If I understand your interpretation of scripture correctly, you are saying that without water baptism we cannot be saved. How is this not "works based" salvation? Do you consider infant baptism as acceptable for salvation or only adult "believer's" baptism?
What a shame that God's saving power is so limited by our ability to perform a ritual!
As TK touched on, you are assuming that Galatians 3:27 and Romans 6:3 are referring to the act of water baptism. Yet John (the Baptist) said of Christ "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire." John spoke of a greater baptism through Christ. The ritual of water baptism is a symbol of the reality of that greater baptism--our union with Christ in death and resurrection. This union comes by grace, through faith--not by performing a physical act.
The Greek word baptizo was used in the ancient world to describe much more than a religious rite. One of the common usages of the word was to describe being overwhelmed (based on the idea of a ship becoming submerged).
Here is an interesting historical note on baptism that I found on studylight.org:
Hebrews 9 speaks of things which are copies of heavenly things. "They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings--external regulations applying until the time of the new order." (9:10) When is this new order? Throughout the book of Hebrews the indication is that the old covenant is passing away and will soon disappear. This was occuring as the letter was written. Once the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed, that pretty much marked the end. We live in the new order.The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be 'dipped' (bapto) into boiling water and then 'baptised' (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g. Mark 16:16. 'He that believes and is baptised shall be saved'. Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle!
In the parallel passages which you brought up in Matthew and Mark, Jesus instructed his immediate disciples to go out and baptize (among other things). Paul was not in this number and he states in 1 Corinthians 1:14 that he was not sent to baptize. The Jewish Christians continued to participate in some Jewish religious customs (for example, Paul apparently took a Nazirite vow in Acts 18) but were not propigating them to Gentiles. Could it be that the Jewish rite of baptism was fading away along with the old covenant, to be replaced by the new covenant, which is Christ Himself?
When we see references to baptism in the New Testament, we tend to assume they are referring to water baptism, but might this be an assumption on our part? For example, Acts 19:1-7:
In this exchange, Paul seems to be contrasting John's water baptism with baptism into Jesus. The point of this text is their receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit. There is no mention of immersion in water to facilitate this baptism.While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"
They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"
"John's baptism," they replied.
Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all.
Could it be that the "one baptism" which Paul speaks of in Ephesians 4:4-5 ("There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to one hope when you were called--one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.") is the baptism into Christ--the entering into His death, burial and resurrection--which is not dependant on adherence to an ancient Jewish ritual of water immersion?
I can honestly say for myself that I was baptized into Christ (with all of the attendant benefits you listed) long before I was baptized in water. The water baptism was something I did later because I was told I should, but it gained me nothing that I hadn't already been given.
Are we moving on to the Lord's Supper now?
