Context determines the immersion into water, Holy Spirit or doctrine. The modern conception of baptism meaning water is just that a modern conception arising from the inability of the English translation of the Greek to reveal the intent of the original.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
We can look at passages that mention 'baptism' but do not say 'in water', and then read that the baptism was in water to get a since of the word 'baptism.' If you ask a Jewish person about a mikveh without asking if they were mikveh'ed into the word or the Spirit, they are going to assume you mean water.
Let's take a look at Mark 7,
4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.
Who would think this means baptism without water?
There are other scriptures
John 3
23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.
John 4
1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Is it reasonable to think that there was no water involved? The disciples were already baptizing in water as early as this.
Peter used water when he baptized
Acts 10:47
Can any man forbid
water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
So did Philip,
Acts 8:38
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.
Have you been baptized with water?