Thank you, but this passage does not provide a written purpose of baptism in Jesus's name. It speaks of John's baptism, which was different Acts 18:24-26, Acts 19:3-5.
In the big picture, Jesus and Peter first commanded baptism in Jesus's name after the thief died Matthew 28:19 Acts 2:38-39. The thief would not be expected to fulfill a command that didn't exist until after his death.
Paul did use Abraham being saved by faith as the picture of one being saved, but Paul never associated physical circumcision with baptism in Jesus's name. No one in the Bible did. It's everybody else who did that.
Abraham's faith was described in this way
Hebrews 11:8-10 By faith Abraham obeyed...
This is the common argument, yes. What it does not say is "Y'all got baptized in order to symbolize..." or "the likeness is the reason y'all got baptized". That's the difference between incidental and purpose.
"Clearly" is a subjective term where all the eye of the beholder, inference, and...
Peter made a distinction by not calling that a baptism. John the Baptist also said that it would be Jesus who would baptize with the Holy Spirit. Both times baptism with the Holy Spirit was referred to about Acts 2 & Acts 10 (both references were made in chapter 11), there was no mediator or...
I'm not sure if that question will ever be definitively answered. The best that I can say right now is that Jesus is the only person in history whoever got baptized without anything to do with sin, and he was the only person ever recorded to be baptized in such a way to fulfill all righteousness.
The thief on the cross is the oldest argument against baptism's role in getting saved. Do you not consider that it might also be the oldest debunked argument as well? The question still comes back to "In the New Testament, what is the written purpose of baptism in Jesus's name?", which was first...
I believe "the like figure" means “the flood". The flood is representing baptism. It's not saying the flood saves us, but baptism.
I suspect the Greek word for answer carries both meanings, request/answer, and can go either way in different sentences. In 1 Peter 3:21, it works both ways.
That's just church lingo and it's inferred. Every command is expected to be obeyed, not just baptism (Matthew 28:20). Getting baptized in Jesus's name just to obey it is not a written purpose. The apostles never said get baptized for the sake of obedience. The apostles never said to obey any...
The sola fide of Martin Luther is very different than today's variety. Martin Luther saw no conflict between sola fide and infant baptism as a requirement of salvation. Of course infant baptism is not Biblical, and I wish Martin Luther had gotten that, but this just shows that with sola fide...
"Works" are listed basically as
1. What God has planned for us to do after we are saved. Eph. 2:10
2. Circumcision and requirements of the Mosaic law. Eph. 2:11-15
Since I'm not including belief as a doing thing necessarily but I could if I brought up John 6:28-29, but I won't for now.
Acts 3:19 initial repentance, Romans 10:9-10 confessing with one's mouth the Lord Jesus, Acts 2:38-39 being baptized in Jesus name for the forgiveness of sins and to...
For this I defer to Romans 9:32. Some Israelites put their faith in the law instead of God the giver of the law. If God gives us expectations to "do" to be saved, then our faith when we "do" them is in God, not in what is done itself. Much like Naaman the leper, he didn't even want to go to the...