Mark 16:16------- baptism >>>>>>>>saves
John 3:5 --------born of water>>>>>>enter the kingdom
Acts 2:38------ baptism>>>>>>>>>>remission of sin
1 Peter 3:21---baptism>>>>>>>>>>saves
How do you reach the conclusion baptism does not save?
Mark 16:16 is a questionable verse as to its authenticity. Not something to build a doctrine upon. Notice that the passage is clear that believing and being baptized is not the same thing. The fact that those who do not believe shall be damned clearly makes no reference to baptism. Their lack of faith is the cause of their doom. The first half of the passage talks of salvation by faith, and baptism
because they are saved. My friend, if you baptize a sinner, all you get is a wet sinner! If you baptize a Christian you have a testimony! Getting wet would do absolutely nothing for the one who is not already saved by faith. People get baptized because they believe and are already saved.
John 3:15 is not talking about baptism; that's eisegesis.
Acts 2:38 is emphatic in the Greek. Receiving the Holy Spirit by repentance and belief precedes baptism. One gets baptized in view of the remission of sins that has already occurred.
1 Peter 3:21 says that baptism does not cleanse the filth of the flesh.
“Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The
LIKE FIGURE whereunto even baptism doth also save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
Baptism is mentioned here only as a
FIGURE, that is, a shadow, symbol, or picture of salvation. Baptism does not save; it declares salvation. It was as if God knew that this passage would be misused that He ended the verse with “(not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.)” Water baptism does not put away the filth of the old carnal nature, but simply gives us a good conscience toward God.
Mark 16:16 is a genuine and legitimate as other NT verses. If one questions the genuineness of Mark 16 one needs to question the genuineness of the whole NT.
Is Mark 16:9-20 Inspired?
Mk 16(a)
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
Mk 16(b)
but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mk 16:16 is a compound sentence with 2 subjects 1) salvation 2) condemnation. CHrist made to conditions (belief and baptism) necessary to being saved and one condition (unbelief) to being condemned. Belief is connected to baptize with the conjunction "and" making them inseparable. If baptism is not necessary then neither is belief necessary.
Therefore one does not have to meet TWO conditions (unbelief and unbaptized) to be lost, unbelief is sufficient to cause one to be lost. In Mk16(a) Jesus used a logical progression making belief a prerequisite to baptism and baptism a prerequisite to being saved. This means an unbelieving person cannot be baptized. Therefore in Mk16(b) when Christ said "he that believeth not", the phrase "believeth not" logically already means not baptized since the unbeliever cannot be baptized. It would be redundant and unnecessary for Christ to say in 16(b) he that believeth not and is not baptized due to his unbelief shall be condemned since unbelief already includes not being baptized.
He that eateth AND digesteth his food shall live
he that eateth not shall die.
A logical progression as Christ used..one must first eat before he can digest and digest before he can live. Since one must eat before he can digest this means we can logically know that "eatheth not" means one has not digested for one cannot digest what he has not eaten. Just as we can know "believeth not"
already includes not being baptized.
=====================
John 3:5 born of water refers to water baptism:
John 3:5------------Spirit++++++++++++++
water>>>>>>>>>>in the kingdom
1Cor12:13----------Spirit++++++++++++++
baptized>>>>>>>>in the body
Tts 3:5------------Holy Ghost+++++++++
laver of water>>>>>>>>saved
Since there is just one way to be saved/born again, than all 3 verse must express the same idea and they do. "
Water" is equivalent to "
baptized" which is equivalent to "
laver of water". Therefore if a person is not born again it is his own culpability for not obeying the command to be water baptized and no culpability lies with God.
======================
1 Peter 3:21 Peter says baptism saves. End of story.
Acts 2:38---------------------baptized>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>saved/remission of sins
1 Pet 3:21--------------------baptism>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>saves
"
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. 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:"
The underlying word for
like figure is anti-type which means a mirror reflection, a mirror reflection of the type.
OT type: saved by water (flood)
NT antitype: saved by water (baptism)
Hence the NT type (saved by water) is a mirror reflection of the OT type (saved by water). Obviously Peter is talking about water baptism for the world was flooded with literal water.
The world was not flooded with Spirit but with literal water. Hence the following is false:
OT type--------saved by water
NT antitype---saved by Spirit baptism
Water baptism is the answer of a good conscience towards God. In Acts 2 Peter convicted his listeners of crucifying the Christ (v36) and it pricked them in their heart, that is, it made their conscience guilty to the point it caused them to ask Peter "what shall we do?" (v37). Peter's
ANSWER for them to have a good conscience towards God was to command them to repent and be baptized for remission of sins (v38). Those that obeyed had their sins forgiven by God and would thereby have a good conscience towards God.