I told you that babies don't develop the ability to ...
You haven't outright said babies are born sinful...and further below you appear to attempt to redefine the Christian concept of sin.
Everyone experiences shame of sin regardless of whether they've ever heard of Christianity or not. Sin is simply the idea that there is success and failure.
Sorry buddy, you are eitherwise lying, taking terrible shortcuts & not explaining yourself properly, or you don't understand the Christian concept of sin, at all. Sin has always been about morals. Some argue it is moving closer to, or further from God...but no one argues it is 'failure'...that simply is not supported by the many talkings of sin in the bible (unless you want to try and take maybe one text out of context of the rest...perhaps then...maybe...)
Christianity has nothing against failing, and trying again. It is not a sin to fail. And we've also already previously discussed sin's that do not meet your definition, at all, like engaging in homosexuality. Nor do things like the Golden an opposite version of success.
There's no point in explaining things to you if you're not going to read/understand what I post. You just want to debate without understanding what you're debating with.
I understood it perfectly - I talked about how you think it suspect when aetheists are kind, generous, compassionate AND you believe it suspect BECAUSE they don't believe in god).
You can't reply to the first phrase (which is the 1st part of 3 phrases, and inseparable from the 2nd and 3 parts), say NOT TRUE, without ever address the 2nd and 3rd parts, then claim your 'explanation' was related my statement (which contained 3 parts to make a whole). It didn't relate.
Once again...sitting in the dark, inside your box, rationalising things that you can't bring yourself to honestly face.
You're not reading what I'm explaining; only looking for the pattern you can see in the data, which you don't otherwise understand.
ROFL, says the person who I keep having to pull up on dishonesty, avoidance, reading out of context, replying to just one phrase (and removing the qualifiers from it) then claiming they disagree.
You can't even identify your own behaviour that supports your severely flawed beliefs.
And in your mind, likely you think all of these people writing against you hate christians etc. You should take some time to read Neologists writing. Many here disagree with him, but of the posters on this forum disagreeing with him...they treat him respectfully. He's thought through his Christian beliefs. They are very strong beliefs.
You are nothing like him. You engage in severely flawed thinking, and must avoid your flaws in order to support your beliefs. It doesn't have to be like that. You can be Christian and still engage your logical faculty...granted it would be harder, but it is possible.