Just to put things in a bit more perspective, in relation to one or two threads, some of what we have been discussing generally relates to the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, I think, and the idea of being under the law, versus being under grace. This is seen for example on the one hand in Acts where Paul resisted Peter to his face about the issue of circumcision: there had been some professing Christians who had been teaching that it was necessary to be circumcised before being saved (not unlike the contemporary teaching of baptismal regeneration, but I digress). But then also Paul circumcised Timothy, not because of any compulsion, but as a voluntary step by Timothy who knew the Old Testament Scriptures and by doing so would at least be more likely to have a hearing on the part of Jews that he hoped to reach with the Gospel. If this all makes sense, I think that questions of legalism and matters of supposed compulsion are to some extent linked. Blessings.