

Please see my second paragarph in response to Daedakus above.  I'm not a biblical literalist.

He's a rational being, reasoning requires a mind.

It's nothing more than an easy way to explain a difficult concept to a simple people.

As for death, I would indeed take the position that death entered the world through a willful act of disobedience on the part of our orginal parents towards a deity.  Yes, indeed.

As for menstrual cycles, I'd probably take a more biological approach.  I've explained it several times already with pretty good results.

I know, all those "He's" wrote the bible...

If God had some other plan with the tree of life but it was unable to come to pass due to the meddling of man, than he is not omniscient nor omnipotent. If you will concede that point than you theory is plausible.