Stripe, I have to complain about something here. Most people on an Internet discussion board are here to have a discussion. It appears with every one of your posts that your intent is to put an end to any discussion. Just about all you do is post stupid icons and do a bunch of finger-pointing and name calling.
Getting back to where you posted translations of chet' and `avon, I gather from that that chet' is a lesser sin than `avon. Is that what your intent was in posting it? If that's the case, I don't see how it supports the position that Christianity holds everyone responsible for his own actions - I guess it holds everyone responsible, unless his father's or grandfather's actions were of the more severe variety?
And if I'm "not very good" at understanding original sin, perhaps you could enlighten me with your understanding? Here, I'll give you my take so you can explain where I'm off-base. Please no shrugging icons, just explain your view. My take is that the concept of original sin is pretty fundamental to Christianity, and especially those of the fundamentalist variety would subscribe to it. Do you? Is it actually mentioned in the Bible?
And my take is that Jesus took the hit for our sins, for those who accept him, which is another way of saying substitutionary atonement. Would you agree with that? Apparently not, since your response was just a face-palming icon, but why is this wrong?
Use your big-boy words here, Stripe.