Sin Nature

So to be clear, in this round we are only rebutting each others claims made thus far, not defending our own. You say, ". . .Jesus did not have a sin nature, because He was fully man, fully God." How does this answer the question? I do believe that He was fully God, but God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16)! If you hold to the belief that all humans receive a sinful nature from their ancestors, then so to must Christ have received this nature as He was dual-natures, fully man and fully God. He is traced all the way back to Adam, as his descendant in Luke's genealogical account of Christ (Luke 3:38). He is the son of Adam, which, if all Adam's descendants receive a sinful nature, and "sinned through Adam," would demand that Christ too be a guilty sinner with an inclination to sin despite His divine nature. There is just no way to logically and biblically rectify this problem presented by the fallacious doctrine of the sin nature. You say, "He didn't even come to the world biologically, but by the Spirit." But you then contradict yourself by saying, ". . .He was fully flesh." If He indeed was fully flesh, then He came into the world biologically. He was born of Mary according to the flesh (Luke 2:1-21). Unless you would arbitrarily claim that this sin nature only passes down through fathers, Christ would inherit this sinful nature according to this abominable doctrine! You say, "But if Adam hadn't sinned, we would be perfect." In what sense? As newborn infants? Or as conscious, accountable people? The term perfect seems arbitrary to me. A better term would be innocent. I believe all people are born innocent, and are judged as such until they commit their first sin. You say, "So, it is our choice to sin to a degree, but before Adam, it was not our nature to sin." What does that even mean? To a degree? Either we sin by our own volition, or else we cannot be justly condemned as guilty transgressors. We must really define for each what we each believe "nature" to mean. What do you mean by nature? I believe nature is biblically defined as natural constitution. For example, "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law. . ." Notice gentiles do by NATURE the things contained in God's eternal law. If we had corrupt moral constitutions at conception, how could gentiles keep the law by NATURE? You say, " Sin had not been brought into the world yet." I already addressed this, sin was brought in, in the sense that the world first saw sin with Adam and Eve. Sin is an abstract entity formed by a conscious, sentient person, not a physical, tangible object or spirit. Sin cannot compel a person; persons may sin, but sin itself does not exist beyond the cognitive thoughts or decisions of a man or woman. You say, "He sinned, making sin real to us and 'through the one man the many were made sinners.'" What does that even mean, that sin was "made real to us?" I also already addressed Romans 5:19. You may rebut my argument in the next round. You say, "Also, the death mentioned in Romans could also be taken as the spiritual death. . ." No it cannot since the only "spiritual death" the Bible speaks of is the second death in which souls shall be cast into the Lake of Fire. Your arbitrary usage of the term "spiritual death" is unbiblical. It is just a way of saying we are born depraved and separated from God, which is indeed not the case if gentiles can by nature fulfill aspects of the eternal moral law. You say, "Of course infants our born with a sinful nature. Everyone is born with sin, because Adam sinned and brought it into the world. " This is not an argument, it is an unsupported statement. Chapter and verse? Of course you cannot give one since this entire doctrine is unbiblical. Where does the Bible say everyone is born with sin? What does that even mean? You say, "But I believe that God would allow a dead infant into heaven because they do not understand how to be forgiven." That is not logically consistent. God will not allow sin to go unpunished. To make a plea for the child's ignorance is to support my case and refute your own. If a child be "born with sin," then he is condemned! The only way to be saved from sin is repentance through faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:25). Do you see how ridiculous it is to say infants are born with sin on their account when they have not yet sinned themselves? You ask, ". . .do you just believe that when sin entered the world, we just started sinning because it was there?" I do not understand the question. I believe all men sin of their own volition in rebellion to God, not because of Adam and not because of a sin nature which compels them to sin. You ask, "If we weren't born with a sin nature, then wouldn't Adam and Eve have withheld the knowledge of sin from their children, and they wouldn't have sinned?" No. How did Adam and Eve sin? They had no sin nature, and yet sin was possible. Again, what is sin?