[Havoc]

Now you're referring to yourself in third person? "Smeagol likes hobbitses!" |^D!

LOL.

You should know that the Catholic Church has ALWAYS maintained that "a sacrament of desire" occurs

Not always, this developed as with other philosophies that became doctrine. Not to knit pick, just getting perspective. Your clergy defined an exception that they decided was ok from their practice. Scripture contrarwise states that the practice with regard to circumcision is useless because the heart is what matters. The same would apply to water baptism. Thusly, you require something that spiritually is not required. God has already made the universal exception, you guys have not.

This is the problem. You can't say that God waved what he does not require. Did the Apostles water baptise? Yes. Not always; but, they did do it. But Christ required baptism of the Spirit. The exemption you make for your sacrement is from the "reasoned" or rationalized view that God made some judgement that isn't noted. In other words you're making an exemption under the assumption that God acted a certain way that isn't otherwise explained in your philosophy. Rather big of you to Give God the benefit of a doubt after ruling against him initially. But that assumes you actually know what God was thinking - doesn't it.

But EVEN baptism in the spirit was done with a laying on of hands.

Was it really. Who layed hands on who at Pentecost?

If a person rejects the outward sign, that it is certain that he has rejected the body of Christ.

Kinda like the Gifts of the spirit - meaning if you haven't layed hands on someone recently and healed them, raised them from the dead or had a Prophecy that came true, ect, then you have rejected God.... Remember the gifts of the spirit are supposed to be present according to Christ in those that follow him.. each showing different Gifts.. Funny how that sword of outward signs tends to cut.

[dangus]

>>Scripture contrarwise states that the practice with regard to circumcision is useless because the heart is what matters. The same would apply to water baptism. >>

Where does it say, "The same would apply to water baptism"?

The disciples FORBADE the practice of circumcision (of adults, at least), but themselves performed baptism all the time. Incessantly. Everywhere they went.

>>Not always; but, they did do it. >>

Yes. Absolutely, positively always.

>> Was it really. Who layed hands on who at Pentecost? >>

Baptism is an annointment. Baptism of the spirit shows that we are chosen by Christ to evangelize. The apostles were Chosen by Jesus in the flesh. At Pentecost, they were empowered to evangelize. Since the apostles, now that the time is fulfilled, both occur at once.

[dangus]

>>Scripture contrarwise states that the practice with regard to circumcision is useless because the heart is what matters. The same would apply to water baptism. >>

Where does it say, "The same would apply to water baptism"?

The disciples FORBADE the practice of circumcision (of adults, at least), but themselves performed baptism all the time. Incessantly. Everywhere they went.

>>Not always; but, they did do it. >>

Yes. Absolutely, positively always.

>> Was it really. Who layed hands on who at Pentecost? >>

Baptism is an annointment. Baptism of the spirit shows that we are chosen by Christ to evangelize. The apostles were Chosen by Jesus in the flesh. At Pentecost, they were empowered to evangelize. Since the apostles, now that the time is fulfilled, both occur at once.

Note that even Paul was sent to Damascus.