On and on you go saying that Paul never once said that baptism is part of our salvation, but you continue to be mistaken. He did say it. The passages have been provided and explained. Just because you refuse to believe it doesn't mean they are not there or that they don't say what they say.
I pointed out earlier about your self contradictions, and this you also fail to see. You did it again here:
He even tells us the exact moment of salvation, when we believe, and baptism is never mentioned.
If you've changed your mind about confession of Jesus with the mouth being required for salvation, as stated by Paul in Romans 10, and are now saying "no" to that, then maybe you're not as inconsistent with yourself as I am claiming. However, if Romans 10:9-10 is still something you believe is necessary for salvation, then you contradict yourself and you pit Paul against himself. Paul would not say "only believe" or "at the exact moment of belief" in one place, and then in another combine belief and confession and say that confession is for salvation. As it is, Paul never says "only believe" or "at the exact moment of belief" or anything else like those, in his writings.
This focus on Paul is somewhat troubling, but only because you seem to lift him up above the other writers. All scripture should be given equal importance. Your desire to have Paul trump other writers and their scriptures has gone to the point that you are not getting the whole picture of salvation. Your claim that Paul says, "all you have to do is believe" (although he never says that) is proof of this. All scripture on any issue should be given equal weight and studied so as to gain a more proper perspective.
In addition, your constant requirement for some passages to be worded a certain way, or else you cannot accept a certain truth, is particularly troubling. For example, you said in the quote above that baptism is not mentioned in certain passages that do mention belief, and therefore baptism is not necessary. This is why others here have been haranguing you about looking at all scripture, not just certain ones that say what you want and leave out the things you don't want to accept.
Remember the point about Titus 3:4-7? It doesn't mention faith. If I was to use your method of biblical interpretation, I could say that faith is not a requirement for salvation. Your proper response would have to be that I look at other scriptures to see the necessity of faith, right? That is what you need to do regarding baptism.
Another example is your need to have Mark 16:16 be worded a certain way, because the way it is worded is not good enough for you to accept what it simply says. You may not believe it, but Paul agrees completely with Jesus there. Paul explains and emphasizes what Jesus said. Paul gives the how and why that baptism is for salvation from sin.
My point, simply put, is that you are too inconsistent with the scriptures and with your own arguments. These inconsistencies make you appear unable to provide valid points for others to seriously consider. If you keep posting the same arguments that have been repeatedly shown to be scripturally incorrect, then I and others will keep posting the scriptural reasons why those arguments fail to prove your point.
And round and round we will go
, for as long as you want.