Some Roman Catholics Are Making Fun of Born Again Christian's Baptism by Water Immersion

If Roman Catholics could not even get the Lord's Supper right where it ends up as Lord's breakfast (morning service), Lord's lunch (noon service) and it only becomes Lord's Supper on an evening service then I do not really expect them to get baptism right. Some Roman Catholic apologists tend to be laughing at the born again Christian ritual of baptism that involves immersion or are making false allegations that "somebody drowned during baptism".

I will be quoting again from the Good News Translation (GNT) instead of the King James Version (KJV) which I use for my daily Bible reading to show the stupidity of these Roman Catholic apologists on making fun of born again Christian's baptism ritual.

Here are verses from the GNT to show baptism was by immersion:

Matthew 3:17 - "As soon as Jesus was baptized, He came up out of the water. Then heaven was opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God coming down like a dove and lighting on him. Then a voice said from heaven, This is my own dear Son, with whom I am pleased."

Acts 8:38-39 - "The official ordered the carriage to stop, and both Philip and the official went down into the water, and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord took Philip away. The official did not see him again, but continued on his way, full of joy."

If you think about the passage, it says that Jesus came out of the water. Later we read that Philip and the official went down into the water and came out of it. Question is does that happen in the Roman Catholic infant baptism? But just in case somebody says, "Well some Protestants do practice infant baptism." I do agree that some born again Christians do still practice infant baptism (or anointing) but they do not believe that it cleans the child of original sin. Instead, it's viewed as an act of dedication.

What is even more stupid is that many Roman Catholics quote Acts 2:38 out of context to make fun of baptism by immersion and defend infant baptism just like they quote Matthew 16:16-18 to defend the papacy's shaky ground. What they are ignoring is that one the sermon of Peter led to conversions and there might have been children baptized during the service. Baptism is not a rite restricted to just adult believers as teenagers and children who have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior are all candidates of believer's baptism. Acts 2:41 in GNT says, "Many of them believed his message and were baptized, and about three thousand people were added to the group that day." They first believed and they were baptized. An infant could not respond but a small child certainly can respond to that message.

Also if Catholics want to appeal to the original Greek, do they know that the Greek word is baptizo (βαπτίζω) which really means to SUBMERGE? I do not see any submerging in the Roman Catholic infant baptism. What is so funny in pictures I see from a child's catechism or a Catholic baptistry is a picture of Jesus' baptism is drawn yet their practice does not match the Bible's command for believer's baptism. When a person converts to Catholicism, they just simply end up sprinkling or pouring some water which is no way an act of submerging the convert.