Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
To be baptized because you sins were already forgiven doesn't make sense. Peter would have been telling those who believed and were convicted to 1) repent and then be baptized because your sins were forgiven at repentence.....why not say repent for (in order to) the forgiveness of sins and then be baptized (insert whatever reason you believe baptism accomplishes or is symbollic of).
Really, it just doesn't make sense to say Repent and be baptized everyone of you for (because you have) the forgiveness of your sins. You are making the assumption that sins are remitted either at faith or repentance. And then one has to wonder why be baptized, what profit is there in water baptism and why wasn't that point made clear? If the reason for repentance was to remit sins then why didn't Peter tell them why they were being baptized. Sorry saying they were baptized because their sins had already been forgiven doesn't work.
|
IT also doesn't make sense of Peter to say twice in
1 Peter 3 that water saves! Then oooohhh he didn't really mean it! LOL! The only time people can get confused is when they take "one" witness out of context and that is Paul. Even then he cleary teaches baptism is essential in uniting with Christ.