The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Monergism

William,

It is quite sad to see that you are not willing to deal with the wording of "The Form for the Baptism of Infants". You have tip-toed all around the questions offering irrelevant responses, quotes that have no bearing upon the Form itself but with other matters of which I have no dispute.

There is an OBVIOUS contradiction between the "Form for the Administration of Baptism", your denomination's rejection of "presumptive regeneration" and the "Form for the Baptism of Infants". Most who read that form conclude it teaches "presumptive regeneration" due to the specific words and phrases used, which have been and always will be questioned, although here they have gone unanswered.

Now, as to your question:

There are a great number of paedobaptists who take offense at the wording used in the "Form for the Baptism of Infants". And, FYI, there are two Dutch pastors locally who just happen to be close friends of mine who are even more adamantly opposed to that Form than I am but for the exact same reason; it teaches "presumptive regeneration".

You obviously have no desire to deal with the FORM so I'll bow out of this discussion and let the "Form for the Baptism of Infants" and my questions speak for themselves.

In His grace,