Let's talk Vaccines, from a medical, scientific, historical, ethical and theological perspective.

[farouk]

PS: Depends how 'negligence' is defined, really...(a lot of money for lawyers there...)

 

[Sabertooth]

Just what if foreign policy negligence could be charged to the Pentagon /CIA when it all goes wrong, like with the marketing of defective products...

There is no higher [American] authority that they are beholden to. Such an authority would have to be global, but that is off-topic for this thread.

 

[farouk]

There is no higher [American] authority that they are beholden to. Such an authority would have to be global, but that is off-topic for this thread.

In effect, maybe the CIA /Pentagon gives itself permission for some of their (sometimes unstated) long term goals....(look at the Bay of Pigs, for example...)

 

[farouk]

Though maybe I am getting off topic...

It does go to show that corporations do wield huge power...

 

[Sabertooth]

Depends how 'negligence' is defined, really...(a lot of money for lawyers there...)

Even if they don't make repairs for their own negligence, somebody will end up doing so, in the form of its consequences. It is comparable to pollution.

(If industry isn't checked for polluting the water, for instance, it becomes the water treatment plant's problem.)

 

[farouk]

Even if they don't make repairs for their own negligence, somebody will end up doing so, in the form of its consequences. It is comparable to pollution.

(If industry isn't checked for polluting the water, for instance, it becomes the water treatment plant's problem.)

Foreign policy negligence has its dire consequences, too....

 

[Sabertooth]

Foreign policy negligence has its dire consequences, too...

You keep veering off-topic. Vaccine-injury negligence is important enough to stay on topic. Increased support for unnecessarily disabled adults threatens to outpace community resources in so many places. (And that concern is more consistent with the OP.)

 

[farouk]

You keep veering off-topic. Vaccine-injury negligence is important enough to stay on topic. Increased support for unnecessarily disabled adults threatens to outpace community resources in so many places. (And that concern is more consistent with the OP.)

Good point.

 

[Triumph1300]

What is your point??? I had life insurance all the time my family were dependent on me, but I never died. Did I not need it? Should I have gambled on my family's future and not taken it out?

I put my trust in the Lord. Call me crazy, but it's in the book.
He never failed me yet.

 

[Triumph1300]

I think that helmet and 'shades of cool bro' kept you from the flu, or maybe it as the bike, going 80 mph. :) Flu couldn't keep up with ya'. :)

Or wait, its that protective lip gear. What do you call that brushy white lip thing? :)

Yup, the lip gear. Lol. You are right! :-)

 

[Jay Ross]

Yup, the lip gear. Lol. You are right! :)

That is if the lip gear is allowed to become long enough and sticky enough to act as an external filter for all of the germs.

 

[Steve Owen]

I put my trust in the Lord. Call me crazy, but it's in the book.
He never failed me yet.

That is Satan's argument in Matthew 4:5-8. Our Lord's response: "It is written again, You shall not put the Lord your God to the test."

 

[amadeus]

Though maybe I am getting off topic...

It does go to show that corporations do wield huge power...

Corporations have been a legal way to stop the buck from stopping here at the doorstep or in the lap of the ones who really do pull the strings. Men may not be able to or even may not want to identify the ones pulling the strings, but God always knows them and He knows us. Those responsible will pay a price... but while we may see it, we should not expect to...!

 

[Kermos]

That is Satan's argument in Matthew 4:5-8. Our Lord's response: "It is written again, You shall not put the Lord your God to the test."

1) @Triumph1300 wrote that "trust" in the Lord is in the Bible; on the other hand, you changed "trust" to "test" the Lord. One of the passages from the Bible that supports Triumph1300's assertion that trusting God is in the Bible is "Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight" (Proverbs 3:5-6). Be on your guard, Steve Owen, that you not call evil good nor good evil (2 Peter 3:17, Isaiah 5:20).

2) Respecting where Lord Jesus said "it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.'" to the tempter, the devil, who said to Jesus to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple (Matthew 4:5-7), injecting toxins such as aluminum directly into the blood of little helpless children is putting God to the test (the same goes for getting injections yourself), and you are promoting the very thing.

The scriptural exposition of the evils of vaccination post in this thread remains true.

 

[Steve Owen]

1) @Triumph1300 wrote that "trust" in the Lord is in the Bible; on the other hand, you changed "trust" to "test" the Lord. One of the passages from the Bible that supports Triumph1300's assertion that trusting God is in the Bible is "Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight" (Proverbs 3:5-6). Be on your guard, Steve Owen, that you not call evil good nor good evil (2 Peter 3:17, Isaiah 5:20).

2) Respecting where Lord Jesus said "it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.'" to the tempter, the devil, who said to Jesus to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple (Matthew 4:5-7), injecting toxins such as aluminum directly into the blood of little helpless children is putting God to the test (the same goes for getting injections yourself), and you are promoting the very thing.

The scriptural exposition of the evils of vaccination post in this thread remains true.

With respect, you have misunderstood my earlier post which may be my fault for not being clearer.
In Matthew 4:5-6, Satan tempts our Lord to throw Himself down from the Temple, trusting that the Father will save Him. The Lord Jesus replies that one should not put God to the test.
It seems to me that @Triumph1300 is putting God to the test by not having a flu jab which would not only protect him against flu, but also those around him. I have worn a seat belt when driving for the last 30 years or so. In that time I have never had an accident. Was I lacking in faith in God to protect me by wearing a seat belt? Or would I have been testing God had I not worn one? Oliver Cromwell famously told his troops, "Trust in God and keep your powder dry." Was he lacking in faith by not believing that God could make damp gunpowder work? Or would he have been testing God if he had told his troops it didn't matter if their powder got wet?

 

[DPMartin]

Let's talk Vaccines, from a medical, scientific, historical, ethical and theological perspective.

I'll go first, with this testimony.

More may be seen here:

The word "Vaccine", or "Vaccination", comes etymologically from:

"vaccination (n.)

1800, used by British physician Edward Jenner (1749-1823) for the technique he devised of preventing smallpox by injecting people with the cowpox virus (variolae vaccinae), from vaccine (adj.) "pertaining to cows, from cows" (1798), from Latin vaccinus "from cows," from vacca "cow," a word of uncertain origin. "The use of the term for diseases other than smallpox is due to Pasteur" [OED]." - vaccination | Origin and meaning of vaccination by Online Etymology Dictionary

[Thus the Spanish "Vaca" = English "cow", as in California, Vacaville = Cow-Town (and sure smells like it, one whiff, lungs will begin to bleed, and nasal passage burn ...)]
​

Which brings to the next point about what has always been said about Vaccines, scientifically and medically, is that they are made from, and often carry, animal embryo, DNA, of either "bovine" (cow), monkey, dog, pig, or chicken (are the primary animals used), and even aborted human fetal (baby) tissue, along with all manner of other stabilizers, catalysts, suppressants, etc.

You can see some of that here, from the CDC excipient list:

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf

Looking at this from a theological point of view, let us bring the subject back up to a higher plane, and speak spiritually.

The Church, is likened unto a Body:

Eph_5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Col_1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Col_1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:​

And so, if we consider that a virus, is like a deadly foreign toxin that invades a "body", we can liken it unto evil or bad belief/doctrine/practice that corrupts the body and can even get the body to fight itself (auto-immune).

The "body", the Church, has an immune system, the general outer body first, then leaders, like deacons and elders, pastors, etc that all heresies, error must get past first, before it can infect the whole, and a standard, the Bible, which all things are checked before admission into the body. For instance, a pervert, an adulterer, or someone like a known Jim Jones, etc, is not accepted into the Body, right?

Would any healthy "body" seek to bypass the outer defenses, and inject straight into the pulpit, a known heretical professor of foreign belief (like atheism, occultism, etc), doctrine or practice and see how the church reacts from it? or allow such person, or multiple persons (like multiple vaccines) to teach for 6 months to the whole body? Would that be sanity or insanity? Healthy or unhealthy?

What if we first weakened the person by blindfolding them, and then allowing them to preach from the pulpit or classroom for so long a time? Would that be any different?

What if we placed such persons, with venomous doctrines, beliefs and practices (by passing the body) straight into the theological seminaries, where they could readily disseminate throughout the whole body their materials? Just like a vaccine does to a human body?

What if we instead, or in addition, weakened all the deacons, elders, pastors, teachers in the church, by placing stoppers in their ears, and then allowed such foreign elements to come in and teach to the rest of the body, just as like weakening the immune system and white blood cells through aluminum and other adjuvants in the vaccines?

I know of a Beast (Genesis 3:1) in the Bible that likes to inject poisons through a needle-like fang - the serpent.

science and engineering also figures out how to build bridges and fly jets. if it works it works if it don't it don't. but its communism to tell others what to do with what is theirs isn't it? if a bridge is built should it be law to use it, if a vaccine is made should it be law to use it just because you think so?

 

[Kermos]

With respect, you have misunderstood my earlier post which may be my fault for not being clearer.
In Matthew 4:5-6, Satan tempts our Lord to throw Himself down from the Temple, trusting that the Father will save Him. The Lord Jesus replies that one should not put God to the test.
It seems to me that @Triumph1300 is putting God to the test by not having a flu jab which would not only protect him against flu, but also those around him. I have worn a seat belt when driving for the last 30 years or so. In that time I have never had an accident. Was I lacking in faith in God to protect me by wearing a seat belt? Or would I have been testing God had I not worn one? Oliver Cromwell famously told his troops, "Trust in God and keep your powder dry." Was he lacking in faith by not believing that God could make damp gunpowder work? Or would he have been testing God if he had told his troops it didn't matter if their powder got wet?

Wearing a seat belt is in compliance with the law in many jurisdictions, and the Apostle Paul wrote "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities" (Romans 13:1).

Back to your earlier post, both of these address points which you covered about Triumph1300's post.

1) In post #89, @Triumph1300 wrote that he "trusts" the Lord to take care of him as he testifies that he's not had a vaccination in about three quarters of a century; on the other hand, in your post #92, along with your post quoted above, you still try to change "trust" to "test" the Lord. The Word of God includes this passage about trusting God "Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight" (Proverbs 3:5-6). Whose understanding are you leaning on, Steve Owen?

2) Respecting where Lord Jesus said "it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.'" to the tempter, the devil, who said to Jesus to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple (Matthew 4:5-7), injecting toxins such as aluminum directly into the blood of little helpless children is putting God to the test (the same goes for getting injections yourself), and you are promoting the very thing.

Steve Owen, you have not answered the question What scriptural support do you propose for the injection of various chemicals and agents with toxic properties into helpless little children in the scriptural exposition of the evils of vaccination post in this thread - which remains true.

 

[Triumph1300]

you still try to change "trust" to "test" the Lord. The Word of God includes this passage about trusting God "Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight" (Proverbs 3:5-6). Whose understanding are you leaning on, Steve Owen?

Correct.
I like to see an answer, Steve.

 

[ReChoired]

science and engineering also figures out how to build bridges and fly jets. if it works it works if it don't it don't. but its communism to tell others what to do with what is theirs isn't it? if a bridge is built should it be law to use it, if a vaccine is made should it be law to use it just because you think so?

You use a lot of non-sequitur to attempt an equality. There is no equality with true medical science (knowledge) and the falsely so called science of 'vaccine'. Here is a testimony of an Ex-Exec from MERCK at a CDC hearing:

 

[DPMartin]

You use a lot of non-sequitur to attempt an equality. There is no equality with true medical science (knowledge) and the falsely so called science of 'vaccine'. Here is a testimony of an Ex-Exec from MERCK at a CDC hearing:

you mean people lie cheat destroy others for fun and profit, naaaaw how can that be. get real, just because the catholic priesthood is less than human, doesn't mean Jesus isn't the Son of God, does it? same with anything else in the hands of men. there is what is true and then those who seek to place themselves between you and the truth of a matter. like media for instance.