Simply put, the mention of getting hurt by a fire was referring to experiences causing personal pain that was not taught by parents or society, not that it was a sin.  My contention is that sin is caused by affect.

Sorry for biting your head off like that JJ; I was exhausted - and therefore less than in control - when I responded to you.

I think my concern is that so far the only examples given have been of what are natural, innate defence mechanisms.  For instance, as far as I am aware, being afraid isn't actually a sin, nor is suffering pain - they aren't even malfunctions of the the bodily system.  In almost all cases I can think of, there are choices of reaction. 

Again, I reiterate that I view actions that hurt others are caused by fright, fear, terror, projection and transference engendered in the perpetrator to name a few causes.  In fact it beggars belief that some people think that sin is some sort of special package inside every one of us that is dying to come out unless we control this strange impulse.  Where is the impulse stored?  Where in the genes is sin expressed? What is it made of and what chemical does it contain.  Until there are cogent answers to these questions we are comparing the metaphorical chalk of sin with the psycho-developmental cheese of human behaviour.  Human beings are made up of genes, chemicals, cells, bodily fluids etc. Why does sin have some special sort of licence to exist without a trace of its origin in any atom of the body whereas all the other affects are explained by hormones, instincts, evolution and so on right from conception.

You could quite equally ask where impulses such as love, hate, pain, etc. are 'stored', JJ.  Where do they appear in one's genes?  Are there traces of them in any of the atoms of the body?  I'm afraid that until you can give cogent answers to those questions, what you have written above is just as valid a comment about theses impulses that we happily acknowledge.

PS as I said before "It's wrong to compare siblings from a family if one turns out bad, no-one can tell the psychic effects of birth and upbringing on an individual, it doesn't mean that the bad person was born bad - biochemical, circumstantial and innate abilities cause every person to turn out different.  One person thrives in a lovely family - another is suffocated by the same family conditions or a very bad experience at school.  Our experiences make us what we are and most people grow quite well, but some are ruined by something another would find a healthy challenge."

Are you suggesting that there is something in our genes that control this?  If so, are you suggesting that - potentially - everyone who shares genes could be made to react in exactly the same way to the same stimuli?