Spriestsma.  Again, thanks for continuing the discussion.  I should have used the word "re-interpret" from your original post v. "re-imagined".  The question should read "What is the re-interpreted original sin".
The word "only", in your first paragraph does not negate that the mission of Jesus was to redeem us, it only, possibly, extends that (though one may argue that His redemption is an act of Love).  I don't think Jesus, as God, had to go along with anything that an ostensible series of prophets just made up.
The way you describe sin sounds like it is simply part of our biology rather than a "nature" that is reduced (fallen) through sin.  In such a case, Jesus might as well have come to free us from "opposable thumbs" as from "sin".
I think that finding uniformity of thought among our Jewish brothers is as difficult as it is among Catholics.  Talmudic scholars have asked "When did the pollution of the serpent cease?" or "Did the pollution of the serpent cease?"  Original Sin?