Baptism for salvation questions
 

These questions are for the Oneness folks who believe that without the correct baptism "In the name of Jesus" there is no salvation.

If "Jesus name" baptism is the only baptism to be saved.....


1. what happens to all the people that lived and died before 1913 when the Jesus name baptism "reemerge" in modern times?

2. why was this saving baptism hidden from the world, if its the only baptism that can save us?

Thank you in advance.

They died in their sins.

This saving baptism is plain for all to read in the Bible. It's hidden to those who don't want to see it.

You're Trinitarian, right? This is taken from the Nicene Creed:
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/nicene.htm

Obviously then, you must believe baptism is for the remission of sins.

Now the question is; Did the early church baptize in the name of Jesus Christ?

I have read that they did until it was changed later in the 2nd century.

http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/name.htm

I thought this thread was closed

I don't know, however I have to wonder how questions that appeal to ones emotion determine what the bible says is truth?

I might also ask about all those that died before Martin Luther "rediscovered" salvation by grace alone through faith alone etc etc

Man, you're getting a little harsh there aren't you Mizpeh?

Many Trinitarians believe those who don't believe in the Trinity are lost. That view is considered harsh as well, I suppose.

Bob, I believe baptism in Jesus' name is for the remission of sins not because of the remission of sins. Jesus died to take away the sins of the world. If one is not baptized in his name, they are still in their sins. To not have one's sins remitted defeats the whole purpose of why Jesus came into the world.

How can I make that any more palatable for you? If I did try to sugar coat it I would be dishonest.

When one understands that baptism has nothing to do with salvation before God the question of invocation becomes academic.

While I do hold that baptism is not part of the Gospel, not saving as relating to the soul, and is not the occasion for sin remission, I still see plenty of evidence to hold that it should be performed by using the "Jesus Name" invocation and that it was not "hidden from the world" until recent times. NT saving faith was to be directed to God THROUGH Christ. Baptism was the time when an individual was to openly declare his repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

Even trinitarians baptized using the Jesus name invocation. In fact, Frank Ewart began looking deeper into the nature of God only after hearing a trinitarian man, R.E. McAlister, preach a message on Jesus name baptism. McAlister, however, in no way connected this topic with the nature of God. He was using the issue to head off a growing heresy in the church which demanded that a baptismal candidate be dunked three distinct times rather than simply once.

A quick note concerning men prior to Luther and justification by faith alone:

It's my impression that Luther began to realize justification by faith alone when reading the works of Augustine (354-430AD). I suggest a book by Thomas Oden called the Justification Reader for examples of the justification by faith position from the time of Christ to Luther. If I remember correctly, Oden gets much of his information from Vatican archives which had not been released for translation unto recent years. Prior witnesses agreeing with Luther's ultimate realization were abundant.

Baptism in Jesus name is necessary.

But,...there is a verse for those kind of people.

2 Peter 2:21 (KJV)
For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.


This verse sound more ....they have a chance than to those people that been enlighten and turn around the truth.

blessings,

Some how God will give you the measure of understanding. I quess....it's up to you how to respond. We can take it or leave it. I don't think God will punished those people that are not been enlighten of His word.

God will always weigh the spirit of truth. If we know the forbidden to us called truth or you can call it law? Which you prefer? Law or Truth are the same. According to the book of ......

Psalm 119:142 (KJV)
Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.


blessings,

Thanks for recommending this reference book. I'm taking an Western Civ class this semester and I might use it for one of my book reports.

Adino, it's easy to spin justification by faith and disregard baptism. You say you can explain away the scriptures that are clear on the necessity of baptismal regeneration, I don't see how you can do it convincingly. I know none of the Trinitarians I've talked to have been able to do it. I think all the verses on justification and baptism harmonize much better with the PAJC view of salvation.

I'm going to go back to your thread called Sinful Union this week and finish reading it. Maybe we can discuss our differences some more there.

I disagree with her. If she is right then Jesus was wrong and the gates of hell did over power the church.

can you show where any baptismal formula was actually use "in the name of Jesus," in the Bible?

I believe the "Jesus name" baptism was not only preached by R.E. McAlister, but another person had a vision that the "Jesus name" baptism was right, which is what started the "rebaptizing."

Mizpeh, this is one of the best posts I have ever viewed. Grand Slam!

Why are we even discussing this on AFF? I thought Trinitarians weren't allowed to push their views on others?

Willy,

I'm not sure what you're asking. Do you want to know if there is scripture with the exact words 'in the name of Jesus' being invoked over the person to be baptized? or are you asking me why I believe baptism should be done calling on the name of the Lord instead of the titles?

LOL, thanks, but there are much better posts than this written by much more articulate writers on this board. Look around in the archives and you'll find some interesting stuff.

You must be new. :roseglasses

Maybe you can start by looking at some comments I made concerning some of the usual scriptures offered. Feel free to tell me where these alternative interpretations fall short. We can look at the issues more closely as time permits.

Here's a link to a post dealing with a few of those passages.

We could start with Matthew 28:19

In the Name (singular)... :coffee2

Right...baptism in Jesus name becomes irrelevant. It seems that the Oneness Pentecostal identity is being washed out yet again. Yes in history there were those that believed in baptism in Jesus name. What happened to them? And yes there were those that held to a modalistic view....and what happened to them? There were even those that believed in the gifts of the Spirit and healing...and historically they too disappeared.

However it would be short sighted to say just because water baptism does not in and of itself save someone that it has NOTHING to do with salvation. Biblically speaking the only people who were baptized were those that JUST put their faith in Christ and repented of their sins. There was no such thing as a waiting period putting baptism off for a later time. To them it was very important to salvation. They whats and whys and hows were not something to be questioned or argued. They simply obeyed.

I would argue baptism IS a part of the "gospel", though that might depend on what someone means by the gospel. What you say here sort of clashes with the first statement. I always find it odd when someone declares baptism is NOT for salvation, and they feel they have scriptures for that. Then they declare what baptism is for, to declare his repentance and faith in Christ, but I never see scriptures for that. Might I add though, if this is true and Jesus said that to deny him before men would mean He would deny them before the Father..if one rejects being baptized are they or can they still be saved?

Don't the Church of Christ people do it in Jesus name? Although they do believe it is salvational

i hate to rain on everybody's parade, but everybody is wrong! what a minister says over a baptismal candidate by invocation is more traditional than biblical. The bible commands the believer to call on the name of the Lord. When Paul was baptized, he was told to go call on the name of the Lord for himself. On the day of pentecost, every believer baptized themselves in the cleansing pools calling on the name of the Lord. Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Acts 22:12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, 13Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him. 14And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. 15For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. 16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
This doctrine about what somebody says over you is from catholicism and the doctrine of substantiation, or the minsiter taking the place of the candidate. Each beliver is commanded to call on the name of the Lord for themselves!!! Anything that is not of faith is sin and if it does not come from the heart of the believer, it has no value. New testament baptism was tied to the mosaic law of cleasing and identification for new belivers.

Acts 2:37 - Acts 2:41 (KJV) 37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

Seems those that heard and obeyed Peter were added to the church.........

that's just your assertion.

Jesus said on this rock I will build my church. The church he is speaking of is the church built on the rock. When it is built on the rock it is unmovable. That does not mean Jesus meant "There will be an unbroken chain of the church passed on from generation to generation and visible" etc etc...that's something Rome invented when it also invented Apostolic succession.

If this was true in the absolute sense, there should have still been churches of Jerusalem and other places that remained as they were in the first century to this day with NO false doctrine. IF this is true we should all have gone back and joined Rome and not argued with her over doctrine. There would have been a church like the modern Protestant, Trinitarian church, all through out history and not rather being recovered around the time of Luther. There never would be a Laodecian church in the bible that fell away.

Again, all this verse is stating very simply is that Christ's church would be the one that builds on the Rock. Any church that is NOT built on the rock would not prevail against the gates of hell.

That's far different from Christ saying "The gates of Hell will not prevail against my church"..so in context Jesus was not predicting His church would be a visible monolithic movement that continued to grow despite having false doctrines, starting wars, persecuting anyone that did not agree with them. selling indulgencies, having popes that were corrupt men (and women?).

That would mean "God is gonna have Himself a visible church organization no matter how corrupt and heretical they are"....

The church is the body of believers...they are believers in Him. The church is powerful so long as they rest in the Lord and not in man.

Prax, I do make a distinction between the Gospel and baptism while I also understand that baptism presents a beautiful picture of that Gospel. It is the Gospel dramatized, but it is not the Gospel itself.

I do understand baptism is very close to the Gospel in that it declares, like I said, the believer's repentance and faith "in the Gospel." Remember Christ said he that believeth (the Gospel) and is baptized shall be saved. Christ makes a very clear distinction between the Gospel and baptism. Paul does the same when he said that he was not sent to baptize but to preach the Gospel.

I agree that ALL who believe/are saved should be baptized. The purpose though is not to be saved in the eyes of God. He knows the heart and recognizes the regenerative work He's performed in the confines of the soul. We, on the other hand, as mere men, do not know the innermost hearts of men so we must have a criteria by which we accept someone into the church at large "as being saved." Christ said that his Church was to be built upon the rock of an open confession in Him. Baptism was the time at which a believer openly declared his repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus.

Confession "unto salvation" was made before the community at large. Salvation in the eyes of God? No. Salvation in the eyes of our peers. With the heart man believeth unto righteousness (i.e., unto salvation before God) but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation (before our peers) [Romans 10:10]. Baptism was the time at which an open confession in Christ was declared. Only those who made such a confession were to be given the right hand of fellowship and welcomed in the Christian community at large.

Baptism was "the answer of a good conscience toward God" (1Peter 3:21). A good conscience of one's right standing before God was required prior to getting dunked. Water baptism is not supposed to be administered to anyone who does not have the full assurance of faith that he has been freed from sin by the work of Christ (Hebrews 10:22). Baptism was the time at which an inquiry was made concerning the conscience toward God.

Baptism was the "answer (eperotema) of a good conscience toward God" (1Peter 3:21). The word "eperotema" was a word used in court settings when a witness was inquired of his pledge to tell the truth. If I remember correctly, it was Tertullian who pointed out that water baptism was the time at which a new believer was asked concerning his "good conscience toward God" concerning sin. This "inquiry" (eperotema) of faith was directed toward every baptismal candidate. The candidate who did not feel free from the guilt of sin did not have true faith in the sin remitting work of Christ. Only those who have "full assurance of faith" in the Lord Jesus Christ and have a good conscience toward God are to be baptized. In other words, only those who truly believe the Gospel are to be baptized and considered saved by the Church.

This thread was not started for people to "Slam" on other people. Also, please re-read my thread, it said nothing about "trinitarians" or pushing their views.

I have to leave for a while, but can you define what "the gospel" means? In the strictest most literal sense I would define that to mean simply What Jesus did for us etc etc...however even when that was done in Acts the question was asked "what must I do to be saved"...the answer was believe on Jesus...looking at all the accounts we know that includes repentance too. So in a looser sense I would say the gospel includes not only preaching Jesus but telling them what they need to do as a result of the conviction of their sins and hearing about what Jesus did for us so that we could be forgiven and born again. Where you go from there though is where we get the differences

can you show scripture that says "if a person is not baptized a certian way" they are still in their sins?

These scriptures she will share in no way indicate an invocation by a third party mitgates/activates/ remission of sins... calling upon the name has a deep history in scripture and meaning ... that begins in the old testament.... it connotes a cry for aid [salvation] and its always personal -- not hinging on the officiator of a ceremony but by the believer.

Here are some scriptures to show what I mean:
The Uses of to Call the Name of the LORD

Genesis 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Genesis 12:8 And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the LORD.

Genesis 13:4 Unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first: and there Abram called on the name of the LORD.

Genesis 21:33 And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the LORD, the everlasting God.

Genesis 26:25 And he builded an altar there, and called upon the name of the LORD, and pitched his tent there: and there Isaac's servants digged a well.

1 Kings 18:24 And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the LORD: and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken.

2 Kings 5:11 But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.

Joel 2:32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

Psalm 116:4 Then called I upon the name of the LORD; O LORD, I beseech thee, deliver my soul.

Psalm 116:13 I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the LORD.

Psalm 116:17 I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and will call upon the name of the LORD.

Joel 2:32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

Zephaniah 3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

Without trying to promote any doctine, I am left with only posting scriptures without being able to make my point. So, I'll allow the Apostle Paul to take my place.

1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,

2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,

4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

According to scripture, this is the Gospel that Paul recieved from Jesus Himself, and which he taught.

No one is refuting that all our deeds should be done in Jesus name ... ... nor is anyone advocating that the name should not be invoked or called upon during baptism..... clearly it's biblical ... the question is who does the invoking and for what purpose.

We should call upon the name Jesus when we pray, first come to repentance, cast out demons and drive our car ... but the power is not in the incantation of the name ... or in it's vain repetition as some have become accustomed to

the power is in Him that has given the authority and he who has the power and in everything His name represents

.... nor does someone else calling upon it effectuate remission for another believer. I don't see that in scripture ... I see the opposite in Romans.

I know that's what all of us believe .... that it's not just the name but in who possesses the power...

but when we examine soteriological issues some would make the incantation of the name by the baptizer the be all and end all to effectuating remission.

The following scriptures make evident that simple invocation is not enough ....

Acts 19:13-16: "Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded."

Matthew 10:1: "And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease."

Matthew 17:15-18: "And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him. Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me. And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour."

One has to assume they tried to in the name of Jesus.

"Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name? And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness" (Matthew 7:21-23).

Evidently, simply knowing the name and using it ... is not God's measuring stick to salvation.

We are stating simply that invocation of the name by a third party does not mitigate salvation ...

Do I see precedent in the scriptures for this ....yes ...

do I see precedent to baptize in the power and authority given to us by Jesus ... yes ... onama ... indicates this .... in the Greek.

Is there anything wrong or damnable in baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost when we know that His name is Jesus ... no.

Do I see a 1st century pattern of baptisms performed in the name of the Lord Jesus, or Jesus Christ. to be biblical ... yes ...

Do I see dialogs of baptisms of apostles stating "I baptize you in Jesus name" ... no.

Nor will I find every sermon preached to unbelievers by Peter and Paul in Act that state that baptism is salvific ... sometimes is not even mentioned.

In each sermon they do require repentance and true belief, however.

But interestingly enough when we examine the dialog between Philip and the eunuch ... it seems important to Philip ... to know that the Eunuch confessed Jesus as the Son of God prior to immersing him ... it gives one pause ... to think that it was this confession of the name Jesus and a repentant heart that led to his salvation. Philip baptized him in this name ... invoking the authority given to him to do so ... but it wasn't the act in of itself that applied the blood for remission .... nor the incantation.
__________________

Dan, according to Paul, we are to do all things in the name of Jesus. Would it be necessary for Believers to speak a formula in every word and deed?

17 Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father.

One reason the believer is to call upon the name of the LORD, given in Psalm 116:13, is to accept His salvation:

I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the LORD.

All of God’s salvation, His deliverance, is currently available. We stir ourselves up to take hold of God and receive, dechomai (receive before God: be born-again) and lombano (receive into evidence), the cup of God’s wholeness.

How is this done?

Romans 10:9-10,13 tells us:

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

When we say with our mouth what we believe in our heart concerning the Son of God, our risen Lord and savior Jesus Christ, we will absolutely be saved.

This great cup of His salvation runs over into our lives according to these same principles.


Colossians 2:6 commands
As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk (live our lives) ye in him:

The Colossians boldly received into evidence the Lord Christ Jesus. If we walk in believing boldness in this way, we will reign in life as Romans 5:17 says:

For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive (lombano) abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ...

Yes, the Gospel of Christ's death, burial and resurrection. The resurrection is good news because it proves that the issue of sin has been dealt with in the eyes of God. If God would have still imputed the sins of the world to Christ he would not have risen from the dead. The fact of the resurrection shows that sin has been forgiven. Those in Christ are to be resurrected with Christ because we have been crucified with him, i.e., our sins have been taken to the cross with him. We are to place our faith in his resurrection and reckon ourselves alive unto God as well. We are to place our faith in the sin remitting work of Christ which resulted in his reception of the promise of eternal life and understand this is our ultimate future as well. Our hope rests in the truth of the Gospel.

We are to "repent and believe the Gospel." This is another way of saying we are to have repentance and faith. Repentance is inseparable from faith. The heart returning to faith in God (the heart turning away from dead works and turning toward God in faith) was to return to God via faith in Christ.

The correct response to hearing the good news of the Gospel is to return to God (repent) in faith. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the avenue by which the repentant heart is to return to God.

Keyword: "Heart"

God weighs the spirit if....the heart right with God. Ananais kept the part .... he don't have to keep it and hide. Actually it is belong to him. All he has to do be honest to himself, to God, and others. "Heart is wicked"

In the OT ... to call upon the name of the Lord, the word upon is the particle preposition b or beth. There is no Strong's number that corresponds. Only the use of this Hebrew preposition separates to call the LORD or to call to the LORD from to call upon the LORD or to call upon the name of the LORD.

Almost every use of to call on the name of the LORD involves the construction of an altar and the offering of a sacrifice (Genesis 12:8, 13:4, 21:33--implied, 26:25; 1 Kings 18:24).

All of the Old Testament sacrifices were only as effective as the believing of the one offering them.All of these sacrifices entailed acknowledging God's lamb who would be revealed in the future. To call “upon the name of the LORD” was to formally enter into a covenant by coming into His presence.

Notice that it was between the believer and God ... not the officiator of a ceremony invoking it on someone else.

How is the heart circumcised? How does one call on the name of the Lord? How does one believe with the heart?

"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Romans 2:28,29).

How did the heart of the true believer get circumcised?

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?" (Romans 6:3) Did a professing believer become justified by faith alone, or by faith with works? If the believer just stated that they believed in baptism, but never acted upon it in obedience, did he/she really believe according to the principle of faith?

"Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (Romans 6:4). How is a professing believer in the Gospel of Jesus Christ (death, burial, and resurrection) buried into Jesus' death? The question then arises, that if a professing believer in the Gospel is not buried with Jesus by baptism, can he or she walk in newness of life?

"For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:" (Romans 6:5). What are the consequences to a professing believer who has not been planted together with Jesus in the likeness of his death?

"Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
For he that is dead is freed from sin." (Romans 6:6,7). How was the body of sin destroyed? by baptism; that is, being buried with Jesus
Where was this body of sin held in the professing believer? The body of sin was held in the professing believer's heart where the weight of sin was carried until it was destroyed by baptism in the likeness of Jesus' death. Again, when was the body of sin destroyed? When a professing believer thought about it and believed it to be truth or when he/she acted upon it and became a believer?

"In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:" (Colossians 2:11). How was this spiritual circumcision of the heart made in putting of the body of sins? Answer: "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." (Colossians 2:12). The baptism takes place through faith...this is a spiritual operation of God; the spiritual knife that cuts off the body of sins contained in the heart.

The answer of a good conscience toward God is only after putting off the body of sins by baptism into Jesus' death...in the likeness of Jesus' death, being buried with him by baptism, then being raised with him in the newness of life....by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
There are seven Feasts of the Lord in the believer's life that are types and shadows of the truth and good...the first three are:
Passover is the death=Repentance
Unleavened Bread is the burial=Baptism
Firstfruits is the resurrection=heart circumcised being raised into newness of life

It is only then that one is a true believer, believing with the heart, not with the intellectual mind; for the heart is circumcised with the body of sins being destroyed....by baptism. Then the believer receives the Holy Ghost with the outward evidence of speaking in tongues...then there is a walk of obedience going from glory to glory until he/she comes unto the measure of the fullness of the stature of Christ; full maturity.

The true believer has the testimony of Jesus and keeps the commandments of God; that is, the testimony of Jesus is the faith...keeping the commandments of God is love. Faith works by love, for it is only by love in doing the will of God that faith flows to the believer in receiving knowledges of good and truth; lest we forget, faith is not of ourselves, it is of God.

Circumcision in the OT never took away sins .... clearly Paul's parallel with it has more in significance than what you have stated in your exegesis, Beard.... nor did it save anyone. Abraham was circumcised 12 years after he entered in a covenant w/ God ... are you suggesting he was unsaved during this interim?

Way to go Dan, the truth hurts. The natural instinct is to participate in our own salvation. Who can even conceptualize a free salvation? If baptism alone saved you, we could baptize at wal-mart next to the chip & dip. Buy three packs of Doritos and get baptized for free...if it's not a work of faith, it means nothing.
Salvation is a free work of Grace and everybody knows it, but doesn't want to admit it. Should we be baptized? Of course, but salvation alone belongs to God and we are commanded to judge nothing before its time. If baptism is rejected, then thats between the new believer and God. Our responsibility is to love them.

What if? What if? What if? Let God be Judge.

No mention of repentance....so how do we get saved according to the gospel?

The Gospel, which Paul preached, must have included also salvation by faith, without the works of the law because Paul said
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they were not behaving consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "If you, although you are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you try to force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"
Gal 2:15 We are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners,
Gal 2:16 yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

Yet we don't find that in the verses you posted...they were either left out by Paul or somehow implied or included in the definition of preaching Christ's death, buriel and resurrection

In fact one has to wonder why the connection between believing the gospel and being baptized

Act 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the gospel, the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Also one has to wonder how can one obey the gospel when all it is is telling someone about Jesus being killed, buried and resurrected...

2Th 1:8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ,

1Pe 4:17 For the time has come for the judgment to begin from the house of God. And if it first begins from us, what will be the end of those disobeying the gospel of God?