Jordan Wilson on Mandatory Vaccination and The Church
by Ginger Taylor
"Where is the Church?"
A great many of us who are Christians have been asking this question in regard to vaccine injury and corruption for years. We read the very errant missives put out by often well meaning, professing Christians, pastors, elders and physicians that seemed to have never looked beyond the CDC's home page on vaccine safety and efficacy, and give up hope that our voices, and our cries for our children, will ever be heard in what should be our spiritual homes.
This week, one of those errant missives was answered with a stunning five part series by Jordan Wilson in the New City Times. Wilson has not only bothered to actually search the scriptures to inform his writing to the church on vaccine questions, he watched the Plotkin videos.
If you are looking for a good source to begin to talk about the vaccine problem in your church, I offer you...
"The Gospel Coalition & Vaccines: A Response to Joe Carter
Jordan Wilson July 29th, 2019
This article is the intro to a 5-Part series on Vaccines. See the full list of (and links to) the rest in this series below.
A recent article at the Gospel Coalition manifests one contributor's decision to wade into the debate regarding vaccines. Contributing Editor, Joe Carter, planted his flag firmly on one side of the debate.
If I had to summarize the gist of Carter's position in three statements, they would be:
- The debate is settled: modern vaccination programs are safe, ethically sourced, and the results are amazing, let's celebrate!
- Skepticism of the vaccine program is unwarranted, and results in practices which are unloving to neighbor, harmful to their children and society.
- If Christian parents ultimately decide against vaccinating, they should reasonably be prepared to accept banishment from public institutions, and they are also to be held morally responsible if their child (or someone else's child) dies because they chose not to vaccinate.
An Uncritical, One-Sided Perspective
I'm not sure to what degree, if any, Carter is willing to be persuaded from his position. I used to passionately write the same things he wrote, before really opening myself up to hear both sides of the debate. Regardless, my goal in writing is not mainly an attempt to persuade Joe Carter; it's to offer an alternative viewpoint which I firmly believe deserves consideration for many reasons.
Reluctantly I have to say that Carter's arguments represent an uncritical, one-sided perspective which essentially repeats half-truths and other industry talking points while demonstrating he doesn't really know what the opposing perspective's best arguments are. It almost reads like he asked google for anti-vaccine skeptic talking points that he repackaged into his article. To that end, much of what Joe confidently posits as obvious is actually on much shakier ground than he realizes. I fully understand that there is a need to be skeptical about what we read, as long as that goes both directions.
With that said, this article will respond to Joe Carter in two ways. First, in this article I will respond directly to some of the more questionable points that Carter makes in his original post on The Gospel Coalition website. Second, I will lay out five reasons why parents have a legitimate reason to be skeptical of the vaccine program as currently administered in the United States. These five reasons will be addressed in articles I have written as linked to at the conclusion of this article..."
Read the rest of Wilson's introduction here, and then read his whole series:
Part 1: Vaccines & Aborted Babies: Should Christians be Concerned?
Part 2: Are Vaccines What Saved Us from Epidemics of Infectious Disease?
Part 3: Is the US Vaccination Program Safe?
My father was diagnosed with ALS in the summer of 2013; His initial symptoms were quite noticeable. He first experienced weakness in his right arm and his speech and swallowing abilities were profoundly affected. We all did our best to seek help for this disease no medications they prescribe worked ,we were all scared we might lost him due to his condition, as he had been his brother's caregiver a few years earlier for the same disease before he past. doctor recommend nuatural treatment from total cure herbal foundation for his ALS we have no choice to give a try on natural organic treatment ,this herbal cure has effectively reverse my father condition ,losing his balance which led to stumbling and falling stop after the completing the herbal supplement which include his weakness in his right arm and his speech, home remedies from totalcureherbsfoundation com is the best although their service is a little bit expensive but it worth it, they save lives.
Posted by: Jerry Atson | January 03, 2020 at 02:52 PM
My mother was diagnosed with ALS in june 2015. Her doctor put her on riluzole, letting her know there was no cure but the medication might provide her a few more months of delayed symptoms. ALS progresses at different rates and affects different body parts first. My mother, being 80 at the time, fell into a category of what they call "fast progression" (older female). Her arms weakened first, then her hands, her mouth, and throat, and finally her lungs. Throughout her years ordeal, she was able to walk with assistance. We have to give a try on herbal supplement which effectively get rid of herbal ALS condition dramatically after her 15 weeks of her usage,she lost touch with reality. Suspecting it was the medication I took her off the riluzole (with the doctor’s knowledge) and started her on the ALS natural herbal formula we ordered. it advisable to always try natural herbs at first because totalcureherbsfoundation.com neutralize her ALS/MND which surprise everyone at home.
Posted by: Gary Madison | August 26, 2019 at 09:00 AM
Very good article ,Sunday Service Christianiaty isn't anything new ?
Translation -To A Louse -The Poem , Robert Burns, 1786.
O would some Power with vision teach us
To see ourselves as others see us!
It would from many a blunder free us and foolish notions
What airs in dress and carrage would leave us and even devotion !
Posted by: Morag | August 07, 2019 at 03:36 PM
Was greatly disappointed to hear Marianne Williamson "back track" on her courageous stand for #1 .. Choice not mandated vaccines .. now saying schools have right to mandate vaccines .. but .. thankfully remain confident in #2 .. her promise to increase oversight of pharma industry which would include vaccine industry.
Posted by: Bob Moffit | August 04, 2019 at 09:38 AM
I seriously believe all this is the judgement of Almighty God on this nation for our...collectively...the "church's" apathy towards the abortion holocaust Ginger. Talking to them about vaccines is a lesser issue...the bigger issue is talking to our churches and pastors about treating abortion like the holocaust that it is. The blood of these babies is on our hands. I have repented. We need a revival in this nation, weeping and repentance. I believe that only when this happens that God will relent and hear our cries. Watch/listen to this 11 min sermon on blood guiltiness:
https://youtu.be/FoOss3WEAak
This is the full 45m version: https://youtu.be/3ZPNnNCP1sQ
Please don't delete this comment. We need all the Christians we know to listen to one of these videos and then speak to our pastors and fellow Christians.
Posted by: D | August 04, 2019 at 01:15 AM
Greg Hill: "Herd immunity" is a concept based upon observation, which explains the natural history and course of outbreaks of infectious diseases within a particular community. Once 60+% of the population of the community had contracted the disease, the outbreak would cease; no new cases would be reported. Thus, it is descriptive term, not a medical or scientific one, and it is well documented. There will always be a small percentage who are asymptomatic, and a small percentage who are immune for unknown reasons. The use of this term in vaccinated communities is wrong, and perfectly ridiculous. What is truly frightening is that so much of today's world population have immune systems which have never been properly challenged, and thus never properly developed. This is absolutely crucial for lifetime health. We are seeing both longevity and fertility declining in developed countries. It is no mystery why this is so.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | August 02, 2019 at 09:47 AM
Re the MSNBC interview: In the age of censorship (AOC) Marianne Williamson clearly realizes the rules of baseball in a free society have changed. Using another baseball comparison she got a nice hit into left center and is standing on first. She learning how to swing when interviewers throw her fast balls.
Now I want to see her steal second from Big Pharma and the DNC. She will be interesting to watch.
Posted by: michael | August 01, 2019 at 06:16 PM
Thank you for talking about Marianne Williamson. She is a ray of hope for vaccine choice. Maybe others will start to see this. I can only hope and pray. Most politicians will not say the things she says for money reasons. I have been avoiding political speeches because they make me sadder. I listened to her because of what was said here in these comments.
Posted by: Loraine Fishel | August 01, 2019 at 11:40 AM
Posted by: go Trump | July 31, 2019 at 11:36 PM
Posted by: Carol | July 31, 2019 at 06:53 PM
Marianne Williamson, Democratic candidate, came out in favor of vaccination safety research on Ari Melber's MSNBC show today.
She mentioned a chronic illness rate of 54% in American children.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is exactly what we need, politicians talking openly about IG_pharma's VAX_xterminations
Posted by: Hans Litten | August 01, 2019 at 06:52 AM
A very good clip with Marianne Williamson / vaccines at about 8:00
She wants vaccine? research NOT paid for by big Pharma
Sadly of course drug money is needed to run for President
https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari/watch/2020-dem-marianne-williamson-addresses-vaccination-controversy-65010245934
Posted by: go Trump | July 31, 2019 at 11:36 PM
Marianne Williamson, Democratic candidate, came out in favor of vaccination safety research on Ari Melber's MSNBC show today.
She mentioned a chronic illness rate of 54% in American children.
Posted by: Carol | July 31, 2019 at 06:53 PM
"1. Did the original observations leading to the theory see the same statistical effect for both bacterial infections and viruses?"
There is no observational evidence that anybody in history has *ever* been infected - vaccinated or not - in any manner.
Immunity (both natural and vaccine derived) and infection are observation free beliefs - assumptions. In both cases self-fulfilling prophecies rule the day. If a child gets measles (or the vaccine for it) the doctor assumes that they have immunity so the next time they get a rash they will diagnose something else. Amusingly, with say the flu they will continue to diagnose the flu but they still want to believe in their immunity nonsense so they claim that the virus "mutates" every year. But they never ask why the measles virus doesn't mutate all the time nor do they ask why anybody should bother getting a flu shot for just 4 or 5 strains when there must be billions of strains out there from previous mutations.
All of this stems from our desire to treat medicine as a statistical "science". Instead of trying to understand the what and why we just shrug our shoulders and say "well that's what the statistics appear to show". But statistics in medicine are always fraught because of the self-fulfilling prophecy problem.
That is true for so-called "alternative medicine" too by the way. Many alternative cancer treatments will boast of certain percentage success rates but such numbers are meaningless as there is no valid way of determining the statistical efficacy of a cancer treatment (for starters, accounting for the placebo effect is not possible).
If you want to understand medicine you must start with first principles.
Here is the first principle to assume and see how far it can take you:
Nature/God/Intelligent Designer/evolution does not just make mistakes.
You would be amazed how far you can get with this one.
Posted by: Rtp | July 31, 2019 at 05:48 PM
There is no valid, scientific evidence that vaccines are effective in saving lives much less preventing any disease.
The following article lays out the basics nicely, to which I will add more below:
https://medium.com/@doromaln_50113/are-vaccines-effective-are-we-asking-the-right-question-7008cafb0080
There are, however, a few additional considerations that further destroy the notion that vaccines are effective.
Firstly, regarding mortality in developing countries: whenever claims are made by the WHO/etc that vaccines have saved X lives in the Third World, it is important to understand that these numbers are made up in a spreadsheet. There is nothing close to reliable mortality data in most of these countries, so they "estimate" lives saved by a simple formula similar to [# vaccines-administered] x [estimated-mortality-rate] x [vaccine-efficacy-rate], the latter value being also made up as I will show below.
Secondly, regarding incidence, there are also numerous diseases that declined from quite prevalent to almost non-existant today without a vaccine or without a vaccine in widespread use: scarlet fever, typhus, typhoid, cholera, scurvy, leprosy, plague, etc. So the idea of a disease disappearing without a vaccine should not be surprising. It also places an extra burden of proof on those who would claim vaccines affected any (apparent) decline in incidence to show something much strong than mere (apparent) correlation.
Thirdly, if you take the "incidence" data at face value, there is certainly an appearance that some vaccines correlated with a marked drop in the rate, but little scientific evidence to support it.
For one thing, there is no true incidence data from which to draw this conclusion. All data we have (which is erroneously called “incidence”) is notification data, subject to a number of unquantifiable and uncontrolled biases. The foremost is diagnostic bias, whereby doctors — under their faith-based belief that vaccines work— are more likely to diagnose a disease as something else in vaccinated persons. This is simply human nature. The CDC even instructs doctors to do just this (https://www.cdc.gov/VACCINES/pubs/surv-manual/chpt07-measles.html):
“To minimize the problem of false positive laboratory results, it is important to restrict case investigation and laboratory tests to patients most likely to have measles (i.e., those who meet the clinical case definition, especially if they have risk factors for measles, such as being unvaccinated, recent history of travel abroad, without an alternate explanation for symptoms, for example epi-linked to known parvovirus case) or those with fever and generalized maculopapular rash with strong suspicion of measles.”
So, at base, this apparent drop is derived from data that is intrinsically biased by belief in the fact itself, making it circular in nature and woefully unscientific. The belief is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This bias explains why the disease is “found” more often in unvaccinated individuals and also why its “incidence” declined as the numbers of vaccinated grew.
One might argue that it is not possible to mistake these diseases for others. However, were that true then there would be no need for differential diagnosis nor laboratory confirmation when diagnosing them, a requirement for almost all VPDs.
Which leads to another related point about the very nature of these diseases themselves and gets to the very question of the validity of germ theory itself. Consider that the association of germs to diseases is little more than tautological. Take measles: prior to vaccine introduction the diagnosis was entirely clinical. However, the subsequent requirement of laboratory confirmation in diagnosis has not only fundamentally changed what it means to have “measles” but also associated it with the virus by definitional decree.
Prior to the vaccine, someone with disease that is clinically indistinguishable from measles but without presence of the virus would have been labeled as having measles. Today they are labeled with something else. But if the diseases are otherwise indistinguishable save for the presence of some proteins in the blood, why do we fixate on the proteins instead of the disease? Especially when that fixation/division is only a modern development (post-vaccine introduction) used to justify a paradigm (vaccination) that rests entirely upon it.
To make any valid claim that vaccines reduced incidence, proponents would have to demonstrate in a rigorously controlled manner that vaccines have reduced true incidence (not notifications) of all disease that is clinically indistinguishable from the purported VPD, hence controlling for definitional changes and biased reporting systems. Not only has this never remotely been done, there is evidence that the opposite is true: most dreaded disease complications (e.g. paralysis from polio, blindness and encephalitis from measles, birth defects from rubella, etc) appear to be more common now than at the peaks of these diseases, to the extent that reliable data can be found. This can most clearly be seen in real time in India as their much acclaimed "eradication" of polio has been accompanied by a massive increase in accute flaccid paralysis.
Lastly, going a bit deeper, it is important to consider the evidence that the measles virus and other VPD viruses even exist. Consider this interesting event from Germany: https://www.sott.net/article/340948-Biologist-wins-Supreme-Court-case-proving-that-the-measles-virus-does-not-exist
The reason that he won the court case is because all of the studies presented as proof relied upon the first “isolation” of measles by Enders (https://archive.org/details/EndersPeebles1954). Yet this first isolation consisted merely of treating and sterilizing a cell culture and adding a sample of purportedly infected blood. When the stressed cells died they attributed it to infection with the purported virus and called the resulting cellular stew an “isolation.”
Notice there is no control experiment involved: they did not rule out that their stressing of the cell line was the cause of cellular changes. Notice also that they did not perform the standard density gradient centrifugation necessary to truly isolate viral particles for proper biochemical characterization: their “virus” is nothing more than cellular debris.
If that is the foundation of all evidence for the virus existing, how can it possibly be said to cause anything? And if there is no valid scientific evidence that measles "virus" causes anything, then any claims that a vaccine targeting this "virus" prevents anything are patently absurd.
Posted by: TheAlmightyPill | July 31, 2019 at 04:17 PM
This comes at a time when I'm just beginning to seriously explore what appears to me to be a scientifically well-disproved theory called "herd immunity." I hope that in my ongoing readings I'll run across these two tidbit of info, but does anybody here know off the top of their head:
1. Did the original observations leading to the theory see the same statistical effect for both bacterial infections and viruses?
2. Over the course of that original observation period were there any changes at all in the total number of people who were EVER infected, or was it just in the number of people that happened to be infected at any point in time?
Posted by: Greg Hill | July 31, 2019 at 02:01 PM
Ginger,
Thank you for sharing this incredibly well-done series by Jordan Wilson.
I read through Jordan's introduction and all 5 parts of his series. The one sentence I came across, in his introduction, that I find out of place and in contradiction to all else that he wrote is this:
"I think there is a case to be made for vaccination in certain severe circumstances, at certain frequencies, ages, etc."
I don't agree with any part of that sentence, as there is absolutely no evidence upon which to base any part of what he wrote.
I find his use of "at certain frequencies, ages, etc." especially troubling, as that is exactly what is transpiring now...permanently disabling, making chronically ill, impairing fertility, permanently sterilizing, causing inter-generational damage, destroying natural mother-to-child immunity, and prematurely killing MILLIONS, now likely BILLIONS, worldwide...not to mention the many benefits that are forever forfeited once a person has been vaccinated.
Perhaps he will read this comment and remove that one statement.
Other than that, his series is excellent, and I will be sharing it with my email group.
Posted by: Laura Hayes | July 31, 2019 at 01:39 PM
"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's"
The Founding Fathers went out of the way to separate Religion from State. Our children are God’s — not the property of the state.
If people choose to vaccinate their children, breaching true herd immunity which protects the very young, then that is their moral choice between them and God.
Its their moral choice, to exchange a few days of feeling unwell, for possible Non-Specific Immune Responses which can last a lifetime and shorten life.
It is their moral choice, to either live like cattle under the yoke or to question false gods, so as to always remain in the light of God.
True Science is being confused and abused by scientism, an ideology — which is not even a false god(s) yet it is being obeyed as if it were.
Posted by: Pogo | July 31, 2019 at 11:11 AM
What an amazing series. Wow, hands down the best and most-researched set of articles I've ever read. I really hope people encourage Mr Wilson to package this as a small booklet and make it available that way! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 to NewCityTimes.com also for having the guts to publish this in these times of censorship and oppression from Facebook, Google, Twitter... Let's hope they don't get shut down!!
Posted by: Conners Clinic | July 31, 2019 at 09:16 AM
Jordan Wilson in the New City Times apparently took the time and made the effort to "inform his writing" by watching the 9 plus hours of "sworn testimony of Stanley Plotkin" … identified as the "Godfather of vaccines".
I defy ANYONE .. especially Joe Carter the contributing editor of the Gospel Coalition ...
to view Plotkin's testimony regarding the despicable "moral/ethics" he employed in creating vaccines … from experimenting on the most vulnerable in our world .. perfectly healthy innocent children and mentally challenged adults held in institutions .. at that time embracing the most vile "ethics" of eugenics … as well as .. admitting in just one "study" utilizing 76 fetal cells culled from organs of aborted infants .. indifferent to whether or not the mother of that aborted infant was informed of his use of mom's aborted fetus.
After reading Plotkin's sworn testimony .. I find it hard to believe Joe Carter would not RETRACT his observations:
•The debate is settled: modern vaccination programs are safe, ethically sourced, and the results are amazing, let's celebrate!
•Skepticism of the vaccine program is unwarranted, and results in practices which are unloving to neighbor, harmful to their children and society.
•If Christian parents ultimately decide against vaccinating, they should reasonably be prepared to accept banishment from public institutions, and they are also to be held morally responsible if their child (or someone else's child) dies because they chose not to vaccinate.
Stanley Plotkin's testimony is the greatest weapon of TRUTH .. exposing the sordid history of our "one size fits all vaccines .. where the benefits of vaccines ALWAYS outweigh the RISKS .. as well as .. the HUMANITARIN MORAL AND ETHICAL LAPSES THAT WERE COMMITTED BY THE GLOBAL VACCINE INDUSTRY.
Posted by: Bob Moffit | July 31, 2019 at 07:05 AM
Fair Play to you Ginger. This has been on my mind greatly recently given the Dr Theresa Diesher revelations of fetal DNA-RNA contamination in so many vaccinations.
The Roman catholic Church is completely and disgracefully missing in action.
Except for the Kenyan RC hierarchy of course who have been legendary.
Ginger - Are you able to provide contact addresses where I can complain against my own Church ?
I actually have not been able to find a way to do so. The RC Church of the UK needs to feel the heat.
Posted by: Hans Litten | July 31, 2019 at 06:08 AM
The Peace Of The Church.
So if you have a religion that does not want vaccines for whatever reason when was the state given permission to universally overide the church..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_the_Church
The "Peace of the Church" is a designation usually applied to the condition of the Church after the publication of the Edict of Milan in 313 by the two Augusti, Western Roman Emperor Constantine I and his eastern colleague Licinius, an edict of toleration by which the Christians were accorded liberty to practise their religion without state interference.
Pharma For Prison
MMR RIP
Posted by: Angus Files | July 31, 2019 at 05:37 AM