Censored Dr. Simone Gold discusses China Virus

[flyingfool]

some interesting data that's not being released by the media

https://prezi.com/i/gw4zv2c_cwrb/anecdotal-experiences-cvv/

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/16/norway-warns-possible-covid-19-vaccine-risks-frail/

Edited February 10, 2021 by flyingfool

[Bash74]

I go with, if you don't watch the news you are uninformed, if you do watch the news you are misinformed. This goes for all media.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

[Donstar]

14 hours ago, Bash74 said:

I go with, if you don't watch the news you are uninformed, if you do watch the news you are misinformed. This goes for all media.
 

If you take your information from one source you may be misinformed.    Amassing information from  many and diverse sources will increase your chances of becoming informed.  We can all remember our lessons on adding a significant and diverse bibliography to our research papers.  Technology has not changed the need for critical thinking and has actually reduced our excuses for not being informed.  Some of us are guilty of simply echoing the statements of a respected individual.  I got into a school yard fight when I was 8 years old in an effort to support the fact that Fords were better than Chevys.  The source of my information, my father, was always right!  

[Grumpy Bear]

Faith and the Truth:

 

Paul at Hebrews 11:1 and The Oxford Dictionary disagree on the definition of faith. 

 

Hebrews says, "Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities......"

 

While Oxford says: /feɪθ/ 1[uncountable] faith (in somebody/something) trust in someone's ability or knowledge; trust that someone or something will do what has been promised I have great faith in you—I know you'll do well. We've lost faith in the government's promises. Her friend's kindness has restored her faith in human nature.

 

The difference may not at first be obvious but in Paul's definition, faith is anything but blind. Faith that a thing is true must be assured with/by a demonstration of evidence. Oxford simply relies on a hoped based on a trust. Simply, it hinges on your willingness to believe in the presenter, his inclination to be truthful, to have accurate knowledge and faithfully present it!

 

The Oxford definition is the basis for the requirement in Biblical justice for more than one witness in the absence of unassailable evidence. Two if they are in agreement and three if they are not. Under that Divine Law conviction with but evidence of circumstance was impossible. Deuteronomy 19:15 states the law such, (ESV) “A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.

 

Thing about truth...it isn't dependent on your belief in IT or even on your need to, but belief without faith as Hebrews defines it, does not have an anchor and without an anchor you are driven about like a sailboat with neither rudder nor anchor never knowing your destination, never knowing your place.  

Edited February 11, 2021 by Grumpy Bear

[Bash74]

If you take your information from one source you may be misinformed.    Amassing information from  many and diverse sources will increase your chances of becoming informed.  We can all remember our lessons on adding a significant and diverse bibliography to our research papers.  Technology has not changed the need for critical thinking and has actually reduced our excuses for not being informed.  Some of us are guilty of simply echoing the statements of a respected individual.  I got into a school yard fight when I was 8 years old in an effort to support the fact that Fords were better than Chevys.  The source of my information, my father, was always right!  

I get information from different sources just none are news or media sources. For instance when in comes to Covid, I look at peer reviewed medical information with substantiated facts, information that is science only based, and talk to actually medical people with boots on the ground. Basically stay away from personal or emotional based information

When it comes to politics I don't pay attention to what is said, only what is written and submitted in an actual bill or legislation.

I don't need the actual media for any of this.

Its all about research and facts, and not the maybe, probably, could, possibly, or the I think or it's my opinion.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

[The Zip]

7 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Faith and the Truth:

 

Paul at Hebrews 11:1 and The Oxford Dictionary disagree on the definition of faith. 

And I respectfully disagree with both of their definitions.  But that's ok, 'cause I'm not a biblical scholar.  To me, faith is the lack of fear.  If man had faith instead of being fearful after seeing the wind and waves, he would have remained on the top of the water.  

 

That's what HE said....

 

[Grumpy Bear]

21 minutes ago, The Zip said:

And I respectfully disagree with both of their definitions.  But that's ok, 'cause I'm not a biblical scholar.  To me, faith is the lack of fear.  If man had faith instead of being fearful after seeing the wind and waves, he would have remained on the top of the water.  

 

That's what HE said....

 

 

It's not uncommon for people to dismiss or simply not believe the Bible for one reason or another but I must say this is the first time I've ever heard anyone who's first language is English dismiss Oxford. 

 

oiener doeon eoando vbksoz boitnat boeijnos di iaidn aoignad 

 

 

Matt 14:28-31: (NWT) 

 

Peter answered him: “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you over the waters.” He said: “Come!” So Peter got out of the boat and walked over the waters and went toward Jesus. But looking at the windstorm, he became afraid. And when he started to sink, he cried out: “Lord, save me!” Immediately stretching out his hand, Jesus caught hold of him and said to him: “You with little faith, why did you give way to doubt?”

 

What is it Jesus says Peters faith gave way to? Doubt...not fear. I doubt I will be given a fortune today but I don't fear it.

 

Fear was the distraction that allowed doubt to unseat his faith in Christ, but not the cause. Once his focus was restored, "Jesus caught hold of him" they walked back to the boat. That's what HE said.   So I repeat:

 

oiener doeon eoando vbksoz boitnat boeijnos di iaidn aoignad

 

No idea? Why is that?

 

2 Timothy 3:16 says: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousnes (KJV)

 

Oxford on the etymology of faith says: 

 

 

faith (n.)
mid-13c., faith, feith, fei, fai "faithfulness to a trust or promise; loyalty to a person; honesty, truthfulness," from Anglo-French and Old French feid, foi "faith, belief, trust, confidence; pledge" (11c.), from Latin fides "trust, faith, confidence, reliance, credence, belief," from root of fidere "to trust,"from PIE root *bheidh- "to trust, confide, persuade." For sense evolution, see belief. Accommodated to other English abstract nouns in -th (truth, health, etc.).

From early 14c. as "assent of the mind to the truth of a statement for which there is incomplete evidence," especially "belief in religious matters" (matched with hope and charity). Since mid-14c. in reference to the Christian church or religion; from late 14c. in reference to any religious persuasion.

And faith is neither the submission of the reason, nor is it the acceptance, simply and absolutely upon testimony, of what reason cannot reach. Faith is: the being able to cleave to a power of goodness appealing to our higher and real self, not to our lower and apparent self. [Matthew Arnold, "Literature & Dogma," 1873]
From late 14c. as "confidence in a person or thing with reference to truthfulness or reliability," also "fidelity of one spouse to another." Also in Middle English "a sworn oath," hence its frequent use in Middle English oaths and asseverations (par ma fay, mid-13c.; bi my fay, c. 1300).

 

So how do we reconcile this? 

 

We forget that the words we use today do not always have the same meaning the word had when coined nor possibly the meaning it has in the language of origin.  Think of the word Gay and it will come to you. 

 

The Book Insight to the Scriptures makes this note on the original Greek the scripture is written in: 

 

FAITH. The word “faith” is translated from the Greek pistis, primarily conveying the thought of confidence, trust, firm persuasion. Depending on the context, the Greek word may also be understood to mean “faithfulness” or “fidelity.”

 

Oxford relied on the meaning as it is derived from DOGMA or the teachings of a (some) religion.   Paul relied on being "born along by Gods Spirit". (2 Peter 1:P21) To provide what God meant by faith. As the say, straight from the horses mouth. 

 

Neither in incorrect in it's context and time. But this is not the point nor the direction I made that post in. To reiterate: 

 

9 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

....belief without faith as Hebrews defines it, does not have an anchor and without an anchor you are driven about like a sailboat with neither rudder nor anchor never knowing your destination, never knowing your place.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

   

[Grumpy Bear]

As any of this pertains to the OP's title.

Stories are just that, stories. 

 

To have faith that the story is true, for me at least, requires some form of verification that would adhere to the principles outlined before in Deuteronomy 19:15......

 

9 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

in the absence of unassailable evidence.

The beauty of the quoted law is that it forced one to be accountable to God who you can't lie to nor escape and it removed blood guilt from the human judge. 

 

This kids is what a person is backed into when lied to from every front for every unrighteous reason.