The New Testament teaches that the penitent believer must be baptized for the remission of sins.

Beginning, it is my prayer that my opponent's family matters become peacefully resolved. Now, let's end this debate.Rebuttals: Round FiveGod's Grace1.) "Unfortunately my opponent didn’t again reply to my contentions about this matter."I most-certainly did reply; I just took a different approach. I felt as if my earlier approach was inadequate for this debate. Nonetheless, it did result in an interesting turnabout.2.) "BucketHead3459, time and again, I have showed that it does not justify your faith alone doctrine."My opponent attacks my repetition of using Eph. 2:8 for my case. I will agree that I have been using Eph. 2:8 to declare my case valid; this was because I feel as if this verse adequately exemplifies my stance in this debate. Nevertheless, I have also provided many a verse that has proven my opponent's verses out of context. In the same manner, I have supplied many a verse concerning salvation without the mention of baptism; as my opponent continues to use the same verses to support his case.3.) "Faith was living when they began to march, but the blessing was not received until they completed their obedience."Issue already refuted. Extend4.) "As for the issue of animal sacrificing, it's very different from baptism and but my opponent concludes that it's like animal sacrificing."My opponent attempts to rise concern to a contention that he has already conceded to; compromising a rule of debate. Nonetheless, I will proceed to rebuke him; although this isn't necessary: "Actually, animal sacrificing is done many, many times while baptism is done only once."According to the resolution, my opponent agrees that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness or remission of sins. I have already proven how it is impossible for man to be sinless; therefore, sins would still be accounted for. This would mean (according to my opponent's resolution) baptism would have to occur multiple times. "Baptism does not nullify Christ's sacrifice in the cross, the sacrifice on the cross brings grace and my opponent himself said that baptism does not nullify Grace therefore baptism does not nullify Christ's sacrifice."This is irrelevant. I have stated how I agree that baptism does not nullify God's grace; IF it is not necessary for the remission of sins. I have proven Christ's sacrifice would be in vain, if this were the case; as my opponent has conceded. Additional Refutations: 1.) "I stated that I agree [that baptism does not nullify God's grace], but not if it is necessary for the forgiveness of sin."Baptism is not an act of grace. It is an act of obedience. I have proven how God's grace (Jesus) would be inadequate for man's sin if baptism were the only way to remove sin.2.) "It is not baptism that would be negated, but Christ's sacrifice."My opponent claims this invalid by merely stating himself "correct." This will be considered conjecture in a debate of truth.3.) Extend all unrefuted argumentsConclusion:As this debate comes to a close, I would like to thank my opponent for the exciting disputation; I hope his future is filled with honorable challenges that will build him up into a better debater. I also extend my gratitude to any of the voters who read this entire debate; it was a long one, but I appreciate your time.