Quote Originally Posted by Bruno View Post
Does that also change the implications of not being baptized in your religion?
Because it does in catholicism (which is the local flavor of christianity where I cam from) and I've always found the catholic doctrine of inherited sin (and the implications of baptism or lack thereof) unconvincing.
So have I. And yes. That does mean that the reasons and implications for being baptised are different from what they are in the catholic church.

The youngest that anyone can get baptised in or church is 8 years old. Why? (well...first of all because wel believe God said so but beside that because baptism is something that is a covenant (like a contract) between people and God. If the person didn't choose for it then the contract is void.

Second of all we believe in the innocense of newborn (and young) children. That means there is no guilt for the sin. Adam is held accountable for his own transgressions and this does not pass on to every man/woman/child that came after him.

JMS' description of the apple falling close to the treev is somewhat close to what I believe but not quite there.

It's more like "if you lite the fuse...thing will explode whether it was you who lit the fuse in the first place or not.". Adam set certain things in motion when he partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The results can still be noticed. But that does not mean that we'll be held accountable for it.

(Please note that this is what I understand the doctrine that is taught in our church to be....I might be misstaken here and there, only human afterall)