Baptism is essential to salvation

"just i said earlier baptism is for the remission of sins which my opponent ignores every timeAnd in Acts 2:38 it states "repent, and be baptized in the he name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF SINSand therefore necessary for salvation, and this baptism in the acts 2:38 is the implement o the great commission,"Again, that does not follow. Incidentally you are misusing quotation marks here. The imperative "Be baptized... For the Remission of Sins" does not establish "Baptism is necessary for salvation." In fact, since it's imperative, it couldn't even establish a conclusion similar to the premises-- commands are inherently not factual statements. "And the great commission says in Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized shall besaved, get the point"I already addressed this. However, there is no point to get. "baptism is divine imperative"Wholly irrelevant to whether it is a necessity for salvation, especially in a religion which assumes it is impossible to avoid violation of divine imperatives.Incidentally, it's Peter's imperative based on what you were citing before it. I didn't know Peter was considered by you to be divine. Is he also golden and bovine?"...Thus Baptism is a "must". Not only does it not follow that because Saul of Tarsus was told by someone that he must do something he therefore must (ad authoritatem fallacy), even if we assume that proves Baptism being a must it still doesn't tell us what it's a must for. Salvation? Certainly not demonstrated/"(2) A corollary. John 3:7 is a corollary passage. This text state, “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye "must" be born again.""This is still completely irrelevant to our debate.Basically, you're just repeating crap I've already addressed with pretty bolding. " Other "musts". Faith is a "must" (Heb. 11:6); and scriptural worship is a "must" (John 4:24). Can a person be saved without baptism when it is equally a divine imperative?"My toothbrush is a sticklike object, and a toothpick is a sticklike object. Is a club a tooth cleaning instrument merely because it is a sticklike object? No, that's completely irrelevant. "Divine imperative" and "Necessity for salvation" are two distinct phenomena. You have to create a link between them if you want the former to be relevant, and you haven't done that.:I said it's a "must" therefore what? Therefore it is necessary to salvation.Must->What? ->Necessary to salvation. I'll note that there are no relations between these terms. If your logic here is accurate, then my sister is therefore a tree and therefore a Martian. Since this is not the case, the rule "Putting up three random propositional terms and sticking a therefore between each adjacent pair proves the last of them" is false and your argument is therefore invalid. "Yes, baptism is a command not a mere suggestion or good idea or optional choice."Irrelevant. Paying my taxes is not a mere suggestion or good idea or optional choice, it does not follow that a necessary condition of my not being personally raped by reptilians is prompt payment of taxes. Likewise, even if baptism is not optional, even if it is somehow mandatory, it does not follow that it is a necessary condition of salvation. "And, be it observed that the word "non-essential" does not modify it."Be it observed that the word "Essential to salvation" does not either. Since you are making the positive claim, that means you lose."(2) Other commands. The same Lord that made faith a command (Acts 16:31; I John 3: 23) and repentance a command (Acts 17:30; 3:19; 2:38), made baptism a command. Who has the authority to say two of these are important and one is non – essential. "There is no need. All three can be important, divinely commanded, etc. , without their importance being a cause of action for "essentiality to salvation." Especially in the context of a religion where EVERYONE IS ASSUMED TO BREAK THE RULES ANYWAY." i hope also that con would also prove his position, and would not rely of what i'm saying although it is my job, but it wouldn't be a debate if i would only prove my argument, but also the opposing side "It remains a debate. That is simply how debates work, the affirmative claim has the tough job.