When Jesus was on earth, He could save people any way, anytime, He chose. He not only saved the thief on the cross, He also saved the man let down through a hole in the roof. That does not mean that people today can be saved that way.
You make it sound like there are multiple ways to be saved, yet the thief on the cross and the man let down through a hole in the roof were both saved by
faith.
Luke 23:39 - Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us."
40 But the other, answering,
rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41
And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said to Jesus, “Lord,
remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” 43 And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you,
today you will be with Me in Paradise.”
Luke 5:18 - Some men came carrying a paralyzed man on a mat and tried to take him into the house to lay him before Jesus. 19 When they could not find a way to do this because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and lowered him on his mat through the tiles into the middle of the crowd, right in front of Jesus. 20 - When Jesus saw their
faith, he said, “Friend,
your sins are forgiven.”
He very likely was baptized with John’s baptism but no one knows.
Certain people may try to argue that the thief on the cross may have been converted, was water baptized, yet the
fruit of that is
being crucified as a thief? - (highly unlikely) In Matthew 27:39-44, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests' scribes and elders
blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and
EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. More fruit? I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that one of the thieves had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died while still hanging on the cross before having the opportunity to be water baptized.
You do not understand the difference between the old Jewish law of Judaism and the new law of Jesus Christ for Christian’s. The thief lived under the laws of the Jews; the laws of Judaism. It did not require baptism. Read Hebrews 9:16-17. Jesus had a will, the New Testament is called the last will and testament of Jesus Christ. It contains the gospel message of salvation. It was never required of the thief or anyone else before Jesus’s death on the cross. Just like any “will” today, it did not come into effect until Jesus’s death. That’s exactly what Hebrews 9:16-17 tells us
A common argument used by water-salvationists in an attempt to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved by
faith "apart from water baptism" is, "the thief was not subject to baptism because he died under the Old Testament mandate. (Others may argue how do we know he was not already water baptized just to cover all the bases). So let's see, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Acts 2:38, we read - "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.." and before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, we read - John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a
"baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."
So, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, was this baptism of repentance
for (eis) "in order to obtain" the remission of sins or was it or
for (eis) "in regard to/on the basis of" remission of sins received upon repentance? It would have to be
the latter in order to agree with the Old Testament mandate argument from water-salvationists. In Matthew 3:11, we read: I baptize you with water
for (eis) repentance.. If interpreted "in order to obtain" the verse does not make sense. I baptize you with water
for (eis) "in order to obtain" repentance? or I baptize you with water for (eis) "in regard to/on the basis of" repentance? Obviously,
the latter. In Luke 24:47, we read - and that
repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. *No mention of baptism.
Whatever baptism is
"for" in Acts 2:38, it's
"for" in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3. In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis. *No mention of baptism in Acts 3:19.
*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received
the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 -
the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was
BEFORE water baptism. (Acts 10:47)
In Acts 5:31, we read - Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give
repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. *No mention of baptism.
In Acts 11:17-18, we read - If therefore God gave them the
same gift (Holy Spirit) as He gave us
when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, (compare with Acts 16:31 - believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved with no mention of baptism) who was I that I could withstand God?” When they heard these things, they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles
repentance to life.”
In Acts 15:7-9, we read - And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should
hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 So God, who knows the heart,
acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made
no distinction between us and them,
purifying their hearts by faith. *What happened to baptism?
In Acts 26:18, we read - to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may
receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are
sanctified by faith in Me. *What happened to baptism?
In Acts 10:43 we read
..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received
the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 -
when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 -
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as
repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.
*So, the only logical conclusion
when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18).
*Perfect Harmony*
So, the water baptism is not necessary for salvation under the Old Testament mandate but is necessary for salvation under the New Testament mandate argument is bogus and does not hold water. Before AND after Pentecost, salvation is through
belief/faith "apart from water baptism" (Luke 7:50; 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43-47; 11:17-18; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:2-6; 5:1; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).