Why does faith+works=not saved?

[Matt Black]

Pretty much agreed on this one, Steaver.

 

[mman]

Originally posted by Eric B:
Who said anything about US baptizing with the holy Spirit? That was ONE use of the term baptize. There are others which are literal referring to water, and still others that are spiritual meaning immersed into the Body of Christ. You are blurring them all together to try to get literal water baptism to be what saves.
This "two baptisms" thing is old already. No one ever confessed to any two baptisms, and nobody sees it that way, except you, as a straw man you make of our position, because that's the only answer you have against it. There is one baptism, with both a spiritual and physical aspect. Nobody said anything about one of them "ending", or one being "replaced" by the other. This continues as long as the Church and this world continues.
You're so busy trying to divide water baptism from spirit baptism into "two baptisms", that you miss when we point out that once again, the water ceremony simply represented the spiritual transaction that occurred when people received Christ. They then made the public profession of him on the spot. Yet since it is faith that saves, and not works, (and "Faith" is NOT works, though it should be accompanied by them), then we see that it is not the water ceremony that has the saving power, but the spiritual act of joining Christ. The two were viewd as one in the same and thus used interchangeably, as we see in your examples, yet in the Church it later changed, with the water ceremony taking place later. It was this later Church that split them into two things, (and we cannot just wave our hands and change it back), so it is futile to keep using that "two baptisms" rhetoric against us. You still cannot deny salvation to the people who have received Christ until that later date.

You are making up your own definition of words. Where does it say there that the "instructions" WERE themselves the "grace", or even "provided by" the grace? The word means "favor", and is also translated as that, and as "precious", and "pleasure" elsewhere. He found the grave or favor with God FIRST, then God decided he should be saved from the flood and provided him the instructions for the ark. Two totally separate things! THEN he by faith in God's warning prepared the ark. A THIRD separate thing. The building of the ark was in itself not the "faith", but was something done "BY" the faith [separate entity!], showing the opposite of what you are always trying to teach by it. Yet then you try to mesh it all together by mixing Hebrews' use of the word "grace" into it, along with the "grace through faith" of Eph. to prove that the "grace" WAS the instructions, and the "Faith" was the work. Faith is trusting God for whatever He says. Whether it is instructions to do something, or otherwise. In Noah's case, it was instructions for work that physically "saved" him. It is used as an example for the spiritual salvation promised us now, and like the salvation translating from a physical one to a spiritual one; God has determined this is attained by a spiritual act (acceptance of Christ) and not a physical work, "lest any man should boast".

Eric, do you want the truth?

It's really simple. The bible makes a distinction between baptism in water and baptism with the Holy Spirit. They NEVER occurred simultaneously. That fact alone destroys your total logic. I can show beyond any doubt where they occured separetely, therefore they CANNOT be one in the same!!!!!!! Get tired of it all you want, it does not change the truth.

Since they are distinct, then the one baptism in Eph 4:5 is water baptism. That is the only command man can carry out, since the other was a promise and something Jesus would do.

Now on to God's grace providing instructions.

Let's read Titus 2:11-12,

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age," - ESV

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age," - NAS

"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age," - NKJV

"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age,"

What trains us?
What instructs us?

God's grace provides instructions. It provided Noah instructions and it provides us instructions today.

If we ignore those instructions, it's not because God's grace didn't provide them.

I Pet 3:20-21 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

You can perform all the mental gymnastics you want, but if you will remove the prejudice and prior teaching and read this for what it says, you will see how baptism in water saves us.

We know that there is no inherent power in the water, but the blood of Christ. That is how we come in contact with the death of Christ, where his blood flowed.

Let's read Rom 6:3-4, "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."

Just the mere fact that baptism always means baptism in water unless something in the text dictates otherwise should be enough to convince anyone that water baptism is essential to salvation.

It truly takes help to misunderstand the clear teaching of God's word that He has graciously provided to us.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by mman:

We know that there is no inherent power in the water, but the blood of Christ. That is how we come in contact with the death of Christ, where his blood flowed.

This is a heretical fallacy.
There is nowhere in Scripture where you can show that through baptism we come in contact with the blood of Christ. They are not even related. There is nothign to relate the blood of Christ to baptism. If baptism is not but a symbol then you do succumb to a superstitious magical practice of which you just denied.
DHK

 

[mman]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by mman:

We know that there is no inherent power in the water, but the blood of Christ. That is how we come in contact with the death of Christ, where his blood flowed.

This is a heretical fallacy.
There is nowhere in Scripture where you can show that through baptism we come in contact with the blood of Christ. They are not even related. There is nothign to relate the blood of Christ to baptism. If baptism is not but a symbol then you do succumb to a superstitious magical practice of which you just denied.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]Matt 26:28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized (water) in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins (blood); and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Simply comparing Acts 2:38 and Matt 26:28, we can see that we come in contact with the blood at baptism in water.

It can also be noted that the same Greek phrase which is translated, “for the remission of sins”, is used in both Acts 2:38 and Matt 26:28. If one tries to say that we are baptized because we have already received forgiveness of sins is the same as saying that Christ’s blood was shed because peoples’ sins had already been forgiven, which we know is impossible.

Since Jesus’ blood, that has the power to forgive sins, flowed at his death, how can we come in contact with his death? Romans 6:3-4 tells us, “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”

The death, burial, and resurrection. This is the gospel according to I Cor 15:1-4, “Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you--unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures”. Since this is the gospel, how do we “obey the gospel” (II Thes 1:8, I Pet 4:17)?

Back to Romans 6, Paul said in verse 17, “But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine (death, burial, and resurrection that he talked about in verses 3 and 4) to which you were delivered.” He had already stated in verses 2-4 that they were no longer slaves to sin because they had died to sin, were buried with him in baptism, and were raised to walk in newness of life, thus obeying that form of doctrine (death, burial, and resurrection) talked about in verse 17. This is how we obey the gospel.

Therefore, baptism is how we come in contact with the blood of Christ that flowed at his death. This also shows the significance of John 19:34 that states, “But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.”

Baptism is how we get INTO Christ, where all spiritual blessings are and where salvation is found (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27, Eph 1:3, II Tim 2:10). This is why Paul was told to “…arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” in Acts 22:16. If we did not come in contact with the blood of Christ at baptism, this would not make any sense whatsoever, since only the blood of Christ has the power to wash away sins.

This agrees with Eph 5:25-27, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.

This also agrees with Col 1:13-14, “He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins” and later in Col 2:12-13 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses.

Furthermore, it agrees with Gal 3:26-27, “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” They are what? Sons of God. How? Through faith. Where? In Christ. Why? Because they had been baptized into Christ.

Peter, through inspiration, tells us of the importance of baptism, instructing the people on the day of Pentecost what they needed to do to receive the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). If you or I had been in the crowd on that glorious day, what would we have done to obtain the forgiveness of ours sins? The same thing that they did, repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of our sins.

Perhaps, our Lord, in his final instructions to his apostles, gave the easiest, most straight forward statement on the subject in Mark 16:16, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” This verse tells us what to do to be saved and what to do to be condemned.

Can water alone wash away sins? Certainly not, only the blood of Christ can do that. Water, by itself can no more wash away sins than it can cure leprosy. Yet, through Naaman’s obedience to God’s instructions, he did just that as recorded in 2 Kings 5. God’s grace has given us instruction on what is required to be pleasing to Him. Through faith, we submit to God in baptism, coming in contact with the blood of Christ, having our sins forgiven, and being added to the saved who are in Christ and in his Church, where every spiritual blessing exists.

There is a wonderful Old Testament pattern given for our learning. It was a shadow of the good things to come. Heb 9:19-22, “For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20saying, "This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

Here we have water and blood being used to purify. God gave Moses specific instructions for the construction of the tabernacle, courtyard, and furnishings. Only the priests were allowed into the holy place. Today, Christians are a priesthood (I Pet 2:5,9) serving in the holy place or house of God/Church.

Heb 10:19-22, “Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, 20by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.

We know the house of God is the Church (I Tim 3:15). We can enter the Church by the blood of Jesus. Here we have our hearts sprinkled with blood and our bodies washed in water.

Where did God tell Moses to put the laver of water? Between the alter (blood) and the door of the tabernacle (holy place) – Ex 30:17-21, 40:7, 30. That fact alone should be enough to tell us the proper order, that baptism precedes salvation as is also stated in Mark 16:16. The penalty for trying to enter the holy place without washing in the laver was death! Yet how many people today teach that one is saved before he is baptized. Therefore, they could not enter the holy place without having come in contact with the blood and water. They did not come in contact with the blood and water after they were already in the holy place, but before!

The priest of old had to continually offer sacrifices and wash. Just as Jesus, our High Priest, needed only once, for all time, to offer his blood sacrifice, we also only need once to wash in the waters of baptism to come in contact with His blood. When we are washed and have the blood applied to us, we can serve as His Priests in the holy place (church).

Matt 26:28, “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The two things listed are for the remission of sins, the blood and the water. It is no wonder or coincidence that blood and water flowed from the Savior’s side, at his death.

 

[DHK]

Nothing like stringing a series of passages together (all taken out of context). Do you believe on transubstantiation too? It sounds like it.
DHK

 

[Eric B]

Eric, do you want the truth?

It's really simple. The bible makes a distinction between baptism in water and baptism with the Holy Spirit. They NEVER occurred simultaneously. That fact alone destroys your total logic. I can show beyond any doubt where they occured separetely, therefore they CANNOT be one in the same!!!!!!! Get tired of it all you want, it does not change the truth.

Since they are distinct, then the one baptism in Eph 4:5 is water baptism. That is the only command man can carry out, since the other was a promise and something Jesus would do.

You still mix up the "Baptism WITH the spirit" (Acts) with Baptism BY the Spirit into one Body. Noone ever said we baptize with the Spirit, like John said Jesus would do. This is your own straw man. Yes, the only command we can carry out is to baptize with water, but it is the Spirit that baptizes (immerses) the person into the Body. If you insist that the only baptism now for us is something men do, then it is men who have the power to add a person (spiritually) to the Church. Now, that is beginning to sound like the Romanists!

Now on to God's grace providing instructions.

Let's read Titus 2:11-12,

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age," - ESV

What trains us?
What instructs us?

God's grace provides instructions. It provided Noah instructions and it provides us instructions today.

If we ignore those instructions, it's not because God's grace didn't provide them.

You STILL mix all of this up. The grace is not the "INSTRUCTIONS"; it "brings" SALVATION; which then, (through the conviction of the Spirit) instructs us in those things. It is NOT "the grace of God whch brings instructions to renounce ungodliness, etc., [in turn] training us unto salvation". That's BACKWARDS. But that is what you are reading into the text. It doesn't matter how many translations you quote; it just does not say what you are trying to make it say.

I Pet 3:20-21 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

You can perform all the mental gymnastics you want, but if you will remove the prejudice and prior teaching and read this for what it says, you will see how baptism in water saves us.

We know that there is no inherent power in the water, but the blood of Christ. That is how we come in contact with the death of Christ, where his blood flowed.

Let's read Rom 6:3-4, "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."

Just the mere fact that baptism always means baptism in water unless something in the text dictates otherwise should be enough to convince anyone that water baptism is essential to salvation.

It truly takes help to misunderstand the clear teaching of God's word that He has graciously provided to us.

And I've explained this to you several times now. The water baptism accompanied the spiritual baptism (INTO the BODY), and thus marked it. They were not separated at that time, so could be spoken of as one. If a person openly confessed Christ by being baptized, they were then considered to be in Christ.
You keep trying to say that the water does not have the power, but that disclaimer is shallow, because in practice, it is all about the water, and there is no salvation without it. That places the power in the water. That exalts the water to the status of the blood. They are like one and the same (spiritually) in your system. So just admit it, or ditch the teaching.

 

[mman]

Originally posted by DHK:
Nothing like stringing a series of passages together (all taken out of context). Do you believe on transubstantiation too? It sounds like it.
DHK

I'm disappointed in you. The verses were not taken out of context, you just don't like the obvious conclusion.

I don't believe in transubstantiation? Another erroneous conclusion.

John said, "This is he who came by water and blood--Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree. - I Jn 5:6-8

Here we have water and blood tied together.

What is the Spirit's role? He is the one who testifies, because the Spririt is truth.

John 14:14 says, "...Thy word is truth"

Other places refer to the "Spirit of Truth".

Men inspired of the Holy Spirit spoke the truth and it is recorded for us.

Read Acts 2:4, "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance."

Therefore it was the Spirit speaking through the Apostles of which Peter was included.

Now, Acts 2:38, "And Peter said (by the Holy Spirit) to them, "Repent and be baptized (water)every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins(blood), and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Matt 26:28 clearly tells us that his blood was shed for the remission of sins.

Therefore, Acts 2:38 is a place where the blood, water, and Spirit all come together and agree as one.

Do you really think it was a coincidence that blood and water came forth from our Savior's side at His death? (Jn 19:34)

When you consider I John 5 when reading Rom 6, it is so clear how they agree as one.

Do you also think it is a coincidence that part of Jesus last instructions was "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"? Do you believe Jesus or not? Was he being misleading, just kidding, or mistaken?

Since the water and blood are two of the things that are in agreement, any passage that you can come up with that shows how we come in contact with the blood, I can tie back to baptism. Rom 6 already does that on it's own, but since all the scriptures are in harmony, there is nothing to preclude water baptism in any verse dealing with the blood.

 

[Dustin]

mman, what's the doctrine of grace?

 

[xdisciplex]

Originally posted by gb93433:
James talks about faith by itself is not a saving faith but rather an empty creedal faith. Faith which is a genuine saving faith is accompanied by actions which are the proof of their faith. Faith without works is dead. The Jews held that their faith was in the shema and that they were God's people. Tey did not have agenuine saving faith in Chirst but their faith was in the pages of the OT. James teachesd that a genuine saving faith is dynamic and written in the hearts of men. James teaches that a genuine saving faith is clearly demonstrated in works which accompany faith. Faith by itself is not faith. Faith in the NT is a verb not a static head knowledge. A genuine saving faith is dynamic. Works come as a result of a genuine saving faith in Jesus Christ. Faith does not come as a result of works.

Totally agree, very good answer!

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by mman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by DHK:
Nothing like stringing a series of passages together (all taken out of context). Do you believe on transubstantiation too? It sounds like it.
DHK

I'm disappointed in you. The verses were not taken out of context, you just don't like the obvious conclusion.

I don't believe in transubstantiation? Another erroneous conclusion.

John said, "This is he who came by water and blood--Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree. - I Jn 5:6-8

Here we have water and blood tied together.

What is the Spirit's role? He is the one who testifies, because the Spririt is truth.</font>[/QUOTE]The verses have nothing to do with baptismal regeneration--the heresy in which you believe. In no way is baptism connected with the blood. Use the KJV. You will get a better understanding of these verses.

1 John 5:6-8 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
--No contradiction here. The three that bear witness are the three persons of the trinity: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These three are one. And it was this triune Godhead that bore witness of Christ that he was the Messiah, the son of God, thee specific times in his ministry:
1. Frist it was at his baptism. If your pernicious heretical doctrine of baptismal regenration is correct then you are portraying Jesus as a sinful man in need of salvation. But that is not what the baptism of Jesus was all about. He did not need salvation. His baptism was not connected with salvation in any way. It was the Father bearing witness of the Son that he was indeed the Son of God, the Messiah:

Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
--That was the Father's witness of the Son at his baptism (water). He bore witness of the Son.

--Again the Father bore witness of the Son on the cross that He was the Son of God, as Jesus cried out:
Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

John 19:34-35 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
--The blood was shed. John bore record of the blood that was shed. It is blood that makes an atonement for our sins. The blood of Christ bore witness of our salvation. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. Everyone that was there saw that bloody sacrifice, and was witness to it.

The Spirit bore witness to the fact that Jesus was the Son of God. He bore witness to the thief on the cross. He bore witness to the centurion at the foot of the cross, who said: "Surely this is the Son of God." He bore witness on the day of Pentecost where 3,000 were saved without being baptized. Their baptism was not part of their salvation. Baptism is not connected with the blood in any way except in your imagination.

John 14:14 says, "...Thy word is truth.

Other places refer to the "Spirit of Truth".

Men inspired of the Holy Spirit spoke the truth and it is recorded for us.

And your point is??
So what has this to do with baptism? Absolutely nothing!

Read Acts 2:4, "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance."

Therefore it was the Spirit speaking through the Apostles of which Peter was included.

And therefore?? Your point being?? The Holy Spirit spoke through all the Apostles. The Apostles were the authors of the books of the New Testament. This is nothing strange. And it has nothing to do with baptism.

Now, Acts 2:38, "And Peter said (by the Holy Spirit) to them, "Repent and be baptized (water)every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins(blood), and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

We know that it is a lie to exagerrate; however if I have told you the meaning of this verse once, I have told it to you a million times and yet you will not believe. You will also give me your same old stock COC answer.

I indeed baptize you with water unto (eis) repentance: (Mat.3:11)
Acts 2:38: baptize..."for (eis) the forgiveness of sins.

Did John baptize in order that they might receive forgiveness of sins, or on the basis that they had already repented from their sins. Because they had repented he baptized them. Because they had forgiveness, Peter baptized them. That is the meaning of the two verses. The construction is the same. Study the two verses carefully. The same prepostion is used in these two verses.
Also remember that the audience that Peter was speaking to was Jewish, the same audience that John was speaking to. Baptism was closely identified with repentance, and yet always following it.

Matt 26:28 clearly tells us that his blood was shed for the remission of sins.

So? It was. That is the truth of the whole matter. But baptism has nothing to do with this truth. Baptism destroys this truth if included in salvation.

Therefore, Acts 2:38 is a place where the blood, water, and Spirit all come together and agree as one.

Therefore it isn't. Baptism always follows salvation, never precedes it. Study the Scriptures. Baptism has nothing to do with the blood.

Do you really think it was a coincidence that blood and water came forth from our Savior's side at His death? (Jn 19:34)

No. Both were evidences of the death of Christ. They were physical evidences of his death. They have nothing to do with baptism. Neither does the bath water in my bath tub. They are unrelated.

When you consider I John 5 when reading Rom 6, it is so clear how they agree as one.

It is not clear at all. You have to twist Scripture and read into it your own COC doctrine to get it to mean what you want it to mean.

Do you also think it is a coincidence that part of Jesus last instructions was "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"? Do you believe Jesus or not? Was he being misleading, just kidding, or mistaken?

This is a summary of the same commission given in Mat.28:18,19

Matthew 28:19-20 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

What is the command. Go and teach (disciple or evangelize), and then after that baptize, and then teach some more. Note that baptism comes after salvation. This is the same command given at the same time. It is the last command that he gave his disciples before he ascends into heaven. Mark only recorded a part of it. He summarized it. Matthew recorded it in full. You are the one that is misleading.
Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures neither the power of God.

Since the water and blood are two of the things that are in agreement, any passage that you can come up with that shows how we come in contact with the blood,

This is not true. I have demonstrated that already. Here is what Peter says about your interpretation:

"...in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. " (2Pet.3:16)

I can tie back to baptism. Rom 6 already does that on it's own, but since all the scriptures are in harmony, there is nothing to preclude water baptism in any verse dealing with the blood.

Romans 6 gives a picture of a believers baptism; baptism after salvation. It has nothing to do with salvation at all. It has nothing to do with the blood. "Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures..."
DHK