no water baptism is done by another sinner who needed saved himself
?
I was baptized (placed into) Christ. Only God can do this
I was baptized (immersed) in water a year later
Looks like two baptisms you have there, plain as day. That is against direct Bible scripture stating that there is
"one baptism" (that the Jews and Gentiles had both received and Paul is calling them to unity, since they both have one baptism, as to kind, i.e., water baptism).
I was baptized (placed into) Christ.
There is nothing in the original language, or in the English for that matter, that can substantiate the addition into the translation of the word "placed".
Then, how about: why doesn't He say He does?
so then lets take the plain sense of the word as it was used in the first century in the roman empire
Really? You want to understand the Bible, so it will stop making a monkey out of you?
What did the word "baptism" mean in that same context back when it was written or spoken to them? "lets take the plain sense of the word as it was used in the first century in the roman empire", which would be 'to dip' or 'to plunge', i.e., 'immerse'.
Nobody in the Roman Empire, including Jesus, ever heard of anything like a 'spirit baptism' until it was invented by the Protestants during the Reformation Period. Catholics had invented a worldwide population of its followers who were thought of as being visible (and why not?), but that bastardized the Bible word for "church", as always indicating 'a local assembly', and changed the meaning of the word "church" to essentially mean, 'a visible worldwide KINGDOM'.
So, the Protestants had a couple of elements to their large dilemma.
1a. If the Catholics didn't have any Authority, where do they suppose they ever got any Authority?
1b. And if they say the Catholics DO have Authority, what are the Protestants doing moving away from them?
Those two things conflict, with the Catholics vs Protestants in 1a. & 1b., which makes a dilemma.
The Protestants are between a rock and a hard place.
Then, a third party is introduced, which now applies pressure to the dilemma, making it a trilemma.
And who or what is that extra pressure?
They look over at the Baptists, and THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY FROM THE FIRST CENTURY, TO BAPTISE, TO CARRY OUT THE GREAT COMMISSION, TO HAVE THE LORD'S SUPPER, TO NAME OFFICERS, etc., etc.
So, the Protestants close their investigation into where the Authority to Do God's Business on Earth comes from and they just invent another bastardization of the word "church" and after trying for 1,500 years or so, since the Catholics changed its New Testament meaning into the rubbish of being 'a visible worldwide' "church", Satan was able to sell to a bunch of them that there is an 'invisible worldwide' "church", in which they will claim they belong and all they had to do was for the first time, doctor the interpretation and meanings of a couple of other words.
Thus, we have the birth of this 'spirit baptism' tomfoolery, which the Bible does not TEACH.
Some vague notions are batted around to play church and pretend that THEY SUDDENLY MEAN SO AND SO. When they never did before, don't, and won't ever.
If I do this. I see it as an action taken on me.
What action would you personally see as taking place on you?
Seeking another to me would be to seek to see water where no water is involved
Then, what happens when we discern water to be there involved all the way up over its head?
It should be brought under consideration, because that's what it means there.