The Instigator
BrandonButterworth
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
TheYummyCod
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Is baptism necessary for salvation?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
BrandonButterworth
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/1/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,778 times Debate No: 35197
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (41)
Votes (2)

 

BrandonButterworth

Pro

This debate is for people who have already accepted Christianity.

I am pro, meaning I say yes to the aforementioned question.

First round is acceptance.
TheYummyCod

Con

I accept this debate.

I pray that we will both honor God, and debate on this topic without the use of discourteous behavior.
Debate Round No. 1
BrandonButterworth

Pro

Thank you to "theyummycod" for accepting this debate. In this first round most of my argument will be quotes from the bible, with very little commentary.
Mark 16:16
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved: whoever does not believe will be condemned."

Here, we see that one must believe and be baptized in order to be saved.

1 Peter 3:21
"Those flood waters were like baptism that now saves you. But baptism is more than just washing your body. It means turning to God with a clear conscience, because Jesus Christ was raised from death."

Baptism is more than just a symbol, It is something that turns you to God and cleanses you from sin, as represented in these next verses.

Acts 22:16
"Now, why delay? Get up and have yourself baptized and your sins washed away, calling upon his name."

1 Cor 6:10-11
"nor the effeminate, nor males who sleep with males, nor thieves, nor the avaricious, nor the inebriated, nor slanderers, nor the rapacious shall possess the kingdom of God. That is what some of you used to be, but now you had yourselves washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.."

Based on these verses, I contend that baptism is more than just a symbol of one's faith, but rather is completely necessary in order to enter the kingdom of heaven.
TheYummyCod

Con

God works coventially. You see his covenants throughout the Bible. He works in signs, Miracles. Such as the Rainbow after the flood, or a 'circumcised' Israel. Christians unanimously agree that circumcision is not necessary for salvation - because Jesus' death on the cross has fulfilled it. But what about Baptism? Is Baptism, so similar to circumcision, necessary for salvation?

We, as Christians, are meant to be like Jesus. Not exactly like - because nobody is perfect. But to live our lives according to the will of God, and using Jesus as an example. Baptism is an example of this. We are baptized, because it is a symbol of God's acceptance.

Ephesians 2:8-9 says:
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast."
This clearly gives the implication that by no ceremony are you given salvation, but by faith in God. Baptism is a symbol of such faith. The Bible states that if you deny God before men, God will deny you. Baptism is meant to be as a public affirmation - to make the commitment and declare that you are saved.

___

In response:

(Acts 22:16)

I quote from: http://carm.org...

" Is the washing away of sins done by baptism, the representation of the circumcised heart (Col. 2:11-12) which means you are already saved, or is it by the blood of Christ (Heb. 9:14; Rom. 5:9; Eph. 1:7)? Obviously it is the blood of Jesus and the washing here refers to the calling on Jesus' name. "

(Mark 16:16)

This doesn't make a case that baptism is necessary for salvation. It could easily say "Whoever believes and knows God's word will be saved...", yet that wouldn't make reading the Bible necessary for salvation. It is by belief and by faith that you are saved, baptism comes after.

(1 Peter 3:21)
You took the verse out of context, and you misquoted it. The verse says (NASB):
"And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you..."
But what does baptism correspond to? What is the context in which this is said? Look at verses 18-20:

"For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, 20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water."

What is it corresponding to? The ark, that saved Noah and his family. Peter refers to the flood waters as in the destruction of the ungodly, not the salvation of Noah. The ark saved - the ark that Noah built and entered by faith in God. It is the faith, that saves.

(1 Cor 6:10-11)
I do not consider this verse to have any implication related to this argument.

By this, I contend that Baptism is a symbol of faith, not necessary for salvation.
Debate Round No. 2
BrandonButterworth

Pro

In our bible we have 2 different testaments. The old and the new. The old testament focuses on the covenant that God made with Abraham, and the new testament focuses on the new covenant, brought to us by Christ. Circumcision was in the old law, or the old covenant. In order to become a Jew, one had to become circumcised in order to enter into the covenant with God.
Genesis 17:10
"This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised."
And here we see that refusing to be circumcised, cuts you off from God's people, the Jews.
Genesis 17:14
"Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant
The people who did not become in covenant with God were known as the Gentiles. Because of the fact that the Gentiles were not in covenant with God, they weren't saved, and needed to be saved.
1 Samuel 14:6
"Jonathan said to the young man who carried his armor, "Come, let us go over to the garrison of these uncircumcised. It may be that the Lord will work for us, for nothing can hinder the Lord from saving by many or by few."

His statement that "Christians unanimously agree that circumcision is not necessary for salvation" is undeniably true. Because, as we know, the old covenant has been abolished in favor of the new. But for the Jews, circumcision was a must have in order to become in covenant with God. And Christians unanimously agree that salvation is only found through God.

My opponent then says "Is Baptism, so similar to circumcision, necessary for salvation?" My opponent claims that baptism is similar to circumcision. I completely agree. In the old covenant, in order to become a disciple of Moses, one had to be circumcised. And in the new covenant, in order to become a disciple of Jesus, one has to be baptized. This is illustrated in Matthew 28:19
"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
So I'd like to ask my opponent, since salvation is only found through following Jesus Christ, and the only way to become a follower, or disciple, is by being baptized, how then can I be saved by neglecting baptism? Am I not doing the same as the Gentiles did when they neglected circumcision?
http://www.bing.com...=

My opponent then quotes from Ephesians 2:8-9 which states that there is nothing that I myself can do to be saved, for salvation is a gift from God. Amen brother, once again I completely agree with him. Salvation can only be obtained because of the grace of God. Without God and his sacrifice on the cross, I can do nothing to be saved. But one has to note that once you have God's grace (which is given to us thanks to Jesus' sacrifice) faith alone can not save you.
James 2:14
"My brothers, what benefit is there if someone claims to have faith, but he does not have works? How would faith be able to save him?"
James 2:17
"Thus even faith, if it does not have works, is dead, in and of itself."
As evidence with the above quotes, God expects you to DO something along side of your faith. This is perfectly illustrated when Jesus gives the parable of the talents. Matthew 25:14-30
https://bible.org...
(I cannot post the whole quote on here, it's too long. So I implore you to take a look at it through the link I've given you.)
Throughout the bible Jesus asks us to do something aside from simply believing, whether it's baptism (Mark 16:16) or simply following the commandments (John 14:15). Jesus Christ never says that by simply believing you will gain access into the kingdom of heaven.

In my opponents argument against Acts 22:16 he quotes CARM which states that Acts was referring to the blood of Jesus instead of baptism. This is CARM's opinion and fails to prove that baptism doesn't free us from sin. I have an opinion from Catholic.com that agrees with me, does this prove that my interpretation is correct?
"Then we read in Acts 19:1-6 and 22:16; Romans 6:3-4, 11; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 12:13; and Galatians 3:26-27, where Paul says baptism frees us from sin, makes us children of God, gives us new life, and incorporates us into the Body of Christ."
http://www.catholic.com...-

Then my opponent attacks Mark 16:16. The key word in here is "and" which means "Together with or along with" http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
So this means that "along with" believing one who is baptized will be saved. We can't just chuck out a part of a verse we don't agree with. If the bible said, "Whoever believes and knows God's word will be saved..." then knowing God's word would be necessary for salvation. But it doesn't say that, it says "whoever is baptized"

My opponent claims that I misinterpreted 1 Peter 3:21. One must understand that there is about 900 different interpretations of the bible out there, and if my version said "those flood waters" and his says "corresponding to that" I cannot take fault for that.
My opponent claims that Peter was referring to the ark, I agree. The ark represents the church. And the water of the flood represent Baptism. Thus, we are saved through baptism. My opponent also neglects to challenge when Peter says "Baptism that saves you. But baptism is more than just washing your body."

My opponent never gives an argument on 1 Corinthians, which I contend says that baptism sanctifies you. Just as 1 Peter and Mark do. I await his argument to 1 Corinthians in the next round.
TheYummyCod

Con

I have been held at an inconvenience where I am on a road trip, and will not have time nor internet to pay attention to this debate. Therefore, I forfeit.

I sincerely apologize to my opponent who has put so much work into this debate. I would ask that the voters 'vote bomb' my opponent, securing his victory.

Thank you,
The Yummy Cod
Debate Round No. 3
BrandonButterworth

Pro

Thanks to my opponent TheYummyCod for debating me thus far. Have fun on your road trip.
TheYummyCod

Con

Forfeit.
Debate Round No. 4
41 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BrandonButterworth 3 years ago
BrandonButterworth
If that same person sincerely repents of his actions, then yes. Those who ask to be forgiven, will be.
Posted by Naajpowell 3 years ago
Naajpowell
I am not a Christian but I have ONE question to ask you since we are on this topic. Can a person who has killed many children in cold blood for no reason be saved?????
Posted by BrandonButterworth 3 years ago
BrandonButterworth
Yeah I completely forgot about the debate. I just got back from a fishing trip. I caught absolutely nothing so next time maybe I'll just bring my laptop along with me.
Posted by TheYummyCod 3 years ago
TheYummyCod
Ooh, Close call. I thought you weren't going to make it.
Posted by BrandonButterworth 3 years ago
BrandonButterworth
2 minutes to spare.
Posted by BrandonButterworth 3 years ago
BrandonButterworth
That's fine, I kinda did the same thing lol.
Posted by TheYummyCod 3 years ago
TheYummyCod
Sorry about the short and quick argument - I realized that I only had 4 hours left, and had to type up something really quickly.
Posted by GOP 3 years ago
GOP
Yeah I knew that but it was still scary to see the time running out.
Posted by BrandonButterworth 3 years ago
BrandonButterworth
I still have 9 hours. :)
Posted by GOP 3 years ago
GOP
Brandon hurry up and post your argument!!! lol
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by calculatedr1sk 3 years ago
calculatedr1sk
BrandonButterworthTheYummyCodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by GOP 3 years ago
GOP
BrandonButterworthTheYummyCodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had to forfeit and abandon the debate.