There's no point in debating someone who consistently (and conveniently) pretends not to understand one's argument.
Your argument is flawed. It's flawed because you ignore the key points of what is in fact written, that 'sin entered the world because of one man,' only to impose your own interpretation.
You do that because you know that taken literally, the story doesn't make sense, yet you want to salvage whatever appeals to you, so you deem this to be metaphor, and that to be literal. Cherry picking.
