Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueridge reformer  I listened to both parts yesterday. I thought both men presented thier positions very well. I tried as much as possible to listen from an objective postion to both sides. As one who has spent a good bit of the last year (after attending an ARP church for a while) examing the doctrine of infant baptism I really enjoyed it. I can see problem and difficulties in both postions.
However, to me it seems that the infant baptism side has more Biblical difficulties than the believers postion imo.
The Lord has greatly modified my position on this issue in recent time though. It may anger some here but it is a secondary issue with me. I appreciate the spirit that both men had in the debate. We have too much in common doctrinally to let this issue divide us forever. I will still retain my postion by concience and I will RESPECT my Prebyterian brethen and ask only the same from them.
God bless and keep you all.  |
I have yet to listen to the debate; I have downloaded it. Tina and I will listen to it this evening; MY guess, if Shisko did not hammer the point of covenant, then he went and fought on credo soil. If he did do this and let White lead the dialogue, he shot himself in the foot. CT and paedobaptism is cleary mapped out in scripture using the whole of Gods scriptures, starting in Genesis and ending in the book of revelation. One cannot find it properly using a dispensational approach, i.e. using the NT to try and define the principle. I assume Shisko did this; I will see tonight.