FreeGrace2 said:
Why do you continue to argue against the FACT that Paul's answer to the jailer REFUTES your claim? If water baptism was required to be saved, then Paul's answer WOULD HAVE included water baptism. How can you not see that?
What a ridiculous retort. The jailer asked a question and Paul answered it. And you just want to dodge the truth.
If water baptism was required for salvation, Paul would have said so. And he didn't say so.s
That doesn't help you in any way. Those who reject your ideas agree that water baptism is a symbol for being a Christian, which is what the jailer did.
No one is arguing that Paul disagreed with water baptism. So don't try to make it look as if that's our position. We call that being very dishonest.
What you cannot argue against is that Paul's answer to the jailer's question about what he MUST DO to be saved was to believe, without ANY mention of water baptism.
Paul's answer REFUTES your position thoroughly.