Well, maybe you didn't know that. Anyway, take a look at what you just posted ~ "Baptism with the Holy Ghost and with fire".
My cousins who belong to various "Apostolic" and "Charismatic" churches say that has real meaning, and its only after you've been baptised by water by being immersed "backwards" three times, and then receiving the Spirit in church, that you've really been baptised. Some of my inlaws who are Roman Catholic, but also Charismatic, tend to read the same parts of the Gospels the same way as the Apostolic Charismatics too, and to the same effect, but they hold off on that full immersion thing!
And NO, none of them handle snakes in church ~ they think that derives from a misreading of the Scriptures ~ not sure, though, that they draw the line at drinking poisons ~ not gonna' ask either.
Good for them.
Well, maybe you didn't know that. Anyway, take a look at what you just posted ~ "Baptism with the Holy Ghost and with fire".
Yes, what about it? We always light the babies first, then throw them in the baptistry font. Seems to make more sense that way.
I'm not sure what point you are making. The "fire" is obviously symbolic. Baptism, Christian baptism, to which John refers is what happens in Churches all over the place all the time. Someone is washed with water and this brings about the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. One is baptised with water and the Holy Spirit. The outward sign of washing signifys the inward cleansing of the soul by the Spirit.
That's efficacious Christian baptism, and distinct from John's baptism of repentence.
SD