Resolved: Baptism is not a requirement for Salvation.

INTRODUCTION:
Concur

CONTENTION ONE:
Baptism is a public display of obedience which is symbolic of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. (Romans 6: 1-11)

CONTENTION TWO:
One must accept Jesus as their personal savior, believe that Jesus died for their sins, and confess him as Savior. (Romans 10: 9-10, 13)

SUMMARY:
While baptism is practiced, it is not a requirement.

Pleasantries aside, my dear twerpter,
I will contend that both of your contentions are in error in as far as that they are 'shortsighted'.

1.) I shall address "Baptism" as it is fully intended
which was that one had to be baptized in the holy spirit.
The public display being merely John's initiation of the concept
and Jesus' confirmation of the correctness of the concept.
One must be baptized in the holy spirit
for it is by this that a person is marked by God
that the soul will be maintained and continue.

2.) Jesus said that no one may come unto his father except though him(Jesus).
He also said that there were many 'spiritual houses'.
Even though he paid the price for the previous system's failure to recover an acceptable number of souls,
the path that he and God created by his death s wide enough
for baptized souls to be saved without visiting with the Father.

Thus I summarized,
while baptism is necessary, having Jesus as a 'personal savior' is not.

Eros for your correction.

OPPONENT's CASE REVIEW:
1. You're in the ballpark. Clarifying water baptism which comes from the Greek baptizo mean submerged. (Mounce's Expository Greek)
Spiritual baptism along with indwelling and sealing are works of the Holy Spirit at the time of Salvation (Systematic Theology, Henry Thiessen; doctrines of pneumatology & soteriology)

2. Referring to John 14:2 & 6, but not relevant to the topic. "1. recover an acceptable number of souls; 2. for baptized souls to be saved without visiting the Father; 3. having Jesus as a personal savior is not necessary to salvation"? What Bible are you reading? Definitely need to provide source for these statements. While you are correct that no one cometh unto the Father but by Jesus, that isn't the topic of discussion. Gotta stay with the program.

OBSERVATIONS:

A. My opponent hasn't presented any information to confirm that water baptism is required for salvation.
B. My opponent has numerous grammatical errors.
C. My opponent has paraphrased the words of Jesus, but has not cited any sources.

MY CASE:

A. I have cited scripture indicating the requirements for salvation, of which water baptism is not stated.
B. 2 Timothy 3: 16 proves the legitimacy of scripture.
C. While on the cross along side the two thieves, Jesus forgave the one who believed. Since he did not have the opportunity to get baptized did that negate the promise of salvation made by Jesus himself? I think not.

VOTE PRO

My dear believer with blinders on;

I certain am with the program.

First I will concede your observations A and C.
A.) Implicit in my response, I hold that water baptism is not required by indicating that it was symbolic. I was offering the alternate as the proper point of debate.
C.) If you grasped the reference sufficiently, citing sources is unnecessary.

As for the observation B, I will hold that my grammar is perfect unless particulars are noted, though I am shock you perceive a deficiency and thrilled to improve in any area, I would rather debate the issues than work on concepts of ‘High English'.

Under your case A, I read the scripture but have difficulty grasping the connections that you are implying for me to grasp.
Thus I will deal with your contention one separately and then try to grasp your point of the verses cited.

Your contention one: Baptism is a public display of obedience which is symbolic of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.

As a public display, the word "Baptism" signals to me the ceremony of water immersion.
Your contention furthered by your summary,
"While baptism is practiced, it is not a requirement."
implies that you hold the ceremony is not required and this I agree with.
But from Romans 6: 3, 4
3Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

The scripture clearly requires baptism so that we may live a new life. I shall suppose that we are in agreement.

Under your case B. 2 Timothy 3:16
16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
A statement of self-reference proves nothing. It is not that I dispute the legitimacy of scripture, but the above indicates the value of scripture and the reason it has value, not that it is true or false.

Under your case C. A man didn't have the opportunity to be baptized by John but was promised by one who walked on water that heaven wasn't denied. That is good enough for me. I would say he was baptized by blood.

And so now we are left with the Contentious Two.
"One must accept Jesus as their personal savior, believe that Jesus died for their sins, and confess him as Savior. (Romans 10: 9-10, 13)"
We are in agreement that speaking, declaring and believing that "Jesus is Lord" is sufficient to be saved as per the citation, but that it is necessary is not what that scripture says.
I didn't find a biblical reference that included the concept of ‘necessary' as you indicate was required with your words "One must accept…" thus I offer that though sufficient, Jesus is not necessary for salvation. Whether or not there is salvation outside of the church is an argument within the church. If you wish to push this point further you require a biblical reference that includes the concept of necessary in conjunction with salvation or that going in front of the ‘Father' would be necessary for salvation.
Though I appreciate your references provided, and they proved necessary for me to grasp your confusion, but for my response I must merely mention that Buddhism and Hinduism offer paths to salvation that don't mention Jesus by name for you to have the bop.

Eros for your correction.