We know that a prayer is not a command but a wish and we know that once baptised there can be and is “backsliding” by the individual in which the COMMITMENT of the individual made in baptism is failed to be sustained.
What can it possibly mean to ask that the waters be made “the final destruction of demons”? The nature of the waters of Baptism reveals the Orthodox understanding of the world. These waters, now in a font, are none other than the waters of the Jordan. They are an incorruptible fountain and all the things we ask for. They are the final destruction of demons because they are nothing other than Christ’s Pascha. The waters of the font are Christ’s death on the Cross and His destruction of Hades. They are the resurrection of the dead...This event becomes that event. This time is now that time. Christ’s death now becomes my death. Christ’s resurrection now becomes my resurrection.
How utterly and uselessly weak is the thought that Baptism is merely an obedience to a command given by Christ! The idea that nothing happens in Baptism is both contrary to Scripture and a denial of the very nature of our salvation.
What delusion. Assigning supernatural power to water or making that act as effecting regeneration is false doctrine wile holding baptism to merely be obedience to a command is erroneous (likewise teaching Rm. 6 refers to baptism by the Spirit, as some do). Water does not save anyone, nor the very act of baptism, but it is a formal and commanded act by which the baptized is confessing penitent, heart-purifying, regenerating effectual faith, (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9) in the Lord Jesus, (cf. Romans 10:8-13) signifying death to self and being made alive in Christ, which the act itself does not effect (contrary to RC theology at least)
Thus Paul writes,
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 should walk in newness of life (Rom. 6:3-4)....Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. (Romans 6:11-12)
"Do you not know?" is asked because they needed to realize what their baptism signified and thus act it out, and not because this act had actually effected regeneration - which is NOT what Paul, nor Peter preached.
Instead, the simplest most sucient presentation of the gospel states and records,
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. (Acts 10:43-48)
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:7-9)in whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth--the good news of your salvation--in whom also having believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the promise, (Eph 1:13 YLT)
Thus it is penitent, heart-purifying, regenerating effectual faith that preceded baptism in Acts 10, and which is interpretive of Acts 2:38.
There, Peter promised devout OT-type Jews that if they did something - baptism - which required as well as confessed faith, then they would receive the promised gift of the Spirit, for to believe is to obey, thus if they would be baptized it meant that they believed.
For as with the palsied man in Mark 2:2-11 in which forgiveness went together with healing so that the Lord could ask, "Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? " (Mark 2:9) For as with faith and obedience, forgiveness went together with healing as cause and effect. However, the effect is not be confused as being the cause, and it is clearly stated and shown that it is effectual regenerating faith which is imputed/counted for righteousness.
What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? (Romans 4:1) Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations; according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara’s womb: He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; (Romans 4:18-24)
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. (Titus 3:5)
In contrast, attributing regenerative power to baptism has resulted in vast multitudes have a false confidence that they are children of God thereby, without ever having faced their damnable condition and effectually believed on the Lord Jesus who alone can save them on His account, thus rendering them "accepted in the Beloved." (Eph. 16) Thanks be to God.
Finally, while EO's have significant disagreements with Rome, they are also hold to many errors, is as much as Rome, that of distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).