This is a poor analogy for "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved". Can you not see this?
I see it. "He who believes and is baptized will be saved" (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized)
but he who does not believe will be condemned. While this verse tells us something about believers who have been baptized (they will be saved), it does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized. In order for this verse to teach that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, a third statement would be necessary, such as, "He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned" or "He who is not baptized will be condemned." *But, of course, neither of those statements are found in the verse.
John 3:18 - He who
believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO)
does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO)
because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. *Can you not see this?
In Mark 16:16 the subjects "believes" and "baptized" are distinct.
Yes they are and there is a "distinction" between believing AND getting baptized "afterwards" and you can believe and not yet be water baptized.
Your "takes his medication" and "washes it down with water" are saying the same thing.
No, there is also a "distinction" between taking medication AND washing it down with water. One who takes his medication dry without washing it down with water still took his medication, which is what makes you well and not the water.
Take you medication and wash it down with water?? This is your analogy?? Do you talk this way?
The analogy makes perfect sense, but you insist on continuing to fight against the truth because you are determined to accommodate your biased church doctrine at all costs.
My analogy is proper
its subjects are distinct. You are simply putting two similar ideas together and presenting one as redundant. This is a bogus analogy, one invented out of desperation.
You are the master of IRONY.
Again, using my proper analogy please answer the following questions: Does the cause "but whoever fails the quiz will not go" negate the need for the permission slip? Does the teacher need to qualify herself in the same breath for the need for the permission slip to be valid?
This is not a proper analogy so answering the question is irrelevant. There is no need for shady lawyer tactics and this is not a silly game of battle of the intellects. The Bible is not simply a text book that we rely solely on human intelligence to understand. In 1 Corinthians 2:14, we read - But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
You seem to base understanding God's word solely on human intelligence and deny an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. Yet scripture says, “For our gospel came
not unto you in word only but also in
power and in the
Holy Spirit.." - 1 Thessalonians 1:5.
"Lydia...
whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul" - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. While the word is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is also necessary. Paul referred to his preaching as being "in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power" (1 Corinthians 2:4). This explains why the preaching of those who teach salvation by works is dead and relies so heavily upon faulty human logic and legalism.
*So there is more to coming to saving faith in Christ/believing the gospel than merely paper, ink and human intelligence.