So to you the bible SHOULD read "All but babies have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"?
No. My beef is not with the Bible, rather with some of its readers. The Bible should be understood within the context of human language and experience.
It should go without saying that "all have sinned" is not an absolute statement, but is meant to exclude certain peoples.
Once we have established that it puts forth a general thought and not an absolute one, then we can move on to discussing what natural exceptions should be made.
SD
Not if one thinks it's okay to apply human reasoning -- e.g. the pope, whomever your personal pope happens to be -- to define God's justice. ;-)
I think I recall someone once defended the "age of accountability" notion with Scripture. But, I don't recall how. For some reason -- faith in His sovereignty, certainly -- it's not something I'm terribly concerned about.
No. A proper understanding of what Paul had to deal with (similar to what David had to deal with when he wrote similar language - "no one is righteous, no not one") shows that it is the word "all" that is being missunderstood. Paul is again trying to get the point across that the Jews have no inherent sanctity that will save them apart from accepting Christ. As David leads us to understand that it is possible to be "in" the covenant without being "of" the covenant, Paul deals with Judaisers. "All have sinned" is just a legitimately "No group of people is without sin (Jew, Gentile, etc.etc.)"