Wednesday, February 13, 2019



  1. Is the author's answer meant to be actually what he'd give in response to the person asking the question? If so, it's really bad. He's asked a question by someone who went through a rite of baptism at 13 when she wasn't a believer, about whether she should be baptised now that she is 20 and has become one, a question that made no reference to the question of baby baptism. In response, he decides to work through significant amounts of the polemics of that debate in response, framing his answer in a complex way, at essay length and including very substantial amounts of theological jargon. If that was an intended answer to the actual questioner, then it suggests he needs to spend a lot more time with ordinary church members.

    1. I have bracketed the actual theology and logic of the answer, of course!

    2. It reads better in the original Klingon but something was lost in translation when it was rendered into Portuguese.

    3. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to obtain the original Klingon version of this Q&A (many good men died in the attempt however), but I was able to find the far less civilized (indeed Klingons would consider it downright philistine) English version.

    4. The translation into bad Portuguese still makes the answer more inedible.
      People like to complicate what is simple.