Do you think he and his flesh were defiled before his death?
Are you saying that there is no "mens rea" element to sin?
What is "mens rea"?
in a criminal matter it is the "intent" or guilty mind....which is why children are often seen as not culpable. They simply lack the mental capacity to form the intent to do something wrong.
His flesh was under the same condemnation as the rest of man.
Culpability would not be a matter of concern had not a real wrong occurred. The fact that we're discussing responsibility, accountability, and culpability implicitly means some wrongdoing is acknowledged.
But the responsibility, accountability and culpability of a newborn is oxymoronic. There is no wrongdoing -- Period.
That's not what I asked.
Please keep in mind that the grave "wrong" considered at that time was a child saying "No" to a parent. If a child doesn't have the capacity to understand the concept of parent-child can you legitimately say the child disrespected his parent?
Which (I post rhetorically) is why little children are never disciplined, should never be disciplined, and if they are disciplined then it's only because parents are evil and don't understand the child has done nothing wrong, cannot possibly do anything wrong, have judged wrongly, and shouldn't be judging their child's behavior at all.
If there is no wrongdoing, then there is no sin. The child has not sinned. And if the child has not sinned, then he is not a sinner. The child is not dead in trespasses and sins. If he lives long enough, he undoubtedly will, for all such do.Which (I post rhetorically) is why little children are never disciplined, should never be disciplined, and if they are disciplined then it's only because parents are evil and don't understand the child has done nothing wrong, cannot possibly do anything wrong, have judged wrongly, and shouldn't be judging their child's behavior at all.
Bad parents. Evil parents. Sinful parents.
Only Adam was condemned when Adam sinned.
Perhaps I am not making myself clear. It has been claimed young children do not and cannot do anything wrong. That claim contradicts the facts of reality. Children do things wrong all the time, every day, all day long. Likewise, the argument has been made they are not responsible or culpable but both responsibility and culpability are irrelevant if no wrong has been done. In other words, merely by arguing against responsibility and culpability the wrongdoing has been implicitly acknowledged. There'd be nothing for which to hold them responsible or culpable of nothing had happened. So, the minute either of you guys assert the premise of culpability you've contradicted yourselves! It cannot be said "now wrong is possible," and then argued, "There's no culpability." Then there is the problem of using earthly legal jurisprudence as an analogy for sin. It's a flawed analogy. It's built on the premise some law and its legal system are the only means of identifying sin and that premise is not scriptural. 1 John 3:4 is not the only verse in the Bible that defines sin and, as has already been demonstrated, sin existed prior to the giving of the Law of Moses. There'd be no talk of accountability if it did not exist! Then there's the matter of disciplining children. Either children did, in fact, do something wrong and are therefore in need of correction, training, rebuke, and discipline, or there is no warrant or need for ever disciplining any child. On every occasion when a no-sinful-kids person even admonishes a child with a single word they have contradicted themselves.
Yes, that is what I am saying. Sin is against God. He may choose to treat the sin with mercy for a time but not forever---just as he did with Israel by the temporary sacrifices. And even there he provided a way of covering for unintentional sins. Sin is always sin. It does not depend on motive or age, or ignorance of it being sin, or anything else in order to become sin.
Yes, but I am not condemned for that. Adam wasn't condemned for that. He was condemned because he disobeyed. And we, before being born again, are condemned because we disobeyed, not because we were born human beings. The classic idea of "the fall" is just plain wrong.
Well done, brother. Clear as crystal.
(josh pulls up chair to watch)
) and that's our misfortune 
. LOL 
. I suspect you mean it is humanity's misfortune to have been adversely affected by Adam's disobedience. Merely telling JIM that won't work. He denies the premise. How is it humanity's misfortune to have experienced adverse effects of Adam's disobedience.
