Should Christians Be Wearing Face Masks?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- In an effort to stop the spreading of COVID19, mandates and strong suggestions for face masks have become common around the world. But do we need to wear them? Are we free to refuse face masks?
#PracticalApologist #FaceMasks #COVID19
![KAYTRANADA - Witchy (feat. Childish Gambino) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jGK3YVmGZ3Y/mqdefault.jpg)
Is it love when what is being done is being based on emotions and fear and not truth science?
I don’t think it’s about serving others at this point though...
I think it’s the catering to a clear political agenda.
There’s a vast difference between caring for your neighbor and being mandated to do something when the “something” isn’t that bad, and most of what’s happening doesn’t even make sense.
24% effective for a disease that is 98%of people recover from..fools all of them
To me, the mask is the opposite of helping our neighbor. To hide ourselves from one another, and stay away from each other is not what Christ would do. The mask is permanent. Would Jesus wear a mask for the rest of His life? THAT’S the question. Not “if He would temporarily for two weeks, wear a mask.” We are over a year now. No, I don’t think He would just Hide Himself from the people. The whole Bible would be different if He was a masked Christ. None would believe.
Many are saying that masks and vaccines must be the "mark of the beast." Most Evangelicals today see little or no room for the United States in Bible prophecy.
"Then I saw another *beast* (beast = nation; Daniel 7:25), coming up out of the *earth* ..." (Revelation 13:11a). The *earth* would certainly represent a population sparsely populated since the *waters* can represent masses of people: "The *waters* which you saw, "were ... peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues" (Revelations 17:15). So, what sparsely populated nation "coming up out the earth" formed into two powers?
Let's now look at the totality of Revelation 13:11 -- "And I beheld another nation *coming up* out of the earth; and he had *two horns* like a *lamb," and he spoke like a dragon." *Horns* represents strength and power. *Two Horns:* Civil & Religious -- "a State without a King, and a Church without a Pope" (civil and religious), was the great attraction for the pilgrims fleeing Europe. The words "*coming up* out of the earth" (Greek, anabatnon) means "to grow up like a plant out of the earth".
So what nation arose in an unsettled area of the world professing lamb-like principles? Only one, America was born with aspirations of liberty and justice for all. It was to be a republic not a monarchy. This kingdom has TWO horns (civil & religious), and described as lamb-like as in Christian qualities. The final issues spoken about in the symbolic language of the book of Revelation revolve around freedom of conscience, of choice, in relation to worship. This will have NOTHING to do with masks and vaccines, but I do know what law will be enacted, so do millions more. I'm not alone on an island, if you will. If you're interested in exploring this amazing prophetic line further, let me know.
"Religion" will manipulate the power of the civil government to force worship upon the multitudes. But what kind of forced worship? Just a taste. blessings.
Sadly, the conservative religio-politico right of Christ's day (the Pharisees) refused God's word to "love thy neighbor". The same is true today. May God soften hearts that want to be softened, in Jesus, Amen.
Excellent comments, thank God in Christ for His word.
It's just your opinion 🤷 not everything in the Law is given by God. The problem is with the spirit of fear. That Christians are afraid to admit 😳 love, power and self control is really missing, Fear comes Not from God. Fear is very contiguous not controversial.
Is Blood of Christ unsufficient?
Can you make a video about the verse that talks about women being quiet in church please?
Can you make a video about the passage which talks about judging angels please?
A much needed video. Thank you!
But what if i government is taking it to far
The problem with your position is you assume masks are safe and effective, yet there is now plenty of evidence that they are neither. In fact, there is evidence that they are harmful, so forcing people to wear them is essentially unlawful.
There is no peer reviewed scientific evidence to claim that wearing a facemask is harmful. There is no law saying they cannot be required. They are neither harmful nor unlawful.
As far as how effective masks are, I agree that statistics are showing that masks are only having a minor impact on the reduction of transmission. But shouldn't we, as Christians who are meant to consider the needs of others before we consider our own, be willing to do this if it helps save lives?
You are descriminating if you as a business, refuse to let an unmasked person in. Read 2nd Corinthians 13:17.
Can you clarify a bit, here? 2 Corinthians 13 only has 14 verses. There's no such thing as 2 Corinthians 13:17. I tried some other combinations, but still not sure what you're meaning for me to read. (1 Corinthians 13 only has 13 verses, 2 Corinthians 13:7 doesn't seem to fit what you're trying to say, etc)
What verse are you meaning for me to look at?
Not contagious illness but rather dangerous illness
Thanks for discussing this, Steve!
Executive orders are not "laws of the land" which must be passed by the legislature. Executive orders are limited to the people who consent/agree to obey company policy of the government agency which does not apply to everyone. You don't have to wear a mask for lots of reasons... it's harmful; it promotes and creates fear in others; it scientifically does not prevent coronavirus according to over a dozen studies reviewed by the CDC.
I never said "law of the land", nor does Romans. It says "governing authorities", which definitely applies to government mandates. As per your claims about the masks being harmful per the CDC and WHO, can you post links from reputable sources? I haven't seen that at all.
What I have seen are the CDC's mask recommendations, here: www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html
And WHO's mask recommendations, here: ruclips.net/video/esM_ePHn0aw/видео.html
Both recommending people to wear cloth masks in public settings.
@@ThePracticalApologist You don't have to say "law of the land". You implied it by saying "governing authorities". Here's an absurd example... If the Queen of England sends you a demand letter for payment of a bill under penalty of law... are you going to pay it? You shouldn't pay or feel obligated to obey any command or law from a "governing authority" if they don't have jurisdiction over you. There are thousands of jurisdictions. It's up to you to know what jurisdiction you are in and whether a law applies to you. We don't just submit if someone gives us an order. If someone breaks into your "castle"-home and imposes new government under threat of force... are you going to just sit there and let him do that? No. If you are going to loot a house you must first "bind the strong man" because you are going to have a huge fight from the man of the house. We have an obligation to protect our property/stewardship and our life and the life and property of our neighbor which is why Christians should be involved in government and be ready to defend the Biblical principles we are instructed to obey. If you don't know the law and how it's rightfully made, then you are probably going to obey just about anything someone tells you. Paul didn't obey; nor did Daniel; nor Shadrach, Meshach and Abidnego; nor the "wise men"; nor Moses; nor Rahab; nor David; nor Jesus... the list goes on and on of people who did not obey or submit to "government order".
Reputable sources?????? I'm chuckling. The Bible is the only reliable source. Scientific studies and journals are admittedly suspect and frequently fraudulent or misleading since companies fund and control their own studies for their own products. The CDC has been caught in numerous scandals including hiding data that the MMR vaccine increases the probability that black boys will develop autism (Thank you Dr. Thomson - whistleblower). The government frequently experiments on the American people without their knowledge (over 200 times in congressional testimony) 90% of main stream news is owned and controlled by just six corporations where we see "fake news" and agendas, so even though we don't have "reliable sources", I still use them, and I will give you some.
blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/07/20/face-masks-dont-work-study-published-by-your-very-own-cdc/
From the CDC linked above in May 2020, “We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility…”
The CDC and WHO recommend wearing a mask but they also admit that there is no scientific evidence the mask is effective in preventing coronavirus. They are busy trying to manufacture "studies" to sell this narrative that if it helps even in the tiniest amount then it is worth doing. This is a "noble lie" or a story that sounds good but is not the real reason behind something.
Here's another source... (They are being hammered by leftists to remove this information from the internet because it doesn't support their agenda)
Center for Infectious Disease and Research Policy
www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data?fbclid=IwAR1zw5RO4z_NePM6GZwHB0pOjs-a_v5bY2C_DO0gGBWapVk8_AAyNnBI_iY
"COMMENTARY: Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data
Data lacking to recommend broad mask use
"We do not recommend requiring the general public who do not have symptoms of COVID-19-like illness to routinely wear cloth or surgical masks because:
"
"There is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission"
The devil is in the details, so if you look closely at what the CDC, WHO, etc... are saying, you will see they are playing semantic games and playing loose with "science" and "studies". The emperor has no clothes.
These are great articles, thanks so much for linking them! They were also QUITE the read to read in completion, haha! It seems like some quotes have been taken out of context, though. After reading both in their entirety, I found several important statements.
Your first article is linked to a blog. I do not consider blogs or other opinion pieces as reliable scientific sources. BUT, the blog links to a peer reviewed article from the CDC! Per that article (my emphasis added):
"In lower-income settings, it is more likely that *reusable cloth masks* will be used rather than disposable medical masks because of cost and availability. There are still few uncertainties in the practice of face mask use, such as who should wear the mask and how long it should be used for. *In theory, transmission should be reduced the most if both infected members and other contacts wear masks*, but compliance in uninfected close contacts could be a problem. *Proper use of face masks is essential because improper use might increase the risk for transmission*. Thus, education on the proper use and disposal of used face masks, including hand hygiene, is also needed." (Section on Face Masks, final paragraph)
"However, as with hand hygiene, face masks might be able to reduce the transmission of other infections and therefore have value in an influenza pandemic when healthcare resources are stretched." (section titled "Discussion", third paragraph)
"It is essential to note that the mechanisms of person-to-person transmission in the community have not been fully determined. Controversy remains over the role of transmission through fine-particle aerosols. Transmission by indirect contact requires transfer of viable virus from respiratory mucosa onto hands and other surfaces, survival on those surfaces, and successful inoculation into the respiratory mucosa of another person. All of these components of the transmission route have not been studied extensively. The impact of environmental factors, such as temperature and humidity, on influenza transmission is also uncertain. These uncertainties over basic transmission modes and mechanisms hinder the optimization of control measures." (section titled "Discussion", fourth paragraph)
For the first article, the conclusion on face masks, specifically, is that there was no evidence that wearing surgical face masks in a family home setting would reduce transmission of influenza. Cloth face masks should reduce transmission, in theory, but that was not studied. Overall, there were many factors not studied, and there are still many variables.
And I think the purpose of the second article may have been misunderstood. It isn't suggesting that masks are not effective and shouldn't be worn, but that masks aren't an effective replacement for social distancing.
Per the article:
"Wearing a cloth mask or face covering could be better than doing nothing, but we simply don’t know at this point. We have observed an evolution in the messaging around cloth masks, from an initial understanding that they should not be seen as a replacement for physical distancing to more recent messaging that suggests cloth masks are equivalent to physical distancing." (Section titled "Is wearing a face covering better than nothing?", first paragraph).
"Despite the current limited scientific data detailing their effectiveness, *we support the wearing of face coverings by the public* when mandated and when in close contact with people whose infection status they don't know." (Section titled "Do we support cloth mask wearing where mandated?")
The truth is that both of the scientific, peer reviewed articles linked support the wearing of cloth face masks by the general public.
I agree with this video. I wear a mask and social distance because of Roman's 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-25. The context of these passages seems to point at the sovereignty of God over the government. That being said, when I wear masks and social distance it causes me to glorify God because I'm thinking of Him being sovereign. If God is truly sovereign over the government and their decisions, what does a Christian's disobedience to the government's mandate (especially when it's not a sin) say about their belief that God is sovereign over the government?
do as you are told....your freedoms are gone and you gave them away freely...you are a fool
You lied about Leviticus 13:45, it never says wear a mask.
In the future, I'd recommend doing some more research before saying someone lied about something. I know I don't appreciate it. Maybe say something like, "I read Leviticus 13:45 and it doesn't say to wear a mask, can you clarify?"
With that being said, let's look at Leviticus 13:45. "“Anyone with such a defiling disease must wear torn clothes, let their hair be unkempt, cover the lower part of their face and cry out, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’" (NIV).
So, in the video, I don't say, "wear a mask", I say "wear a mouth covering". In the verse, contagious people are told they must "cover the lower part of their face". In the original Hebrew, this is a covering that specifically starts with the upper lip.
The original Hebrew command is to literally wear a mouth covering.
Hope that helps clarify things.
Can you make a video about the talking donkey please?
2:40 He says business have the right to discriminate as long as it's not against a specific people group. This is absolutely false. You can object for religious reasons and the business cannot discriminate against you. Here's proof. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 says “Sec. 202. All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from
discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or
national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any
law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political
subdivision thereof.
Sec. 203. No person shall (a) withhold, deny or attempt to withhold or deny, or deprive or
attempt to deprive, any person of any right or privilege secured by section 201 or 202, or
(b) intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any
person with the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by section 201
or 202, or (c) punish or attempt to punish any person for exercising or attempting to
exercise any right or privilege secured by section 201 or 202.”
Make a video that will inform and encourage the body of Christ to lovingly show people they don't have to be afraid of this propaganda.
Religious people are people groups. You cannot discriminate against group of people based on their religion. But I know of no verses that clearly tell Christians to not wear a face mask, specifically. Therefore it's not religious discrimination.
@@ThePracticalApologist Religious discrimination in this context is for a single person, not a people group. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to a business who discriminates against someone with a religious belief. If I believe I have religious reasons for not wearing a mask and I am discriminated against then it is religious discrimination.
Unless you're referring to a religion other than Christianity, I still don't see how it's discrimination against your faith.
@@ThePracticalApologist Civil Rights Act, Sec. 202. All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from
discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion...
If I'm denied service because I'm not wearing a mask, and any of my reasons for not wearing a mask are because I believe God doesn't want me to wear a mask, then if I inform the "establishment or place" that I have a religious objection to wearing the mask and they continue to "discriminate or segregate" or deny service then that is discrimination against me because of my religion and a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (my opinion). Keep in mind that I don't have to give a Biblical proof or reason to the "establishment or place". We have the protection to believe and not be discriminated against.
When someones life or health is at risk, your beliefs don't matter for a temporary small amount of time. It's not about YOU for the 100th fuc king time....
No