Quote
The instructions given for the Lords Table are not the same as Baptism. There aren't any examples of "household" communions. One is a sign, administered once. The other is a continuing practice.

William,

I don't think you dealt with my post. Maybe my point wasn't made clearly enough. My point is that we may not say that Baptism is not for the converted alone simply based upon our inability to discern who the converted are. This should be quite recognizable for the credo-communionists since we do believe that communion is for the converted alone, even though we cannot know who the converted are. Accordingly, the discussion over who qualifies for baptism cannot be resolved over our inability to discern the state of the soul. In other words, I believe it is a mistake to argue that we should baptize babies simply because we cannot ensure a converted visible church through the means of credo baptism.

Quote
What I was arguing against is that baptism cannot be assigned to the elect alone in practice.

Do you know of any baptist who thinks that the credo baptism ensures that only the elect or converted will be baptized? Accordingly, to argue against such a position seems at least to be a waste of time, if not to beat up on a strawman.

Ron