Those passages are difficult to understand if water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Back up to verse 13 and 14...
1 Corinthians 13 [...] Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
The people were all baptized, just not by Paul. Paul preached about baptism, but he rarely performed the baptisms. Where's the controvery?
“The people were all baptized, just not by Paul. Paul preached about baptism, but he rarely performed the baptisms. Where’s the controvery?”
If water baptism was required for new life, do you think Paul would leave it to others?
Heck, if it is required for new life, what happens to someone who converts, is not baptized immediately, and then dies?
And if it GIVES new life, then why don’t we forcibly baptize everyone? Just kidnap them, baptize them with water, and save them!
“>> and no infant is capable of repenting and believing.<<
Acts 16:31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”
Household. In context, I think it is safe to read that as anyone in the household who believes can be saved. However, since there is no indication in scripture that anyone is saved without repenting and believing, it is up to those who contradict the plain teaching of scripture to prove the household contained infants...