A person Becomes a Christian at the Point of Baptism and not before

I started out this debate by affirming "That a person, who believes that Jesus is the Christ, must be baptized into Christ in order to become a Christian and thus are saved." I also said that I must prove 3 objectives. 1. Belief alone does not save. 2. The actions that save a person from their sins must involve baptism. 3. I must also prove that anything less than baptism with the correct understanding, does not make one a Christian, but a follower of the blind, who leads ignorant people to hell with himself. I have proved point number 1 beyond a shadow of a doubt. My Opponent "nickthengineer" Said, at the end of round 1... "My opponent is correct in that believers should be doers of the Word, and not hearers only." (James 1:22) He agreed with me so I have proven this point. Yet my opponent seems confused for he also said... "This is why James rhetorically asks, "Can that faith save him?" Again, actions do not save, but salvation results in proper actions." Is this true, or a devils lie? Ja. 2:17, Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James is talking to Jewish Christians and reminded them of their great confession. Yet in John 3:16 I showed that belief is a verbal noun, a preposition, literally teaching us in order to be saved we must have a working belief. 2 points; 1. John 6:29 Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent." #. This verse teaches us that belief is a work. This word in the Greek also is a verb. #. This verse is an action word that expresses something we must do. 2. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that who so ever believing into him should not perish but have ever lasting life." Notice the word into "eis" is the Greek word meaning to enter into, or with a view toward. Now this is where my friend missed the boat. My esteemed rival seems to think that Acts 2:38 means because of and has translated it as such. Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for (because of) the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Translating the word "eis" in the Greek to "because of" is wrong. "Because of" does not make a participle out of belief. It cannot be used in John 3:16 or Acts 2:38. Violating grammar law is an auto defeat. His entire argument is based on this violation. This, in his ignorance, has proven him wrong. Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ "into" "eis" the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Giving "eis" its proper meaning will never violate grammar law. In Acts 2:38, both, repent and baptized are a command! This cannot be denied. Any Bible interpretation must include all of Scripture, not just the portions that we like. When we use only the parts we like that is poor exegesis to say the least. In Acts 2:38, the words "repent" and "be baptized" are connected with the conjunction "and." A conjunction is a part of speech that connects two thoughts of equal importance or value. In this case, "repent" and "baptized" both being of equal importance. In his example of the bird, "Whatever has feathers and is a flying creature is a bird, but whatever does not have feathers is not a bird" let me ask you, was it a command or a statement of fact? It does make a difference. When I used "The warden said to them, Stop committing crimes, and let everyone of you be pardoned upon the name of Jesus Christ, into forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Which was more important, stop committing the crimes, or the pardon, or are they both equal? Both were commanded and the word "and" made them both equal. Both repent and be baptized, are verbs and are words that express action. In nickthengineer argument he refuses baptism, because he says it is a work, well, so is repentance, both are verbs. If repentance is a command, which it is, and we must do it in order to be saved, which Jesus said in Luke 13:3, "I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish." Then we learn that is a command and a work, just like baptism. Nick said, "Again, actions do not save, but salvation results in proper actions." So using his argument in Acts 2:38, these people were saved before they repented!! That means they were saved in vs 37. If that was the case, why did Peter give the command? This does not make sense? We see the Ethiopian eunuch being taught the gospel in Acts 8:35. As we look at vs. 37, it's obvious that the eunuch believed, but he still wasn't saved at that point in time. He knew there was something else that needed to be done which Philip taught in vs. 35. That "something else" was submitting to the command of baptism in vs. 38-39, which he gladly did, and then "went on his way rejoicing." If he did not just get his sins washed away why did he rejoice at that point? "Then Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing." Again the word belief here is a verb. When Philip used the verb belief it was in the present, active indicative mood. That means: Tense: Present. The present tense represents a simple statement of fact or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases this corresponds directly with the English present tense. Voice: Active. The active voice represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, "The boy hit the ball," the boy performs the action. Mood: Indicative. The indicative mood is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood. When the eunuch responded he used the same verb in this mood. Tense: Present, Active, Indicative. Proofs, The new Analytical Greek lexicon by Wesley perschbacher, Moulton Analytical Greek lexicon, and the Blue letter bible lexicon. Along with Strong Greek lexicon. My opponent does not think the rules of language evidently are important, for he uses the word belief only as a noun. When in Acts 2:38 they believed so strongly that they had killed the son of God, Jesus Christ, which 3000 of them said, Men and brethren what shall we do? Vs 37. A belief of action that also corresponds with John 3:16. Now Rom 10:10, For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Notice the word unto righteousness and also unto salvation, in both places unto is the Greek word "eis." If the word in Acts 2:38 "eis" which he translates to mean "because of," well it must be "because of" there also! So let's replace the word "unto" with "because of" and see how that works? Rom 10:10, For with the heart one believes (because of) righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made (because of) salvation." Wrong definition, right? This would make one saved because he is righteous, and already saved, this does not make sense does it? In the same way in Acts 2:38, it does not make sense! If Nick follows the laws of physics like he does the laws of English grammar, I would not want to walk into a structure nick built. 1. He ignores the law of conjunctions. 2. He ignores the law of verbs. 3. He ignores the law of preposition. 4. He ignores all other scriptures that don't go along with what he believes. 5. Most importantly he ignores the very gospel of Christ. This is God's power to save. Thanks Nick for the debate, you conducted your self honorable.