Regarding when remission occurs, for those who argue that it is before baptism, but after repentance, and that the preposition
eis therefore means because of, or in regards to, then they must prove when any of the people in
Acts 2 who listened to Simon Peter's sermon actually received forgiveness.
Was it when they were "pricked in their hearts" and cried out "men and brethren, what shall we do?"?
If so, then why did Simon Peter tell them they still needed to repent and be baptized?
If the pricking of their hearts and the demand to be told how to respond to Simon Peter's preaching was indicative of their repentance, Simon Peter should not have told them they needed to repent. Instead,
Acts 2:38 should read "Be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ..."
But that's not how it reads. Simon started with repentance, which indicates that as far as he was concerned, the respondents had not repented, even while they were pricked in their hearts and demanding instruction.
As far as Simon was concerned, if they did not come forward and be baptized, there was no repentance.
For,
Acts 2:41 reads, "then they that gladly received his word were baptized'. It does not read, "then they that gladly received his word repented". Their repentance is presumed as a prerequisite to their baptism.
It is therefore clear that without a baptism following the pricking of the heart and a desire to know what to do, there is no repentance, and therefore, no remission of sins.
Remission of sins therefore, takes place in baptism, and not before, as evidence for repentance.