Conditional Baptism

I’m not religious but I thought baptism was always conditional on confirmation - not in writing or scripture but via a handshake agreement with the parents or some shit.

Haskell mentioned λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ

Half Life mentioned λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ

i need a therapist who will express life in haskell

Excerpt from Learn You a Haskell for Great God!

Priest: If you are not yet baptised, I baptise you in the name of the father, the son and the holy spirit. Else break.

Parents: sweating nervously...else what

I didn't expect the FP inquisition.

This is a slippery slope to baptismal logic gates

Turing complete baptisms

Baptism is such a weird thing. It's ritualized cleansing turned into one and done

You can get baptized as many times as you like, it doesn't stack

Although baptism probably has its roots in the Mikva, which is a ritual cleansing, that's not really the significance within Christianity. Baptism is not a washing away of sins, or impurity, but is rather a symbolic death and resurrection. The Apostle Paul, an early codifier of Christian doctrine whose letters became part of the Christian Bible wrote as follows in Romans chapter 6
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
This has the same end effect- the removal of sin and purification, but the conception is totally different.
- Jesus was a revolutionary. He removed all weaknesses that could be used against the Jewish people, from temples to stockpiles to using money. He made the early church suck resources from an occupying force while giving nothing back, not even disobedience that could justify a crack down
  In this process, he replaced many rituals with simpler versions that can be done without any special requirements. He reworked every ritual so that it couldn't be taken away, it couldn't be used to force compliance
  Paul was a true believer and philosopher, his job was to sell it to the people. His words were canonized alongside the gospels because they were convenient when reframing Jesus's teachings with the values of the Roman religion... Plenty less convenient writings were buried instead
  Paul was a transitional figure who found himself in between the early church and unexpected gentile converts... He had to rebrand the rituals for a wider audience while keeping the core message. Nothing against the guy... He was in an impossible position and did his best
Per the actual wiki, some denominations seem to think it's a sin or heresy to do someone more than once. Which seems like what the nullification in the baptize function is supposed to capture.
- some denominations seem to think it's a sin or heresy to do someone more than once
  Those denominations must have really high divorce rates..
Baptism is such a weird thing.
I think Haskell is such a weird thing
- Dunno what to tell ya, it's great.
Could you imagine how op you could become though if baptisms stacked
- Can you get more clean than clean?
  Numbers are a human thing. The universe don't care
The LDS (Mormons) actually do repeat it, in a sense. Their weekly sacrament is a renewal of their baptismal blessings
- Probably the reason some other sects call double-dipping a sin, so as to not be like those Mormons.

That honestly seems like the best way to write conditionalBaptize but I still hate it. Probably because IRL you'd just rewrite baptism instead of retrofitting the function with a clever use of id.

It looks pretty normal to me as a professional Haskeller, though I suppose it's perhaps slightly cleaner to write it as conditionalBaptize p = fromMaybe p $ baptize p. It's largely just a matter of taste and I'd accept either version when reviewing an MR.
Edit: I just thought of another version that actually is far too clever and shouldn't be used:
conditionalBaptize = ap fromMaybe baptize, making use of the monad instance for ->. But yeah, don't do this.
This is probably an ok use for a GADT. Something like:

{-# LANGUAGE DataKinds #-} {-# LANGUAGE GADTs #-} {-# LANGUAGE KindSignatures #-} data Bap = Baptized | Unbaptized data Person :: Bap -> * where Baptize :: Person Unbaptized -> Person Baptized NewPerson :: Person Unbaptized conditionalBaptize :: Person a -> Person Baptized conditionalBaptize p = case p of NewPerson -> Baptize p Baptize _ -> p main = return ()
- Thank you for refactoring baptism. How do we push this to production now?

Which denominations implement idempotent baptisms?

Sounds like Haskell needs an official Saint.

There's an old joke about functional programming separating Church from state.

How would this read try-catch-ing with the Mormon baptism for dead Jewish people ?