Does it seem obvious that we can be poisoned with no ill effects?
Why do none of the epistles command water baptism if it is of salvific importance?
One reason would be because the epistles were letters written to Christian’s who had already been baptized..
Romans 1:7-to all the “SAINTS”in Rome. Written to Christian’s.
1 &
2 Corinthians 1:2- to the CHURCH of God at Corinth.
Galations 1:2- to the CHURCHES of Galatia.
Ephesians 1:1 to the SAINTS in Ephesus
Philippians 1:1- to all the SAINTS in Philippi.
Colossians 1:2- to the SAINTS AND FAITHFUL BRETHERN in CHRIST who are in Colosse.
1 &
2 Thessalonians 1:1- to the CHURCH of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
And even James, Peter and Jude, Hebrews and Revelation are all written to Christian’s who have already obeyed the gospel in baptism and are saved. So you would not expect the writers to try to persuade these churches and saints to be baptized! That would make no sense at all.
However, there are some passages on Baptism in the epistles that you would do well to read. For instance in Roman’s ,6, Paul tells those Christian’s who had already been baptized, “…AS MANY of US WHO WERE BAPTIZED INTO CHRUST 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 should walk in NEWNESS OF LIFE.” Proving that these Christian’s to whom he was writing had already been baptized. Read on through verse 11. It explains a lot of what happens in baptism. Christ shed His blood in His death. We are baptized into His death where we come into contact with His blood which then washes away our sins. No where in the scriptures does it ever say, hint, or imply that the blood of Christ washes away our sins when we “believe” or “repent” or “confess.” We come into contact with the blood of Jesus when we are baptized into His death, where His blood was shed. This is why baptism is so impirtant and why there was such urgency in the New Testament for people to be baptized.
In 1 Corinthians 1, Paul is rebuking men who call themselves after other men. He said some were calling themselves after Barnabas, and Apollos. He then makes the point that you should not call yourselves by the names of men— kinda like the LUTHERANS today call themselves after Martian Luther. Paul says there are two things that must be true before you can call yourself after someone: 1) the person needs to have been CRUCIFIED For you and 2) you would have to be BAPTIZED into that person’s name. SO, Christ has been CRUCIFIED for us and we have been BAPTIZED into the name of Christ just as Jesus said to do in the Great commission in
Matthew 28:18-19, “… baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”and also Peter in Acts 2 when he said, “ let everyone of you’be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ…” so we are now qualified to call ourselves “CHRISTIAN after the name of Christ. But what about those who don’t think Baptism is necessary and so are not baptized? Can they call themselves a Christian when they have never “put on Christ” or been baptized inHis nane. Paul would say “No.” That was His whole argument in 1 Corinthians 1. There is more about baptism in Galations and Colossians and Peter (it SAVES us) that tell us how important it is; so I don’t know why you would complain that the epistles don’t command it. I think “you do err not knowing the scriptures.” Matthew 22:29.