Sunday, May 30, 2021

What If 'Follow The Prophet' Could Get You Killed?


Previously: The Brain God Gave You


I'm encouraged by the growing number of members who are discovering that "follow the prophet" is a false doctrine.  Joseph Smith actually berated the saints for depending on him, warning them that their overdependence on the prophet was causing them to be "darkened in their minds." That was a nice way of saying that their penchant for following the prophet was turning them stupid.

God, on the other hand, didn't mince words.  He did not just warn against trusting in men, he said those who did so would be cursed. (2 Ne 28:31, Jer 17:5, Jer 7:8, et al.)

You will search in vain for any scripture promoting the idea that we should follow and obey the leaders of the Church.  Joseph Smith was the only president of the Church who was ordained of God to also be a prophet, and even in that instance God did not advise us to follow or obey Joseph.  God tells us we should "heed" (not obey) only those words Joseph received directly from God through revelation. (D&C 21:4-5)

God has never said anything remotely resembling that regarding any other president of the church.  If you believe he has, please show me the revelation.  Joseph Smith is the only one whose words we are told to "heed," and even then the words we are told to heed are not Joseph Smith's words, but the words of Jesus Christ who spoke through Joseph.

So what are we to think when modern leaders of the LDS Church try to convince the members that they should run right out and get a "vaccine," when the very government agency charged with approving vaccines still refuses to approve any of the covid injections as ready to go? 

Does that surprise you?  Did you think this vaccine has already been given the stamp of approval by the government agency charged with that duty?  It has not. Do you know why the Food and Drug Administration has not approved these so-called "vaccines"?  It's because those "vaccines" have not yet undergone the trials required by law to be proven safe and effective.  So, assuming Church leaders want you to try a "vaccine" that may or may not even work, that still doesn't explain why Russell Nelson et al would be so anxious to see you put your life and health at risk, given that even the scientists charged with the testing are not able to give it their approval.

With all the hype from the media and politicians trying to convince you to take the injection, you may think these medicines have passed all the rigorous trials.  They have not. The various injection medications have not been approved for general use. They have been authorized for emergency use only.  "Authorized" is not the same as "approved." That's specified right there in the law at U.S. Code 21 Sec. 360bbb-3.

Are You Dying of AIDS?  
If you're old enough to recall the AIDS epidemic, you may have seen horrifying videos of AIDS patients dying slow, agonizing deaths from that disease.  Watching these videos was heartbreaking, as a person with AIDS slowly wastes away until finally, months later, comes the sweet release of death.

At that time there was no known treatment for Acquired Immune Deficiency.  And as the name implies, there was no method known to strengthen the immune system against it.  And then one day it was announced that the FDA was running trials on a new drug known as AZT that might show promise.  The catch? The FDA would not approve the use of this drug for AIDS patients because, without the usual tests, trials, and further research which requires 5-10 years before any new drug can go on the market, there was no way of knowing whether AZT was safe, let alone whether it was effective.  So they wouldn't let anyone have access to the drug, because for all the government knew, if an AIDS patient took AZT, it could kill him.

AIDS victims said, "look, we're dying anyway.  We don't care about the side effects, at this point we're willing to try anything!"

As a result of the public outcry, use of AZT was authorized under U.S. 21 for Emergency Use Authorization, which allowed people to try an unapproved drug as long as the recipient was willing to assume all the risk.  If something went wrong, the patient could not sue the government or the pharmaceutical company that manufactured it.  The underlying assumption was that the patient understood the drug was experimental.  They knew they were taking a gamble. The risk was theirs and theirs alone.

Happily,  AZT turned out to be a successful treatment for quite a number of AIDS patients, and it led to further advances for those suffering with AIDS.  So that story has a happy ending. 

But it's important to understand that AZT was an experimental drug, and the people who couldn't wait to take that drug became willing guinea pigs on which the drug was tested for nearly a decade.  Why not?  What did they have to lose?  AIDS was certainly going to kill them, so they were willing to be experimented on if there was even a tiny chance it might not.

Are You Dying of Covid? 
So here's the pertinent question: if the Covid vaccine has been authorized for emergency use like AZT was, where is the emergency?  With a virus that has an almost imperceptible fatality rate of between one and two percent (depending on the age of the patient), what would motivate the average American to put himself at actual risk, given the deleterious effects already experienced by many who have already taken that gamble?

We now know that what is being called a pandemic is anything but a pandemic. A pandemic is properly defined as a disease that spreads across many countries.  Okay, fine.  But this one turned out to be nowhere near as deadly as we were initially told.  Tony Fauci's earliest prediction, the one he published along with two colleagues in the New England Journal of Medicine, turned out to be accurate. The Sars-CoV-2 virus, popularly known as COVID-19, ended up being akin to a severe seasonal flu as predicted. Some people do die from the flu, but not that many. Most people get better. (See my first blog post on this topic, Science Is Your Friend, for an excerpt from that report and more.) 

As we all know, the establishment inflated the death numbers to make it appear that nearly three and a half million people died of Covid, when most of those people actually died from heart disease, cancer, pneumonia, diabetes, old age, and obesity.  The actual number of people who died who only had covid and no other illness was somewhere around ten thousand. But everyone coming into a hospital who was on the verge of death for any reason were tested for Covid, and surprise, surprise! Nearly everyone tested positive.

Yes, no matter what illness a person complained of when they entered a hospital, an overwhelming number were "diagnosed" with having covid as well.  This was due to what has been exposed as a faulty method of testing using the RT-PCR test. So if your grandma was in the hospital breathing her last, no matter what the reason was she originally came in for treatment, COVID was invariably stamped on her death certificate because every patient who dies "with" covid translates into a financial benefit for the hospital, courtesy of American taxpayers.  The reality is you can get a positive test from anyone by ratcheting up the cycles on a PCR test above 35,000, which was being done constantly.  Many perfectly healthy people have tested positive with the PCR test; you may have been one of them.  In Tanzania,  A container of motor oil and a papaya tested positive for Covid. So Covid "cases" mean absolutely nothing. Sometimes numbers do lie.

The Virus Is Real But The Pandemic Is A Hoax
If there was an actual, emergency pandemic, you would be hearing sirens in the streets day and night. Hospitals would be overflowing (they're not), people you know would be dropping dead,  and graveyards would be...well, they'd be like graveyards.  But a peek at the total number of people who died in 2020 compared with the total number of people who died the year before -and pretty much every year before that- shows there has not been a skyrocketing number of deaths since Covid became the disease du jour. If we were in the midst of a real pandemic, there would be a massively large number of deaths compared to the previous year.  Instead, the number of people who died last year was very close to the number that died the year before. And the number of people who have died so far this year is on par with the yearly average. 

In other words, people die every year from heart disease, cancer, pneumonia, diabetes, old age, and obesity.  And of course, there's the usual number of people who die each year from the flu, which for some reason seems to have disappeared from the scoreboard in 2021.  A cynic might say the reason nobody got the flu this year was because everyone who actually had influenza was counted as having Covid.  Put another way, if everyone who had the flu was actually counted as having had the flu, the Covid numbers would be way down.  And if the Covid numbers were way down, what would the politicians use to keep scaring the pants off us?  The common cold?

If there was truly a pandemic caused by the coronavirus, there would be a massive number of people dying from Covid-19 in addition to the usual number of people who die every year from the flu.  But there isn't. Everything remains pretty much the same, aside from the fact that no one seems to be dying of the flu anymore.  So why is  that?  What the heck happened to the annual flu statistics?

Guess Who Had The Flu This Year?
I can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you my wife and I caught the flu in January (we can tell the symptoms, which are different from the symptoms for SARS-CoV-2) and from there my illness morphed into the usual bronchitis I tend to come down with every winter. I could tell by my symptoms that it was bronchitis (I'm no stranger to the malady) but before my doctor would prescribe the prednisone I requested from him, he insisted I get tested for Covid "just in case." If I wanted the prednisone, I would have to comply, so I did. But I knew the test would be useless, and here's why: when a person is said to have tested positive for Covid, we are conditioned to believe he has the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is a very serious thing.  But it's actually quite rare that someone would come down with the COVID-19. Very often the patient has come down with nothing more serious than the common cold.

As Dr. Joseph Mercola explains:
The problem with antibody testing is that there are seven different coronaviruses known to cause respiratory illness in humans. Four of them cause symptoms associated with the common cold:
229E
NL63
OC43
HKU1

In addition to the common cold, OC43 and HKU1 — two of the most commonly encountered betacoronaviruses — are also known to cause bronchitis, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia in all age groups. The other three human coronaviruses — which are capable of causing more serious respiratory illness — are:
SARS-CoV
MERS-CoV
SARS-CoV-2
The tricky part is that the antibodies created by these different coronaviruses appear very similar, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention admits recovering from the common cold can trigger a positive antibody test for COVID-19, even if you were never infected with SARS-CoV-2 specifically. As explained on the CDC’s “Test for Past Infection” web page,

“Antibody tests check your blood by looking for antibodies, which may tell you if you had a past infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. Antibodies are proteins that help fight off infections and can provide protection against getting that disease again (immunity). Antibodies are disease specific …

A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold. (Dr. Joseph Mercola, "Common Cold May Trigger Covid-19 Antibody Test")

So when I was told I had tested positive for the coronavirus, I naturally assumed it was either OC43 or HKU1, since either one of those are the coronaviruses that would have caused my bronchitis.  The test result I received in the mail didn't specify, so I called around until I got someone from the lab. But all she could tell me was that I tested positive for Covid, by which, of course, she meant I tested positive for the coronavirus. Down here on this lower rung of the ladder, your basic lab technician has no idea there are different types of respiratory coronaviruses.  They know nothing other than the test tells them the patient tested positive for the coronavirus.  Precisely which coronavirus, they haven't a clue.

I've read enough studies to know that if I had actually come down with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, I would most likely be dead. THAT is the serious coronavirus, and the reality is very few Americans have contracted that particular strain.  Remember last year how everyone was panicked because there weren't going to be enough ventilator machines to go around?  Those might have been needed if there was a true epidemic of SARS-CoV-2, but since most "cases" of Covid-19 were most likely the coronavirus responsible for colds and flu, those machines were almost never needed.

Remember when President Trump was hospitalized with Covid?  Certainly if an intubator was needed, the President of the United States would have had access to one.  But he didn't need one, not because he's such a boss, but because, like most Americans, he probably had a cold or the seasonal flu.  The doctors -also the best medical experts available- gave him some medicine and had him rest up a few days, then he walked out of the hospital and went back to work. Just like you did the last time you caught the flu and then got over it.

By the way, I never got that prednisone I requested because my doctor was unsure of whether it would react negatively, what with my having Covid and all. So I treated it myself using a mixture of saline and food grade hydrogen peroxide in my nebulizer machine and was a lot better in two days. You can find instructions HERE with a lot more detail and video instructions HERE (P.S. it also cured my "Covid-19")

Somebody Wants You Injected
Given all the hype from the media and politicians, you wouldn't know that the covid shots have not been approved by the FDA, but merely allowed under the same Emergency Use Authorization that permitted people to allow themselves to be the guinea pigs for testing AZT.  Media talking heads and feckless politicians are currently drowning out the voices of actual medical professionals who are trying to tell you that the covid vaccines are experimental and therefore potentially dangerous.  It shouldn't surprise us that it is the medical professionals -at least a thousand frontline doctors and nurses as well as virologists, epidemiologists, biochemists, and other experts in disease- who are issuing dire warnings about the growing number of adverse reactions among vaccine recipients, including permanent disability and death. 

A highly unusual number of deaths.

If you are at all curious as to why the ruling class is so anxious to get everybody vaccinated, and you suspect all this talk of "vaccine deniers" is just a smokescreen...well, it is. There is a frantic campaign to get you to ignore the science and the scientists who are trying to get the truth out.  Below is a presentation by Dr. Christiane Northrup, one doctor among many who are alarmed at what is currently happening. In light of all the propaganda you're getting through the media, you might want to consider this a crash course in "Covid Vaccines 101."  It's a perfect introduction as to why you may want to reject the now panicked push from certain politicians, reporters, and church leaders:


If you're unable to view the video, Here Is The Link on Bitchute. 

Attention People of Earth:You Are Being Lied To
We are bombarded every day by the opinions of moronic pundits who haven't taken a class in science since the 9th grade and are probably not even aware those subjecting themselves to the "vaccine" are being used as guinea pigs. So why would you want to participate? To what end could you possibly benefit? There is certainly no upside to taking the jab, but the risks are enormous. 

Just last week the CDC reported over ten thousand people who had been vaccinated wound up being infected anyway. That does not take into account the thousands who have been harmed or the hundreds who have died. I can't even keep up with the number of deaths among the recently vaccinated, but you can check out THIS SITE -one of many that are attempting to catalog all reports where people have died or had serious reactions after taking the shot. 

So here's the thing: if you are a member of the church who still buys into the false teaching that you should "follow the prophet" on this topic, the question you might want to ask yourself is "why?"

Does the God who gave you the ability to think and reason really want you to risk your health and possibly your life just on the say-so of men who hold title and position in the church? If you believe Russell Nelson has received a revelation from God saying church members should all take the vaccine, why has he not published that revelation so you can read it and pray about it and receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? And if he has not received a revelation telling you God wants you to take this vaccine, why in heaven's name would you want to take advice from him that could very possibly ruin your life and the lives of those you love?

This Church has had many presidents, but only one was ordained of God to be His prophet. If you want to "follow" a president, then go right ahead. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

                                    *****

 


Related Links:

I've written a number of posts on this blog tracing the strange teaching that members of Christ's church should follow the prophet without question.  Here are a few:

Follow the Prophet: True or False?

Why Heed Prophetic Counsel?

How We Know Thomas Monson is a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator 
Who Died and Made Him Prophet?

Have You Voted For the New Church President Yet?

Did the Lord Choose Not to Anoint 'The Lord's Anointed'?

          Where Did the Oracles Go? 

A House Divided Against Itself By Vaccinations is the latest thoroughly researched post at LDSTruths.com.  Always highly informative and armed to the teeth with information.

Consistent with the CDC report above showing over ten thousand people have come down with the virus after being vaccinated, noted French virologist Luc Montagnier has said the Covid vaccines reflect a scientific error as well as a medical error and that the history books will show it was "an unacceptable mistake." Watch that interview HERE

I cribbed the graphic at the top of this post from Ben McClintock's Youtube channel "Defending Utah" where he comments on a piece by Jana Reiss in the Salt Lake Tribune titled "Half of U.S. Latter-day Saints are 'Vaccine Hesitant' or Vaccine Refusers."  You can read the Tribune article HERE and watch Ben's commentary HERE.

Take it from me, watching senate hearings can often be tedious, but every now and then I catch something that makes me sit up and take notice. On May 11th of this year Senator Richard Burr was questioning Tony Fauci and representatives from the FDA and the NIH when out pops this surprising exchange:

Senator Burr: (02:25:51)
Okay. This question, I’m going to go to Dr. Fauci, Dr. Marks, and Dr. Walensky. What percentage of the employees in your institute, your center, or your agency, of your employees, has been vaccinated?

Dr. Anthony Fauci: (02:26:13)
I’m not 100% sure, Senator, but I think it’s probably a little bit more than half, probably around 60%.

Senator Burr: (02:26:19)
Dr. Marks?

Dr. Peter Marks: (02:26:21)
I can’t tell you the exact number, but it’s probably in the same range. Some people vaccinated at our facility, and others outside of the facility.

Senator Burr: (02:26:30)
Dr. Walensky?

Dr. Rochelle Walensky: (02:26:31)
We’re encouraging our employees to get vaccinated. We’ve been doing town halls and education seminars. Our staff have the option to report their vaccination status, but as you understand, the federal government is not requiring it, so we do not know.

The "employees" of those agencies are mostly seasoned scientists and medical researchers.  If half of them have not yet taken the jab, I'm inclined to believe they have their reasons.  Do they know something their agency heads don't want to admit?  You can watch that exchange HERE at 02:25:51. 

And this just in: Mike Adams, also known as The Health Ranger, reports having received a direct warning from a government insider that the deep state is planning a massive false flag event that will produce many casualties and be blamed on "anti-vaxxers" and gun owners. The event will be used to confiscate firearms nationwide and criminalize all anti-vax speech online. 

Take that for what you will, but I'm inclined to believe him. Mike, like many others, has meddled with the forces of evil for a long time and today he sounds genuinely rattled. You can hear Mike's report by clicking HERE

I could post links here all day, but if you really want to keep up with the latest developments on the dangers of the "vaccines" check out my Facebook page where I add what I consider pretty important stuff every day.  There's some goofy stuff on there, too, so if humor is not your bag, ignore those and go straight for the horror stories.

Finally, don't forget to watch this 28 minute presentation by Doctor Christiane Northrup I linked to earlier.  This is important. If you're not already horrified, alarmed, and angry, this oughta do it.

Okay, one more: If People Get Jabbed After Watching This, They Are Beyond Saving.

UPDATE Tuesday, June 1st, 2021:
Last Friday's episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight devoted the entire episode to discussing how it came to be that science has been all but abandoned today, not only as it regards the science of vaccines, but of every facet of our lives where we depend upon science for objective truth:
See The Left's War on Science.

UPDATE Thursday, June 3rd, 2021
Below is an important link to a declaration by America's Frontline Doctors titled "No Jab For Me."  Here is how the preface reads:

"Statements in this site are substantiated with facts that will stand in a court of law. Informed Consent requires a flow of clear, accurate, unfiltered information. Click on the hyperlinked sections to direct you to primary sources such as CDC, WHO, FDA documents. Anyone trying to take down this site will be named as codefendant in Nuremberg 2.0 for being an accomplice to crimes against humanity. That includes social media. Lawyers are standing by."

This document contains all the ammunition you will need, including forms to submit to schools, universities, or employers that pretend to "require" your compliance: No Jab For Me




Sunday, May 9, 2021

The Brain God Gave You

 

Previously: The Book of Abraham Controversy Finally Laid to Rest

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.” -Galileo Galilei

One of the more encouraging signs I see lately is the growing number of members of the church who are refusing to blindly follow church leaders who are teaching contrary to the will of God. 


I particularly have in mind here apostle Dale Renlund's announcement in December that "wearing a face covering is a sign of Christlike love for our brothers and sisters."

You'll pardon me for wondering how he thinks that's supposed to work.  Before he was selected to be an apostle, Renlund's day job was as a cardiologist. I assume he used to perform heart surgery in that capacity, and I expect he has probably worn face masks during those operations. Is he extrapolating the wearing of a protective mask while performing an operation as somehow comparable to preventing the spread of infection to random people outside the operating room?  Or is he simply suggesting that when we are seen wearing face masks, our brothers and sisters will somehow get the message that we care about them? 

It makes more sense if we're wearing them as mere symbols, because there are no scientific studies that show face masks are effective in preventing the spread of infection. Studies have shown that, outside healthcare facilities, face masks are are essentially useless in stopping the spread of infections. And they do very little good inside those facilities as well.  Since Renlund is a cardiologist, one would expect him to be up to speed on the science in this area.  So, what would make Renlund decide to put on the dumb guy hat and demonstrate to the whole world that he doesn't understand how science works?

To the scientists who have actually run studies on this stuff, Renlund's pronouncement borders on the ridiculous.  Here is what the New England Journal of Medicine had to say:

"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection." -Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era, New England Journal of Medicine May 21, 2020

That study was compiled by five medical professionals who hold multiple degrees, and it contains 92 supporting citations which will direct the reader to actual research and scientific studies to support their thesis. Dale Renlund would be aware that the New England Journal of Medicine is one of the world's most prestigious medical journals.  Still, since he is now retired from medicine I suppose he can be excused for not keeping up with the latest science. But I don't think the Lord will look favorably on him for invoking His name to promote superstition in the name of religion. 

And that's what the science concludes: that the wearing of face masks to ward off disease represents the triumph of superstition over science. There's is no other way to look at it.

That NEJM report was written out of concerns for hospital personnel -notably nurses and support staff- who were concerned about contracting COVID-19, given the hysteria promoted in the early weeks last year by the news media, which, you'll recall, greatly exaggerated the dangers of the virus. (It was going to spread and multiply until it killed pretty much everyone, in case you've forgotten.)

While it's true the virus poses some risk to hospital personnel, it's not likely to be fatal as previously believed.  And it won't be a problem to everyone on staff even if directly exposed, and there's almost no risk of healthy persons who do not work in a medical facility being exposed and winding up on an intubator (remember those?)  As the report clarifies, significant exposure to COVID-19 is defined as "face to face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (some say 10 to 30 minutes.) [Emphasis mine.]

Here's the key takeaway for those who do not spend time inside a medical facility:

"The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic."

Remember how this report laid out the truth in its second paragraph? "We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection." The scientific evidence on this topic has never changed, regardless of what you have been told by politicians, news media, or religious leaders.  You should especially question the bureacrats who walk around with near-meaningless titles like "Public Health Official" because they are bought-and-paid-for shills of the political class and they never cite the science they pretend to rely on when telling you what you have to do.

When did you see Dr. Tony Fauci cite a research study when doling out more of his unsupported opinions on why you can't have a life but he can do whatever he wants?   Well, it did happen once that I know of.  The one and only time I ever saw Fauci's name on a bona fide research paper was in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine itself, where he was one of three MDs who correctly predicted that the expected pandemic would turn out to be little different than a severe flu the likes of which  Americans experienced once per decade back in the nineteen fifties and sixties:

"If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively." Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., H. Clifford Lane, M.D., and Robert R. Redfield, M.D.-Covid-19: Navigating the Uncharted; New England Journal of Medicine February 28. 2020. (Emphasis added.)

It's looking like the early prediction of Fauci and his colleagues may end up being closer to the truth by the time all this pans out, as the actual number of people who died "from" Covid (as opposed to the many thousands deceptively counted as having died "with" Covid) is a tiny, tiny percentage. The great majority of the larger number died from heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, pneumonia, and obesity, as well as various other illnesses it's not uncommon for people to die from. Those massive numbers of fatalities were only counted as Covid deaths because there was money to be made by inflating the numbers.

Fauci was much more conservative in his estimates that time he published in the NEJM than he is whenever he gets a TV camera pointed at him today.  He knew that in the Journal his conclusions would be peer reviewed. So if Fauci were to actually publish, in a peer-reviewed journal, some hyperbolic nonsense about how "it's likely" that if one mask is effective, then two or more "might be" even better when his peers are well aware of the studies that show masks are not effectve at all - I expect he would have been laughed out of the fraternity.  Fauci knows full well that when he was writing for his peers he had to carefully stick to the science, but when spouting off in front of the cameras (where no reporter ever seems to ask him what sources he's citing) he can get away with the most egregious exaggerations as long as he prefaces his comments with qualifiers such as "I think," or "maybe," or "it's likely," or "I guess it's possible."

You should know there are quite a number of medical professionals who have been critical of Fauci for engaging in self-promotion when he could have been making a difference.  But you never hear of them because Fauci has star power and all they have is years of experience treating patients.  Why should Fauci care when others less well-known than he is are critical of him? He's the highest paid employee in the entire U.S. government. That makes him too rich and too famous to care. 


Very Superstitious, Writing's On The Wall
Let's get back to that paper from the New England Journal of Medicine that tells us masks offer very little if no protection against an infection  If this is true, why do people buy into the fraud?  More to the point, why are hospital workers, who one would think would know better, so intent on wearing them even in situations when wearing them isn't even remotely necessary?

Well, the short answer is they've been scared by the non-stop media propaganda telling them how deadly and contagious this virus is.  When people are bombarded with a lie long enough and often enough, they not only come to believe the lie, but to embrace it as the truth. When people allow fear to overtake them they lose the capacity for critical thinking. They become more willing to go along with whatever they're told to do in order to "get back to normal."  In a word, they move from being scientific in their approach to becoming supersitious:

"First and foremost, a mask is a core component of the personal protective equipment (PPE) clinicians need when caring for symptomatic patients with respiratory viral infections, in conjunction with gown, gloves, and eye protection. Masking in this context is already part of routine operations for most hospitals. What is less clear is whether a mask offers any further protection in health care settings in which the wearer has no direct interactions with symptomatic patients..."

From the familiar tools of their profession, the authors eventually show the gradual slide from the scientific method into something decidedly less rational: 

"...It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask...but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis." (New England Journal of Medicine, ibid)

Do you see how easy it is for otherwise rational beings to go from a scientific mindset to one ruled by the superstitious need for a talisman in order to feel safe?  A "talisman," according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is an object supposed to have occult or magic powers, something "worn as an amulet to avert evil...a thing that acts as a charm or achieves remarkable results." 

I can think of few things falsely assumed to "achieve remarkable results" than a silly piece of cloth worn across the face that is somehow thought to have sufficient magical powers that microscopic viruses will find it impossible to make their way between the comparatively large spaces between the threads.  "Talisman" is the right word to describe this insane superstition.  In an earlier age, a talisman would have been something the local witch doctor would advise you to wear around your neck in order to protect you from bad juju. You've heard the analogy: expecting viruses to be stopped by a cloth or paper mask is like putting up a chain link fence and hoping to keep out a swarm of mosquitoes. 

Face masks are not only useless, they are worse than useless, because the side pressing against your nose and mouth can't help but get more and more moist with bacteria and redirect more and more carbon dioxide back into your lungs at a time when what your lungs need more than anything is pure oxygen.  The only thing I can think of more dangerous than a grown person wearing a mask is when a grown person forces a child to wear a mask.  That does not just border on child abuse, that is child abuse.  If you're looking forward to having a child with some serious health issues down the road, just keep it up.

In order for you to catch the virus in the grocery store or anywhere else, you would have to come in close contact for at least 10 to 30 minutes with someone who was visibly exhibiting flu-like symptoms, and that person would have to cough or sneeze directly into your face, in which case even if you were wearing a mask around your nose and mouth, those juicy little droplets would spray directly into your eyes anyway.  So tell me again what good you thought wearing that mask around your mouth was gonna do if you aren't also wearing a scuba mask? 

I don't know about you, but in my entire lifetime not once has any person over the age of two ever coughed or sneezed directly in my face.  I now live in Northern Idaho, so things may be different in these parts from where you live, but ever since the "pandemic" became a thing, I have not seen any rampant outbreak of sneezing and coughing among the populace at any time when I was interacting out among the locals.  I did once sees a congressman on TV lower his mask like a four-year-old so he could sneeze directly into his hand, but that just demonstrates that he was too dumb to realize the entire purpose of wearing a mask in the first place is if you're going to sneeze, the mask is there to catch all that snot, you slobbering moron. 

But that's a politician.  We expect them to be stupid.  At any rate, there was never any danger of my contracting a virus from that guy because I keep myself more than six feet away from politicians at all times just as a matter of principle. 


But I digress. 

We were talking about Dale Renland, Weren't We?
Assuming Renland is sold on wearing face masks on account of he's used to wearing them when performing surgery, you may find this of interest: It turns out there is some debate among medical experts as to whether some members of a surgical team even need to wear masks at all, given that the only kind of mask that actually provides a modicum of protection, the N95, sometimes has the nasty side effect of making the surgeon less competent due to the restricted ability to breathe through those damn things.  This means the surgeon experiences restricted oxygen to the brain at the very time he needs to have all his wits and faculties at the ready. This is no time for the doctor to start feeling woozy.

So there is now a debate in some quarters over whether masks should be abandoned, or at least made optional by some team members during some operations. It remains to be seen whether surgeons themselves will ever decide to give them up, but already some anasthesiologists were the first to opt out:

"When introduced a century ago, the purpose of the surgical facemask was to provide protection for the patient from surgical wound infections. But is there evidence that face masks prevent wound infections? A recent review concluded that it is not clear whether face masks prevent surgical wound infections, and the scientific evidence for this practice is weak and insufficient.  Questioning the efficacy of surgical face masks, an established routine in operating rooms worldwide, is clearly controversial given the tradition of the practice. Recognizing the lack of sound scientific evidence, we have changed facemask routines in several units at the Karolinska University Hospital." (Is Routine Use of a Face Mask Necessary in the Operating Room?  Anesthesiology December 2010, Vol. 113, 1447.)

Of course that was a decade ago, before rationality was displaced by fear of the unknown.  It wouldn't surprise me to learn that these sensible polcies have now been reversed, not because the science has suddenly discovered that masks block tiny viruses, but because there has been a sudden change in the zeitgeist.

I think we can all agree that whether or not face masks should be required on members of surgical teams, at the very least protective screens should be mandatory in all hospital galleries after the tragic Junior Mint incident of 1993:


Does God Want You Following The Leaders?

I suppose some dyed-in-the wool Brethrenites in the church will point out that all this talk of "evidence" and the "scientific method" is moot because Brother Renlund made it clear that when he came up with that odd idea about a face covering demonstrating Christ-like love, he was careful to note he was not speaking as a cardiologist, but as an apostle.  Well, unfortunately that doesn't make it any better. A "clarification" like that only raises more difficult questions, such as why in the world would a guy with a position of authority blurt out such an absurd opinion? Didn't it occur to him to first seek the guidance of the Lord before invoking Christ's name in such a flippant manner?

Certainly Brother Renlund must be aware that many latter-day saints will immediately assume that because of his title and station in the Church, he must certainly be speaking on behalf of the Lord.  And sure enough, that's exactly what has happened. 

Although a growing number of members have, like me, read the science and concluded that they would prefer to follow the science rather than blindly follow politicians and media personalities, a separate faction is accusing these sincere believers of sinning against the Church.  And what, you may ask, is that sin? Refusing to follow the leaders.

I think these pro-mask zealots would be hard-pressed to find anything in scripture that would indicate God has declared that anyone should follow any church leader.  That's one of those false tradtions that keeps tripping Mormons up and eventually results in the Church having to frantically backpedal away from it.  The only instance I can find in scripture that one could possibly interpret as a suggestion that members should be  "following" a particular prophet is in D&C 21:4 where the Lord tells His congregation that they should "heed" the words Joseph speaks.  But look closer.  We are not to give heed to Josephs's words simply because Joseph holds the title of a prophet;  we are to heed the words Joseph speaks exactly as he receives them from the Lord. 

So it isn't Joseph's words we are to heed; it is the exact words he receives from the Lord. That is what we should be giving heed to.  We certainly are not to "follow" Joseph, but instead to heed the words he speaks which he received from the mouth of God Himself.  To "heed" means to "give consideration to."  It does not mean you are to blindly follow the speaker simply because the speaker has a title in front of his name.  Joseph himself, who we know was ordained of God because we have the documents to prove it, warned the saints to stop depending on him because that was causing them to be darkened in their minds. The last thing he wanted was followers.

Do you think it's possible for the members today to become darkened in their minds if they blindly comply with the words of a random church leader who did not even pretend to be speaking the words God put in his mouth?  I don't think Jesus would take kindly to that. To promote the wearing of face masks as some peculiar token of your devotion to Christ contradicts all reason, logic, and common sense.

It was this tradition of blindly following church leaders that has gotten us into so much trouble.  The Church is still trying to dig itself out of the mess promulgated by Brigham Young and every president who came after him that had us all promoting the idea that God had declared the African people to be grossly inferior to the rest of us.  It was just assumed by all of us -including me as a missionary in the mid-seventies- that God had given Brigham Young a revelation to that effect.  This tradition we have of "following the leaders" no matter what they say has forced the Church to rapidly backpedal away from statements such as this:

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind . . . Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 290).
We now know Brigham had received no revelation on this, that Brigham Young was a product of his time who carried with him the same unwarranted prejudices of a good many misguided Christians of his day.  Why haven't the members learned from that mistake? 

Yes, I am aware that the current president of the Church has made a show of taking the vaccine, and he did so as an example to all the members, obviously hoping they would do the same.  But I suppose it doesn't occur to some of these Brethrenites that those who have chosen not to take the vaccine have come to that decision after weighing the overwhelming evidence that is now coming forth exposing these experimental "vaccines" to have been untested and in many cases quite dangerous.  They have prayed for guidance as to whether they should take that jab. Why would they want to follow the president of the Church if the Lord tells them otherwise?

One of the strangest things I've seen lately is the comments under the Salt Lake Tribune stories where those who favor masks, lockdowns, and vaccines are convinced these think-for-themselves members have only taken their contrary stands because they chose to follow Donald Trump as their prophet.  But this shows a mountain of ignorance on the part of the pro-vaxxers.  The reality is most of those who have decided to forgo the needle have not made that choice because of any political leanings.  The guy you think these people worship is the same guy who irresponsibly fast-tracked those untested vaccines, and he has quite recently encouraged everyone to take the shot in spite of the overwhelming evidence that accepting that shot would be akin to playing Russian Roulette with one's health.

The people you criticize for "not following the prophet" are most decidedly not following Donald Trump in this matter.  If anything, they are angry at him. They are vigorously rejecting Trump's counsel, just as they are rejecting the counsel of men who put forth their own unsupportable opinions without consulting the science and without having importuned for a single revelation from the Lord in order to make certain they're not in the wrong. 

I'll have more to say about the so-called "vaccines" at a later date.  For now I wanted to focus on what the science says about the wearing of face masks in public, and why the Lord does not bless those who blindly obey politicians merely because there has been a concerted push by the those same politicians to get everyone on board. God gave you a brain because he expects you to use it, to seek the truth and not simply do what those in power tell you you must do. 

I follow the Lord and I follow science.  What I don't follow is people pushing pseudo-science and people pretending to speak for the Lord who have not been privy to His counsel.  The former is unscientific and the latter is blasphemy.


When you believe in things
That you don't understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain't the way.
-Stevie Wonder

                                                                   *****

Related Posts:

How Not Wearing a Mask Will Eternally Damn You is a recent post written by my friend and fellow blogger over at Latter-Day Truth.  LD has an annoying habit of writing pieces I wish I had written, so don't miss this.

Not Quite The Same
Some people reading this might object to my position that the general authorities are not authorized to simply speak and have their words accepted as doctrine every time. This explains how the Lord works through revelations spoken in HIS words and His alone.

Muh Muh Muh My Corona Part One: Science Is Your friend
This is the first part of my classic study on the virus, the first of which was published on March 22nd of last year. The facts recorded then still hold up.  You can follow this post to get to all four.

I'll be talking about the dangers of the covid "vaccines" next time, along with a ranting screed about the dangers of The Brethren talking out of their butts and trying to pass their opinions off as the will of God.  In the meantime, if you have the stomach and the stamina for it, I'll leave you with this collection of horror stories that have accumulated in just the past few weeks.

UPDATE:
As it happens, no sooner had I posted today's issue than Denver Snuffer also weighed in on the the odd way in which the covid vaccine is being promoted.  In this short piece Denver, who is an attorney,  reminds you that because the vaccine has been neither tested nor approved, if you take it and experience death or disability, the onus is on you. You cannot sue the manufacturer, the pharmacy, your doctor, or the government, even if they all assured you the vaccine was perfectly safe, because the law assumes you knew the dangers and took the risk anyway.  Read it HERE.

Saturday, April 10, 2021

The Book of Abraham Controversy Finally Laid To Rest


In recent years there have been a handful of (what purported to be) scholarly dissertations on the Book of Abraham that strongly suggested that document was a fraud. 

According to that received narrative, given what is now known regarding Egyptology, Joseph's translation from the papyrus could not possibly have been accurate.  The conclusion is that the Book of Abraham was a fake; Joseph Smith most certainly made it all up in his head.

I believe I've read most of these arguments and even watched the documentary that has been floating around, and I must say those arguments have been compelling.  Yet when I would actually go back and read the Book of Abraham, the contents of that book rang true to me. Although the naysayers seemed -at least on the surface- to have an almost airtight case against Joseph's work, I remained skeptical of their conclusions. There must be something missing, I decided, some element of the story I wasn't aware of.  Turns out I was right. 

Two weeks ago some 600 people pitched their tents at Aravada Springs, Nevada for a gathering put on by some of the local members of the loosely defined "Remnant" movement.  Denver Snuffer was invited to speak at this informal conference, and his topic centered around the provenance of the Book of Abraham. That talk lasted almost four hours, with a break halfway through for dinner.   Trust me when I say the evidence presented was eye-opening.  

I'm not going to try to summarize Denver's presentation here; instead I'll simply post the video below.  If  you have ever had questions about the validity of the Book of Abraham, the answer to those questions is simple. But the explanation takes some time to lay out, so it's best if you sit back and allow Denver to the time to walk you through it.  Denver has also provided a complete transcript which contains copious footnotes and citations.  I'm posting a link to document below as well.  

In point of fact, if there is anything fraudulent about the Book of Abraham, it's that the translation in the "authorized" set of scriptures Mormons have been given starts off with an introduction that was not written by Joseph Smith, but later added by Willard Richards under the direction of his cousin, Brigham Young, neither of whom knew what the hell they were talking about.  (I've included a scan of that introduction in the upper left-hand corner of this page.) Willard implies something about the translation not found anywhere in the text of the Book of Abraham itself, as you'll see when you read or listen to Denver's explication. That misleading introduction, which Mormons tend to accept as an integral part of the scripture, has been responsible for sending both anti-Mormon scholars and Mormon apologists off in the wrong direction every time. Watch the video and you'll see.




 You can download the transcript (in Word format) by clicking HERE

Extra Bonus Material
If four hours on the Book of Abraham is not enough for you, also presented at that conference was a fascinating exposition by Vaughn Hughes titled The Electric Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon. That one lasts over two hours.  Although I have not yet watched Vaughn's presentation in full (I'm still going over Denver's footnotes), I am quite familiar with the subject matter, and I count Vaughn Hughes one of my closest friends and a brilliant teacher.  Find the time to watch this one. It will give you a whole new way of looking at the universe -a universe Abraham understood far better than most do today.

 

The Electric Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon



In closing, don't forget to buy my T-shirts!

Just kidding. I don't sell T-shirts. But I do have another blog that's entirely different from this one. Check  it out sometime.