She does not insist that a person get baptized when it is impossible for that person to do so.
You continue to treat Baptism as necessary by necessity of precept, despite your denials, and you continue to claim that Baptism could be impossible for anyone whom God has chosen to be among His elect, despite your denials.
Neither he nor any NSAAer will answer your clear question, with a clear answer because if they did, they, at least eventually, would be forced into rejecting the error they embrace that No Sacrament At All is necessary for salvation.
LoT like all NSAAers considers all the sacraments to be little more than a technicality or type of "accident of Providence" which makes the sacraments merely optional, based on an individual's circuмstances of course.
In the NSAAers world, God Provides by providing nothing and God substitutes the sacraments with No Sacrament At All at the point of death, and via No Sacrament At All, the person is rewarded salvation!
The problem with your question is that for NSAAers, it forces God into the whole "salvation by desire" equation.
Now they need to admit it is God's will that the one who desires the sacrament is not only denied the sacrament by God, but that it is God's will that the person not receive the sacrament God Himself instituted for the singular purpose of our salvation. How's that for a God "Who is the same yesterday, today, yes and forever"?
If the NSAAers were honest, they'd admit they have no clue why God even instituted any sacrament at all.
Your question was excellent and phrased perfectly - it bears repeating.........
Is it or is it not true, LoT, that in cases of BoD (conceding for a moment that this exists) God wills that the person should not receive the Sacrament of Baptism but that the person should be saved via BoD.
Why would God will that someone should be saved via BoD?
... now that we've dispensed with this "impossibility" nonsense.