Infant Baptism is not given in scripture.

[DJT_47]

I provided Scriptural evidence that man is born with original sin. You deny Scripture......
The early Church taught original sin. You deny your own Christian history.....

YOU assume erroneously when YOU suggest households that were baptized did not have infants in them. THAT is illogical........

You did not answer my questions. I can see you are not a serious or logical thinker. The reason you didn't answer my questions is because you know if you were to answer them honestly you would realize that what your men have taught you is false.

Thank you for your time.........

Man was not born with original sin. No such terminology jn scripture. Adam wasn't born with original sin. He committed sin as did Eve. The early church meaning what? Subsequent to the written scriptures? The church in biblical times was going off the rails as evidenced by the NT writings, let alone afterwards. You've provided nothing other than catholic nonsensical dogma that they dreamt up, not scripture.

 

[bdavidc]

The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: (KJV)

“because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.” ~ 1 Peter 3:20-22

Peter is not referring to water baptism here, but rather a figurative immersion into union with Christ as an ark of safety from the judgment of God. The resurrection of Christ demonstrates God's acceptance of Christ's substitutionary death for the sins of those who believe (Act_2:30-31; Rom_1:4). Judgment fell on Christ just as the judgment of the flood waters fell on the ark. The believer who is in Christ is thus in the ark of safety that will sail over the waters of judgment into eternal glory (cf. Rom_6:1-4).

You're quoting 1 Peter 3:21, but you're missing what it actually says. The verse itself clarifies that it's not the physical act of washing, “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh”, that saves. The power isn’t in the water, it’s in what the baptism represents: “the answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Baptism is a symbol, a public testimony of the internal transformation that has already taken place through faith in Christ. Salvation comes by grace through faith, not through any external ritual (Ephesians 2:8–9). If water had the power to save, then the thief on the cross would be lost, but Jesus said plainly, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43). Baptism is important, but it’s not the means of salvation. It’s an obedient response to salvation already received through trusting in the finished work of Jesus Christ.

 

[DJT_47]

“because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.” ~ 1 Peter 3:20-22

Peter is not referring to water baptism here, but rather a figurative immersion into union with Christ as an ark of safety from the judgment of God. The resurrection of Christ demonstrates God's acceptance of Christ's substitutionary death for the sins of those who believe (Act_2:30-31; Rom_1:4). Judgment fell on Christ just as the judgment of the flood waters fell on the ark. The believer who is in Christ is thus in the ark of safety that will sail over the waters of judgment into eternal glory (cf. Rom_6:1-4).

You're quoting 1 Peter 3:21, but you're missing what it actually says. The verse itself clarifies that it's not the physical act of washing, “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh”, that saves. The power isn’t in the water, it’s in what the baptism represents: “the answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Baptism is a symbol, a public testimony of the internal transformation that has already taken place through faith in Christ. Salvation comes by grace through faith, not through any external ritual (Ephesians 2:8–9). If water had the power to save, then the thief on the cross would be lost, but Jesus said plainly, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43). Baptism is important, but it’s not the means of salvation. It’s an obedient response to salvation already received through trusting in the finished work of Jesus Christ.

No, it's not the cleansing of the flesh by the water, but it's still by baptism we are united with Christ and become part of the body, so, it is baptism that saves us as the scripture clearly says; without baptism there is no salvation.

 

[bdavidc]

No, it's not the cleansing of the flesh by the water, but it's still by baptism we are united with Christ and become part of the body, so, it is baptism that saves us as the scripture clearly says; without baptism there is no salvation.

So are you saying the Bible has it wrong and you have it right? That statement is not consistent with what the Bible actually teaches. Scripture does not say that water baptism is what saves a person. Salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by any outward act or ritual. Ephesians 2:8–9 says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” If baptism were required for salvation, that would make it a work added to grace, which contradicts the gospel.

Yes, baptism is important, it is an act of obedience and a public declaration of faith, but it is not the means of salvation. Romans 10:9 makes this clear: “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” The thief on the cross was never baptized, yet Jesus said, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). That alone proves baptism is not a requirement for salvation.

1 Peter 3:21 is often misused to claim baptism saves, but the verse itself clarifies it’s not about the physical act: “not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” It’s not the water, it’s faith in the risen Christ that saves. Anyone adding baptism as a requirement for salvation is preaching a different gospel, and Scripture says that must be rejected (Galatians 1:6–9).

I do believe that if someone is truly born again, they will want to be baptized, not to be saved, but because they are saved. It’s a step of obedience, commanded by the Lord (Matthew 28:19). A genuine believer, transformed by the Holy Spirit, will desire to follow Christ and submit to His commands. If someone comes to saving faith and dies before being baptized, they are still saved, salvation is based on faith, not an outward ordinance.

However, if someone claims to be saved and knowingly refuses baptism without cause, it reveals a heart that may not truly belong to Christ. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15), and 1 John 2:4 warns, “Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” True saving faith always results in obedience, not just words, but action. If someone is actually born-again, they would want to be baptized because that is what the Lord asks us to do, if they don't, then they must be a false convert and never was born-again to start with. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.” ~ 1 John 2:19

 

[DJT_47]

So are you saying the Bible has it wrong and you have it right? That statement is not consistent with what the Bible actually teaches. Scripture does not say that water baptism is what saves a person. Salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by any outward act or ritual. Ephesians 2:8–9 says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” If baptism were required for salvation, that would make it a work added to grace, which contradicts the gospel.

Yes, baptism is important, it is an act of obedience and a public declaration of faith, but it is not the means of salvation. Romans 10:9 makes this clear: “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” The thief on the cross was never baptized, yet Jesus said, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). That alone proves baptism is not a requirement for salvation.

1 Peter 3:21 is often misused to claim baptism saves, but the verse itself clarifies it’s not about the physical act: “not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” It’s not the water, it’s faith in the risen Christ that saves. Anyone adding baptism as a requirement for salvation is preaching a different gospel, and Scripture says that must be rejected (Galatians 1:6–9).

I do believe that if someone is truly born again, they will want to be baptized, not to be saved, but because they are saved. It’s a step of obedience, commanded by the Lord (Matthew 28:19). A genuine believer, transformed by the Holy Spirit, will desire to follow Christ and submit to His commands. If someone comes to saving faith and dies before being baptized, they are still saved, salvation is based on faith, not an outward ordinance.

However, if someone claims to be saved and knowingly refuses baptism without cause, it reveals a heart that may not truly belong to Christ. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15), and 1 John 2:4 warns, “Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” True saving faith always results in obedience, not just words, but action. If someone is actually born-again, they would want to be baptized because that is what the Lord asks us to do, if they don't, then they must be a false convert and never was born-again to start with. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.” ~ 1 John 2:19

"Baptism doth now save us". Can't get any clearer than that.

 

[Marymog]

“because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.” ~ 1 Peter 3:20-22

Peter is not referring to water baptism here, but rather a figurative immersion into union with Christ as an ark of safety from the judgment of God. The resurrection of Christ demonstrates God's acceptance of Christ's substitutionary death for the sins of those who believe (Act_2:30-31; Rom_1:4). Judgment fell on Christ just as the judgment of the flood waters fell on the ark. The believer who is in Christ is thus in the ark of safety that will sail over the waters of judgment into eternal glory (cf. Rom_6:1-4).

You're quoting 1 Peter 3:21, but you're missing what it actually says. The verse itself clarifies that it's not the physical act of washing, “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh”, that saves. The power isn’t in the water, it’s in what the baptism represents: “the answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Baptism is a symbol, a public testimony of the internal transformation that has already taken place through faith in Christ. Salvation comes by grace through faith, not through any external ritual (Ephesians 2:8–9). If water had the power to save, then the thief on the cross would be lost, but Jesus said plainly, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43). Baptism is important, but it’s not the means of salvation. It’s an obedient response to salvation already received through trusting in the finished work of Jesus Christ.

Thanks for your opinion. I will adhere to Scripture and the 2,000 year teaching of Christianity instead of your opinion.

 

[bdavidc]

Thanks for your opinion. I will adhere to Scripture and the 2,000 year teaching of Christianity instead of your opinion.

The Bible alone is the authority for truth, not man-made traditions or institutions. Jesus said in Mark 7:7, “In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” The early church was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Himself as the cornerstone (Ephesians 2:20), not on later traditions that contradict Scripture. Paul warned in Galatians 1:8, “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” The standard is not how long a system has existed, but whether it aligns with the Word of God. Scripture says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching… that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16–17). That is where we find the truth, not in religious systems that have added to or twisted the gospel.

If you’re referring to Catholicism as Christianity, then you don’t understand what true Christianity is. Christianity is not the false religion of Catholicism. True Christianity is founded on the Word of God alone, not on traditions, councils, or the teachings of men. Jesus said in John 8:31–32, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” The Catholic system adds works, sacraments, and the authority of the church to the gospel, yet the Bible says salvation is by grace through faith, not of works (Ephesians 2:8–9). It also forbids calling any man "father" in a spiritual sense (Matthew 23:9) and warns about those who forbid marriage and command abstinence from foods (1 Timothy 4:1–3), which aligns with practices of the Catholic Church. If your standard is the traditions of Rome instead of the Scriptures, then you are not following Christ, you’re following a man-made religion that leads people away from the truth.

 

[Marymog]

The Bible alone is the authority for truth, not man-made traditions or institutions.

Help me out with your theory.

You and your friends get together and read the Bible. Using the "Bible alone" (no traditions, no institution) you and your friends then decide what the "truth" is after reading the Bible. You and your cabal of friend's "truth" ends up being different than the teaching of an Apostolic Father or the Catholic Churches truth or Methodist truth or Baptist truth etc etc. Why is your "truth" THE truth and everyone else's truth wrong?

Also, the Bible says, Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. But you teach that tradition should be disregarded. Whom should I believe? YOU or Scripture?

Curious Mary

 

[bdavidc]

Help me out with your theory.

You and your friends get together and read the Bible. Using the "Bible alone" (no traditions, no institution) you and your friends then decide what the "truth" is after reading the Bible. You and your cabal of friend's "truth" ends up being different than the teaching of an Apostolic Father or the Catholic Churches truth or Methodist truth or Baptist truth etc etc. Why is your "truth" THE truth and everyone else's truth wrong?

Also, the Bible says, Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. But you teach that tradition should be disregarded. Whom should I believe? YOU or Scripture?

Curious Mary

Mary, the issue is not about whose “truth” is right, it’s about what God’s Word actually says. Truth doesn’t change based on denominations, church fathers, or popular opinion. Jesus said, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17). The Bible is not open to private invention or tradition-based reinterpretation. We are called to rightly divide the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), not mix it with man-made traditions. The verse you quoted, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, refers to the teachings the apostles gave directly, by spoken word or written letter, not traditions that evolved centuries later. That’s a major distinction. The apostles' doctrine is recorded in Scripture for a reason, and we're warned not to add to or take away from it (Revelation 22:18–19).

The Bible never commands infant baptism, never shows one example of it, and never teaches baptism as a replacement for circumcision. It consistently presents baptism as a personal response of faith, following belief in the gospel, something infants are not capable of doing (Acts 8:36–37, Mark 16:16). So no, this isn’t “my truth” or “my friends’ truth”, it’s simply what’s written. The standard is always the Word of God, not the teachings of men or traditions passed down that contradict it.

 

[mailmandan]

"Baptism doth now save us". Can't get any clearer than that.

It gets clearer when you read the rest of the verse. Simply isolating part of the verse and ignoring the rest is not a good practice in biblical hermeneutics.

 

[DJT_47]

It gets clearer when you read the rest of the verse. Simply isolating part of the verse and ignoring the rest is not a good practice in biblical hermeneutics.

It says in plain English "BAPTISM DOTH NOW SAVE US". Can you read and understand? Evidently not.

 

[mailmandan]

It says in plain English "BAPTISM DOTH NOW SAVE US". Can you read and understand? Evidently not.

Keep reading - (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

 

[PGS11]

I like it the other way with us having our children blessed at birth or soon after and at a age of understanding confirming the faith of the blessing.Sounds too Catholic

 

[DJT_47]

Keep reading - (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Keep reading - (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The "keep reading" part does not nullify or negate the preceeding words, it simply further explains them and the Godly logic, but, the following words as stated, does NOT nullify ir negate them. I suggest you simply read the very clear words and embrace them for what they say. "BAPTISM DOTH NOW SAVE US"?

 

[mailmandan]

The "keep reading" part does not nullify the preceeding words, it simply further explains them and the Godly logic, but, the following words as stated, does NOT nullify them. I suggest you simply read the very clear words and embrace them for what they say. "BAPTISM DOTH NOW SAVE US"?

The "keep reading" part clarifies the preceding words. In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase, he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, only the wicked in Noah's day came in contact with the water and they all perished.

So, by Peter saying, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ," Peter guards against saving power to the physical ceremony in H20. I don't embrace salvation by works.

There is the “figurative” device called “trope,” which means the attribution of that which is “real” to that which is only a symbol, an emblem, or a representation. Christ said, “This is my body” when He took the bread. When He took the cup, He said, “This is my blood.” Now of course, His body was still His body, and His blood was still in His body. He was using “trope” attributing the reality to the emblem. Since it is not possible for an external ordinance to do an internal work on the heart, baptism cannot do these things except in the “trope” sense. Salvation is signified but not procured in water baptism. The remission of sins has three applications. Literally, by the blood of Christ, (Matthew 26:28; Revelation 1:5) experientially, by faith in Christ, (Acts 10:43; 26:18) ceremonially, by baptism. (Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21)

False religion turns symbols and shadows of our salvation into the substance and the source.

 

[DJT_47]

The "keep reading" part clarifies the preceding words. In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase, he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, only the wicked in Noah's day came in contact with the water and they all perished.

So, by Peter saying, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ," Peter guards against saving power to the physical ceremony in H20. I don't embrace salvation by works.

There is the “figurative” device called “trope,” which means the attribution of that which is “real” to that which is only a symbol, an emblem, or a representation. Christ said, “This is my body” when He took the bread. When He took the cup, He said, “This is my blood.” Now of course, His body was still His body, and His blood was still in His body. He was using “trope” attributing the reality to the emblem. Since it is not possible for an external ordinance to do an internal work on the heart, baptism cannot do these things except in the “trope” sense. Salvation is signified but not procured in water baptism. The remission of sins has three applications. Literally, by the blood of Christ, (Matthew 26:28; Revelation 1:5) experientially, by faith in Christ, (Acts 10:43; 26:18) ceremonially, by baptism. (Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21)

False religion turns symbols and shadows of our salvation into the substance and the source.

The "keep reading" part clarifies the preceding words. In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase, he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, only the wicked in Noah's day came in contact with the water and they all perished.

So, by Peter saying, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ," Peter guards against saving power to the physical ceremony in H20. I don't embrace salvation by works.

There is the “figurative” device called “trope,” which means the attribution of that which is “real” to that which is only a symbol, an emblem, or a representation. Christ said, “This is my body” when He took the bread. When He took the cup, He said, “This is my blood.” Now of course, His body was still His body, and His blood was still in His body. He was using “trope” attributing the reality to the emblem. Since it is not possible for an external ordinance to do an internal work on the heart, baptism cannot do these things except in the “trope” sense. Salvation is signified but not procured in water baptism. The remission of sins has three applications. Literally, by the blood of Christ, (Matthew 26:28; Revelation 1:5) experientially, by faith in Christ, (Acts 10:43; 26:18) ceremonially, by baptism. (Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21)

False religion turns symbols and shadows of our salvation into the substance and the source.

You use a lot of words to explain nothing. Water baptism has nothing to do with removal of dirt from the flesh: that's as silly as the argument you continually make. "BAPTISM DOTH NOW SAVE US". You cannot explain away the simplicity of these words.

 

[mailmandan]

You use a lot of words to explain nothing. Water baptism has nothing to do with removal of dirt from the flesh: that's as silly as the argument you continually make. "BAPTISM DOTH NOW SAVE US". You cannot explain away the simplicity of these words.

In other words, you are very satisfied with what you already believe (because it accommodates your biased church doctrine and credits you with salvation) and you don't want to be confused with the facts. Got it. You would rather isolate part of a verse and hang your hat on that than consider the context and properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching your conclusion on doctrine. Your method of interpretation is called flawed hermeneutics. You seem to have more faith in baptism to save you than you do in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul has something to say about folks who refuse to believe the gospel. (1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 2 Corinthians 4:3,4) We ALL need to make sure that we have placed our faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. (Acts 15:7-9; Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) To believe anything else is to miss salvation.

 

[DJT_47]

In other words, you are very satisfied with what you already believe (because it accommodates your biased church doctrine and credits you with salvation) and you don't want to be confused with the facts. Got it. You would rather isolate part of a verse and hang your hat on that than consider the context and properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching your conclusion on doctrine. Your method of interpretation is called flawed hermeneutics. You seem to have more faith in baptism to save you than you do in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul has something to say about folks who refuse to believe the gospel. (1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 2 Corinthians 4:3,4) We ALL need to make sure that we have placed our faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. (Acts 15:7-9; Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) To believe anything else is to miss salvation.

The words say what they say. I don't try to alter the words to agree with my beliefs, but rather the exact opposite. My beliefs are based on the words regardless where they may lead. Simple question for you: Do you believe baptism saves us as Peter clearly said or not? That's what he said. You either believe that very simple statement, or not? And if you don't agree with the simplicity of the words, which are not esoteric or difficult to understand, then you have a problem. Peter said baptism saves. What do YOU say??

 

[mailmandan]

The words say what they say. I don't try to alter the words to agree with my beliefs, but rather the exact opposite. My beliefs are based on the words regardless where they may lead.

So, what about verses like John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 etc..? Do you believe what they say or do you try to alter the words to agree with your beliefs on baptism? So, your beliefs are based on words regardless where they may lead? That can get you into trouble! It got Roman Catholics in trouble with John 6:53-56. They took Jesus' words here literally instead of symbolically and came up with the false doctrine of transubstantiation (cannibalism). They also added another requirement for salvation based on their error which further upholds salvation by works.

Simple question for you: Do you believe baptism saves us as Peter clearly said or not? That's what he said. You either believe that very simple statement, or not?

I believe Peter in what sense he said baptism saves us after reading the rest of the verse. Water baptism does not literally save us. I also believe what Jesus, Peter and Paul said in John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 which is not in harmony with your interpretation of 1 Peter 3:21.

And if you don't agree with the simplicity of the words, which are not esoteric or difficult to understand, then you have a problem. Peter said baptism saves. What do YOU say??

I agree with Peter's words AFTER READING THE WHOLE VERSE in order to get the proper understanding. If you don't agree with the simplicity of the words in John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 then you have a serious problem.

 

[DJT_47]

So, what about verses like John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 etc..? Do you believe what they say or do you try to alter the words to agree with your beliefs on baptism? So, your beliefs are based on words regardless where they may lead? That can get you into trouble! It got Roman Catholics in trouble with John 6:53-56. They took Jesus' words here literally instead of symbolically and came up with the false doctrine of transubstantiation (cannibalism). They also added another requirement for salvation based on their error which further upholds salvation by works.

I believe Peter in what sense he said baptism saves us after reading the rest of the verse. Water baptism does not literally save us. I also believe what Jesus, Peter and Paul said in John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 which is not in harmony with your interpretation of 1 Peter 3:21.

I agree with Peter's words AFTER READING THE WHOLE VERSE in order to get the proper understanding. If you don't agree with the simplicity of the words in John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 then you have a serious problem.

So, what about verses like John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 etc..? Do you believe what they say or do you try to alter the words to agree with your beliefs on baptism? So, your beliefs are based on words regardless where they may lead? That can get you into trouble! It got Roman Catholics in trouble with John 6:53-56. They took Jesus' words here literally instead of symbolically and came up with the false doctrine of transubstantiation (cannibalism). They also added another requirement for salvation based on their error which further upholds salvation by works.

I believe Peter in what sense he said baptism saves us after reading the rest of the verse. Water baptism does not literally save us. I also believe what Jesus, Peter and Paul said in John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 which is not in harmony with your interpretation of 1 Peter 3:21.

I agree with Peter's words AFTER READING THE WHOLE VERSE in order to get the proper understanding. If you don't agree with the simplicity of the words in John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5,6; Ephesians 2:8,9 then you have a serious problem.

You make no sense.