Argument for Credo-Baptism from the Nature of the New Covenant

Status
Not open for further replies.

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
I've been engaged in some healthy (and not so healthy) debate on the subject of baptism for some time. I've been leaving the subject alone for a while as I don't really have the energy for some of the polemics.

I thought of a way to advance the discussion where I normally have trouble interacting with Credo-Baptists and that is to try to understand if the argument for Credo-Baptism is a valid argument.

In order for this thread to work, I need to first define what an argument is. I'm doing this, not because I believe that the end of all truth is propositional but because, in this case, it is important to be able to see the argument in its parts and whether or not the conclusion is true or false.

It is important to remember that Arguments are not True or False. They are either valid or invalid. It is the propositions (or premises of the argument) that are either true or false. For example, this is a valid argument:

Proposition 1: All mermen can breathe underwater.
Proposition 2: Rich is a merman.
Conclusion: Rich can breathe underwater.

The argument is valid. That is to say that the form leads to the conclusion drawn BUT Proposition 2 is false, therefore the conclusion is false.

Let's look at another argument:

P1: All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
P2: Rich is among the All.
C: Rich has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

Valid argument, true premises, true conclusion.

OK, here we go. I want my Credo-Baptist friends to provide the missing premises to this argument:

P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: ?
P3: ?
....
Pn: ?
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.


A few rules for this thread:

1. No soliloquies. I'm not interested in long editorial comments.

2. Present your premises as concisely as possible.

3. After you've presented your premises, please provide the Scriptural reference that supports the premise.

4. I want to see, specifically, the missing premises that connect the membership of the New Covenant to the subjects of baptism. For the purposes of this exercise, we are assuming that P1 is True. On the assumption that P1 is true, string true premises that logically connect to one another to form a valid argument with a conclusion is that true by necessity of its premises.

5. Only Credo baptists are permitted to reply per the forum rules.
 

Iconoclast

Puritan Board Junior
OK, here we go. I want my Credo-Baptist friends to provide the missing premises to this argument:

P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: ?
P3: ?
....
Pn: ?
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
p2 The Servant of The Lord, [the True Israel, Jesus] Seeks and Saves His elect body,given to Him by the Father-in the CoR. The New Covenant is made with the Elect Servant,and those in Union with Him,[by Spirit baptism]
Isa 40,41, 42, 49......Ezk34,lk19......Jn6:37-44......Hebrews 2:9-16. Rom6:3-6 Col2:11-12 1cor 12:13 Gal3:16-27
p3 Those sheep convicted of sin and drawn by the Spirit,and given a new heart ,do effectually come to the Son,[through the ministry of the word] openly confess/profess Christ, both with their lips and goodworks bearing fruit. They obey the command to believe and be baptized.They receive forgiveness of sins. Heb8, Heb10 Jer31,Ezk36, jn 3,Romans6, Mk16
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
Anthony,

P2 is a re-statement of P1. I won't haggle with that.

You're missing a few premises between P3 and the Conclusion.

Unless it is your contention that *only* those sheep identified in P3 are those who are actually baptized in the visible Church, and none others, then your argument is incomplete. In other words, connect "those who give a credible confession" with P3 and demonstrate that the non-elect cannot do so..

Also, for clarity's sake, please provide one valid argument.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
Anthony, deleted your post. As I noted, I need this to provide clarity. You need to shore up one valid argument rather than trying to present multiple variations of the same. Work on the first and then move on if you can't complete it. The problem with these discussions is a lack of discipline and I need to ensure we make some tight arguments.
 

Iconoclast

Puritan Board Junior
Rich,
Sorry if I messed up. I was trying to set out a couple of ideas, they came out together in one post! Let me look at your response and see if I can clarify.
I am not the best at syllogisms....you probably have seen that by now,lol:doh:
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
Anthony,

I understand. I don't normally write this way either. Try writing out in a paragraph offline and then connecting the dots and then form the premises that way.
 

Iconoclast

Puritan Board Junior
Unless it is your contention that *only* those sheep identified in P3 are those who are actually baptized in the visible Church, and none others, then your argument is incomplete. In other words, connect "those who give a credible confession" with P3 and demonstrate that the non-elect cannot do so..
In the normal course of events, those "sheep" in p3 having been placed into the "invisible church"[Hebrews 12:22-24} by The Holy Spirit,and quickened are then water baptized and accepted as members in what is spoken of as the "visible church".
As you have posted dozens of times we cannot know the heart that only God knows. We can only baptize those who profess and confess Jesus as Lord. judgment begins at the House of the Lord,all tares,goats , false professors, will be found out.Mt7:21-24 presupposes this reality. In the padeo model this would be the covenant breaking apostate,Heb6,Heb 10. falling from membership in the "visible" church.
In the credo model ,these unfortunate persons are described in 1JN 2:19.
Again sorry if I did not follow the model..[I am in central Wyoming, Rawlins,low oxygen up here,, heading to woodland Ca.] so that is my excuse,lol. Ps. I like the exercise, I think it can be helpful both ways!
 
Last edited:

Hunn

Puritan Board Freshman
This isn't necessarily a string of biblical arguments, but it makes sense to me and I look forward to having it torn to pieces. I'm still new to covenant theology so I'm here to learn!


P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: Baptism is the sign of the new covenant.
P3: We have no way to infallibly know who is among the elect.
P4: We should seek to avoid giving the New Covenant sign to those who are not elect.
P5: Our best indication that someone is numbered among the elect is when they provide a credible profession of faith.
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.

P4 is the most questionable in my mind. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than me will provide a good argument. I'm really intrigued by the question. Thanks!
 

Iconoclast

Puritan Board Junior
Anthony, deleted your post. As I noted, I need this to provide clarity. You need to shore up one valid argument rather than trying to present multiple variations of the same. Work on the first and then move on if you can't complete it. The problem with these discussions is a lack of discipline and I need to ensure we make some tight arguments.
Ok thats fine, i was just trying to get this rolling. it was too confusing the way I went about it. I agree with your deletion,it is the marine training at work ,haha
 

Iconoclast

Puritan Board Junior
Anthony,

P2 is a re-statement of P1. I won't haggle with that.

You're missing a few premises between P3 and the Conclusion.

Unless it is your contention that *only* those sheep identified in P3 are those who are actually baptized in the visible Church, and none others, then your argument is incomplete. In other words, connect "those who give a credible confession" with P3 and demonstrate that the non-elect cannot do so..

Also, for clarity's sake, please provide one valid argument.
I am thinking this verse might be useful;
24Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.

25Likewise also the good works of some are manifest beforehand; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid.
Those false professors,acting in the strength of the flesh fall away, others who maintain the facade are discovered on the Last Day mt7.
The visible church is called to be faithful to what they see as a pattern in scripture, not attempting to delve into the secret thingsDeut29
but to be faithful to the revealed things,Deut. 29.
False professors [credo] covenant breakers[padeo] are a sad tradgedy to any assembly, causing reproach to the Name of the Lord.
The scripture gives the objective truths about the "things that accompany salvation[Heb6:9]. The warnings are passages dealing with self -examination are given so no one in any true assemblies follow the wicked example of those who came short of His rest.Hebrews 3-4 psalm95. Either view deals with the same group of persons.

That there are false professors does not mean that the true believers are not to follow the Lord's command.
We would say your covenant breaker,never knew the forgiveness of sins, never knew the Lord, so could never have actually been in the New Covenant, as forgiveness of all sins and a saving knowledge of Jesus as Lord is part of the "newness" Heb8
 
Last edited:

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: Baptism is the sign of the new covenant.
P3: We have no way to infallibly know who is among the elect.
P4: We should seek to avoid giving the New Covenant sign to those who are not elect.
P5: Our best indication that someone is numbered among the elect is when they provide a credible profession of faith.
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
Premises 3-5 might be combined to make a substantive connection between the sign, the covenant, and profession, which will then lead to the necessary inference required to form the conclusion.
 

rbcbob

Puritan Board Graduate
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: The Elect alone are “in Christ”
P3: Those alone who are “in Christ” comprise the true church (Eph 5:23-25; Jeremiah 31:34: Acts 13:38; Romans 11:26)
P4: The Church is to take the paradigm of the New Covenant [knowing the Lord, “in Christ”] for a pattern of admittance into the local church (Acts 13:48; Romans 8:14; Galatians 3:26)
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
 

eqdj

Puritan Board Freshman
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.

P2: WLC 162: A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church,[Gen. 17:7, 10; Exod. ch. 12; Matt. 26:26-28; 28:19] to signify, seal, and exhibit [Rom. 4:11; I Cor. 11:24-25] unto those that are within the covenant of grace,[Rom. 15:8; Exod. 12:48] (e.g. "believers" cf. WSC 92, Gal. 3:27; I Cor. 10:16-17) the benefits of his mediation;[Acts 2:38; I Cor. 10:16] to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces;[Rom. 4:11; Gal. 3:27] to oblige them to obedience;[Rom. 6:3-4; I Cor. 10:21] to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another;[Eph. 4:2-5; I Cor. 12:13] and to distinguish them from those that are without [Eph. 2:11-12; Gen. 34:14] (cf. WCF 27:1, and solemnly to engage them to the service of God in Christ, according to his Word. [Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 10:16, 21.])

P3: WLC 163: The parts of a sacrament are two; the one an outward and sensible sign, used according to Christ's own appointment; the other an inward and spiritual grace thereby signified.[Matt. 3:11; I Peter 3:27; Rom. 2:28-29]

P4: WLC 165: Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,[Matt. 28:19] to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself,[Gal. 3:27] of remission of sins by his blood,[Mark 1:4; Rev. 1:5] and regeneration by his Spirit;[Titus 3:5; Eph. 5:26] of adoption,[ Gal. 3:26-27] and resurrection unto everlasting life;[ I Cor. 15:29; Rom. 6:5] and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[I Cor. 12:13] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.[Rom. 6:3-4]

P5: WLC 166: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him [Acts 2:38; 2:41; 8:12, 36-38; 18:8]

Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: The Elect alone are “in Christ”
P3: Those alone who are “in Christ” comprise the true church (Eph 5:23-25; Jeremiah 31:34: Acts 13:38; Romans 11:26)
P4: The Church is to take the paradigm of the New Covenant [knowing the Lord, “in Christ”] for a pattern of admittance into the local church (Acts 13:48; Romans 8:14; Galatians 3:26)
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
The conclusion contains a term, "baptized," which is not accounted for in the premises.
 

rbcbob

Puritan Board Graduate
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: The Elect alone are “in Christ”
P3: Those alone who are “in Christ” comprise the true church (Eph 5:23-25; Jeremiah 31:34: Acts 13:38; Romans 11:26)
P4: The Church is to take the paradigm of the New Covenant [knowing the Lord, “in Christ”] for a pattern of admittance into the local church (Acts 13:48; Romans 8:14; Galatians 3:26)
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
The conclusion contains a term, "baptized," which is not accounted for in the premises.
Didn't feel the liberty to change Rich's conclusion. We baptize believers and bring them into the church at the same time.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
The purpose of a logical form is to make it possible to test whether the argument is logically correct, that is, do the premises lead to the conclusion. That is all. Whether the premises and conclusion are true or false is irrelevant to the process.
 

KMK

Administrator
Staff member
I don't think it is possible to leave this in "Credo-Only" any longer. Did anyone read Rich's OP?
 

steadfast7

Puritan Board Junior
Rich, your desire to avoid lengthy commentary is being challenged. How about this:
1. True baptism is a baptism into Christ
2. Water baptism is a picture of true baptism
3. Water baptism is a picture of baptism into Christ.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
First of all, this is for credo-baptists to respond to.
Unless it is your contention that *only* those sheep identified in P3 are those who are actually baptized in the visible Church, and none others, then your argument is incomplete. In other words, connect "those who give a credible confession" with P3 and demonstrate that the non-elect cannot do so..
In the normal course of events, those "sheep" in p3 having been placed into the "invisible church"[Hebrews 12:22-24} by The Holy Spirit,and quickened are then water baptized and accepted as members in what is spoken of as the "visible church".
As you have posted dozens of times we cannot know the heart that only God knows. We can only baptize those who profess and confess Jesus as Lord. judgment begins at the House of the Lord,all tares,goats , false professors, will be found out.Mt7:21-24 presupposes this reality. In the padeo model this would be the covenant breaking apostate,Heb6,Heb 10. falling from membership in the "visible" church.
In the credo model ,these unfortunate persons are described in 1JN 2:19.
Again sorry if I did not follow the model..[I am in central Wyoming, Rawlins,low oxygen up here,, heading to woodland Ca.] so that is my excuse,lol. Ps. I like the exercise, I think it can be helpful both ways!
Please put this into an argument to demonstrate logical connection between hidden things and revealed things as a basis for baptism.
This isn't necessarily a string of biblical arguments, but it makes sense to me and I look forward to having it torn to pieces. I'm still new to covenant theology so I'm here to learn!


P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: Baptism is the sign of the new covenant.
P3: We have no way to infallibly know who is among the elect.
P4: We should seek to avoid giving the New Covenant sign to those who are not elect.
P5: Our best indication that someone is numbered among the elect is when they provide a credible profession of faith.
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.

P4 is the most questionable in my mind. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than me will provide a good argument. I'm really intrigued by the question. Thanks!
Well, I'm not simply looking for arguments that "make sense". I need you to demonstrate that all your premises have a Biblical foundation. Yours is actually the most sound argument presented so far in terms of connected premises to the conclusion but, as I noted, an argument can be valid even with false premises. I need you to demonstrate that each of your premises is true by Scripture.
Anthony,

P2 is a re-statement of P1. I won't haggle with that.

You're missing a few premises between P3 and the Conclusion.

Unless it is your contention that *only* those sheep identified in P3 are those who are actually baptized in the visible Church, and none others, then your argument is incomplete. In other words, connect "those who give a credible confession" with P3 and demonstrate that the non-elect cannot do so..

Also, for clarity's sake, please provide one valid argument.
I am thinking this verse might be useful;
24Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.

25Likewise also the good works of some are manifest beforehand; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid.
Those false professors,acting in the strength of the flesh fall away, others who maintain the facade are discovered on the Last Day mt7.
The visible church is called to be faithful to what they see as a pattern in scripture, not attempting to delve into the secret thingsDeut29
but to be faithful to the revealed things,Deut. 29.
False professors [credo] covenant breakers[padeo] are a sad tradgedy to any assembly, causing reproach to the Name of the Lord.
The scripture gives the objective truths about the "things that accompany salvation[Heb6:9]. The warnings are passages dealing with self -examination are given so no one in any true assemblies follow the wicked example of those who came short of His rest.Hebrews 3-4 psalm95. Either view deals with the same group of persons.

That there are false professors does not mean that the true believers are not to follow the Lord's command.
We would say your covenant breaker,never knew the forgiveness of sins, never knew the Lord, so could never have actually been in the New Covenant, as forgiveness of all sins and a saving knowledge of Jesus as Lord is part of the "newness" Heb8
OK, but we still haven't bridged between your prior premises and conclusion. Without stating the premise, you're acknowledging that some seem to have a credible profession of faith and are baptized. In other words, you're noting that there is a "gap" between the idea that all true believers confess Christ and those that seem to have a credible confession of Christ are baptized. Again, you need to provide the necessity of the conclusion somehow factoring in false profession (if necessary).
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.
P2: The Elect alone are “in Christ”
P3: Those alone who are “in Christ” comprise the true church (Eph 5:23-25; Jeremiah 31:34: Acts 13:38; Romans 11:26)
P4: The Church is to take the paradigm of the New Covenant [knowing the Lord, “in Christ”] for a pattern of admittance into the local church (Acts 13:48; Romans 8:14; Galatians 3:26)
Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
As noted, you've conflated "true church" with "local church". Furthermore is "knowing the Lord" and "in Christ" synonymous with "giving a credible confession"?
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.

P2: WLC 162: A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church,[Gen. 17:7, 10; Exod. ch. 12; Matt. 26:26-28; 28:19] to signify, seal, and exhibit [Rom. 4:11; I Cor. 11:24-25] unto those that are within the covenant of grace,[Rom. 15:8; Exod. 12:48] (e.g. "believers" cf. WSC 92, Gal. 3:27; I Cor. 10:16-17) the benefits of his mediation;[Acts 2:38; I Cor. 10:16] to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces;[Rom. 4:11; Gal. 3:27] to oblige them to obedience;[Rom. 6:3-4; I Cor. 10:21] to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another;[Eph. 4:2-5; I Cor. 12:13] and to distinguish them from those that are without [Eph. 2:11-12; Gen. 34:14] (cf. WCF 27:1, and solemnly to engage them to the service of God in Christ, according to his Word. [Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 10:16, 21.])

P3: WLC 163: The parts of a sacrament are two; the one an outward and sensible sign, used according to Christ's own appointment; the other an inward and spiritual grace thereby signified.[Matt. 3:11; I Peter 3:27; Rom. 2:28-29]

P4: WLC 165: Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,[Matt. 28:19] to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself,[Gal. 3:27] of remission of sins by his blood,[Mark 1:4; Rev. 1:5] and regeneration by his Spirit;[Titus 3:5; Eph. 5:26] of adoption,[ Gal. 3:26-27] and resurrection unto everlasting life;[ I Cor. 15:29; Rom. 6:5] and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[I Cor. 12:13] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.[Rom. 6:3-4]

P5: WLC 166: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him [Acts 2:38; 2:41; 8:12, 36-38; 18:8]

Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
I'm going to assume P1 as you have used the WLC, which disputes this point.

In P2, how is the Church to identify "those who are in the Covenant of Grace"?
P5 is confusing because you're borrowing language that doesn't fit the premises of P1. A "stranger to the Covenant of Promise" is a reprobate person. I haven't seen a logical connection made between being outside of the visible Church and being reprobate. I also haven't seen a connection made between being a professor and being elect.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
The purpose of a logical form is to make it possible to test whether the argument is logically correct, that is, do the premises lead to the conclusion. That is all. Whether the premises and conclusion are true or false is irrelevant to the process.
That's right.

This is an exercise. If it was not, I would not be admitting Premise 1. I'm trying to see if a logical connection can be formed between two things which are axiomatic to Reformed Baptist theology.

1. Can a sound argument be formed?
2. Can each of the premises be sustained by Scripture or GNC therefrom?
 

eqdj

Puritan Board Freshman
P1: The New Covenant is made with and consists of the Elect Alone.

P2: WLC 162: A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church,[Gen. 17:7, 10; Exod. ch. 12; Matt. 26:26-28; 28:19] to signify, seal, and exhibit [Rom. 4:11; I Cor. 11:24-25] unto those that are within the covenant of grace,[Rom. 15:8; Exod. 12:48] (e.g. "believers" cf. WSC 92, Gal. 3:27; I Cor. 10:16-17) the benefits of his mediation;[Acts 2:38; I Cor. 10:16] to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces;[Rom. 4:11; Gal. 3:27] to oblige them to obedience;[Rom. 6:3-4; I Cor. 10:21] to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another;[Eph. 4:2-5; I Cor. 12:13] and to distinguish them from those that are without [Eph. 2:11-12; Gen. 34:14] (cf. WCF 27:1, and solemnly to engage them to the service of God in Christ, according to his Word. [Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 10:16, 21.])

P3: WLC 163: The parts of a sacrament are two; the one an outward and sensible sign, used according to Christ's own appointment; the other an inward and spiritual grace thereby signified.[Matt. 3:11; I Peter 3:27; Rom. 2:28-29]

P4: WLC 165: Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,[Matt. 28:19] to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself,[Gal. 3:27] of remission of sins by his blood,[Mark 1:4; Rev. 1:5] and regeneration by his Spirit;[Titus 3:5; Eph. 5:26] of adoption,[ Gal. 3:26-27] and resurrection unto everlasting life;[ I Cor. 15:29; Rom. 6:5] and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[I Cor. 12:13] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.[Rom. 6:3-4]

P5: WLC 166: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him [Acts 2:38; 2:41; 8:12, 36-38; 18:8]

Conclusion: Therefore, only those who give a credible confession of faith in Christ are to be baptized by the Church.
I'm going to assume P1 as you have used the WLC, which disputes this point.

In P2, how is the Church to identify "those who are in the Covenant of Grace"?
P5 is confusing because you're borrowing language that doesn't fit the premises of P1. A "stranger to the Covenant of Promise" is a reprobate person. I haven't seen a logical connection made between being outside of the visible Church and being reprobate. I also haven't seen a connection made between being a professor and being elect.
P1: It was also my understanding that P1 was assumed from, "For the purposes of this exercise, we are assuming that P1 is True."

P2: I have not and would not claim that the church can know the elect, or "identify those who are in 'the Covenant of Grace'".

P5: This is the negative of P4.

I have not and would not claim that every professor is elect.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
P1: It was also my understanding that P1 was assumed from, "For the purposes of this exercise, we are assuming that P1 is True."

P2: I have not and would not claim that the church can know the elect, or "identify those who are in 'the Covenant of Grace'".
Notice in P2, then, you have stated that a acrament...is instituted...unto those that are within the covenant of grace..."

P1 makes clear that elect="those that are within the covenant of grace.

P2 then makes clear that sacraments are "...unto...the elect..." and are for none others.

This would mean that where P4 speaks about "parties being solemnly admitted" is also the elect alone (as P2 makes clear).

You have already admitted you don't know who these are so you're speaking of visible signs and activities toward those you cannot identify.

P5: This is the negative of P4.
Consequently, P5 states that baptism is not to be administered to the "non-elect" (strangers from the covenant of promise). Again, you've admitted you don't know who they are.

I have not and would not claim that every professor is elect.
In other words, you have not connected your premises to your conclusion yet.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
Rich, your desire to avoid lengthy commentary is being challenged. How about this:
1. True baptism is a baptism into Christ
2. Water baptism is a picture of true baptism
3. Water baptism is a picture of baptism into Christ.
Oops, I missed this one.

1. Provide the Biblical references.
2. You haven't shown a logical connection between 3 and the conclusion. You also haven't shown a connection between P1 and 2.
 

eqdj

Puritan Board Freshman
P1: It was also my understanding that P1 was assumed from, "For the purposes of this exercise, we are assuming that P1 is True."

P2: I have not and would not claim that the church can know the elect, or "identify those who are in 'the Covenant of Grace'".
Notice in P2, then, you have stated that a acrament...is instituted...unto those that are within the covenant of grace..."

P1 makes clear that elect="those that are within the covenant of grace.

P2 then makes clear that sacraments are "...unto...the elect..." and are for none others.

This would mean that where P4 speaks about "parties being solemnly admitted" is also the elect alone (as P2 makes clear).

You have already admitted you don't know who these are so you're speaking of visible signs and activities toward those you cannot identify.

P5: This is the negative of P4.
Consequently, P5 states that baptism is not to be administered to the "non-elect" (strangers from the covenant of promise). Again, you've admitted you don't know who they are.

I have not and would not claim that every professor is elect.
In other words, you have not connected your premises to your conclusion yet.
We can not know absolutely who the elect are, but we are told who to apply the sacarament to (P4: open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.[Rom. 6:3-4] and P5: till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him [Acts 2:38; 2:41; 8:12, 36-38; 18:8])
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
Your premises are self-referentially incoherent Enrique. You can remove the language within them that make them such and improve your argument. P2 makes clear that *only* the Elect (members of the covenant of grace) are to receive the sacraments. Here's an easy way to look at what you said (removing the distractors as you can't seem to follow what I'm saying).

P2: A sacrament is to be administered unto the elect alone.
P3: The parts of a sacrament are a sign and a seal.
P4: Baptism is a sacrament whereby the elect are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[I Cor. 12:13] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.
P5: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and are not elect, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him.

At best, you've established that people who are elect are not to be baptized until they have professed.

Before you dispute with P4, you need to remember that you've already admitted that a Sacrament is to be admitted to the elect alone in P2. Because baptism is a sacrament, it is to be administered to the elect alone.
 

eqdj

Puritan Board Freshman
Your premises are self-referentially incoherent Enrique. You can remove the language within them that make them such and improve your argument. P2 makes clear that *only* the Elect (members of the covenant of grace) are to receive the sacraments. Here's an easy way to look at what you said (removing the distractors as you can't seem to follow what I'm saying).

P2: A sacrament is to be administered unto the elect alone.
P3: The parts of a sacrament are a sign and a seal.
P4: Baptism is a sacrament whereby the elect are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[I Cor. 12:13] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.
P5: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and are not elect, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him.

At best, you've established that people who are elect are not to be baptized until they have professed.

Before you dispute with P4, you need to remember that you've already admitted that a Sacrament is to be admitted to the elect alone in P2 and Baptism is a sacrament (and to be administered to the elect alone).
Whew! Thank you! I see now that we interpret the WLC differently.

P2: I didn't read WLC 162 to say who anything about who the sacraments are to to be adminstered to but rather the definition/purpose of a sacrament in general.

P4: I read WLC 165 as a specfiic definition of the sacrament of Baptism

P5: WLC 166 - This is where i read about who the sacraments are to and not to be administered to.

Thank you for the clarification!
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
Enrique,

The problem is that you borrowed WLC language (that does not assume P1) and then injected it into your argument. If you want to use *some* of the language of the WLC, then you need to remember that wherever you see "members of the covenant" that this will mean "elect" wherever you find it.

I know how to properly interpret the WLC, it was your use of it with the first premise that makes it incoherent.
 

eqdj

Puritan Board Freshman
Enrique,

The problem is that you borrowed WLC language (that does not assume P1) and then injected it into your argument. If you want to use *some* of the language of the WLC, then you need to remember that wherever you see "members of the covenant" that this will mean "elect" wherever you find it.

I know how to properly interpret the WLC, it was your use of it with the first premise that makes it incoherent.
I do understand "members of the covenant" to mean "elect".

I only said we interpreted the WLC differently. I hope you didn't infer from that, that I think you do not know how to interpret the WLC.
 

Semper Fidelis

2 Timothy 2:24-25
Staff member
No worries Enrique. I wasn't offended. I just wanted to point out the problem we ran into. I understood you were using the WLC and, if you note my first response, that's why I made the point of clarifying that P1 had to be carried through to look at the WLC language through Baptist eyes if it was going to be employed for premises.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top