How do you know what Paul did and didn't do after meeting the Lord? Perhaps you never read/thught about his lament about doing that which he would not do and not doing that which he would do - sounds to me like his sinful side was still winning once in a while and he understood that it was so - it tells us that even having met the Lord, a man is incapable of being sinless or Jesus would not have had to die - His death didn't make us perfect, as some seem to consider themselves, but rather it made us worthy in Him despite our imperfections.
Argue all you want but Jesus described you in the bit about noticing the mote in your brother's eye as if it was a nuclear blast while ignoring the log in your own eye - you probably would have picked up and cast the proverbial first stone.
The sins of the father will not be passed onto the son. Whenever I get to feeling like I'm all perfect and worthy to judge others on how sinful they are, I take a look in the mirror and thank Him for forgiving and abiding by my own sinfulness - you might consider trying it - it's enlightening.
I find this attitude toward the Saints typical of those denominations and sects that emphasize personal experience over true holiness. They disparage actual Saints so their saints can continue to draw large incomes. At least you concede Once Saved Always Saved is a false doctrine.
The sins of the father will not be passed onto the son. Whenever I get to feeling like I'm all perfect and worthy to judge others on how sinful they are, I take a look in the mirror and thank Him for forgiving and abiding by my own sinfulness - you might consider trying it - it's enlightening.
This thread was about the father. It seems to me you are contending for the sins of the father precisely because you fear they will be passed onto the son. Such masquerades for religion when one's religion is politics.