# Church/Members Asking About a Person's Vaccination Status



## Jonathan95 (May 15, 2021)

With the CDC's new guidelines I've found many people already making small talk over their vaccination status. I work at a hotel and already guests will ask the staff if they have been vaccinated. I'm sure some members of different congregations will begin asking each other the same questions on Lord's Day mornings. Some might even request that they only sit in same pews as others who have received the vaccine. 

Do I have to disclose whether or not I have had the vaccine? Some are saying that it's just like how kids going to school must prove they have their shots. It just makes me uncomfortable when people ask so bluntly if I've received my shots. 

How should this be handled on both sides of the aisle?


----------



## Taylor (May 15, 2021)

You are not legally or morally obligated to disclose to anyone anything whatsoever about your medical status records. Nobody can require it of you. Of course, they can refuse service if you refrain disclosure, but they cannot coerce you to disclose anything.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Zach (May 15, 2021)

Of course you don't have to disclose whether or not you've been vaccinated if you don't want to! It should be handled respectfully by people both sides. People who ask shouldn't be asking as the inquisition for either side (indeed, I've found myself asking mainly as a form of small talk) and people should be respected for their reasonable decisions. I understand why some are hesitant, but I generally think the benefits outweigh the risks. I respect those who come to different conclusions (as long as they're not promoting unfounded or false claims about the vaccine or criticizing those who choose differently from them). Generally speaking, respectful honesty is the best policy.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 15, 2021)

Most people who ask whether or not you have had the vaccine are only making conversation. I was talking to three people in their 60s (at least) up at the north coast the other day, and all of them had taken it, but respected my reasons for not doing so. I said that I had read the government's documents on the vaccines and decided that the risks outweighed the potential benefits. I also said that I considered it unnecessary to vaccinate people who are not at serious risk from the disease - and certainly not the entire population. These folks, all of whom had taken it themselves, agreed with my reasoning on the subject. We also agreed that vaccines were a personal matter, the media are not to be trusted, and that the lockdowns were a scam. There is no need to bite anyone's head off; if you demonstrate that you understand why they might consider it wise to take it, they are often open to listening to your reasons for refusing the vaccines.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## JimmyH (May 15, 2021)

I ask people in my community, in my congregation. For no other reason than to satisfy my curiosity, and to make conversation. Not as a litmus test of some sort. So far the majority have said they've gotten the vaccine, and I know some anti vaxxers, but there's never been any contentious words on either side of my encounters discussing the subject. In our congregation it isn't, and will never be, a reason to exclude anyone.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (May 15, 2021)

I think it's completely fine for a matter of small talk and conversation, but I don't think it should be brought up as a matter of judgment and division. The reality is that if somebody is vaccinated, they no longer have to worry about the virus for themselves, because they are mostly immune to any serious effects of it, so it seems pointless to bring up.

Reactions: Love 1


----------



## Edward (May 15, 2021)

It's been a topic of casual conversation for quite some time at our church, starting when the shots were difficult to arrange. At this point, I'd assume that everyone that wanted one had gotten one, and those that haven't don't care or have already had the WuFlu. A couple of weeks ago, it was rare to see someone without a mask or face shield; by last week a majority appeared to be un-masked during the service. I'll mask this week because I'm ushering, but it is likely the last week for me to do that. 

As for those with particular concerns, several options. 1) stay at home and watch the live stream. 2) go to the 8 AM outdoor service. 3) there are hundreds of empty seats with room for 60 foot rather than 6 foot social distancing in the fellowship hall with a large screen there. So if someone wants to be difficult, they can be advised of their options. 



Jonathan95 said:


> How should this be handled on both sides of the aisle?


As a last resort, there is always honesty. Yes, No, or "I plead HIPAA rights"


----------



## De Jager (May 15, 2021)

I can tell you this: If churches have already made masks a condition of entry, there is no logical reason why they will not do the same thing with the vaccine.

Reactions: Like 6 | Sad 1


----------



## Jonathan95 (May 15, 2021)

I've just been surprised how free people feel to ask if you’ve been vaccinated. Remember when private health information was considered private?

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## JM (May 15, 2021)

I do not ask people about their personal medical history unless they bring it up.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Herald (May 15, 2021)

It is no one's business whether I have been vaccinated. If I am asked I will decline to answer. If pressed, I will tell them it is a private matter that does not concern them.

Reactions: Like 7 | Amen 1


----------



## pilgrimmum (May 16, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> With the CDC's new guidelines I've found many people already making small talk over their vaccination status. I work at a hotel and already guests will ask the staff if they have been vaccinated. I'm sure some members of different congregations will begin asking each other the same questions on Lord's Day mornings. Some might even request that they only sit in same pews as others who have received the vaccine.
> 
> Do I have to disclose whether or not I have had the vaccine? Some are saying that it's just like how kids going to school must prove they have their shots. It just makes me uncomfortable when people ask so bluntly if I've received my shots.
> 
> How should this be handled on both sides of the aisle?


Some people want to know because of the reactions some unvaccinated people are experiencing when in close proximity to vaccinated people. There has been a lot of reports about this lately. Some unvaccinated people are choosing to self- isolate from vaccinated people so I guess then it becomes an important question for them.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 16, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> I've just been surprised how free people feel to ask if you’ve been vaccinated. Remember when private health information was considered private?



Indeed, it is strange. It is also peculiar that we live in an age wherein I am considered responsible for the health of all 68 million people in the UK, but no one is responsible for their own health. If someone, somewhere gets COVID, it is my fault for not wearing a mask in a shop. Conversely, if that person is badly ill from COVID as a result of being morbidly obese, then it is everyone's fault but their own. Many people who are happy to police everyone else for not following the Pharisaical COVID-rules to "protect the NHS", which, if you read them, are impossible for anyone to follow, have no problem eating to excess so that they are obese, smoking forty cigarettes a day, and sitting at home getting drunk every night, despite the strain these things put on the health service.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1 | Wow 1


----------



## Jack K (May 16, 2021)

I'm a bit surprised by the "it's personal" responses. At my church, we're encouraged to ask personal questions. I guess I wonder what kind of real, Christian-fellowship conversations we are expected to have at church if we shy away from anything personal.

Especially when it has come to COVID, I've been thankful to have a church where I can discuss the many considerations that go into caring for others and honoring God during this time. Bouncing my vaccine thoughts off of fellow believers who know me well has been a part of that. I'm glad for those conversations. I think conversations of that sort are one of the reasons God puts us in local churches. The alternative, I suppose, would be to reach my own conclusions about difficult matters by reading some guys on the Internet and then go to church with my mind made up, refusing to discuss or pray about it with the believers who know me best and care about me. I don't want to end up like that.

I do understand that some churches are filled with judgmental people. I agree that I wouldn't want to get personal with them. Or if the spirit behind asking about one's vaccination status is some sort of shibboleth, that would be bad. And if someone wants privacy, I'm willing to honor that—they have their reasons. But I have a hard time seeing how "don't get personal" ought to be the norm within a church.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## JM (May 16, 2021)

It's a politically motivated question, a reason for gossip that creates the opportunity to virtue signal.

Reactions: Like 2 | Rejoicing 1


----------



## Jonathan95 (May 17, 2021)

Jack K said:


> I'm a bit surprised by the "it's personal" responses. At my church, we're encouraged to ask personal questions. I guess I wonder what kind of real, Christian-fellowship conversations we are expected to have at church if we shy away from anything personal.
> 
> Especially when it has come to COVID, I've been thankful to have a church where I can discuss the many considerations that go into caring for others and honoring God during this time. Bouncing my vaccine thoughts off of fellow believers who know me well has been a part of that. I'm glad for those conversations. I think conversations of that sort are one of the reasons God puts us in local churches. The alternative, I suppose, would be to reach my own conclusions about difficult matters by reading some guys on the Internet and then go to church with my mind made up, refusing to discuss or pray about it with the believers who know me best and care about me. I don't want to end up like that.
> 
> I do understand that some churches are filled with judgmental people. I agree that I wouldn't want to get personal with them. Of if the spirit behind asking about one's vaccination status is some sort of shibboleth, that would be bad. And if someone wants privacy, I'm willing to honor that—they have their reasons. But I have a hard time seeing how "don't get personal" ought to be the norm within a church.



The issue is that I don't want to be made to feel like I am the problem when I don't believe that I am. We know couples in church who are terrified and who refuse to come to church even though that are relatively young, without kids, and in great health. Regardless, that's their choice. When does the fear of unvaccinated individuals become an unwarranted fear? Should we not seek to convince our fellow believers that they are in no danger? I mean, I cannot really say for certain that they are/are not. But to avoid fellowship in the church week after week, month after month, until you're certain that most others in the church are vaccinated doesn't seem okay. Also, I don't think I should be made to feel guilty as if I am the reason why they cannot come to church because I am not vaccinated.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Beoga (May 17, 2021)

JM said:


> It's a politically motivated question, a reason for gossip that creates the opportunity to virtual signal.


I ask the question because I am genuinely curious what people are doing. It helps me think through my decision making. I respect those that have gotten the vaccine. I respect those who will never get the vaccine. I respect those that are waiting (as long as they can) for to see how the vaccines turn out. I especially trust my brothers and sisters in the Lord to make the best decision for themselves and their family. No politics or virtue signaling for me (unless this statement is one...)

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ed Walsh (May 17, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> With the CDC's new guidelines I've found many people already making small talk over their vaccination status


I just read all the posts, and no one mentioned people like me. When I'm asked if I'm vaccinated, I tell the truth, "no, I'm not vaccinated. I'm better than that. I had covid, and I am immune. Probably a lot safer than any of you who have been vaccinated. And I don't shed anything that could harm others either."

BTW - It's been four months now since my wife and I got over the illness, and I still have no smell or taste. Even that's working out for my good because I'm eating a lot less and losing some excess weight I gained during the lockdowns. 

But here's the bottom line. People never seem satisfied with my answer. They seem only to trust somebody who is vaccinated. Also, I have read there's a three times greater risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine for somebody who already has had covid.

This thing isn't over yet.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 17, 2021)

Jack K said:


> I'm a bit surprised by the "it's personal" responses. At my church, we're encouraged to ask personal questions. I guess I wonder what kind of real, Christian-fellowship conversations we are expected to have at church if we shy away from anything personal.
> 
> Especially when it has come to COVID, I've been thankful to have a church where I can discuss the many considerations that go into caring for others and honoring God during this time. Bouncing my vaccine thoughts off of fellow believers who know me well has been a part of that. I'm glad for those conversations. I think conversations of that sort are one of the reasons God puts us in local churches. The alternative, I suppose, would be to reach my own conclusions about difficult matters by reading some guys on the Internet and then go to church with my mind made up, refusing to discuss or pray about it with the believers who know me best and care about me. I don't want to end up like that.
> 
> I do understand that some churches are filled with judgmental people. I agree that I wouldn't want to get personal with them. Of if the spirit behind asking about one's vaccination status is some sort of shibboleth, that would be bad. And if someone wants privacy, I'm willing to honor that—they have their reasons. But I have a hard time seeing how "don't get personal" ought to be the norm within a church.



I see the general point that you are making, Jack, but I think you are missing one crucial contextual factor. Some of us are living in a context where churches are seriously considering introducing vaccine passports in order to attend the services. (Thankfully, not my congregation.) For that reason, some people are understandably concerned that questions about vaccines may be more than just making conversation. They are reluctant to answer such questions because they fear that they would be painting a target on their backs that could see them excluded from church. Having said that, I do think it is generally best to presume that the brethren who ask us about such matters do not have a bad motive and just explain your reasons for your decision on the subject.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## ChristianLibertarian (May 17, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> With the CDC's new guidelines I've found many people already making small talk over their vaccination status. I work at a hotel and already guests will ask the staff if they have been vaccinated. I'm sure some members of different congregations will begin asking each other the same questions on Lord's Day mornings. Some might even request that they only sit in same pews as others who have received the vaccine.
> 
> Do I have to disclose whether or not I have had the vaccine? Some are saying that it's just like how kids going to school must prove they have their shots. It just makes me uncomfortable when people ask so bluntly if I've received my shots.
> 
> How should this be handled on both sides of the aisle?


Your employer can ask about your vaccine status and can require you to get the vax if they so desire. There is no law prohibiting employers from requiring Covid vaccinations as a term of employment in the US. HIPPA privacy protections were specifically suspended as to Covid thus allowing employers to inquire about your healh status regarding Covid. 

As for people asking about whether of not you have been vaccinated, if at church the question makes you uncomfortable politely decline to answer. I suspect most people are just making small talk. Perhaps there are extremists on both the pro and anti-vax sides that want to inquire and harshly judge you for reaching a different conclusion than they did. For the most part though, people are happy to return to normal and are only inquiring about vaccination status to make small talk.


----------



## iainduguid (May 17, 2021)

There's nothing unique about this question. In many churches, there are questions that are explosive, that in another church would simply be inoffensive small talk. "Do you home school?" "What do you think about Donald Trump?" "Do your kids read Harry Potter?": the list could be multiplied. Wise churches and leaders will teach and model what Christian liberty is, how far it extends, and how to disagree well with other believers (and unbelievers). This just happens to be the latest manifestation, and your experience will be very much influenced by the sub-culture within which your church exists, as this thread already demonstrates.

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## Edward (May 17, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> We know couples in church who are terrified and who refuse to come to church even though that are relatively young, without kids, and in great health.


Church leadership needs to step up with care, teaching, and discipline. Care for their mental health, teaching about life, death, and eternal life, and discipline for their disobedience.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## hammondjones (May 17, 2021)

I've not been asked. But, (I assume) I'll likely disclose if I know the person, else I'll suggest that it is not a concern of theirs. 

However, I have a friend who plans on identifying as a transvaxxite, and will tell people he's vaccinated.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Jack K (May 17, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> The issue is that I don't want to be made to feel like I am the problem when I don't believe that I am. We know couples in church who are terrified and who refuse to come to church even though that are relatively young, without kids, and in great health. Regardless, that's their choice. When does the fear of unvaccinated individuals become an unwarranted fear? Should we not seek to convince our fellow believers that they are in no danger? I mean, I cannot really say for certain that they are/are not. But to avoid fellowship in the church week after week, month after month, until you're certain that most others in the church are vaccinated doesn't seem okay. Also, I don't think I should be made to feel guilty as if I am the reason why they cannot come to church because I am not vaccinated.


Of course, much depends on the vibe within the particular church, and the fear of being labelled a danger to others is understandable. But I am suggesting it would be good if such concerns could be openly discussed in a church with a charitable mindset, so that people could bear each other's burdens rather than immediately despise or dismiss burdens they think are unreasonable.

In your case, let's say you have a burden in that you believe getting vaccinated is an unwise personal health decision or a capitulation to an evil agenda (or whatever your reason might be). If you had a church where people were inclined to help bear your burden even if they suspected you might be overreacting, or where people would challenge you patiently and without shaming you if they thought you needed to think through the matter more, and would work to find solutions that that help everyone follow their conscience and still join in fellowship, etc.—wouldn't that be a good church? Likewise, if you had discussions with that other family and came to understand why they are more concerned about the virus than you are, so that even if you ultimately still disagree you know how you can help bear their burden and/or gently challenge them in loving ways—wouldn't it be good for you to face up to your responsibility to love them like that?

The alternative is to believe we are so right and others are so wrong (they are so obviously deceived that we can only have scorn for their decisions) that the best we can do when we encounter them at church is keep our head down and avoid any meaningful fellowship. Perhaps this preserves some peace sometimes, but it isn't really what we ought to desire in a church.

A personal story: Yesterday at my church, a family that has been absent for a year showed up. I noticed them as they walked up the street toward the front door, and I greeted them. I told them I was glad to see them. Happily, they took a chance and explained that they'd stayed away due to COVID but were coming back now that the mom and dad were fully vaccinated. They asked about my COVID/church decisions, and I explained my thinking (I've been in church every week except once when we stayed away voluntarily because we'd been exposed elsewhere in town). They seemed to appreciate that, and I asked them more about their concerns. They have a strong social conscience and mom and dad both have public-service jobs that require contact with vulnerable people, plus there's an ailing grandfather in the picture, and they felt duty-bound to stop attending worship for a while. Now, that is not a choice I think I would have made, for reasons they and I might discuss sometime, but rather than silently judge them or scoff at their decision I now can understand them better. Plus I know how to help bear their burden. They're still a bit leery of spending the morning inside our building, and of sending their daughter to my Sunday school class where the kids of course remain unvaccinated, and if I can make them feel a bit more comfortable by reminding my students about their masks or something of that sort, I'm glad to do it. It's a little bit of burden-sharing, and a significant kindness to them, even if I personally suspect it won't make much difference in actual virus protection.

My point is that I've never been particularly close to that family even though I've taught their kids, but after yesterday's talk at church—which did not shy away from COVID despite some differing concerns—I feel closer to them than before. That's good. That should be happening when the church meets together.

Reactions: Like 5 | Love 2


----------



## Jonathan95 (May 17, 2021)

Jack K said:


> Of course, much depends on the vibe within the particular church, and the fear of being labelled a danger to others is understandable. But I am suggesting it would be good if such concerns could be openly discussed in a church with a charitable mindset, so that people could bear each other's burdens rather than immediately despise or dismiss burdens they think are unreasonable.
> 
> In your case, let's say you have a burden in that you believe getting vaccinated is an unwise personal health decision or a capitulation to an evil agenda (or whatever your reason might be). If you had a church where people were inclined to help bear your burden even if they suspected you might be overreacting, or where people would challenge you patiently and without shaming you if they thought you needed to think through the matter more, and would work to find solutions that that help everyone follow their conscience and still join in fellowship, etc.—wouldn't that be a good church? Likewise, if you had discussions with that other family and came to understand why they are more concerned about the virus than you are, so that even if you ultimately still disagree you know how you can help bear their burden and/or gently challenge them in loving ways—wouldn't it be good for you to face up to your responsibility to love them like that?
> 
> ...



I understand and agree with what you've written. Thank you Jack.


----------



## Harrison (May 24, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> The issue is that I don't want to be made to feel like I am the problem when I don't believe that I am. We know couples in church who are terrified and who refuse to come to church even though that are relatively young, without kids, and in great health. Regardless, that's their choice. When does the fear of unvaccinated individuals become an unwarranted fear? Should we not seek to convince our fellow believers that they are in no danger? I mean, I cannot really say for certain that they are/are not. But to avoid fellowship in the church week after week, month after month, until you're certain that most others in the church are vaccinated doesn't seem okay. Also, I don't think I should be made to feel guilty as if I am the reason why they cannot come to church because I am not vaccinated.


I wonder if these "terrified" church avoiders understand God's sovereignty?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Jonathan95 (May 24, 2021)

Harrison said:


> I wonder if these "terrified" church avoiders understand God's sovereignty?


Explain?


----------



## Ben Zartman (May 24, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> The issue is that I don't want to be made to feel like I am the problem when I don't believe that I am. We know couples in church who are terrified and who refuse to come to church even though that are relatively young, without kids, and in great health. Regardless, that's their choice. When does the fear of unvaccinated individuals become an unwarranted fear? Should we not seek to convince our fellow believers that they are in no danger? I mean, I cannot really say for certain that they are/are not. But to avoid fellowship in the church week after week, month after month, until you're certain that most others in the church are vaccinated doesn't seem okay. Also, I don't think I should be made to feel guilty as if I am the reason why they cannot come to church because I am not vaccinated.


Any fear that keeps you from church because "you might get sick" is an unreasonable fear: God commands His people to assemble. Ours is to obey, and if He send a pestilence to sicken us while we're obeying, at least we're obeying, and we know that He does all things well. God can just as easily keep us well while we obey as sicken us while we take every precaution known to man.
It is specious to say that we are tempting God if we run a risk in order to obey. God requires obedience in spite of risk, and will not hold us vain tempters of Himself if we suffer danger in order to obey.
Those who from fear will not assemble show that they do not believe that God will honor those who honor Him. They fear the wrong thing: God is to be feared more than any other danger and respected more than any other dignity.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 3


----------



## Jonathan95 (May 24, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> Any fear that keeps you from church because "you might get sick" is an unreasonable fear: God commands His people to assemble. Ours is to obey, and if He send a pestilence to sicken us while we're obeying, at least we're obeying, and we know that He does all things well. God can just as easily keep us well while we obey as sicken us while we take every precaution known to man.
> It is specious to say that we are tempting God if we run a risk in order to obey. God requires obedience in spite of risk, and will not hold us vain tempters of Himself if we suffer danger in order to obey.
> Those who from fear will not assemble show that they do not believe that God will honor those who honor Him. They fear the wrong thing: God is to be feared more than any other danger and respected more than any other dignity.


Really great response, thank you.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## JonC (May 24, 2021)

Seems like it would be contrary to HEPA. I understand if you are going out of the country.....but who knows what the future holds.


----------



## py3ak (May 24, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> Any fear that keeps you from church because "you might get sick" is an unreasonable fear: God commands His people to assemble. Ours is to obey, and if He send a pestilence to sicken us while we're obeying, at least we're obeying, and we know that He does all things well. God can just as easily keep us well while we obey as sicken us while we take every precaution known to man.
> It is specious to say that we are tempting God if we run a risk in order to obey. God requires obedience in spite of risk, and will not hold us vain tempters of Himself if we suffer danger in order to obey.
> Those who from fear will not assemble show that they do not believe that God will honor those who honor Him. They fear the wrong thing: God is to be feared more than any other danger and respected more than any other dignity.



"However, no need to talk about risks that lie in the way of one's duty. It is unnecessary risks that we must avoid."
-Mr. Gibson in Elizabeth Gaskell's _Wives and Daughters_

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## VictorBravo (May 24, 2021)

I remain thankful that this has not been an issue in our church. If anything, people might be hesitant to admit they got the vaccine. The "vibe" in our assembly is to support what one thinks is right in such matters. The anti-vaxers probably outnumber the pro vaxers slightly, but none would try to bind another's conscience that I have seen.

Maybe it's because we are small. Maybe it's because we meet in Idaho. Most of us have been exposed, several have been infected, but, praise to God, it has not had an impact on us like it has had so many other places.

God has blessed us with a group of people who bear one another's burdens.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## arapahoepark (May 25, 2021)

VictorBravo said:


> I remain thankful that this has not been an issue in our church. If anything, people might be hesitant to admit they got the vaccine. The "vibe" in our assembly is to support what one thinks is right in such matters. The anti-vaxers probably outnumber the pro vaxers slightly, but none would try to bind another's conscience that I have seen.
> 
> Maybe it's because we are small. Maybe it's because we meet in Idaho. Most of us have been exposed, several have been infected, but, praise to God, it has not had an impact on us like it has had so many other places.
> 
> God has blessed us with a group of people who bear one another's burdens.


Pretty much how my church is. I've been one of the more cautious members considering the many places I work but, haven't worn my mask for a few weeks now.


----------



## Ed Walsh (May 25, 2021)

arapahoepark said:


> I've been one of the more cautious members considering the many places I work but, haven't worn my mask for a few weeks



Here's what I posted on Facebook yesterday:

No more masks for me.
Today I did it. I have had enough of this mask nonsense. I walked into a convenience store without a mask. I went up to the attendant and told them that I have not been vaccinated and don't intend to do so. "I'm one better than that. I am immune because I had Covid. But if you do not want to serve me, I will gladly take my business elsewhere." He said, "No problem, it's good to finally see your face."
I encourage you to take the same stand. Enough is enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I plan to take the same stand in my church.
So far no one has chased me out. 



​

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Ben Zartman (May 25, 2021)

VictorBravo said:


> I remain thankful that this has not been an issue in our church. If anything, people might be hesitant to admit they got the vaccine. The "vibe" in our assembly is to support what one thinks is right in such matters. The anti-vaxers probably outnumber the pro vaxers slightly, but none would try to bind another's conscience that I have seen.
> 
> Maybe it's because we are small. Maybe it's because we meet in Idaho. Most of us have been exposed, several have been infected, but, praise to God, it has not had an impact on us like it has had so many other places.
> 
> God has blessed us with a group of people who bear one another's burdens.


In our church, it is the vaxxers who are likely to get looked at askance. The anti-vaxxers seem to far outweigh those willing to get shot, and some of them have pretty bizarre reasons for not vaxxing. From political reasons (valid, we are a free nation), to conspiracy theories as wild as that "Bill Gates has put a chip into each vaccine."
I got it simply because it's calculated to comfort the largest amount of people with whom I deal in my work, and because I'm unwilling to have international travel curtailed (I travel quite a bit). But I'm fine with anyone who chooses not to, and I think it'll be a shame if whether you are or aren't becomes weaponized by either side. Which, given human nature, it probably already is.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## nickipicki123 (May 25, 2021)

JonC said:


> Seems like it would be contrary to HEPA. I understand if you are going out of the country.....but who knows what the future holds.


HEPA?


----------



## JonC (May 25, 2021)

nickipicki123 said:


> HEPA?


HIPAA (sorry, been watching people change out hepa filters all day).

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## Edm (May 26, 2021)

I think most people at my church do not want the vaccine. At least the ones I regularly speak with. I have people outside the church hounding me about it. Those that have received the shot REALLY seem to want me to for some reason. I just tell them " My body ,my choice " Seems like they may have heard that before...

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Andres (May 26, 2021)

There are much better topics of discussion on the Lord's Day and much better places to focus our attention before worship.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Zartman (May 26, 2021)

Edm said:


> I think most people at my church do not want the vaccine. At least the ones I regularly speak with. I have people outside the church hounding me about it. Those that have received the shot REALLY seem to want me to for some reason. I just tell them " My body ,my choice " Seems like they may have heard that before...


Their thought is that the vaccine works best if absolutely everyone gets it. That way the virus dies before the vaccine can wear off or it can mutate into stronger strains. Feeling that they have done their part, they want others to do theirs.
NOTE: this is not my desire; it's simply the rationale for their insistence.


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (May 27, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> Their thought is that the vaccine works best if absolutely everyone gets it. That way the virus dies before the vaccine can wear off or it can mutate into stronger strains. Feeling that they have done their part, they want others to do theirs.
> NOTE: this is not my desire; it's simply the rationale for their insistence.


Yeah this has been my experience as well. People generally see that there is an answer to the problem, so they wonder why somebody would not want to help be a solution to a problem.


----------



## lynnie (May 27, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> Any fear that keeps you from church because "you might get sick" is an unreasonable fear: God commands His people to assemble. Ours is to obey, and if He send a pestilence to sicken us while we're obeying, at least we're obeying, and we know that He does all things well. God can just as easily keep us well while we obey as sicken us while we take every precaution known to man.
> It is specious to say that we are tempting God if we run a risk in order to obey. God requires obedience in spite of risk, and will not hold us vain tempters of Himself if we suffer danger in order to obey.
> Those who from fear will not assemble show that they do not believe that God will honor those who honor Him. They fear the wrong thing: God is to be feared more than any other danger and respected more than any other dignity.


well.......under the law of Moses, you had to stay out of the camp for a week if you touched a dead person. I believe that was part of disease prevention. If you had a baby you were home for 33 ( boy) or 66 ( girl) days, which I assume gave the mother rest and protected the newborn from extra germs. If you had leprosy you didn't go in to the assembly at all, no matter how badly you wished you could. God commanded these isolations.

I am aware that some people here think the Mosaic law had no health benefits at all and all these things are just symbolic. I don't want to argue about it, but again, if God commanded lepers to isolate, maybe some people who isolate view it as practical wisdom. It isn't fear to understand that this is a vicious virus and think you need to avoid it. 

We all got it....d-i-l next door, then baby, then my son and me, then my husband. Ivermectin was astonishingly amazing for me and the d-i-l who have asthma, and went from hurting lungs on day 1 to zero lung problems the next day after our first dose. I think one answer to fear is to make people aware of the clinical results globally with Ivermectin, and that they do not have to worry about hospitalization and death. But it's still nasty- I was exhausted for a week and my husband and son for two weeks. Baby had a fever of 104 ( they hesitated to give the Ivermectin) an didn't eat for two days. 

Maybe some people are mindful that the command about the sabbath also says to labor six days of the week. If you have a job, and the job matters, you will not be doing it if you get COVID. The employers won't even let you back until 14 days after all symptoms pass, or you get a negative test which can take months!!! after you are over COVID. D-i-l is stuck in that mess, her job requires her to be there and her doctor and board of health said she is not contagious at this point and may show positive for months, but the HR people at her job ( state of NJ, public school) won't let her back. Our doctors are honest that the vaccine antibodies may last 3 months max, and you can still get COVID with a vaccine.

Give people some grace here. "they do not believe that God will honor those who honor Him" is a very harsh judgment on brethren just trying to do the right thing.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Ben Zartman (May 28, 2021)

lynnie said:


> well.......under the law of Moses, you had to stay out of the camp for a week if you touched a dead person. I believe that was part of disease prevention. If you had a baby you were home for 33 ( boy) or 66 ( girl) days, which I assume gave the mother rest and protected the newborn from extra germs. If you had leprosy you didn't go in to the assembly at all, no matter how badly you wished you could. God commanded these isolations.
> 
> I am aware that some people here think the Mosaic law had no health benefits at all and all these things are just symbolic. I don't want to argue about it, but again, if God commanded lepers to isolate, maybe some people who isolate view it as practical wisdom. It isn't fear to understand that this is a vicious virus and think you need to avoid it.
> 
> ...


The point is not: is this thing real, or how contagious is it, or how serious is it? The point is that we are not given license to disobey because "we might get sick." Lepers were not isolated until their leprosy was evident; mothers were not sequestered until they had given birth.
Anyone who shows symptoms ought to stay home from church for fear of infecting others; but to shut down churches wholesale "because there's something out there" is to disbelieve in God, who sends the pestilence where He will, and can stay it at any moment. Where did David go to worship when the plague was stayed? The very threshing floor where the Angel of the Lord ceased to destroy. When there is plague, famine, trouble and affliction, God's people need more than ever to assemble in obedience and worship God, who is to be feared more than anything else.
As I told the pastors: if the building is currently engulfed in flames, or there's a hurricane actively removing the roof, we need to find another place to worship that day. But the chance that we might get sick? Gimme a break.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Susan777 (May 28, 2021)

lynnie said:


> well.......under the law of Moses, you had to stay out of the camp for a week if you touched a dead person. I believe that was part of disease prevention. If you had a baby you were home for 33 ( boy) or 66 ( girl) days, which I assume gave the mother rest and protected the newborn from extra germs. If you had leprosy you didn't go in to the assembly at all, no matter how badly you wished you could. God commanded these isolations.
> 
> I am aware that some people here think the Mosaic law had no health benefits at all and all these things are just symbolic. I don't want to argue about it, but again, if God commanded lepers to isolate, maybe some people who isolate view it as practical wisdom. It isn't fear to understand that this is a vicious virus and think you need to avoid it.
> 
> ...


Lynnie, so glad that you and your family got through this. Ivermectin has saved untold numbers of lives and would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives if the knowledge of it had not been suppressed by evil men. (See FLCCC)

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## A.Joseph (May 28, 2021)

Susan777 said:


> Lynnie, so glad that you and your family got through this. Ivermectin has saved untold numbers of lives and would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives if the knowledge of it had not been suppressed by evil men. (See FLCCC)


Reason being if effective treatment is widely available they can lose justification for emergency use authorization of experimental 'vaccine.'

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397743613086343168


----------



## Edward (May 28, 2021)

> 4/17/31


 Looks like the vaccine clearly impacted something.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## A.Joseph (May 28, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> The point is not: is this thing real, or how contagious is it, or how serious is it? The point is that we are not given license to disobey because "we might get sick." Lepers were not isolated until their leprosy was evident; mothers were not sequestered until they had given birth.
> Anyone who shows symptoms ought to stay home from church for fear of infecting others; but to shut down churches wholesale "because there's something out there" is to disbelieve in God, who sends the pestilence where He will, and can stay it at any moment. Where did David go to worship when the plague was stayed? The very threshing floor where the Angel of the Lord ceased to destroy. When there is plague, famine, trouble and affliction, God's people need more than ever to assemble in obedience and worship God, who is to be feared more than anything else.
> As I told the pastors: if the building is currently engulfed in flames, or there's a hurricane actively removing the roof, we need to find another place to worship that day. But the chance that we might get sick? Gimme a break.


These are vital points. God speaks to this. He is not silent. He gives us instruction. And I argue there is an obedience component that must cut through a Godless narrative and worldview.

Not only has the narrative of widespread asymptomatic spread been debunked, it's antithetical to God's word and our reality. The whole vague notion of genetic testing for this condition detached and void of symptoms is one big smokescreen. The treating of individuals as potential biohazards by reason of their very existence is not grounded in God's word. There are other religions that hold to such views in which men and women outside a certain camp are unclean but that is not Christianity.


----------



## lynnie (May 28, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> The point is not: is this thing real, or how contagious is it, or how serious is it? The point is that we are not given license to disobey because "we might get sick." Lepers were not isolated until their leprosy was evident; mothers were not sequestered until they had given birth.
> Anyone who shows symptoms ought to stay home from church for fear of infecting others; but to shut down churches wholesale "because there's something out there" is to disbelieve in God, who sends the pestilence where He will, and can stay it at any moment. Where did David go to worship when the plague was stayed? The very threshing floor where the Angel of the Lord ceased to destroy. When there is plague, famine, trouble and affliction, God's people need more than ever to assemble in obedience and worship God, who is to be feared more than anything else.
> As I told the pastors: if the building is currently engulfed in flames, or there's a hurricane actively removing the roof, we need to find another place to worship that day. But the chance that we might get sick? Gimme a break.


I actually agree with you about lockdowns, I think once we have "flattened the curve" for hospitals they are a mistake. I'm all for opening everything.

But that is not the point I was making. I was trying to respond to accusations that people who stay home are in sinful fear and wrong to stay home. My church has plenty of older people and asthma people and so forth who watched church on their computer because they honestly thought it was the right thing to do for a period of time. They could be wrong, but accusations of sinful fear I think are just as wrong as saying home. Satan is the accuser of the brethren, and we should be cautious in our accusations of sin.


----------



## lynnie (May 28, 2021)

One more plug for Ivermectin. This virus isn't over yet. Having experienced Ivermectin results myself I consider it a vital part of the entire discussion. If people knew there was such an effective treatment, it might help. If we actually all used it, it would definitely help! 









"I Don't Know of a Bigger Story in the World" Right Now Than Ivermectin: NY Times Best-Selling Author | naked capitalism So why are journalists not covering it?


So why are journalists not covering it?




www.nakedcapitalism.com





_Michael Capuzzo, a New York Times best-selling author , has just published an article titled “The Drug That Cracked Covid”. The 15-page article chronicles the gargantuan struggle being waged by frontline doctors on all continents to get ivermectin approved as a Covid-19 treatment, as well as the tireless efforts by reporters, media outlets and social media companies to thwart them.

Because of ivermectin, Capuzzo says, there are “hundreds of thousands, actually millions, of people around the world, from Uttar Pradesh in India to Peru to Brazil, who are living and not dying.” Yet media outlets have done all they can to “debunk” the notion that ivermectin may serve as an effective, easily accessible and affordable treatment for Covid-19. They have parroted the arguments laid out by health regulators around the world that there just isn’t enough evidence to justify its use._

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## De Jager (May 28, 2021)

lynnie said:


> I actually agree with you about lockdowns, I think once we have "flattened the curve" for hospitals they are a mistake. I'm all for opening everything.
> 
> But that is not the point I was making. I was trying to respond to accusations that people who stay home are in sinful fear and wrong to stay home. My church has plenty of older people and asthma people and so forth who watched church on their computer because they honestly thought it was the right thing to do for a period of time. They could be wrong, *but accusations of sinful fear I think are just as wrong as saying home*. Satan is the accuser of the brethren, and we should be cautious in our accusations of sin.


We can be dogmatic about this. Staying home from church, neglecting to bring your offerings to the temple of the Lord on this earth, where the means of grace are dispensed because "I might get sick", is sinful, and it should be grounds for church discipline, which starts at the very least with a charitable and gracious admonishing from the consistory/session. This is a dividing line and must be so.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## lynnie (May 28, 2021)

De Jager said:


> We can be dogmatic about this. Staying home from church, neglecting to bring your offerings to the temple of the Lord on this earth, where the means of grace are dispensed because "I might get sick", is sinful, and it should be grounds for church discipline, which starts at the very least with a charitable and gracious admonishing from the consistory/session. This is a dividing line and must be so.


Every PCA and OPC pastor and elders and church within a 45 minute radius from me obeyed the civil magistrate. I looked one day out of curiosity. Thats a whole lot of Reformed brethren and leaders you want to discipline? It doesn't make you wrong, but I'd suggest you go into the prayer closet if you care, because I don't see your opinion ever happening.


----------



## A.Joseph (May 28, 2021)

Slight detour.... cant donate plasma if receive vaccine? https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1394860260410732547/pu/vid/576x314/eBQqOe4nAHMBUDfq.mp4?tag=12

I try not to ask anyone about their vaccination status. It's become a loaded question.


----------



## jw (May 28, 2021)

How else do we discover who _does _or _does *not*_ want grandmother to cease? Inquiring for a companion.

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## iainduguid (May 28, 2021)

A.Joseph said:


> Slight detour.... cant donate plasma if receive vaccine? https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1394860260410732547/pu/vid/576x314/eBQqOe4nAHMBUDfq.mp4?tag=12
> 
> I try not to ask anyone about their vaccination status. It's become a loaded question.


You are entitled to your opinions but please don't disseminate obviously fake news. It only takes 10 seconds to do a google search and find out that this is false.



Fact check: COVID-19 vaccine recipients can donate plasma with the American Red Cross











Fact Check-COVID-19 vaccines don’t strip people of their antibodies; vaccinated individuals can donate blood


COVID-19 vaccine recipients can donate plasma to the American Red Cross, contrary to claims on social media that the Red Cross is not accepting these donations because the COVID-19 vaccine wipes out the body’s natural antibodies.




www.reuters.com

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (May 28, 2021)

De Jager said:


> We can be dogmatic about this. Staying home from church, neglecting to bring your offerings to the temple of the Lord on this earth, where the means of grace are dispensed because "I might get sick", is sinful, and it should be grounds for church discipline, which starts at the very least with a charitable and gracious admonishing from the consistory/session. This is a dividing line and must be so.


I appreciate your opinion on this, but in love I wouldn't agree with this. I think much of life requires balance, and on top of that not everybody interprets the Bible the same way you do.

Many people would say it is okay at times to meet together virtually, or in small groups in homes, as this is still a form of gathering. Also, most Christians would agree that there is no longer a temple system in the New testament church. As far as the means of grace, in the age we are in thankfully we have plenty of access to them apart from Sunday morning gatherings, though I see a great importance of assembling together as a congregation.

We just have to always be careful to not make hard line stances where the Bible gives us freedoms. I don't mean to sound critical towards you, I just know that most people would look at that and view you as pretty extreme.

I would also add that many congregants in a church like this would view that as controlling, and would stay away from such a church.


----------



## De Jager (May 28, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I appreciate your opinion on this, but in love I wouldn't agree with this. I think much of life requires balance, and on top of that not everybody interprets the Bible the same way you do.
> 
> Many people would say it is okay at times to meet together virtually, or in small groups in homes, as this is still a form of gathering. Also, most Christians would agree that there is no longer a temple system in the New testament church. As far as the means of grace, in the age we are in thankfully we have plenty of access to them apart from Sunday morning gatherings, though I see a great importance of assembling together as a congregation.
> 
> ...



Thank you for conversing with me on this, and in a charitable tone.

I'm clearly not out to be ecumenical for the sake of being ecumenical. If most people in the church would look at me as being extreme, that doesn't really bother me, given the state of the church in the western world. I am also well aware that most do not interpret the Bible the same way as I do. That is one of the reasons that there are many denominations even within the reformed camp. This does not mean that each of those denominations does not and should not think that they are "right" in their particular convictions. For example, cannot an RPCNA person be convinced that they are "right" in saying that only Psalms should be sung? I applaud them for taking an actual stance, apart from the usual "different people have different interpretations" stance. If we can all just interpret things the way we want, I'm not sure why there are any divisions in the church at all. But in fact there must be divisions because error exists. How can I have fellowship with people who do not come to the physical gathering? I have no fellowship with these people, it is their own fault. They have cut themselves off. It is like if you cut off a limb from a body and expect that limb to interact with the other limbs - it is impossible. 

I firmly believe that the body of believers is the temple of God on this earth, which obviously finds expression in local congregations. It does not find expression with me sitting on my couch on Zoom. We are instructed to bring our offerings to the place that God has named, and no other place. This is the regulative principle of worship. In the old dispensation that was the temple in Jerusalem. In the new dispensation that is the local congregation of the church of Christ.

This will no doubt be seen as extreme but I believe that there has been an almost wholesale abdication of authority and conviction in the reformed churches in north America, which has shown us to be very weak. The fact that many would rather stay home than come to worship shows how weak our churches truly are, for if the Holy Spirit was present with power, nothing could keep these people away. But the fact is is that many in our churches are actually afraid to die. We have older persons in our congregations, who should have the most assurance of anyone, who should be the most ready to die, who are so afraid of death that they don't even come to corporate worship when there is not a single active case of COVID-19 in the congregation, which in fact is a disease that the vast majority of persons who contract, survive. That very fact is a stinging rebuke of the state of our churches, is it not? Or do we actually think that our churches are in good shape?

From Martin Luther's letter "Whether one may flee from a deadly plague"

"Because this letter will go out in print for people to read, I regard it useful to add some brief instructions on how one should care and provide for the soul in time of death. We have done this orally from the pulpit, and still do so every day in fulfillment of the ministry to which we have been called as pastors.

*First, one must admonish the people to attend church and listen to the sermon so that they learn through God’s word how to live and how to die*."

I believe Luther was correct. In fact, staying away from church is the _exact opposite_ of what someone should be doing if death is all around us.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 2


----------



## Jonathan95 (May 28, 2021)

Proverbs 26:13


----------



## retroGRAD3 (May 28, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I appreciate your opinion on this, but in love I wouldn't agree with this. I think much of life requires balance, and on top of that not everybody interprets the Bible the same way you do.
> 
> Many people would say it is okay at times to meet together virtually, or in small groups in homes, as this is still a form of gathering. Also, most Christians would agree that there is no longer a temple system in the New testament church. As far as the means of grace, in the age we are in thankfully we have plenty of access to them apart from Sunday morning gatherings, though I see a great importance of assembling together as a congregation.
> 
> ...


I would be careful on being too casual when it comes to what God requires in worship. I think it is this type of attitude that has allowed revoice into your denomination specifically, and CRT into almost every denomination. You say it is ok to meet virtually for a time. Many have taken this to mean forever. If after a year and change, someone is still not attending church I believe it is more than reasonable to start some sort of counseling. If they are truly that afraid and not just being lazy, then there is a problem there that needs to be dealt with. If they are being lazy, well, that is also a problem. This is not to say there are not legitimate reasons for missing church for a time, but I find most people not faithfully attending lately, do not fall into those categories.


----------



## A.Joseph (May 28, 2021)

iainduguid said:


> Fact check: COVID-19 vaccine recipients can donate plasma with the American Red Cross
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not fake news.... plenty of conditions attached:


https://www.fda.gov/media/136798/download



_d. *To ensure that COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from donors contains antibodies directly related to their immune responses to SARS-CoV- 2 infection, you should not collect COVID-19 convalescent plasma from*:_
_i. Individuals who have received an investigational COVID-19 vaccine as a participant in a clinical trial, or received an authorized or licensed COVID-19 vaccine, unless they:
1) had symptoms of COVID-19 and a positive test result from a diagnostic test approved, cleared, or authorized by FDA (i.e., individuals who meet the qualification for evidence of COVID-19 described in section III.B.1.a.1 above), AND
2) received the COVID-19 vaccine after diagnosis of COVID-19, AND
3) are within 6 months after complete resolution of COVID-19
symptoms.
Administration of COVID-19 vaccines for the purpose of boosting immunity of convalescent plasma donors would need to be conducted within a clinical trial under IND [21 CFR Part 312].
or
ii. Individuals who received an investigational COVID-19 monoclonal antibody therapy as a participant in a clinical trial, or received an authorized or licensed COVID-19 monoclonal antibody therapy, until at least three months after receipt of the therapy._








New FDA guidance on convalescent plasma restricts which COVID-19 patients can receive it


Despite the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s recent update on the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma, the South Texas Blood and Tissue Center is still encouraging people who are eligible to donate.




www.ksat.com


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (May 28, 2021)

De Jager said:


> Thank you for conversing with me on this, and in a charitable tone.
> 
> I'm clearly not out to be ecumenical for the sake of being ecumenical. If most people in the church would look at me as being extreme, that doesn't really bother me, given the state of the church in the western world. I am also well aware that most do not interpret the Bible the same way as I do. That is one of the reasons that there are many denominations even within the reformed camp. This does not mean that each of those denominations does not and should not think that they are "right" in their particular convictions. For example, cannot an RPCNA person be convinced that they are "right" in saying that only Psalms should be sung? I applaud them for taking an actual stance, apart from the usual "different people have different interpretations" stance. If we can all just interpret things the way we want, I'm not sure why there are any divisions in the church at all. But in fact there must be divisions because error exists. How can I have fellowship with people who do not come to the physical gathering? I have no fellowship with these people, it is their own fault. They have cut themselves off. It is like if you cut off a limb from a body and expect that limb to interact with the other limbs - it is impossible.
> 
> ...


Thanks so much for being charitable as well brother! It's especially difficult when communicating online when we are not in person, as it's hard to feel out somebody's character, but trust me I would never mean anything in a rude way or insulting way towards you. I always want to be kind and gracious.

I see you have some very thought-through reasons to have the convictions that you do have. Thanks for taking the time to explain why you feel the way you do!


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (May 28, 2021)

retroGRAD3 said:


> I would be careful on being too casual when it comes to what God requires in worship. I think it is this type of attitude that has allowed revoice into your denomination specifically, and CRT into almost every denomination. You say it is ok to meet virtually for a time. Many have taken this to mean forever. If after a year and change, someone is still not attending church I believe it is more than reasonable to start some sort of counseling. If they are truly that afraid and not just being lazy, then there is a problem there that needs to be dealt with. If they are being lazy, well, that is also a problem. This is not to say there are not legitimate reasons for missing church for a time, but I find most people not faithfully attending lately, do not fall into those categories.


Thanks for the input friend. I agree with you.


----------



## iainduguid (May 28, 2021)

A.Joseph said:


> Not fake news.... plenty of conditions attached:
> 
> 
> https://www.fda.gov/media/136798/download
> ...


Anthony, I wish you would read and understand news items before you post them. If you don't have the expertise, please refrain from posting on a topic. These restrictions do not apply to general plasma donation but specifically to *"COVID 19 convalescent plasma"* - in other words, plasma that is being used to treat people with COVID. Of course there are going to be specific requirements in that scenario.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## De Jager (May 28, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> Thanks so much for being charitable as well brother! It's especially difficult when communicating online when we are not in person, as it's hard to feel out somebody's character, but trust me I would never mean anything in a rude way or insulting way towards you. I always want to be kind and gracious.
> 
> I see you have some very thought-through reasons to have the convictions that you do have. Thanks for taking the time to explain why you feel the way you do!


Let's just put it this way...if you were at my house I would offer you a coffee and would have a chat with you in the living room, and that goes for anyone on the PB. I agree it's very hard to communicate that kind of thing via text only.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (May 28, 2021)

De Jager said:


> Let's just put it this way...if you were at my house I would offer you a coffee and would have a chat with you in the living room, and that goes for anyone on the PB. I agree it's very hard to communicate that kind of thing via text only.


Amen!


----------



## Harrison (May 28, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> Explain?


Why would they be afraid of coming to church and contracting a virus if they really believe God is sovereign? He determines the length of our days.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## A.Joseph (May 28, 2021)

iainduguid said:


> Anthony, I wish you would read and understand news items before you post them. If you don't have the expertise, please refrain from posting on a topic. These restrictions do not apply to general plasma donation but specifically to *"COVID 19 convalescent plasma"* - in other words, plasma that is being used to treat people with COVID. Of course there are going to be specific requirements in that scenario.


From the fact check you linked...... This is my main concern by the way. Why did the Red Cross not accept "*convalescent plasma donations* (not regular plasma donations) f*rom those vaccinated against COVID-19 *" ?


> "B*efore they stopped collecting COVID-19 convalescent plasma donations on March 26* due to declining hospital demand and sufficient supply, the Red Cross said they were not accepting convalescent plasma donations (not regular plasma donations) from those vaccinated against COVID-19, which is why the confusion may have arisen (here , here)."


Why did the Red Cross makes this distinction? Specifically, that vaccinated are disqualified to donate *"COVID 19 convalescent plasma" as featured in my originally linked report. **https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1394860260410732547/pu/vid/576x314/eBQqOe4nAHMBUDfq.mp4?tag=12** The report says that the vaccine wipes out Covid-19 antibodies from recovered individuals making the plasma ineffective. *


----------



## VictorBravo (May 28, 2021)

MODERATION

Let's drop the side discussions and links to controversies regarding vaccines themselves.

This topic has to do with interacting with other church members on the subject of vaccinations.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 28, 2021)

Jonathan95 said:


> Proverbs 26:13



The last 14 months have been one never-ending act of rebellion against this proverb.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Ben Zartman (May 28, 2021)

lynnie said:


> I actually agree with you about lockdowns, I think once we have "flattened the curve" for hospitals they are a mistake. I'm all for opening everything.
> 
> But that is not the point I was making. I was trying to respond to accusations that people who stay home are in sinful fear and wrong to stay home. My church has plenty of older people and asthma people and so forth who watched church on their computer because they honestly thought it was the right thing to do for a period of time. They could be wrong, but accusations of sinful fear I think are just as wrong as saying home. Satan is the accuser of the brethren, and we should be cautious in our accusations of sin.


I have said that people who have symptoms should stay home. But to stay home because they're susceptible to illness, even when they don't have it, is sinful fear. Fear can be a sin, if we fear the wrong thing. What did Jesus say again and again? "Fear not." Who tops the list of those who are without the Kingdom of Heaven? The fearful, followed by the unbelieving.
Even with these principles, it is not my place to judge those individuals who believed they were doing the right thing by staying home--every one has a unique situation, and to their own master they must stand or fall. But I do say that the churches who caved in to the government an stopped meeting were wrong. Every last one that did so was wrong. While individual members must make decisions for themselves and their families based on their own situations, the churches still have a duty to blow the trumpet and call the solemn assembly. I think God sent this pestilence partly as a means to test which churches would obey, and which would not. Sadly, most did not, and what a statement that makes about the state of the church in our day.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Herald (May 28, 2021)

Ben Zartman said:


> But to stay home because they're susceptible to illness, even when they don't have it, is sinful fear.


Ben, perhaps there is some room for nuance on this issue? Individuals can be susceptible to illness for various reasons. One common reason is a compromised immune system due to immunotherapy. Certain drug therapies can also weaken the immune system and cause a viral or bacterial infection to be life threatening. It seems harsh to accuse these individuals of sinful fear if they elect not to expose themselves to others while they are undergoing treatment.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Ben Zartman (May 29, 2021)

Herald said:


> Ben, perhaps there is some room for nuance on this issue? Individuals can be susceptible to illness for various reasons. One common reason is a compromised immune system due to immunotherapy. Certain drug therapies can also weaken the immune system and cause a viral or bacterial infection to be life threatening. It seems harsh to accuse these individuals of sinful fear if they elect not to expose themselves to others while they are undergoing treatment.


You're right, and that's why I said it's not my place to judge individuals in their particular situations. Some do have a legitimate reason to abstain, and legitimate reasons to abstain abound even when not in pandemic mode. That being said, there are some in my own church who have never exhibited underlying health conditions who still refuse to gather, while several others, who have every reason to be afraid (one is exceedingly old with a wife at home who had ALS; another is brought in in a wheelchair), continue to assemble.
So, there is room for nuance, and there is need for charity. But there is also need for instruction and even discipline when tokens of illness or good cause for abstinence can't be produced. Otherwise, many will ride the train of lazyness and convenience and end up lost.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 29, 2021)

Observing the discussion between Bill and Ben, it is helpful to keep in mind the distinction between a rule and an exception. The rule is that the saints should gather together for public worship. The exception is that people may be excused if they are either too ill to attend or at high risk of getting seriously ill if they do. In our day, however, people want to make the exception the rule. For instance, if I were to say, "It is your duty to work", someone would probably object, "But what about the people who cannot work?" Obviously, those who cannot work are exempt from the general rule, yet those exceptions do not nullify the ordinary rule.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Taylor (May 29, 2021)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> ...those exceptions do not nullify the ordinary rule.


Indeed, the exceptions, as it is often said, _prove_ the rule.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 2, 2021)

Herald said:


> Ben, perhaps there is some room for nuance on this issue? Individuals can be susceptible to illness for various reasons. One common reason is a compromised immune system due to immunotherapy. Certain drug therapies can also weaken the immune system and cause a viral or bacterial infection to be life threatening. It seems harsh to accuse these individuals of sinful fear if they elect not to expose themselves to others while they are undergoing treatment.



I think one issue of great concern is that the same people who have reacted so severely to the threat of covid showed no such caution in regards to flu or other viruses which can be very serious or even fatal. People who would happily have shaken hands with others, or sat shoulder to shoulder, or shared the common cup during the administration of the Lord's Supper, in winter seasons when flu (which kills thousands every year) and viruses like gastroenteritis are circulating through the person's own congregation, have reacted in the opposite way here. This is not a rational response to the circumstances we are in. Even if covid is worse than flu, it's not so much worse to warrant such a response. If someone had never thought of receiving the flu vaccine in the past, but now insists on receiving both shots of an experimental "vaccine" before he will even consider returning to church, then there is something very wrong.

That is not to say we can't be gracious to such a person and give leeway to our weaker brethren. But there comes a time when staying away from church, or abstaining from the Lord's Supper, stops being a permissable response to risk and becomes irrational fear or even unbelief. The Kirk Session has to make the judgment call when that line is crossed. My concern is too many sessions are unwilling to do so.

Reactions: Like 2 | Love 1 | Amen 1


----------



## KMK (Jun 2, 2021)

I prefer to judge my fellow Christians on what they wear rather than their medical history. It's much easier.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## JH (Jun 2, 2021)

KMK said:


> I prefer to judge my fellow Christians on what they wear rather than their medical history. It's much easier.


I prefer to judge them according to neither of those standards


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Jun 2, 2021)

Jerrod Hess said:


> I prefer to judge them according to neither of those standards


I think he was joking.


----------



## JH (Jun 2, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I think he was joking.


_well then_


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Jun 2, 2021)

Jerrod Hess said:


> _well then_


 I don't know what to say, so here's a smile.


----------



## Boreal (Jun 2, 2021)

Is your nose plugged at all as well?

Mine has been for over a year, and I have no idea why. My sense of smell has also been greatly reduced.

We had an illness in the family in February 2020, and I’ve since wondered if it was COVID.

Edit: This was meant for @Ed Walsh


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (Jun 2, 2021)

I know a few people have made some comments that sort of imply that "asking about vaccination status violates HIIPA", but frankly, that's a misunderstanding about what HIIPA is and does.

This article explains well.









What HIPAA Isn't


Word of mouth has turned a narrow health-records law into a supposed health-privacy Bill of Rights.




thedispatch.com

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ChristianLibertarian (Jun 2, 2021)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> I know a few people have made some comments that sort of imply that "asking about vaccination status violates HIIPA", but frankly, that's a misunderstanding about what HIIPA is and does.
> 
> This article explains well.
> 
> ...


People think HIPPA is some sort of catch all that means they can never be asked about their health by anyone other that their doctor and that their health information can never be shared. I've run into this for years, since well before Covid. Your school and employer can ask all sorts of things about your health, including vaccination status.


----------



## Frosty (Jun 2, 2021)

I have not and will not ask anyone their vaccination status.

If asked I would not be offended, but simply say 'no', with no explanation given. As Reformed Covenanter said, most folks who ask are just trying to create conversation.


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Jun 2, 2021)

I have noticed at out church, nobody is talking about Covid, nobody's talking about the vaccine, nobody's wearing masks, and people are greeting each other with normal hugs and handshakes.

Most people listen to the mainstream news sources and obey health officials' recommendations, so I don't blame anyone for being cautious this past year, because that was what we were being instructed to do. But now that Covid seems to be coming to an end according to the officials above us, people are once again returning to what used to be normal.

It was strange, here in Florida I had friends at the beginning of Covid who were predicting mass church persecution, expecting the church to go underground, this being a sign of the end, etc. I chose not to believe it, and here we are, a year later, everything is normal again in the life of the church.

I can only speak of my situation here, and I sympathize with those who have it worse, but I am very proud of how the government and church handled all of this in our state. I have much to be thankful for being a Floridian. It is my hope that you all will prosper at this time as well.


----------



## Boreal (Jun 2, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> It was strange, here in Florida I had friends at the beginning of Covid who were predicting mass church persecution, expecting the church to go underground, this being a sign of the end, etc. I chose not to believe it, and here we are, a year later, everything is normal again in the life of the church.


Have you seen what’s happening in the country above you?

And if those theories are correct, they have a long time to play out still. I wouldn’t be getting too complacent.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Herald (Jun 2, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> I think one issue of great concern is that the same people who have reacted so severely to the threat of covid showed no such caution in regards to flu or other viruses which can be very serious or even fatal. People who would happily have shaken hands with others, or sat shoulder to shoulder, or shared the common cup during the administration of the Lord's Supper, in winter seasons when flu (which kills thousands every year) and viruses like gastroenteritis are circulating through the person's own congregation, have reacted in the opposite way here. This is not a rational response to the circumstances we are in. Even if covid is worse than flu, it's not so much worse to warrant such a response. If someone had never thought of receiving the flu vaccine in the past, but now insists on receiving both shots of an experimental "vaccine" before he will even consider returning to church, then there is something very wrong.
> 
> That is not to say we can't be gracious to such a person and give leeway to our weaker brethren. But there comes a time when staying away from church, or abstaining from the Lord's Supper, stops being a permissable response to risk and becomes irrational fear or even unbelief. The Kirk Session has to make the judgment call when that line is crossed. My concern is too many sessions are unwilling to do so.


Alexander, when you write, "the same people" you are assuming something about others that you do not know. Unless we have intimate, first-hand knowledge of an individual we cannot be specific with our judgment. That is why this is a matter best left to the elders. As they attend to the those under their charge, hopefully they know and care enough about their flock to make the right decision as to how best to respond to those who are not attending worship.


----------



## KMK (Jun 3, 2021)

Frosty said:


> I have not and will not ask anyone their vaccination status.



Given your avatar, I am not surprised.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## RobertPGH1981 (Jun 3, 2021)

Just say something like, "I respect everybody's personal decision on the matter and choose to not discuss private information with others." By saying this you are not revealing if you did or didn't have a vaccine. If they continue to press just tell them to have a nice day and walk away.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## De Jager (Jun 3, 2021)

The real question, and it is a big one is whether churches will segregate their people based on vaccination status. I hear that in some states, churches are being told that vaccinated people do not have to wear a mask while unvaccinated do. Vaccinated people (unmasked) can sit in one area, while unvaccinated people (masked) have to sit in a different area, with different capacity limits in each area. Thus, at the door of the church we would have screening of vaccination status, and a segregation based on that.

And some churches will just go along with this because they have gone along with everything else.

Reactions: Like 4 | Sad 1


----------



## Edward (Jun 3, 2021)

De Jager said:


> Thus, at the door of the church we would have screening of vaccination status, and a segregation based on that.


Do like Target and Walmart - put a sign by the door that unvaccinated folks have to wear masks. I've not been questioned in either about a lack of mask. In countries with basic freedoms, if the government objects, just tell them to get lost. In totalitarian countries like Canada or China, the question is when to go underground.


----------



## J.L. Allen (Jun 3, 2021)

De Jager said:


> The real question, and it is a big one is whether churches will segregate their people based on vaccination status. I hear that in some states, churches are being told that vaccinated people do not have to wear a mask while unvaccinated do. Vaccinated people (unmasked) can sit in one area, while unvaccinated people (masked) have to sit in a different area, with different capacity limits in each area. Thus, at the door of the church we would have screening of vaccination status, and a segregation based on that.
> 
> And some churches will just go along with this because they have gone along with everything else.


This is exactly it.

The Lord's Supper can be different, they can be baptized separately, they could use different facilities at the church, and then eventually they can have their services separated completely! Maybe the unvaccinated can have something on their clothes to signify that they are not to mingle? Paperwork is already being implemented, so that's a step in the right direction. They'll have to remain masked. That's a great way to make sure that their humanity is obscured, too. That'll make it easier to see their employment terminated and other abilities in society diminished. So on and so forth...

Obviously I'm being snarky about it, but I'm doing so to make a point. We're now seeing a makeshift caste system develop right before our eyes based on lies and deceit fueled by fear. "Protect grandma!" from the mouths of the very people who softly (for now) advocate for the elimination of the elderly and give deafening screams for the elimination of the unborn. If it smacks of Soviet-era insanity and the rise of the Third Reich, good! It can't possibly happen here? Right? They said the same thing. And yet even they didn't promote a sodomite agenda to be consumed under threat of elimination. I received a text this morning from a friend who said that the college he works at will require vaccination to continue employment there. Second class citizen? Yup! And becoming more so. It seems that the church has, in large swaths, gone along with the program. We use Scripture to justify it, but when will it become clear that lines drawn in the sand have been long swept away, and we're just blindly submitting to whatever comes from the mouth of rulers who are doing the work of their father the devil? And to the rebuttal that God establishes and deposes kings - yes, and "the devil is God's devil," but we don't bow down to the devil thinking that we're bowing down to God through him. That would be idolatry of the highest order. As one of the brothers in the Great White North has pointed out (in this thread or another) - give it time because it's coming. The church is going to nuance herself to death in an attempt to be winsome and win the world. The church is to be countercultural to the point of it being a siege weapon in God's hands. The gates of Hell will not prevail. So let us not take up roost in the eaves of the watchtowers of Satan. Let us not eat from his table but cry out that there is death in the pot! Hopefully others will see our witness and head the testimony given to us by God and discontinue their bonds with ghouls of Satan's domain. We need to stand firmly on the Word and do no other. Give no room to any of the lies of the world.

To the OP - I personally don't engage in the conversation unless it is directly discussed with me. I gently give my position yet am firm about my convictions.

Reactions: Like 5 | Amen 2


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jun 3, 2021)

J.L. Allen said:


> The church is going to nuance herself to death in an attempt to be winsome and win the world.


I tire of those always trying to make what's black and white "more nuanced"

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 5


----------



## Boreal (Jun 3, 2021)

In my circles, a negative view of the experimental gene therapy injections is usually an indicator of a right assessment of the greater issues at hand*, so these kinds of conversations are transparent and flow freely.

*Note, “in my circles.” I’m not making a pronouncement about anyone else.


----------



## dhh712 (Jun 3, 2021)

J.L. Allen said:


> As one of the brothers in the Great White North has pointed out (in this thread or another) - give it time because it's coming. The church is going to nuance herself to death in an attempt to be winsome and win the world. The church is to be countercultural to the point of it being a siege weapon in God's hands. The gates of Hell will not prevail. So let us not take up roost in the eaves of the watchtowers of Satan. Let us not eat from his table but cry out that there is death in the pot! Hopefully others will see our witness and head the testimony given to us by God and discontinue their bonds with ghouls of Satan's domain. We need to stand firmly on the Word and do no other. Give no room to any of the lies of the world.


Churches may have seemed to returned to "normal" but I would be on guard. I particularly believe that the church will largely be persecuted in this country (in a not-too-distant future) via the LGBTQ movement--that is avenue by which Satan and his slaves will make their most vicious attacks. The propaganda is just like his MOA: appearing as an "angel of light" (what "harm" are homosexuals doing really? No one is getting hurt and these are good, upstanding citizens. Anyone who "hates" these people must be "hateful" themselves: they are wrong and deserved to be punished for being so absurdly prejudiced for no reason at all, except for their brain-washing book which they don't even know how to correctly interpret). 

This is no time to be weak, else we will fall too easily. Churches need to prepare their flock to be assaulted by Satan; it seems very likely we will see some sort of persecution of churches (serious persecution) here in the states very soon.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## lynnie (Jun 3, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> I think one issue of great concern is that the same people who have reacted so severely to the threat of covid showed no such caution in regards to flu or other viruses which can be very serious or even fatal. People who would happily have shaken hands with others, or sat shoulder to shoulder, or shared the common cup during the administration of the Lord's Supper, in winter seasons when flu (which kills thousands every year) and viruses like gastroenteritis are circulating through the person's own congregation, have reacted in the opposite way here. This is not a rational response to the circumstances we are in. Even if covid is worse than flu, it's not so much worse to warrant such a response. If someone had never thought of receiving the flu vaccine in the past, but now insists on receiving both shots of an experimental "vaccine" before he will even consider returning to church, then there is something very wrong.
> 
> That is not to say we can't be gracious to such a person and give leeway to our weaker brethren. But there comes a time when staying away from church, or abstaining from the Lord's Supper, stops being a permissable response to risk and becomes irrational fear or even unbelief. The Kirk Session has to make the judgment call when that line is crossed. My concern is too many sessions are unwilling to do so.


If you had followed the non MSM reports on this from the start, you might understand better.

The lab origin theory is finally starting to penetrate into the mainstream now, but over a year ago geneticists were saying this virus had HIV snips in it. Now it is being openly published finally.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/...n-prove-covid-19-man-made-no-credible-natural ( from daily mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-lab-tried-cover-tracks-new-study-claims.html)

Way back, even that liberal rag of the NY Times ran an story about the eerie parallels between HIV and COVID. Here is a link to an article that has a link ( https://www.zerohedge.com/political...use-depletion-important-immune-cells-ny-times)

_As the mainstream media desperately plays catch-up, The New York Times released a piece yesterday called "How the Coronavirus Short-Circuits the Immune System" and said that *"In a disturbing parallel to H.I.V., the coronavirus can cause a depletion of important immune cells, recent studies found."*

"Now researchers have discovered yet another unpleasant surprise. *In many patients hospitalized with the coronavirus, the immune system is threatened by a depletion of certain essential cells, suggesting eerie parallels with H.I.V.,"* the article says. 

The assertions could explain why few kids get sick and why a "cocktail" of treatments may be needed to bring the coronavirus under control, similar to how H.I.V. is treated._

There were plenty of articles by doctors ( USA, Hong Kong, elsewhere) about HIV like lowering of white cells in the clinical results of their patients. I probably posted them here, don't feel like hunting up links now. 

So tell me, why would anybody who is willing to risk colds and flus, like say me for example, want to risk getting an airborne HIV-ish virus, not knowing if it stays in you forever like chicken pox, or if the body clears it? Why would I want permanently lowered white blood cells?

"Even if covid is worse than flu, it's not so much worse to warrant such a response." False...if you knew the facts you would not say that. And nobody really knows the facts, because it takes 8-10 years for HIV to turn into AIDS and this virus has not been around that long. We do not know what happens eventually. Chicken pox becomes shingles. What does COVID become? We do not know. 

Churches with people who refuse to wear masks because of "tyranny" and "freedom", but will go outside on a dark winter night, breath out a cloud of steam, and if you point out that cloud is lung aerosols and is significantly reduced by masks, they have NO answer but get annoyed and even contemptuous? Who wants to go to that? Why would anybody want to potentially lower white blood cells for the rest of your life? Why would a person not want to wait until this subject is clarified and studied and the facts are clear? I get that you think we should have all gone to church with anti maskers and gotten this potential AIDS-like lab created virus, but that isn't the point. The point is that this is NOT a cold or a flu. There is no hypocrisy in avoiding it.

I got it anyway from grandbaby, and even with all the things I've read about Ivermectin I never anticipated such an almost miraculous effect in 24 hours for d-i-l and me who have asthma. From painful lungs to normal in one day. The efficacy of Ivermectin is astonishing and life saving. I expected virally induced asthma, but never got it- praise be to God. By the way, when HIV was first discovered, one of the earliest treatments was Ivermectin ( cheap, and replaced with costly newer drugs). It didn't cure totally, but knocked virus levels way down. Hub and I plan to stay on it the rest of our lives, maybe every 2 weeks or month....trying to get more research information.

If you want to get people into church, telling them that there are treatment protocols that are effective is possibly the way to go, but until the AMA promotes them most will not consider them. Sending them links to all the excellent doctors and protocols is helpful if they are open. Criticizing them for what they consider to be wisdom and prudence is not helpful. Comparing COVID to the flu is false. Anyway, carry on.......


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Jun 3, 2021)

dhh712 said:


> Churches may have seemed to returned to "normal" but I would be on guard. I particularly believe that the church will largely be persecuted in this country (in a not-too-distant future) via the LGBTQ movement--that is avenue by which Satan and his slaves will make their most vicious attacks. The propaganda is just like his MOA: appearing as an "angel of light" (what "harm" are homosexuals doing really? No one is getting hurt and these are good, upstanding citizens. Anyone who "hates" these people must be "hateful" themselves: they are wrong and deserved to be punished for being so absurdly prejudiced for no reason at all, except for their brain-washing book which they don't even know how to correctly interpret).
> 
> This is no time to be weak, else we will fall too easily. Churches need to prepare their flock to be assaulted by Satan; it seems very likely we will see some sort of persecution of churches (serious persecution) here in the states very soon.


This is a very interesting observation. A trend that I have noticed is that the people who generally get persecuted are the ones who stand in public places, who sound angry and even hateful at times, and are yelling out to people who are minding their own business, telling them that God is going to make homosexuals burn in fire. I can see why this would make people very upset.

I have a friend who was a homosexual and repented. Now he befriends homosexuals, invests in their lives, and lovingly speaks to them about God when possible. As far as I know he never gets persecuted.

I'm not saying open air preaching is wrong, but I wonder if Christians took a different approach in a more relational, loving, and kind way, if persecution would die way down. How much of it is Christians not being tactful or wise, and bringing this upon themselves?

Sorry I got things off track

Reactions: Sad 1


----------



## Taylor (Jun 3, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> A trend that I have noticed is that the people who generally get persecuted are the ones who stand in public places, who sound angry and even hateful at times, and are yelling out to people who are minding their own business, telling them that God is going to make homosexuals burn in fire. I can see why this would make people very upset.


Brother, this is what secular America thinks _all_ Christians are.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tom Hart (Jun 3, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> A trend that I have noticed is that the people who generally get persecuted are the ones who stand in public places, who sound angry and even hateful at times, and are yelling out to people who are minding their own business, telling them that God is going to make homosexuals burn in fire. I can see why this would make people very upset.


A trend that I've observed (and I think I'm not alone) is that people hate being told that they're wrong. But they hate nothing more than being told they're sinners in need of Christ.


Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I wonder if Christians took a different approach in a more relational, loving, and kind way, if persecution would die way down. How much of it is Christians not being tactful or wise, and brining this upon themselves?


The church is still going to have to tell them they're sinners. If they won't do that, then they shouldn't pretend to be loving.

Reactions: Like 4 | Amen 1


----------



## Susan777 (Jun 3, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> This is a very interesting observation. A trend that I have noticed is that the people who generally get persecuted are the ones who stand in public places, who sound angry and even hateful at times, and are yelling out to people who are minding their own business, telling them that God is going to make homosexuals burn in fire. I can see why this would make people very upset.
> 
> I have a friend who was a homosexual and repented. Now he befriends homosexuals, invests in their lives, and lovingly speaks to them about God when possible. As far as I know he never gets persecuted.
> 
> ...


Yeah. If only we were more winsome. Why, I bet nobody would ever be doxed, lose a job, hauled before a ”human rights” commission, or made to apologize for incorrect opinions. No one was more ”relational, loving and kind” than our Savior but for some odd reason he didn’t see the persecution die way down. Neither did the cake baker, the wedding photographer or the florist.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Jun 3, 2021)

I have had one person not like me because I was a Christian. Nothing I could do could win him over. No matter how kind I was he would speak bad of me. O yeah, and I did miss a job opportunity because I wouldn't work Sundays. This kind of persecution does happen and is real.

On the other hand, I have worked alongside of many people for many years who know me as one of the very few true Christians they have ever met. They often talk about how most others appear to be hypocrites. They know me as a holy person who won't comprise anything morally. But they also know I love them, that I am kind to them, and that I always have their good in mind. They know I will always treat them with dignity and thoughtfulness, and because of my character towards them, we have real friendships even though our lives are so different. I've shared the gospel with all of these people, they know I am well aware of their sins and I see that sin as wrong, but we still care about each other. At my job I am known as "brother Ryan." And this same mutual love goes for family and friends I have as well. I have always found that simple kindness goes a long way.

I will also add that I have shared the Gospel with probably thousands of people over the years, the law and grace, and no one has ever persecuted me. If I am kind and respectful to others, I am generally treated the same way back.

You guys can feel free to mock that if you want, but I am very happy to have such a life experience. I'm sorry it seems many of you are so easily hated by others. Have a good night all.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Jun 3, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> You guys can feel free to mock that if you want...


I can't speak for others, but my comment was certainly not mockery. Like you, I have been fortunate to have had a generally good experience as a Christian in America. However, I live in backwoods Georgia, where virtually everyone is at least a nominal Christian. At the same time, I recognize that much of secular America these days is unwilling to distinguish between the angry street preacher and the kind pew sitter. They are one and the same to many of these people.


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Jun 3, 2021)

Taylor said:


> I can't speak for others, but my comment was certainly not mockery. Like you, I have been fortunate to have had a generally good experience as a Christian in America. However, I live in backwoods Georgia, where virtually everyone is at least a nominal Christian. At the same time, I recognize that much of secular America these days is unwilling to distinguish between the angry street preacher and the kind pew sitter. They are one and the same to many of these people.


No problem at all! Yeah, that is a shame, brother.


----------



## dhh712 (Jun 4, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> This is a very interesting observation. A trend that I have noticed is that the people who generally get persecuted are the ones who stand in public places, who sound angry and even hateful at times, and are yelling out to people who are minding their own business, telling them that God is going to make homosexuals burn in fire. I can see why this would make people very upset.
> 
> I have a friend who was a homosexual and repented. Now he befriends homosexuals, invests in their lives, and lovingly speaks to them about God when possible. As far as I know he never gets persecuted.
> 
> ...


It wouldn't be these Christians I was talking about--they are not going about their testimony to Jesus in the right way, in my opinion (I'm a former transgender and have repented). The way to go about showing that one has been with Jesus is just the way you've described: to be loving and kind to all, even our enemies. 

However, what I was talking about is how eventually any sort of talk about how LGBTQ is a sin against God as depicted in God's word would be considered hate speech and a crime that is punishable. The propaganda, without the intervention of God, is not going to go away. This stuff is being heaped into homes and our children's minds and taught in school. We are not to treat these people themselves any different than the way Jesus would treat them, with love and respect. But we are not to support their sinful actions and give verbal or written or some kind of action that displays our support of what they are doing. If directly asked, I imagine the appropriate response is to say that I do not support such things as I feel they are a sin before God (or something along those lines). That is not being hateful or disrespectful, but sharing an opinion that one has. Yet this kind of thing may in the future result in a criminal charge or perhaps in someone being fired from work. 

I wish the world would work in the ideal way you described and that people would be open to Christians who are loving and kind toward all, even the enemies of God (as we once were). Yet the Satanic forces will likely not let that be. Just as it was in the early days when Christians were first persecuted, I believe unless God intervenes and saves us from such trials, we will also be looked at as outcasts who are a danger to society (and this largely because we do not support the actions of such good and upstanding people as homosexuals).

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## dhh712 (Jun 4, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> You guys can feel free to mock that if you want, but I am very happy to have such a life experience. I'm sorry it seems many of you are so easily hated by others. Have a good night all.


I am very glad you have had this experience and at this time I feel that many Christians who act in this way will get just this result, largely by God restraining our enemy's hearts. It is just not likely to last as the LGBTQ movement is infiltrated into every fiber of this country's being--it is already be compared to the human rights movement where people of different races were persecuted (I compared it to that myself when I was a transgender). 

I can't imagine anyone who would state peacefully in their work that Asian Americans or some other race should be seen as a lower status than the other races and treated separately would not be fired from their work place (as this is of course wrong according to moral society and God's word as well). Yet this is the direction the LGBTQ movement is going: something declared as a sin against God is being forced by society to make everyone say it is good. It really is not too far off where if you were to say I do not support the LGBTQ movement and believe it is sinful in the eyes of God, you would very likely be terminated from where you work.


----------



## dhh712 (Jun 4, 2021)

Tom Hart said:


> A trend that I've observed (and I think I'm not alone) is that people hate being told that they're wrong. But they hate nothing more than being told they're sinners in need of Christ.
> 
> The church is still going to have to tell them they're sinners. If they won't do that, then they shouldn't pretend to be loving.


That is where I was going with my post. Where I work no one has ever asked me what my view is on homosexuals. I treat them kindly and with respect as I try to do to everyone. But if I were to be directly asked, I would have to say that I do not support it and believe it is wrong in the eyes of God.

I think some people mistake being kind and respectful as *supporting* what someone is doing. I think this is where some Christians go wrong in that they feel they have to be mean to these people in order to *show* that they do not support what they are doing. I do not see that this is biblical. But there must come that dividing line. If in fact somewhere down the road a Bible-believing Christian is made to show in someway that they really do support what these people are doing and do not feel it is wrong, then they have to make that stand upon God's word and not the moral word of society.

(And I apologize for all the separate posts--if the mods want to combine them, that would be awesome. Each one was supposed to be the last--since I'm in a huge rush to get ready for the farmer's market tomorrow!-- and I kept finding more to reply to. And I noticed unlike another message board I frequent that I can't copy and paste quotes. I do know about the multi-quote thing, but as far as I am able to ascertain I would need to select all the posts before hand and my mind unfortunately is too scattered to do that, or like this I don't think I'm going to be replying anymore. So, sorry if that's a distraction. Definitely not intentional).


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 4, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I have noticed at out church, nobody is talking about Covid, nobody's talking about the vaccine, nobody's wearing masks, and people are greeting each other with normal hugs and handshakes.
> 
> Most people listen to the mainstream news sources and obey health officials' recommendations, so I don't blame anyone for being cautious this past year, because that was what we were being instructed to do. But now that Covid seems to be coming to an end according to the officials above us, people are once again returning to what used to be normal.
> 
> ...



If you think that "everything is normal again" in the church, that the church has not been impacted by what's happened over the year, that the church has conducted itself in a proper and Biblical manner in the past year, then I think you haven't been paying attention.

It's also worth bearing in mind that living in Florida you were most fortunate in having a Governor who did not react in the irrational and tyrannical manner that many other governors in the US did. The Lord was most merciful in this provision. Many, many Christians have been in circumstances significantly less favourable.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 4, 2021)

Herald said:


> Alexander, when you write, "the same people" you are assuming something about others that you do not know. Unless we have intimate, first-hand knowledge of an individual we cannot be specific with our judgment. That is why this is a matter best left to the elders. As they attend to the those under their charge, hopefully they know and care enough about their flock to make the right decision as to how best to respond to those who are not attending worship.



This is based on observation. People who I have seen shake hands and drink from the common cup when nasty viruses have been circulating around our congregation, won't go near people now and remained at home until they were "vaccinated".

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 4, 2021)

lynnie said:


> If you had followed the non MSM reports on this from the start, you might understand better.
> 
> The lab origin theory is finally starting to penetrate into the mainstream now, but over a year ago geneticists were saying this virus had HIV snips in it. Now it is being openly published finally.
> 
> ...



Masks don't stop aerosols spreading.

So after all that you got it anyway and you're fine now? 

Btw, I don't think HIV can be cured by Ivermectin. If so it truly is a wonder drug.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 4, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> A trend that I have noticed is that the people who generally get persecuted are the ones who stand in public places, who sound angry and even hateful at times, and are yelling out to people who are minding their own business, telling them that God is going to make homosexuals burn in fire. I can see why this would make people very upset.



Wasn't there a guy called Paul who stood in a public place and condemned the idolatry of those around him?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## dhh712 (Jun 4, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Btw, I don't think HIV can be cured by Ivermectin. If so it truly is a wonder drug.


Just wanted to respectfully point out that she did say that the Ivermectin did not cure HIV but it knocked the virus levels way down (just to clarify).


----------



## Jeri Tanner (Jun 4, 2021)

dhh712 said:


> I noticed unlike another message board I frequent that I can't copy and paste quotes. I do know about the multi-quote thing, but as far as I am able to ascertain I would need to select all the posts before hand and my mind unfortunately is too scattered to do that, or like this I don't think I'm going to be replying anymore.


Your various replies are fine, you’re not posting too much. But if you want to try the multi-quote: as you’re reading through a thread, just highlight a snippet you’d like to respond to and select “quote” from the box that will pop up. Then you can forget about it and continue reading; repeat the highlighting and selecting “quote” if you see other snippets you’d like to respond to. When you’re ready to post your reply, after you click or touch the box to start your post, the multi-quote box will pop up with all the snippets you highlighted. Choose ‘insert quotes’ (you might be prompted twice on this step) and they’ll all be pasted to your reply box with a space between them where you can respond to each. (Try not to click or touch, or backspace into, the pasted quotes, as your reply will then not be separate from the quote.)

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 4, 2021)

dhh712 said:


> Just wanted to respectfully point out that she did say that the Ivermectin did not cure HIV but it knocked the virus levels way down (just to clarify).



Fair enough. Although I can tell you that most people who have avoided church and "anti-maskers" are not thinking along the lines of Lynnie, re: what sort of virus this is, and they are quite convinced that so long as we follow "the rules" and dutifully receive the experimental "vaccine" then all will be well and everything can go back to normal. In other words, they are not thinking rationally about this situation and are content to follow the official guidelines. For example, church is safe if the Government tells us it is so.

And I would also assume that someone who thought covid was so serious as has been suggested, would not go anywhere near an experimental "vaccine" based on this virus. Nor would they think, surely, that a loose fitting, dirty mask is going to protect them. If covid is so very serious one wonders if it will _ever_ be safe to return to church, or to attend any gathering of significant size, so long as this virus is present in our society?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## lynnie (Jun 4, 2021)

Thank you Anne. Yes, that is correct.

Ivermectin* is* a wonder drug. Here is a link to its efficacy against many viruses. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z Some of this is humans, some in vitro, some animal. There are links out there about its use in the 1980s for HIV, but I don't feel like digging now. I am not posting this in regard to church fellowship, but more as a helpful suggestion if anybody here gets COVID and wants a treatment. 

Alexander.....RNA viruses always over time get less lethal, and I don't know what the average person thinks but I am pretty sure their doctors and even the MSM hold out hope that within 2 or 3 years this would be over, like the 1918 spanish flu and other viral pandemics. That is a separate subject from " do we skip church for two years", but I think most people see it as temporary. 

By the way, leprosy is transmitted by aerosols, not touch. God told lepers to cover their mouths. They probably had dirty and often loose coverings. Please do not insult God and the law of Moses. 

Its about viral load. Some viruses get you from even a tiny exposure. Some you need a heavy exposure...small amounts help build immunity. My MD said that he didn't want me around the heavy load from an indoor setting with people singing unmasked, so I said OK. I still ran in for groceries where every shopper was masked and did fine, and I am sure I had some exposure. When I watched cute baby all day, snuggling and in his face, and that night he hit 104 degrees and tested positive the next day, well, my mistake I guess, but I had never worn a mask around him before. Anyway its over now. Get some Ivermectin; you won't want to go out if you wake up with this virus. 

One general observation, not addressed to you.....I've seen posts here that sound like people equate "fellowship" exclusively with Sunday morning. That may be important, but it isn't all. Try visiting somebody, or calling an older person isolating to ask if you can get them anything from the store. Try writing a nice card to people not coming to church. Have somebody over for dinner if they are willing ( if you go maskless, they may not want to, but offer. ) Try thinking about the one sheep not at the meeting instead of just focusing on the 99 Sunday morning. Fellowship in the book of Acts was in the Temple courts and in big gatherings, but also daily in homes. People who are upset might find some help in more one on one outreach and ministry type activities. 

Hope this is over soon.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## De Jager (Jun 4, 2021)

lynnie said:


> Thank you Anne. Yes, that is correct.
> 
> Ivermectin* is* a wonder drug. Here is a link to its efficacy against many viruses. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z Some of this is humans, some in vitro, some animal. There are links out there about its use in the 1980s for HIV, but I don't feel like digging now. I am not posting this in regard to church fellowship, but more as a helpful suggestion if anybody here gets COVID and wants a treatment.
> 
> ...



Let us all recognize that God required the symptomatic to take precautions, not those who have absolutely no symptoms of a disease.

That's a pretty major difference between how things were done then, and how things are done now. Our contemporary response (everyone could be a "carrier") is a response devoid of faith in God and is based in the fear of death. Therefore, it is by definition unwise and unbalanced. Only a Christian can truly be balanced in this regard. If it is true that "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom", then it is a given that a response to a worldwide pandemic that does not consider what God has to say is a response that will not be as wise as it could be. This is where we are.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 3


----------



## alexandermsmith (Jun 4, 2021)

lynnie said:


> Thank you Anne. Yes, that is correct.
> 
> Ivermectin* is* a wonder drug. Here is a link to its efficacy against many viruses. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z Some of this is humans, some in vitro, some animal. There are links out there about its use in the 1980s for HIV, but I don't feel like digging now. I am not posting this in regard to church fellowship, but more as a helpful suggestion if anybody here gets COVID and wants a treatment.



I'm not disputing the effectiveness of Ivermectin in treating covid. I'm very much aware of the concerted effort to suppress the drug because there is no money to be made from it.



lynnie said:


> Alexander.....RNA viruses always over time get less lethal, and I don't know what the average person thinks but I am pretty sure their doctors and even the MSM hold out hope that within 2 or 3 years this would be over, like the 1918 spanish flu and other viral pandemics. That is a separate subject from " do we skip church for two years", but I think most people see it as temporary.



I think staying away from church for two years is a little more serious than a "temporary measure". And it's certainly not the historical practice of the church in the face of disease. It certainly wasn't the response of the church as a whole to the spanish flu pandemic.



lynnie said:


> By the way, leprosy is transmitted by aerosols, not touch. God told lepers to cover their mouths. They probably had dirty and often loose coverings. Please do not insult God and the law of Moses.



Lepers were also to be segregated from the community and were to make their presence known when out and about so that people could remove themselves from close proximity. They weren't sitting in the public assembly with mere 2m distancing wearing their face coverings. Yet this is is what you want me to do when I have no symptoms of covid. These are not the same scenarios. Quarantining sick individuals is Biblical; quarantining healthy individuals and requiring them to observe these ridiculous restrictions and instrusions into their personal liberty is absolutely not. Please do not think yourself wiser than God. 



lynnie said:


> One general observation, not addressed to you.....I've seen posts here that sound like people equate "fellowship" exclusively with Sunday morning. That may be important, but it isn't all. Try visiting somebody, or calling an older person isolating to ask if you can get them anything from the store. Try writing a nice card to people not coming to church. Have somebody over for dinner if they are willing ( if you go maskless, they may not want to, but offer. ) Try thinking about the one sheep not at the meeting instead of just focusing on the 99 Sunday morning. Fellowship in the book of Acts was in the Temple courts and in big gatherings, but also daily in homes. People who are upset might find some help in more one on one outreach and ministry type activities.
> 
> Hope this is over soon.



I agree public worship on Sabbath is not the only fellowship of the church (though it is the most important and the one most cherished by the Lord) but we didn't have any of the personal fellowship from our ministers and elders during the pandemic either. So much for visiting the sick, which is a duty placed particularly on the elders and minister.

The fact remains that the church has faced far, far more serious pandemics in history and yet the response of many within the visible church was very different to what we have seen in the last year.

Reactions: Amen 2


----------



## RobertPGH1981 (Jun 7, 2021)

De Jager said:


> The real question, and it is a big one is whether churches will segregate their people based on vaccination status. I hear that in some states, churches are being told that vaccinated people do not have to wear a mask while unvaccinated do. Vaccinated people (unmasked) can sit in one area, while unvaccinated people (masked) have to sit in a different area, with different capacity limits in each area. Thus, at the door of the church we would have screening of vaccination status, and a segregation based on that.



The CDC says those vaccinated don't need to wear a mask. Many companies and churches are not asking anybody this question and some at most are posting a sign on their building. In my opinion asking somebody a health question like this is overstepping personal rights to privacy. Some attorney's stated that this doesn't violate privacy. In a sense its a choice a company will need to make which could hurt its bottom line. 

Ultimately, where would these questions end if you open the door to something like this?

Reactions: Informative 1


----------

