Quote
speratus said:
The Westminster Confession article is a correct exposition of scripture and it agrees with Augsburg Confession and what I have read of Calvin and Luther. So, I don't see much point in continuing this discussion.
The Westminster Confession and the Augsburg may be in agreement in your mind, but that's not the problem, is it? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" /> The problem is with YOUR interpretation of what they are teaching in regard to baptism, which is NOT in accord with what the Westminster Confession says.

So, unless you are willing and able to EXEGETE relevant biblical passages which you believe support your view on baptism, regeneration, etc., then I would agree, that there is no point in you continuing this discussion. Confessions and Creeds are secondary sources and therefore they are subject to the scrutiny of the divinely inspired written Word of God.

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]