does baptism save debate

Hillsage said:

Your 'one baptism' understanding of Ephesians 4 is like so many Christians, so you're certainly not alone in it. The problem is it falls short, in the light of scripture. Indeed I struggled with it for many years as I sought the truth that only comes from the Spirit of truth when we attempt to untangle the doctrines which we are warned about in scripture.

MAT 15:9 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.'"

The following verse was written a few years after your Ephesians quote above. It speaks of what is required to go on to maturity/perfection after one has a foundational understanding of the BASIC ("elementary/principle") doctrines of Christ.


HEB 6:1 Therefore leaving the (elementary) principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection (maturity); not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 Of the doctrine of baptisms,

As you can plainly see, multiple baptisms are the 'basic/fundamental/elementary teaching we should be receiving in the church.

Click to expand...

I do not see it as a theological issue more than a mathematics issue: 1=1.


Heb 6:1 "Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,."


The context of the book of Hebrews is warning Jewish Christians not to return back to the law of Moses. In Hebrews 5:12-14 these Jewish Christians had not grown/matured as Christians as they should have. Paul says to them " ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God". The Jews learned of Christ through the law of Moses and they were to leave those OT principles about Christ and "go on to perfection". The OT system could not bring one to "perfection" as the NT system does (Hebrews 7:19). Yet these Jewish Christians were trying to return back to those OT principles. So these principles mentioned in verses 1 and 2 were part of the OT system that laid the path to NT Christianity. In Ephesians 2:20 Paul mentions the foundation of Christianity "being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets" The OT prophets laid the foundation to NT Christianity and "laying again the foundation" (Heb 6:1) would be a return back to the OT law of Moses.

So the plural "baptisms" refer to the principles of the law of Moses that laid a foundation unto Christianity. These baptisms had to do with Jewish washing under the law of Moses and not the one baptism of this present dispensation.

Paul (who may have wrote the Hebrew epistle) does not contradict himself by saying there is one baptism in effect today in Eph 4 and many baptisms in effect today in Heb 6.

lee11 said:

hi

thx for that.

can a person be saved by just believing on Jesus without water baptism?

Example John 1.12
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

thx

Click to expand...

John 1:12 show believers have the right to become sons of God. Belief only therefore does not make one a son of God. BY having belief one can the repent of sins (Luke 13:3) confess (Matthew 10:32-33) and be baptized putting on Christ (Mark 16:16, Gal 3:27) then one is a child of God.

TheSeabass said:

I do not see it as a theological issue more than a mathematics issue: 1=1.

Heb 6:1 "Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,."

Click to expand...

If I closed '1' eye, I would agree with you. But I didn't just quote the '1' verse you just quoted I went into the REST of the fundamental doctrines which were to include.

Hebrews 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

I hope you aren't going to tell me that this whole list is for JEWS only!!! It is a list for immature JEWS to become mature CHRISTIANS. And it is the same for US.

The context of the book of Hebrews is warning Jewish Christians not to return back to the law of Moses. In Hebrews 5:12-14 these Jewish Christians had not grown/matured as Christians as they should have. Paul says to them " ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God".

Click to expand...

And those are the first principle doctrines for ORACLES of God for Christianity, not Judaism. In case you did not know, the Sadducees didn't even believe in a resurrection. That was a major theological disagreement for them which Paul used to his defense in Acts.

Acts 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.

The Jews learned of Christ through the law of Moses and they were to leave those OT principles about Christ and "go on to perfection". The OT system could not bring one to "perfection" as the NT system does (Hebrews 7:19). Yet these Jewish Christians were trying to return back to those OT principles. So these principles mentioned in verses 1 and 2 were part of the OT system that laid the path to NT Christianity. In Ephesians 2:20 Paul mentions the foundation of Christianity "being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets" The OT prophets laid the foundation to NT Christianity and "laying again the foundation" (Heb 6:1) would be a return back to the OT law of Moses.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Paul wasn't in Israel preaching to Jews in Israel. We're talking the city of Ephesus which was 600 miles away. The OT/OLD COVENANT prophets were until JOHN and they were not the foundation for the NT/NEW COVENANT. The letter to Ephesus was written 60+ years after the start of the church and the church had it's own apostles, prophets, teachers from the very start.

Luke 16:16 "The law and the prophets (OT) were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it violently.

And though Paul may have preached to some Jews, in his days, his calling wasn't even to them.

GAL 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, (Paul) as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Paul (who may have wrote the Hebrew epistle) does not contradict himself by saying there is one baptism in effect today in Eph 4 and many baptisms in effect today in Heb 6.

Click to expand...

At least we agree here. Paul was never making a distinction because Paul was not even considering a baptism which had to be accomplished by us in Ephesians to begin with. And THAT is why it doesn't contradict Hebrews.

TheSeabass said:

John 1:12 show believers have the right to become sons of God. Belief only therefore does not make one a son of God. BY having belief one can the repent of sins (Luke 13:3) confess (Matthew 10:32-33) and be baptized putting on Christ (Mark 16:16, Gal 3:27) then one is a child of God.

Click to expand...

hi

im not sure i understand

believing only gives people the right to become a child of God

but does not save a person

is that right?

thx

lee11 said:

hi

im not sure i understand

believing only gives people the right to become a child of God

but does not save a person

is that right?

thx

Click to expand...

You missed what TheSeabass said. In the KJV John 1:12 says "SONS of God", which is an incorrect translation. Most versions correctly say "CHILDREN of God" in that verse. We are born again as 'babes in Christ'; but then we must grow up or mature to become "SONS'. The word used for sons (KJV) or children (most translations) in that verse indicate a level beyond baby, but short of being a mature son. There are 'basically' 4 Greek words used in scripture concerning this topic. They are pais paidion teknon and huios. In a nutshell they kind of represent the 'maturing' process from babies, toddlers, tenagers and finally mature "manifest sons." Being born again as John is talking about in verse 13, and in the context of verse 12 means your basically a born again baby and are able to mature to the level where you receive/lambano the baptism which will take you to the 'teknon' level of Christian maturity.

This may be a TMI answer to your post, but it really does fit into the whole POV which I am trying to help others see.

Hillsage said:

If I closed '1' eye, I would agree with you. But I didn't just quote the '1' verse you just quoted I went into the REST of the fundamental doctrines which were to include.

Hebrews 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

I hope you aren't going to tell me that this whole list is for JEWS only!!! It is a list for immature JEWS to become mature CHRISTIANS. And it is the same for US.

Click to expand...

But you did not resolve the contradiction you created. How can there be baptisms (plural) and at the same time be one baptism in this present dispensation. There cannot be one and many baptisms in effect at the same time, not logically or mathematically correct.

Hillsage said:

And those are the first principle doctrines for ORACLES of God for Christianity, not Judaism. In case you did not know, the Sadducees didn't even believe in a resurrection. That was a major theological disagreement for them which Paul used to his defense in Acts.

Acts 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.

Click to expand...

The issue is not what the Sadducees or Pharisees said or believed, the issue is about what the OT law of Moses said about Christ/Christianity.


Again in summary:
--The OT law of Moses contains fundamental principles of Christ/Christianity.
--The book of Hebrews is warning those Jewish Christian converts not to return back to the OT law.
--They had not advanced to the meat of the word but still in those first principles as found in the OT.
--'Therefore' they were to leave those OT principles that contained the foundation of Christ/Christianity and "go on unto perfection'. Perfection is found in the NT not the OT.
--they were told "not laying again the foundation". Laying again those OT principles would be returning back to the OT law of Moses which they were being warned not to do
--hence those principles listed in Heb 6:1-2 are from the OT law of Moses and not the NT.

Hillsage said:

I disagree. Paul wasn't in Israel preaching to Jews in Israel. We're talking the city of Ephesus which was 600 miles away. The OT/OLD COVENANT prophets were until JOHN and they were not the foundation for the NT/NEW COVENANT. The letter to Ephesus was written 60+ years after the start of the church and the church had it's own apostles, prophets, teachers from the very start.

Luke 16:16 "The law and the prophets (OT) were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it violently.

And though Paul may have preached to some Jews, in his days, his calling wasn't even to them.

GAL 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, (Paul) as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Click to expand...

I never said anything about Paul being in Israel preaching.

My point again is that in the book of Hebrews those Jewish converts learned the fundamentals about Christ/Christianity from the OT law. My quoting Ephesians 2:20 was to show what those OT prophets taught in the OT was the foundation upon which Christianity is founded. Yet those Jewish converts had not moved on from those fundamentals as found in the OT law, that is, they had not moved on from those OT law of Moses washing/baptismS the OT law required.

Hillsage said:

At least we agree here. Paul was never making a distinction because Paul was not even considering a baptism which had to be accomplished by us in Ephesians to begin with. And THAT is why it doesn't contradict Hebrews.

Click to expand...

But again you have not resolved the contradiction you have created between Ephesians 4:5 and Hebrews 6:1. There cannot be logically, mathematically one baptism and many baptisms in effect at the same time.

lee11 said:

hi

im not sure i understand

believing only gives people the right to become a child of God

but does not save a person

is that right?

thx

Click to expand...

Yes.

The verse says believers are given the right to BECOME a child of God. Therefore belief only does not make one a child of God, it leaves one short of becoming a child of God.

John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"

TheSeabass said:

But you did not resolve the contradiction you created. How can there be baptisms (plural) and at the same time be one baptism in this present dispensation. There cannot be one and many baptisms in effect at the same time, not logically or mathematically correct.

Click to expand...

I have not created a contradiction, ORTHODOXY has. The fact is the bible speaks of one baptism in one place and multiple baptisms in the other. But since you don't agree with my exegessis and I don't agree with yours we need to go deeper in "rightly dividing the scripture" to come to THE TRUTH that is not being taught. So let me start with this; Do you remember taking the tests in school where they ask you "What doesn't fit in this category?" And then they have a list like 'rose, carnation, quartz, petunia'. What doesn't fit that list? Obviously it is quartz which is a rock and not a flower. Now apply that same thinking to your verse in Eph

EPH 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Now look at the list concerning our 'One hope' ask ask yourself am I the 'one Lord' or is He? Am I the 'one faith' of Christianity, or is He? Is this the 'one baptism' my baptism or is it His?

But again you have not resolved the contradiction you have created between Ephesians 4:5 and Hebrews 6:1. There cannot be logically, mathematically one baptism and many baptisms in effect at the same time.

Click to expand...

Your logic simply falls short of my logic IMO. Tell me, what baptism is Jesus speaking of here? And then plug 'that baptism into your Eph formula and you will have the truth supported by the bible.

LUK 12:50 I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!

All of the rest of your opinion concerning the OT doesn't apply to the NT IMO. I stated why and you never rebutted so I'm not interested in hearing your biblically unsupported 'opinion' again.

TheSeabass said:

Yes.

The verse says believers are given the right to BECOME a child of God. Therefore belief only does not make one a child of God, it leaves one short of becoming a child of God.

John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"

Click to expand...

hi

ok thx for the claification

thx

Hillsage said:

You missed what TheSeabass said. In the KJV John 1:12 says "SONS of God", which is an incorrect translation. Most versions correctly say "CHILDREN of God" in that verse. We are born again as 'babes in Christ'; but then we must grow up or mature to become "SONS'. The word used for sons (KJV) or children (most translations) in that verse indicate a level beyond baby, but short of being a mature son. There are 'basically' 4 Greek words used in scripture concerning this topic. They are pais paidion teknon and huios. In a nutshell they kind of represent the 'maturing' process from babies, toddlers, tenagers and finally mature "manifest sons." Being born again as John is talking about in verse 13, and in the context of verse 12 means your basically a born again baby and are able to mature to the level where you receive/lambano the baptism which will take you to the 'teknon' level of Christian maturity.

This may be a TMI answer to your post, but it really does fit into the whole POV which I am trying to help others see.

Click to expand...

hi

thx for the info

thx

HARK! said:

YesheYahu (Isa) 43:
11 I, even I, am YHWH; and beside Me there is no savior.

Click to expand...

Yes it is YHVH(Jehovah) -he was the only savior at that point when that statement was made. Jesus didn't become a savior until he completed his earthly mission successfully. Yet it is YHVH(Jehovah) the one does it all through Jesus-Acts 2:22--John 5:30) so in that reality YHVH(Jehovah) is the only savior, but he shared that honor with his son upon completion of his mission.

TheSeabass said:

John 1:12 show believers have the right to become sons of God. Belief only therefore does not make one a son of God. BY having belief one can the repent of sins (Luke 13:3) confess (Matthew 10:32-33) and be baptized putting on Christ (Mark 16:16, Gal 3:27) then one is a child of God.

Click to expand...

hi

oh i almost forgot the Romans 10.9.

which is quoted and used by some denominations to receive salvation.

does a person receive salvation after repenting confession and believing using romans 10.9 as a guide or do they still need to get water baptised.

thx

Hillsage said:

You missed what TheSeabass said. In the KJV John 1:12 says "SONS of God", which is an incorrect translation. Most versions correctly say "CHILDREN of God" in that verse. We are born again as 'babes in Christ'; but then we must grow up or mature to become "SONS'. The word used for sons (KJV) or children (most translations) in that verse indicate a level beyond baby, but short of being a mature son. There are 'basically' 4 Greek words used in scripture concerning this topic. They are pais paidion teknon and huios. In a nutshell they kind of represent the 'maturing' process from babies, toddlers, tenagers and finally mature "manifest sons." Being born again as John is talking about in verse 13, and in the context of verse 12 means your basically a born again baby and are able to mature to the level where you receive/lambano the baptism which will take you to the 'teknon' level of Christian maturity.

This may be a TMI answer to your post, but it really does fit into the whole POV which I am trying to help others see.

Click to expand...

hi

oh i almost forgot the Romans 10.9.

which is quoted and used by some denominations to receive salvation.

does a person receive salvation after repenting confession and believing using romans 10.9 as a guide or do they still need to get water baptised.

thx

lee11 said:

hi

oh i almost forgot the Romans 10.9.

which is quoted and used by some denominations to receive salvation.

does a person receive salvation after repenting confession and believing using romans 10.9 as a guide or do they still need to get water baptised.

thx

Click to expand...

Lee, my understanding will differ from most here. I believe we are triune beings consisting of a spirit soul and body. Salvation takes place progressively beginning with our spirit. Once it is 'born again', or saved we then begin working out the salvation of our soul which is progressive/regressive til the day we die. It's progressive as we put on the mind of Christ and walk in righteousness, but it is regressive if we 'backslide' forsaking the grace that enables us to walk in the victory of "Christ in us" (eg our 'born again'/'saved'/ 'in-Christed spirit'). The life long battle for our soul, is truly a battle for our mind/will/emotions and having the 'mind of Christ formed in us' The last salvation is that of our physical "sinful flesh" bodies.

The nuances concerning the salvation of the spirit as opposed to the soul are the reason we have so much conflicting and confusing theology in the church today. The church understands one salvation, you are or you aren't. This Romans chapter deals primarily and contextually with the chapter prior, with "justification" or salvation of our spirit. In the salvation process we have Justification, Sanctification, Glorification. The baptism for the salvation of the spirit is a baptism of repentance from the Father/God. This baptism doesn't require water as did the baptism of John. A baptism which in spiritual 'Symbolism' was FROM heaven, but in physical 'Substance' was IN water.

This is a subject which confused the religious leaders of Jesus day, just as much (almost) as it confuses them today. That's why we have so much divisive doctrine concerning this issue.

Luke 20:4 Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men?"

Short answer to your question, and my personal POV is this; You do not need 'water baptism' for the initial salvation of your spirit. The spirit only needs the baptism of repentance which is the first of the multiple baptisms included in the list of Hebrews 6:1-2. Repentance was the only baptism received by the thief on the cross which assured him entrance into heaven. Since he was soon to die his soul would not be nearly as 'saved' as the soul of say, Billy Graham, or anyone who has walked as a faithful servant for years.

Hope this helps give you my POV.

Hillsage said:

I have not created a contradiction, ORTHODOXY has. The fact is the bible speaks of one baptism in one place and multiple baptisms in the other. But since you don't agree with my exegessis and I don't agree with yours we need to go deeper in "rightly dividing the scripture" to come to THE TRUTH that is not being taught. So let me start with this; Do you remember taking the tests in school where they ask you "What doesn't fit in this category?" And then they have a list like 'rose, carnation, quartz, petunia'. What doesn't fit that list? Obviously it is quartz which is a rock and not a flower. Now apply that same thinking to your verse in Eph

EPH 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Now look at the list concerning our 'One hope' ask ask yourself am I the 'one Lord' or is He? Am I the 'one faith' of Christianity, or is He? Is this the 'one baptism' my baptism or is it His?

Click to expand...

Is there one baptism in effect today or many baptisms in effect today????

----There cannot logically, mathematically be one baptism and many baptism in effect at the same time.
----The bible does not contradict itself.

When the bible says there is one Lord that means there is just one Lord not many LordS.
When the bible says there is one baptism that means there is just one baptism not many baptismS.

The problem is not the Bible, the problem is not math. The problem lies with those that are attempting to find a way to get around the necessity of water baptism and thereby create many baptisms contrary to to there being one baptism in effect today, that one baptism being Christ's baptism of the great commission.

Hillsage said:

Your logic simply falls short of my logic IMO. Tell me, what baptism is Jesus speaking of here? And then plug 'that baptism into your Eph formula and you will have the truth supported by the bible.

LUK 12:50 I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!

All of the rest of your opinion concerning the OT doesn't apply to the NT IMO. I stated why and you never rebutted so I'm not interested in hearing your biblically unsupported 'opinion' again.

Click to expand...

---My logic and math is consistent with Ephesians 4:4-5.

---Luke 12:50 is a baptism of suffering on the cross.

---Twice I have given you an explanation of Hebrews 6:1,2 and how "baptisms" refers back to the OT law of Moses and those Jewish washings associated with that law and not with the one baptism in effect today under the NT law of Christ. You can reject that explanation, but then you create a contradiction that you have not resolved then try and blame the contradiction on"orthodoxy".

lee11 said:

hi

ok thx for the claification

thx

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

Hillsage said:

Lee, my understanding will differ from most here. I believe we are triune beings consisting of a spirit soul and body. Salvation takes place progressively beginning with our spirit. Once it is 'born again', or saved we then begin working out the salvation of our soul which is progressive/regressive til the day we die. It's progressive as we put on the mind of Christ and walk in righteousness, but it is regressive if we 'backslide' forsaking the grace that enables us to walk in the victory of "Christ in us" (eg our 'born again'/'saved'/ 'in-Christed spirit'). The life long battle for our soul, is truly a battle for our mind/will/emotions and having the 'mind of Christ formed in us' The last salvation is that of our physical "sinful flesh" bodies.

The nuances concerning the salvation of the spirit as opposed to the soul are the reason we have so much conflicting and confusing theology in the church today. The church understands one salvation, you are or you aren't. This Romans chapter deals primarily and contextually with the chapter prior, with "justification" or salvation of our spirit. In the salvation process we have Justification, Sanctification, Glorification. The baptism for the salvation of the spirit is a baptism of repentance from the Father/God. This baptism doesn't require water as did the baptism of John. A baptism which in spiritual 'Symbolism' was FROM heaven, but in physical 'Substance' was IN water.

This is a subject which confused the religious leaders of Jesus day, just as much (almost) as it confuses them today. That's why we have so much divisive doctrine concerning this issue.

Luke 20:4 Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men?"

Short answer to your question, and my personal POV is this; You do not need 'water baptism' for the initial salvation of your spirit. The spirit only needs the baptism of repentance which is the first of the multiple baptisms included in the list of Hebrews 6:1-2. Repentance was the only baptism received by the thief on the cross which assured him entrance into heaven. Since he was soon to die his soul would not be nearly as 'saved' as the soul of say, Billy Graham, or anyone who has walked as a faithful servant for years.

Hope this helps give you my POV.

Click to expand...

hi

that was a very comprehensive and insightful answer.

i enjoyed reading it.

thank you.

lee11 said:

hi

oh i almost forgot the Romans 10.9.

which is quoted and used by some denominations to receive salvation.

does a person receive salvation after repenting confession and believing using romans 10.9 as a guide or do they still need to get water baptised.

thx

Click to expand...

(1)
There are many, many verses that deal with the issue of salvation and one must take in consideration all those verses, consider all God's counsel Acts 20:27. No one can cherry pick a verse like John 3:16 while ignoring all other salvific verses as Luke 13:3, Matthew 10:32-33 Mark 16:16 and falsely declare on need to believe only to be saved.

(2)
Romans 10:9 does not exhaust all there is to know about how to be saved. Just because water baptism is not specifically mentioned in this one verse does not exclude it for other verses require water baptism.

In Romans 10:9 there is no specific mention to grace or the blood of Christ, so they would be excluded from being saved? No.

(3)
Rom 10:10 KJV "For with the heart man believeth unto (eis) righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto (eis) salvation."

Rom 10:10 NIV "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved."

Note how the NIV perverts the verse by pushing the false idea of belief only-ism. It tries to have a person saved twice:
1) believe and you ARE JUSTIFIED
2) profess your faith and you ARE SAVED.

Yet an accurate translation, as the KJV, shows belief and confession are UNTO salvation and do not in and of themselves make one saved but lead one TOWARDS-UNTO salvation/justification.

The Greek word eis means looking toward and not 'because of' as some try and pervert it to mean. Men believe and confess NOT BECAUSE they are already saved but in order-looking toward to being saved.

(4)
In the context of Romans 10 Paul is not detailing how men are saved. In the broader context of Romans chapters 9-11 Paul is showing why/how his brethren in the flesh the Jews are not saved, Romans 10:1-3. Paul is stressing obedience to the gospel is necessary in being saved Romans 6:16-18 but the fleshly Jews thought their physical descent from Abraham meant automatic salvation for them.

Romans 10:13 "whosoever" does not mean Jews only can be saved because of their physical descendency from Abraham but also Gentiles can be saved. ANYONE willing to obey the gospel in believing and confessing can be saved. Simply because Paul did not mention repentance or baptism does not eliminate them from being saved for again, one must search out all the counsel of God. So again, Paul's point in Romans 10 is not detailing every aspect of being saved but proving physical descendency does not save but obedience to the will of God.


Lastly, Paul says "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Romans 10:13.

In Acts 2:21 Peter says "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Peter and Paul both quoting Joel's prophecy. The phrase "calling on the name of the Lord" means doing what the Lord has said to do in believing Jn 8:24, repenting Lk 13:5 confessing Mt 10:32-33 and being baptized Mk 16:16.

Acts 2:21--------call upon the name of the Lord>>>>>>>>>>>saved
Acts 2:38--------repent and be baptized>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>remission of sins

"Saved" is equivalent to "remission of sins".
Since there is just one way to be saved, no alternatives, then 'calling on the name of the Lord' in Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 includes repentance and being baptized along with belief and confession.
Paul 'called on the name of the Lord' when he was water baptized, Acts 22:16.