We are missing each other in the dark. So, with this post, I will drop the issue.

I have translated enough to know that context is one factor, albeit a major one, in translation. Also, the lexical meaning must be considered. In the case of "baptism" this is no problem. Where would "immersion" not be a good translation?

You can reject that "immersion" (or submersion) is not a good translation. I am confounded why you guys press hard against this translation. I see no reason for you to debate the point unless you defend the practices of sprinkling or pouring.

I already made it clear that I do not defend the modern translations. There is an issue of marketplace expediency that demands "baptism" be a transliteration rather than a translation.