Baptizing babies is retarded. Baptizing with water is superstition. Being a Christian means to be baptized with the God's Holy Spirit of Truth

I agree, but with caveats. Why do people make marriages into a public show?

Which had always been understood by the Church to be a literal physical full immersion baptism (preferably triple). Gnostic nonsense with spiritual baptism only recent fad. Same with spiritualizing/abstracting away communion.

Yep. The sacramental life is incarnational because Jesus, the 2nd person of the Trinity, is incarnational. This is true of the entirety of the Church.

Money. Greed. Humans have been programmed to believe that you need a big extravagant wedding so the wedding industry can enrich itself.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. John 4:1–2 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Acts 8:36–38 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest... And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. Acts 9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. Acts 10:47–48 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord... Acts 16:15 And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there... Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. Acts 19:4–5 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance... When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Romans 6:3–4 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead... even so we also should walk in newness of life. 1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body... and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God... Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; 1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God)...

That "recent fad" is older than the Orthodox church.

Certainly that's part of it, but its not what I'm driving at. The point of these public things is that community holds us accountable.

Makes sense, marriage is a public covenant.

I do not think you know what the word baptized means

Claiming to know what "had always been" is a red herring. My claim is not founded on Gnosticism, that is an assumption on your part. And you conflate communion with water baptism. These are not arguments, they are an admixture of phrases you heard.

Its a recent phenomenon of American yearning to return to Monarchy fueled by Fiat and vanity.

I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. (Mark 1:8, KJV) I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: (Matthew 3:11, KJV)

βαπτίζω (baptízō) Literally, it means "to dip," "to immerse," or "to submerge."

St. John is making the distinction as to who has the authority to send a person the Holy Spirit... That person is Christ alone.

Interesting take. I'd like to hear more - I like psychology. What I was aiming at is just the function of community in accountability. If a thing is private, you can easily reneg on it ; if public, the fear of disappointing your fellows helps to keep you on the path you've committed to. Baptising an infant is a public commitment to raising them a certain way. But from the standpoint of the infant being "saved," its retarded. As with almost anything concocted by Augustine, just utter retardation. But if it gets people to stop physically harming children, then it's good. IMO.

The literal definition doesent apply here. There are examples of people being "baptized with water" but not being baptized with Spirit. (Acts 8:14-17, 19:6) "Baptized" in the sense of church members has to do with recieving of the spirit (dechomai), referring to the living waters overflowing from the belly (pletho) with incomprehensible truths. "In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)" (John 7:37-39, KJV) "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2:4, KJV) "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12:13, KJV)

Trying to sound churchy doesn't bring fourth truth. You're buried so far down in Magisterium, Tradition, and obedience, there is no bringing you out with actual scripture.

I can not help you if technical theological discussion sounds churchy. Your simple position is more understandable since you seem to have a distain for tradition and obedience. So let's use small words: 1. Who wrote your "actual scripture"? 2. Did they have a magisterium? 3. Did they practice obedience? 4. Do you know the faith better than the Apostles? 5. Are we commanded in your " actual scripture" to hold fast to the tradition handed down to us?

You presume the magisterium has preserved the tradition rather than just making stuff up along the way and declaring it dogma ex cathedra. Who "wrote the bible?" You think *your* church wrote it? Sure, they compiled the books, and did a pretty good job of it at that. Nevermind all that, the petrine doctrine itself is pure drivel, latched onto by a self-interested administrative elite acting only in the empire's interests. Don't even get me started on Romans 13

I believe Christ when he said he would establish his Church and the gates of hell would not prevail against it. I didnt think "my" church wrote it, so I found the church that almost certainly wrote it (Orthodox). It was delusional to be my own I interperetive judge of scripture. "Interpret as thou will" not much different from "do as thou will" at the end of the day.

Yes. I'm sure you take the supreme court's interpretation of the constitution over your own reading also.