> I'd like to take a look at some of the scripture that you cited. I fear that you are, sadly, taking some of them out of context.
> Acts 16:29-31: To put this scripture in it's proper light, let's go ahead and read on to verse 34. It is interesting to note that the verse you ended with showed Paul instructing them to "Believe in the Lord Jesus" to be saved, and then in verse 33, after Paul had preached the gospel of Jesus to him and his household, they were baptized. And in verse 34 it says that he "rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household."

Don't get me wrong. I do believe baptism is a command given by our Lord God, and Christians should be baptized for that reason. And when you're saved, as those in Acts 16 were, the next natural thing to do is to be baptized. However, nowhere in Scripture does it say that, in our times, baptism is a requirement of salvation. We're saved when we believe. So believing, we should be baptized, but this is not a prerequisite for salvation, and Acts 16 simply does not suggest this.

> In Mark 16:16 Jesus himself said... [...] ...and after Christ's ascension on the day of Pentecost when Peter preached the first gospel sermon, he too was asked what to do to be saved. His reply: "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins."

Agreed and agreed. These parts of the Bible do preach believe *and* baptism for the remission of sins. I have absolutely no quibble with you about the meaning of these passages. However, I don't believe these parts were meant for us, in the present day. My argument to support that is far too extensive to repeat here, so I refer you to post #56351 as a start on that subject.

> Baptism is a symbolic act of faith.

Anything that's an "act" is a work. An act that obeys a command of God is a good work. Baptism is an act -- a symbolic act of faith, as you say -- that obeys a command of God and is therefore a good work. I don't see how this point can be argued except by redefining terms with what I consider very natural definitions, and I don't think that's either profitable or interesting to debate.

> You see, Peter does say that baptism saves(1 Peter 3:21),

Peter was the apostle to the circumcision (see that aforementioned post). I Peter was written prior to the gospel of grace being revealed to Paul. It is meant for those under the gospel of the kingdom (both past and, at the second coming, future). If this can't be established satisfactorily simply by these facts, then the gospel it preaches should do so: what it preaches and what Paul preaches are two different things, differing not just on baptism but on other issues of doctrine as well. It addresses other people under other circumstances. Those that believe as you do will take the doctrinal verses in Acts-Philemon and twist them to mean things they do not. Most of the people that believe as I do, sadly, will do the same only in reverse, twisting those doctrinal verses in Matthew-John and Hebrews-Jude (all gospel of the kingdom books, established as such the same way: by who the books are addressed to, under what circumstances, by whom, and what they actually preach -- all of these facts, about ALL New Testament books, are in accord with the details of the distinction of the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace). The better route is not to twist any of them into meaning things they do not and instead study the bigger picture of who's preaching what to whom when and determine what rules of doctrine apply to the present day.

> and it is he that Jesus said would open the doors to the kingdom(Matthew 16:18-19), not Paul.

Right. The Jews may inherit the kingdom. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. These are all things that apply to God's promise to Israel, offered to Israel first in the times of Christ and again later but not at present, when Jew and Gentile are treated alike, and never at all to Gentiles.

> Paul?s writings, you see, are not the entirety of the revealed will of God.

Right. His writings are definitely not the complete Word of God. Far be it from me to chuck out pieces of the Word of God. ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God and provided for our learning. However, you would not go back to Leviticus and build tabernacles this big and sacrifice animals this often and stone people who break the Sabbath, all on the grounds that the New Testament does not reveal "the entire will of God." Instead, one recognizes that while Leviticus is part of the Word of God and provided for our learning, it is not a part of the Word of God that is intended to provide you and me with the doctrine we are to follow today.

God's commands are not the same for all people. God commanded that none should kill Cain for his murder of Abel. Later, God commanded in Exodus that certain crimes, including murder, should be punished by death. Is Genesis and Exodus somehow miraculously in accord on the issue of capital punishment, and one must twist one or the other to mean what it does not? Hardly -- you simply accept that God told the people living in one period to do something different than he told those living in another period.

> So, seeing that Paul said the gospel (of grace, if you will) is the death burial and resurrection of Christ, evidenced by his appearances which are described in the following verses and that it is the gospel that saves, how then can be take advantage of it? Well, one of the ways we MUST take advantage of it is baptism.

I don't see baptism even MENTIONED in Romans 10:9-10, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5, Acts 16:31 (even up through verse 34), or any of the other salvation verses given for THIS current age. If baptism is a requirement of salvation, Paul was certainly leading a lot of churches astray by claiming divine knowledge of salvation, providing clear instructions on how to get it, and not once mentioning baptism.

> What else did Paul say about baptism? Well, Galatians 3:27 might shed some light.

I fully admit to not completely understanding the intention of this verse. I may do some research on it and post again when I can speak more confidently. However, nowhere does it talk about salvation. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." I don't honestly know what that means, but as it never once mentions salvation, the redemption of sin, or the equivalent, and as it would contradict Acts 16:31 if I assumed it meant "be baptized to be saved," I see no reason to assume that the verse has anything to do with salvation.