I would say there is an onus upon you, or any other paedobaptist, to answer the subtle challenge here:


Now you're taking a huge leap, by saying that "High Voltage" signs aren't a sign of the subjective reality of that one particular station having high voltage, but of the objective reality that all real power stations everywhere have high voltage. If this were the case, I could hang a "High Voltage" sign over my bedroom door, or the neighbour's doghouse, and it wouldn't be a problem. Hey, we could hang 'em everywhere- at every street corner! In every restaraunt! It would be awesome, because it would continue to proclaim to everyone the objective reality that all real power stations have high voltage. What would be more wonderful?

And what it does, is makes the signs in front of real power stations mean absolutely nothing anymore.
One last comment and then igiveup

Your remarks above simply illustrate my point, and thanks for doing so, that Baptists want to DEFINE baptism on the a foundation of shifting sand, i.e., the subjective, the spiritual state of the individual. This is impossible due to the very nature of the case. In your illustration, you balk at the truth that "High Voltage" means just what it says... HIGH VOLTAGE. The fact that the "sign" is misplaced doesn't diminish what the "sign" means. Paedobaptists are more correct to DEFINE baptism by what it truly is; a "sign" of the redemption of sinners secured by the substitutionary atonement of the Lord Christ. Regardless of who the recipient is, it always and forever means the same. You are confusing the reality of that which baptism signifies with the application of that reality to individuals. In so doing, as averagefellar has many times tried and failed to communicate, one must be able to know incontrovertibly that the person being baptized in fact does possess that which baptism signifies; i.e., the "inward reality" of faith. However, few if any Baptists, will ever agree that this is possible. That can clearly be evidenced from the comments made by Baptists on this Board throughout these discussions. They all admit that there are false professors who receive baptism. Thus the definition given to baptism is untrue, false, meaningless, spurious, useless.... agnostic. One simply cannot know the meaning of baptism as Baptists are want to define it because, 1) it depends upon a variable, 2) the variable is impossible to know infallibly.

So, now I must make my leave of this discussion as I cannot see where anything I could add would be of any benefit. Having studied at a Baptist seminary, I am fully aware of the position and how it is derived. It never did ring true to me and I would venture to say, it never will. And, as I have often said, I find errors on both sides. Consequently, I am targeted by both and thus I have found it most prudent just to sit back and watch the two sides throw stones at each other and expend my energy in more fruitful endeavors. grin

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]