pinklight

Even if you say his first sin was his choice, he evidently didn’t need a sinful nature to do it. If he didn’t need a sinful nature to commit one sin, I don’t see where he or anyone else needs a sinful nature to commit more than one sin. If we say his subsequent sins were NOT choice (fault), then we have a real problem. Whose choice were they (the subsequent sins)?

This is why my point is about his CONTINUATION in rebellion. (If I new how put “continuation” in bold I would or if I could use italics I would. So I use caps for emphasis btw).
Right, his first sin was choice and didn’t need a sin nature to do it. So he didn’t need a sin nature to continue in his rebellion either. But that why he has a sin “nature” – because he conintued in his rebellion (by choice).