Now, this is the definition of Christ's baptism. Being of fire, it can hardly be of water. No matter the meaning of the word Bapto. It is being applied in a fashion other than intended by the meaning of the word. I know how badly you want to ignore this; but, it wasn't put there for us to ignore. It is a spiritual reference - meaning it is something that doesn't happen as a physical immersion but a spiritual one. It would litterally mean that Jesus would immerse them in the Holy Spirit. Thus the charge is not to be wet; but, to be filled. No need for secret decoder rings and spy gadgets - just for intelligence applied with proper reading skills.
how sad is the carnal mind on display here for all to see. You apparently have never heard of the Pentecost, where Jesus did indeed come upon the Apostles by fire.
You also, in your limited mind, limit God to being able to instill fire by means of water. It is not surprising that a man who feels God unable to change bread into His Body, would likewise find God unable to transmit fire by means of water. But such is the carnal mind, unable to see spiritual truths.
You make much of "spiritual immersion" and, as the natural man would, oppose this to a physical immersion. You miss the beauty of the sacramental economy in this manner. As one is immersed in the water of Baptism, God immerses the person in the fire of the Holy Spirit.
Sacraments are the signs that signify the reality taking place. You just cant imagine God doing such a thing.
It's very sad.
SD
Quite sad, indeed. But, when reading your posts, I make it a point to look past all that carnal, Pharasitic, holier-than-thou piety.
I'm guessing Havoc does, too. :-)