|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 6, 2020 23:43:42 GMT 10
In Revelation 18:23, the Bible says:
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy SORCERIES were all nations deceived."
“SORCERY” in Greek, is the word “pharmakeia”, which is where we get the word "pharmaceutical".
It says ALL nations would be deceived because of "the pharmakeia", which could come to mean "...because of the medicine".
What sickness involves ALL nations, if not CoVid-19?
As a consequence: "And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee, and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee."
In other words, because of the medicine, we will no longer be sensitive to the call of God or other believers. IOW: This is such an offence to God, that he will refuse to have anything to do with us.
Meanwhile in the tangible world:
They are forcing restrictions on all of us, forcing us to stay indoors, to wear masks, to keep six feet apart, to keep limited numbers of guests.
If you don't wear masks, the stores are not required to serve you.
If you don't wear a mask, you cannot work in your place of employment, etc.
(So you can't buy or sell without it.)
What if the same rules apply for the vaccine as they do the mask?
What if you aren't allowed to buy or sell unless you have the vaccine?
Or the proof that you've had a vaccine? ...Like a mark?
Now I don't want to sound paranoid,I could be wrong and just speculating...
But to anyone who knows their Bible... Doesn't this sound like anything familiar?
(If not, Google the 'Mark of the Beast'.)
The world has a pretty interesting narrative right now, I am waiting for their next move...
If we refuse are they going to force us to take it at gunpoint, are they going to round up and contain those who don't want it?
...Are they setting themselves up to look like the 'good guys', when the reality is that they are the oppressors?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on Oct 7, 2020 9:20:35 GMT 10
I think it was foretold in Mathew 24:
For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
All these are the beginning of sorrows.
We're definitely seeing all of this now.
Even the muslims are saying the virus is an act of god:
"It is obvious that the spread of this virus is an act of Allah. How do we know this? The spread of the coronavirus began in China, an ancient and vast country, the population of which makes up one seventh of humanity . . . The authorities in that country . . . laid siege to more than a million Muslims . . . Allah sent a disease upon them and this disease laid siege to 40 million [Chinese] . . . And there you have it, this disease spread . . . and it has scared humanity in its entirety.”
Personally I believe it is Mother Nature's way of protecting the planet. We evolved to live with viruses - so what it all comes down to is survival of the fittest. Some will have a natural immunity to the virus whilst others will not. Some will have a mild reaction whilst others will suffer and perish. If millions die so be it. The planet is overpopulated as it is and no longer sustainable.
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 7, 2020 14:07:58 GMT 10
I agree, Stellar, that a natural explanation is more satisfying than the biblical one that you propose, Occam. I have a lot of respect for religion and its wisdom and insight into the human condition but as a history nerd I can’t get away from the historical truth that progress in medical science down through the millennia has tended to be in the teeth of trenchant opposition from organised Christianity rather than with its support. I suspect that Occam will come in at this point with a strong reply and that’s fine.
On Stellar’s point of “let ‘er rip, this is Nature’s way of redressing the natural balance” I’m afraid that you’ll get little support on that score from any health care professional who feels bound by the Hippocratic Oath.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 8, 2020 0:40:23 GMT 10
I agree, Stellar, that a natural explanation is more satisfying than the biblical one that you propose, Occam. I have a lot of respect for religion and its wisdom and insight into the human condition but as a history nerd I can’t get away from the historical truth that progress in medical science down through the millennia has tended to be in the teeth of trenchant opposition from organised Christianity rather than with its support. I'm not sure that is universally true. I know that science has benefitted from geography, genealogies and archaeology provided by the Bible as a basis. There are also things mentioned in the Bible that science only found out much later. Such as: The belief that air has weight: Job 28:25 The sea has mountains: Jonah 2:6 Blood is the source of life: Leviticus 17:11 The earth his held by gravitational forces: Job 26:7 The earth is round: Isaiah 42:20,Job 26:10 (*Keep in mind that early man did not have the instruments to know this like we do today.) I can go into more detail, but it will take a bit of research to dig everything up for you. (no pun intended.) |
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on Oct 8, 2020 8:17:56 GMT 10
True. Blood is the most indispensable necessity to life and gives us our strength and vitality. Blood feeds the body and transports oxygen to every cell. Which is why we refer to the lifeblood of anything as being the most vital thing needed.
But I think Leviticus was also talking about sacrifices. And also about draining an animal of its blood before eating it - which is exactly what the mussos and Jews do. However, there is still blood in the flesh that cannot be drained. So they're still eating blood.
The Jehovah's Witnesses will not take blood such as in transfusions and were basically proved right when we had the AIDS epidemic and people were being infected by blood from gays.
I'll have to look at Job for those other references when I get the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 9, 2020 4:21:32 GMT 10
True. Blood is the most indispensable necessity to life and gives us our strength and vitality. Blood feeds the body and transports oxygen to every cell. Which is why we refer to the lifeblood of anything as being the most vital thing needed. But I think Leviticus was also talking about sacrifices. And also about draining an animal of its blood before eating it - which is exactly what the mussos and Jews do. However, there is still blood in the flesh that cannot be drained. So they're still eating blood. The Jehovah's Witnesses will not take blood such as in transfusions and were basically proved right when we had the AIDS epidemic and people were being infected by blood from gays. I'll have to look at Job for those other references when I get the time. That depends on how pharisaic you want to be with the law. (The Pharisees defined 'work' on the Sabbath as anything that requires two hands to do it. -Jesus called the Pharisees, vipers.) Jesus' point was that the spirit of the law was much more important than the word of it. But if you look at the Mosaic law, we are actually ALL guilty of breaking it, which is what I believe was Jesus' point to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 9, 2020 4:34:06 GMT 10
I think it was foretold in Mathew 24: The planet is overpopulated as it is and no longer sustainable. I don't agree with that. There are enough affluent people in the west if they didn't hoard their resources, everyone would be able to live comfortably. The issue isn't overpopulation, it is greed. Bible also says in the final days people would become lovers of themselves. --How popular is Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat, and what is its main focus? |
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on Oct 10, 2020 8:27:53 GMT 10
True enough. For instance I don't really have a problem with the Ten Commandments if that's what you're talking about. I'm quite comfortable with 5 to 9. But being a lapsed Anglican these days, I kinda don't think 1 to 4 applies to me. Now number 10 is a little bit problematic, lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on Oct 10, 2020 8:29:30 GMT 10
I think it was foretold in Mathew 24: The planet is overpopulated as it is and no longer sustainable. I don't agree with that. There are enough affluent people in the west if they didn't hoard their resources, everyone would be able to live comfortably. The issue isn't overpopulation, it is greed. Bible also says in the final days people would become lovers of themselves. --How popular is Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat, and what is its main focus? I've noticed that anyone who is quite religious does have a problem with the idea that our world population numbers are totally unsustainable. Why is that, I wonder? |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 10, 2020 12:54:29 GMT 10
True enough. For instance I don't really have a problem with the Ten Commandments if that's what you're talking about. I'm quite comfortable with 5 to 9. But being a lapsed Anglican these days, I kinda don't think 1 to 4 applies to me. Now number 10 is a little bit problematic, lol. The Commandments weren't given to us to appease God, they were given so that we would recognize that we couldn't do it on our own. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 10, 2020 12:56:48 GMT 10
I don't agree with that. There are enough affluent people in the west if they didn't hoard their resources, everyone would be able to live comfortably. The issue isn't overpopulation, it is greed. Bible also says in the final days people would become lovers of themselves. --How popular is Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat, and what is its main focus? I've noticed that anyone who is quite religious does have a problem with the idea that our world population numbers are totally unsustainable. Why is that, I wonder? Not just religious, scientifically as well. Scientifically anything in a closed system will inevitably reach an equilibrium with its environment. I laughed at the plot in the Avenger's Endgame. Thano's logic was flawed. He reduced half of the universe's population, why didn't he instead just double its resources? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2020 9:15:48 GMT 10
Thano's logic was flawed. He reduced half of the universe's population, why didn't he instead just double its resources? Because then the lesson would not have been learned is my guess. Since I haven't seen the movie, 'guess' is as good as I can offer. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2020 9:22:36 GMT 10
Scientifically anything in a closed system will inevitably reach an equilibrium with its environment. So is Covid (and other diseases we hare having trouble controlling) a means by which the 'closed system' is restoring balance? Does that not suggest the human population is reaching unsustainable levels? You could counter that the plagues of centuries ago killed more people from a much lower population but the available resources to sustain living then were much less than today. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Post by Stellar on Nov 5, 2020 13:39:34 GMT 10
I think you've hit the nail on the head there Grim. We are destroying our environment to feed the growing hordes. Every day we see more deforestation to accommodate more and more people. Yet what of the wildlife that are losing their habitats? We need to nurture all the planet's creatures. They have as much right to their place here on earth as us. And as we've seen, wild animals that are suffering severe stress from loss of habitat have to move into ours - with devastating consequences as they shed their viruses which are passed on to humans.
We have mainly China to blame for this because with their 1.5 billion (and counting!!) population, they are using as much of the planet's resources than almost all the other nations combined! And the spotlight is firmly fixed on China's demand for wild animals to use in traditional Chinese medicine as well as food. But the majority of TCM concoctions have absolutely no basis in science. Which brings us to the World Health Organisation and their blatant support for China and TCM ... and their disgraceful kowtowing to China by refusing to call the pandemic in a timely manner which would have reduced the overall spread of the virus resulting in catastrophic numbers of outbreaks of the virus worldwide.
As for the plagues of centuries ago - these were caused by people living in cramped fetid dwellings - whole families living in a one or two room hovel, cheek to jowel with other poorly constructed dwellings. Disease loves density! So yes, they didn't have the resources to build proper housing. People had poor health from the conditions they had to live in and the poor quality and quantity of the food that was available - so were vulnerable to any outbreak of disease.
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 5, 2020 23:19:59 GMT 10
Wasn’t decent plumbing the greatest public health measure of the modern world?
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 8, 2020 10:22:14 GMT 10
Wasn’t decent plumbing the greatest public health measure of the modern world? Also a detriment if you recall the problem the Romans had with the aquaducts |
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 8, 2020 11:04:21 GMT 10
I did say the modern world, not the ancient world. Occam I know that the ancient Romans had plumbing. By that I don’t mean flush toilets and sewage treatment plants like we have today. I don’t know a lot about Roman plumbing. The very word “plumbing” comes from the Latin word for lead. Does that mean the Romans lined their water pipes with lead? I don’t know! But clearly the reference to lead in the word “plumbing” wouldn’t come out of nowhere so there’s a problem for starters! The problem with lead wasn’t just confined to plumbing, it was used in women’s cosmetics as well - among a slew of other stuff which you probably don’t want to know about and I don’t really want to go there. Basically in their drinking water and with their cosmetics people in the ancient world poisoned themselves with huge and obvious implications for public health and longevity. Incidentally apparently as they practised their Christianity in the catacombs, early Christians refused cosmetics, or makeup, arguing that personal vanity was the work of the Devil, thus anticipating the Puritans by a millennium. But then the Protestant Reformers claimed to be doing nothing more than harking back to the piety of the early Christians of a thousand years previously. Nevertheless the Romans did have a system for flushing away bodily excrement into a giant cesspit they called the Cloaca. I suspect it all ended up in the Tiber river so the river would have stunk. I don’t think we would have enjoyed the Roman concept of plumbing! Bad as it was, it was infinitely preferable to the non-existence of plumbing during the Middle Ages which followed the Roman Empire. The fall of Rome in the 400s AD effectively put an end to a lot of public infrastructure such as plumbing and the engineering skill base that goes with it for the next thousand years. In fact I’d go further and say it took no less than 1500 years for the West to catch up to where Rome was in terms of public amenity and infrastructure. Today of course we’ve surpassed it and are galaxies ahead where the Romans were, but before we criticise their plumbing and their aqueducts let’s not lose perspective here. Modern plumbing which delivers fresh clean disease-free water under pressure to everybody’s house and which flushes away body waste through efficient sewage treatment infrastructure and also enables us to wash ourselves in our own homes didn’t really start to happen in the West until the latter half of the 19th century. That’s from the fall of the Western Roman Empire to the dawn of the 20th century. The fall of Rome meant that our ancestors fell into a technological black hole that it took 1500 years to climb back out of. As for problems with Roman aqueducts I’m sure there were problems. I’ve walked across and through the Pont du Gard in southern France. What a feat of engineering that was!  Still standing 2000 years after it was built. At its peak Ancient Rome was a huge city by ancient standards. About the size of Adelaide in terms of population and that’s a million people. Imagine the daily needs of an urban population of that size in the ancient world and what it would have taken to keep a population that size fed and watered when you had nothing more sophisticated than beasts of burden and slaves to deliver food, and aqueducts to deliver water. I’m guessing that it would have been gravity feed all the way with aqueducts so no water under pressure as we understand it. And yet that represented world’s best practice at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 9, 2020 23:29:08 GMT 10
I love the history of technology. I marvel at the ingenuity of our ancestors in harnessing wind and water to generate energy. The windmills of the Netherlands harnessed wind power to drain what was essentially a giant swamp and also to grind grain crops. Water mills in Switzerland harnessed the force of water gushing downhill in mountain streams to achieve the same result. Sailing ships that were square rigged and were limited in where they could sail until some genius made transoceanic travel possible by combining the Arab lateen sail that they used on their dhows with the traditional European square rigged sail. The combination powered shipping until steamships took over at the dawn of the 20th century.
I also love the history of food. I have a wonderful book on my shelves on the history of spices. Apparently until the Dutch came into Indonesia in the 1500s and spread the cultivation of cloves, that spice was confined to two small Indonesian islands. And yet when British archaeologists were excavating the early Bronze Age tomb of a minor potentate in Iraq that was 7000 years old so we’re really taking about the dawn of civilisation, they discovered clove nails in the sarcophagus. Cloves were used by the Sumerians and the Egyptians in embalming dead royalty. It shows that even back then there was a type of global economy with trade routes that brought those cloves from those Indonesian islands thousands of km to the Fertile Crescent in Iraq. There’s also a history of the humble potato. What a tuber! It’s journey from being a tuber in the Andes to a global staple and its importance in changing Western diets and acting as one of the drivers of the Industrial Revolution is utterly fascinating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 10, 2020 12:34:40 GMT 10
I did say the modern world, not the ancient world. Occam I know that the ancient Romans had plumbing. By that I don’t mean flush toilets and sewage treatment plants like we have today. I don’t know a lot about Roman plumbing. The very word “plumbing” comes from the Latin word for lead. Does that mean the Romans lined their water pipes with lead? I don’t know! I remember reading in history class that this was indeed the case. I always suspected that is the reason so many of the Emperors had gone mad. (Nero and Caligula to name a few) The lower class could not afford plumbing, and that was the reason most of them managed to stay sane. |
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Nov 10, 2020 12:40:06 GMT 10
Not to mention mercury ... they didn't call 'em "mad hatters" for nothing!  |
|
