Quote:
Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis  he stated militated a clear proof that believer's baptism is clearly and necessarily inferred by Acts 2:41-42 |
That was his
opinion, he wasn't requesting a debate. But anyway.
He said that it never hit him solidly enough to cause him to see a paedobaptist position.
I think he should be commended for standing on his convictions enough to voice it, and as friends we should understand that he continues to receive our encouragement, not get effected as if we are being pressed for a debate.
I don't say any of this with bitterness, it is only something that I saw that I'd like to say with all due respect to you.
To continue, I do not believe(strictly as an opinion) that if a credo said they saw the light and went to paedo, and a person responded inversely with defenses and prooftexts supporting paedo, that you would permit people bringing up defenses and prooftexts.
All under the bridge anyway, now that I see its been moved to the debate area of the forum. Again, I say this just as observation and opinion, not for slander or accusation.