Ah, I should have made it clear that this is a rhetorical question, that demands the answer from either of the traditional points of view: "He cannot, yet maintain his theological integrity."
"Why is that?"
And the answer is that he cannot hold to the distinctives of Baptist doctrine, if you are familiar with the acronym "B-A-P-T-I-S-T-S" which sums up the features that set them apart, and presents an inflexible barrier to doctrinal agreement with those holding to the sacral society approach. That is where Rudnick's discussion founders, if he wishes to identify as a Baptist. (Note that here I did not use the more general term 'immersionist.')
Ransomed: "Just like my observation that those who express the belief that the Catholic Church is the whore of babylon on FR never claim to belong to particular group of Christians or Creed that I recall. And that there are reasons for this."
Here, you haven't dealt with the fact that this symbolic description (less rudely voiced as apostasy, or spiritual adultery) cuts across all the "Protestant" spectrum, as indicated by the sample of non-Catholic commentators that I listed. Those who would cite Rev. 17:1 and 18:4 do not need to refer to a document such as the non-infallible Greater Catechism to prove their point. They just go to the Bible where the necessary information has been preserved; and when faithfully translated, and interpreted by a literal/grammatical/historical/cultural hermeneutic, they together arrive at a conclusion as one voice -- that of regenerated believer-disciples learning from the sole documents provided by the Holy Ghost--then they do not have to lean on the broken reed of human extra-biblical opinion.
You seem to add the qualification that on the Free Republic forum, you hear of this interpretation only from individuals who don't/won't certify their authority to speak on the basis of their religious affiliation. In fact, no such certification is desired nor required.
Your point seems to have no value. The symbolism is either right or it is wrong. If it is a wrong interpretation, and you can prove it is wrong both logically and spiritually, adding the Magisterium's consensus will not give it any more certainty.But you also claim that those who do disclose their religious bent do not expose this view on FR. To that I can only respond, "Oh? Please prove that, when the whole drift of Protestant theology, and the need for a refuge from Catholicism stands on that symbology."
With sincere concern -- I leave it resting.
“Here, you haven’t dealt with the fact that this symbolic description (less rudely voiced as apostasy, or spiritual adultery) cuts across all the “Protestant” spectrum, as indicated by the sample of non-Catholic commentators that I listed.”
Because I do not care about any commentators listed in order to justify calling the Catholic Church the whore of babylon. I don’t care why you call it the whore of babylon, that was never the point of my posts.
“You seem to add the qualification that on the Free Republic forum, you hear of this interpretation only from individuals who don’t/won’t certify their authority to speak on the basis of their religious affiliation.”
Yes. I am talking about what I have observed on FR, that those who make claims like the Catholic Church is the whore of babylon don’t bother to claim any specific faith or creed of their own. Because it is too embarrassing. Do you disagree that this is the case?
“In fact, no such certification is desired nor required.”
Of course not, it is an observation about those who post on FR and claim the Catholic Church is the whore of babylon. I made this observation to another Catholic, you responded to this observation by claiming the post-Pentacostal Apostles, as anyone can read.
“Your point seems to have no value.”
I think it is interesting that those who claim that the Catholic Church is the whore of babylon don’t disclose what part of Christianity they are closest to with any specificity, and that there are reasons for that. If someone disagrees that it isn’t interesting, or that there are no reasons for this, I don’t care.
“But you also claim that those who do disclose their religious bent do not expose this view on FR. To that I can only respond, “Oh? Please prove that, when the whole drift of Protestant theology, and the need for a refuge from Catholicism stands on that symbology.”
OK, every time I see any garbage about the Catholic Church being the whore of babylon on FR I could ping anyone ineterested. It doesn’t happen often, and I never recall a poster claiming any specific group of Christianity. What might get more results is if you post a thread with a title like ‘I think the Catholic Church is the whore of babylon, and I claim the (fill in religious affiliation) and I go to the (fill in the blank) church. And see what happens.
Freegards