It would have been nice to see you interact with the comparison I did use rather than erecting a straw man by inventing a very weak comparison that I did not use and criticizing that. That is no way to carry on a discussion.

I am trying very hard to see what your problem is with the Baptist position, but I'm quite unable to do so, and your post hasn't made it any easier.

Let me lay out the Baptist position again.

1. It is fitting only to baptize true believers.
2. False adherents have no part whatsoever in the Church (Acts 8:21).
3. We cannot know with absolute certainty who the true believers are.


4. We do our best to achieve Point 1 above by baptizing only those who make a credible profession of faith.
5. We use church discipline where a person's actions clearly belie their profession of faith.

Where is the problem with that?

Let me try yet another analogy, and perhaps you will reply to this one rather than inventing one of your own.

It is the purpose of the State only to appoint honest policemen. However, this has never been achieved completely, for the good reason that it is impossible to weed out dishonest applicants with 100% accuracy. However, this is no good reason to abandon all checks on new recruits, nor to allow in the children of honest recruits without checks(!) but rather the authorities will make the best checks they can, and if a policeman shows himself to be dishonest at any time, he is fired double-quick.

Every blessing,

Last edited by grace2U; Sun May 09, 2004 3:45 AM.

Itinerant Preacher & Bible Teacher in Merrie England.
Blogging at