<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]If the outward administration of the covenant does in fact make a difference as to whether or not one may be constituted a covenant breaker, then it seems as though there is a sense (shall we call it, "formally", "externally", "fleshly"?) in which the reprobate are related to God differently and the difference had to do with receiving the external administration of the covenant (i.e. being part of the visible church).</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Jason ole pal, good buddy,<br><br>If we define "covenant breaker" as those who are supposed to be marked with the sign of the covenant but aren't (e.g., offspring of a professing believers who are never baptized), and include in that number those who are actually marked with the sign of the covenant yet never come to faith, then we can say that the pagans who merely hear the word and are not baptized are not "covenant breakers". Now that we have our terms defined, you are interested in whether there is some relational difference between the two classes of reprobate with respect to their relationship with God. Well, we have already made several observations. We agree that the baptized hypocrite who remains within the confines of the church is not dearer to God than the pagan who never darkens the church steps. We, also, agree that God does not desire something more for the baptized reprobate than the run-of-the-mill heathen. We, also, agree that the baptized unbeliever (all things being equal) is more culpable than the pagan.<br><br>My parting thought is, I believe that any distinction you might come up with between the "covenant reprobate" and the plain old every day pagan will be a distinction without a significant difference. Wilson and co. have been scratching their heads over this one for a few years but nothing seems to be forthcoming but a whole lot of confusion for God's people. Can you elaborate on why you think that such a topic would make a worthy debate? What I mean to say is, are you aware of any differences between the baptized-reprobate and the non-baptized reprobate other than the obvious ones we have already identified? When you say this might be a worth while debate, do you have something specific in mind? What am I missing?<br><br>Thems my thoughts!<br><br>Ron<br><br><br>
