speratus said: I find it strange that a person holding the WCF has trouble grasping the concept that "The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered." The washing away of sins through baptism, forensic justification, is not tied to a moment of time wherein it is administered.
The WCF means by "not tied to that moment wherein it is administered" only that the one who is baptized is not necessarily at that moment made regenerate and justified. It does not mean that unbaptized believers have received the grace of regeneration and justification through the sacrament even though it has not been administered to them. (For grace can only be received through the sacrament when it has once been administered, not sooner.)
Furthermore, as Pilgrim has pointed out numerous times, the WCF states that "grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto [baptism], as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it." Whereas the WCF allows for salvation entirely apart from the sacrament, you insist that salvation comes through the sacrament even when it has not yet been administered.
In short, you'd best stop attempting to find Lutheran teaching on baptism in the WCF, because it simply isn't in there.
The Westminister Confession of Faith is judged against the sole rule of scripture by the words themselves rather than any subjective intent of the authors. You and I assign different definitions to words like "efficacy", "grace", "annexed", and "moment" in the WCF just as we may assign different definitions to words in the Speratus hymn,
Baptized into Thy precious name, My faith cannot be put to shame, And I shall never perish.
I will continue to regard the WCF article on baptism as being correct although I acknowledge there is no unity of faith between us regarding the doctrine of baptism.
