Who's fooling who?

[Gregory Matthews]

BlesedMan what you have suggested seems to fit The One Project.  Its central focus was Christ

 

[BlessedMan]

5 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

BlesedMan what you have suggested seems to fit The One Project.  Its central focus was Christ

 

unfortunately, IMO, the "music" and a few other things drown that out.

[JoeMo]

23 minutes ago, BlessedMan said:

unfortunately, IMO, the "music" and a few other things drown that out.

Sad commentary.  I attended a One Project gathering and was totally blessed.

[hch]

10 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

The Central Truth in a Simple Theology.--In every school established the most simple theory of theology should be taught. In this theory, the atonement of Christ should be the great substance, the central truth. The wonderful theme of redemption should be presented to the students.--Manuscript 156, 1898. {Ev 223.2} 

 There is one great central truth to be kept ever before the mind in the searching of the Scriptures--Christ and Him crucified. Every other truth is invested with influence and power corresponding to its relation to this theme. . . . The soul palsied by sin can be endowed with life only through the work wrought out upon the cross by the Author of our salvation.  {FLB 50.2} 

This is part of the Third Angel's message!

6 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

I am not saying redevelop the doctrines. I am saying start to do something better with them.

It will soon be too late. Pray that we will be ready for the out pouring of the Holy Spirit, when He comes. That will finish the work!

 

[Gregory Matthews]

BlessedMan:  Did you ever actually attend a TOP Gathering?  IOW, telling us that the TOP music drowned out Christ, did that come from your personal experience?   If you attended, which one did you attend?

 

[B/W Photodude]

3 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

IOW, telling us that the TOP music drowned out Christ, did that come from your personal experience?

A TOP meeting could have been without music and still it would not have been the place to be. There is much in TOP that is emergent church that one should stay far away.

Time and time again here I find the most amazing writings relative to the discussion in my own readings. Here is some selections from The Upward Look (EGW) from today:

There is a counterfeit Christianity in the world as well as a genuine Christianity. The true spirit of the man is manifested by the way in which he deals with his fellow man. We can ask the question, “Does he represent the character of Christ in spirit and action, or simply manifest the natural selfish traits of character that belong to the people of this world?” Profession weighs nothing with God. Before it is everlastingly too late for wrongs to be righted, let each one ask himself, “What am I?” It depends upon ourselves as to whether we shall form such characters as will constitute us one of God's royal family above.

If we would become Christlike, we must study Christ's character.... It is necessary that we should closely examine ourselves, and enquire, “Is this Christ's way? Would Christ pursue this course of action? What kind of an impression am I leaving upon the minds of those with whom I am connected? Shall I pursue a course of action that will weaken the confidence of anyone with whom I deal and cause them to think lightly of the Christianity that I profess? Shall I be uncourteous, un-Christlike, unmerciful toward the purchase of the blood of Christ?”

A new energy proceeding from beneath is taking possession of the whole synagogue of Satan, and a new life descending from heaven is taking possession of every human agent who is consecrated, devoted, and who is seeking to work the works of God....

I posted this recently here and no response from it, but consider the music produced by SDA pastors, one of whom is associated with TOP:

Four of the five members of this band are SDA pastors. 
One of them is Sam Leonard, part of the OneProject!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVpnxeUyUoo 

(Click into 1:50 of this video (or watch all of it!)and see if this is music you want in your church!)

Further info:

http://thegreatcontroversy.info/7-the-emerging-church-and.html

I seriously suggest that everyone listen to the talks by Janet Lundeen as she connected the dots to the emergent church and some of those who are leaders or speakers at TOP. Janet Lundeen actually did go to a TOP meeting and discussed the people around this movement. Some of them have behaved unkindly to people who believe in the historic Adventist teachings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPWCDfTrS3M

 

[Gregory Matthews]

While this may be a typo, I will suggest that it is more than a typo:  There is no Sam Leonard that has ever been connected with The One Project--unless you can  find someone who has attended a Gathering by that name.  However, a Sam  Leonor was one of the founders of TOP.

However, your post is important.  It illustrates my point that often TOP critics have been people who simply repeat 3rd hand gossip that they do not check out.  In some cases that gossip may have been true, but no longer is true.  in other cases the gossip is true in part (The name Sam is true), but false in part.

NOTE:  I have another comment to make about your post. But, I am taking steps to validate it before I post it, as I need to determine that it is true.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

In response to what Photodude posted, but not directly related to that post and with thanks to Spectrum and Lawrence Geraty, I post the following as to the new TOP:

Despite the decision a couple of years ago by the leaders of the One project to suspend their popular gospel weekend retreats in various cities around the world, they “tested the waters” by trying a new format February 16–17, 2020 (a Sunday and holiday Monday), in the Boulder SDA Church in Colorado. By any gauge, it proved to be a major success — so much so that at the end of the event, the leaders announced the next One Project will take place in Sydney, Australia, this coming October.

Chapter One of the One project (2010-2018) began with a prophetic voice and shifted to a pastoral movement. Chapter Two (beginning with the Boulder conference) returns with a prophetic voice. The theme of the Boulder meetings was “The Great Disruption: Jesus’ Unprecedented Confrontation with Politics, Theology, and Belonging.” The exploration of these three timely topics was evenly spread across the two days.

Sunday morning was devoted to “Politics” when Japhet De Oliveira, Tim Gillespie, and Alex Bryan led out. “Theology” was covered on Sunday afternoon by Paddy McCoy, Tacyana Nixon, and Andreas Beccai. “Belonging” was addressed Monday morning by Iki Taimi, Lisa Clark Diller, and Sam Leonor. “Voices of Hope” interviews took place Monday afternoon, first with a series of young professionals (Ashok Willmott, Emily Ellis, Katie Wagner, Tommy Tamaleaa, Niq Ruud, and Angel Castillo) who felt called to ministry, followed by a panel of the nine main speakers over the two days. They responded to questions posed digitally by participants.

Each day’s segment began with a call to worship led by praise teams from either Forest Lake Church in Florida or Kettering Church in Ohio.[/

[B/W Photodude]

17 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

While this may be a typo, I will suggest that it is more than a typo:  There is no Sam Leonard that has ever been connected with The One Project--unless you can  find someone who has attended a Gathering by that name.  However, a Sam  Leonor was one of the founders of TOP.

I misspelled his name. And it was a Leonor in the band. The article linked to covers Leonor thru his band and TOP activities. Tim Gillespie was also in this band.

The link:

http://thegreatcontroversy.info/7-the-emerging-church-and.html

has it as Leonor all the way thru.

My bad! Mispelled his name, but then people have mispelled my name a lot, but they had found the one they were looking for!

[Gregory Matthews]

So if you were to tell us that Ellen G Wilson and her husband James co-founded the SDA Church would you expect us to consider it a spelling error?  

My point is:  The critics of TOP often know very little about it and make no attempt to check their informstion out.

Note:  I am checking out something else in your post prior to podting on it.

 

 

[BlessedMan]

2 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Four of the five members of this band are SDA pastors. 
One of them is Sam Leonard, part of the OneProject!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVpnxeUyUoo 

(Click into 1:50 of this video (or watch all of it!)and see if this is music you want in your church!)

EXACTLY.

[BlessedMan]

1 hour ago, Gregory Matthews said:

In response to what Photodude posted, but not directly related to that post and with thanks to Spectrum and Lawrence Geraty, I post the following as to the new TOP:

when will people learn! We dont need yet another "program!" 

We dont need anymore herding of the sheeple into another prescribed burn.

This is just another distraction!

Edited February 21, 2020 by BlessedMan

[BlessedMan]

37 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

So if you were to tell us that Ellen G Wilson and her husband James co-founded the SDA Church would you expect us to consider it a spelling error?  

PERFECT adhominem with no basis in reality or truth.

[BlessedMan]

3 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

There is a counterfeit Christianity in the world as well as a genuine Christianity. The true spirit of the man is manifested by the way in which he deals with his fellow man. We can ask the question, “Does he represent the character of Christ in spirit and action, or simply manifest the natural selfish traits of character that belong to the people of this world?” Profession weighs nothing with God. Before it is everlastingly too late for wrongs to be righted, let each one ask himself, “What am I?” It depends upon ourselves as to whether we shall form such characters as will constitute us one of God's royal family above.

Quote

 

You don't have to listen to the 2.5 minute video clip taken from three songs, but just watching the band and the crowd should raise some serious questions, should it not? Sam Leonor is directly beyond Tim Gillespie (center) playing his base guitar. No doubt Sam Leonor played a part in getting the Big Face Grace band to participate with several others for this "fund raiser". Notice how the crowd is pulled into participating in the concert.

Since its inception, Big Face Grace has used its music as one of the modes of generating "discussion" and in presenting their "gospel" message. Several of the One Project organizers, including Sam Leonor and Tim Gillespie have participated in this vision. March 14, 2009, Big Face Grace performed on the La Sierra University campus for the purpose of raising funds for missions.

4 of 5 band members present were/are currently pastors in the Adventist Church. In 2009 Jason Hutchinson (guitars), Roy Ice (drums/vocals) Associate Pastor and College Chaplain at Pacific Union College; Sam Leonor (bass/vocals) Pastor at La Sierra University; Michael Knecht (guitars) Pastor at Crosswalk SDA Church in Redlands, CA; Tim Gillespie (vocals), Youth Pastor at Loma Linda University.

 

Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, (Ezekiel 22:26)

Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law. (Zech 3:4)

Very many feel impatient and jealous because they are frequently disturbed with warnings and reproofs which keep their sins before them. Says the True Witness: "I know thy works." The motives, the purposes, the unbelief, the suspicions and jealousies may be hid from men, but not from Christ. The True Witness comes as a counselor: "I counsel thee to buy of Me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous therefore, and repent. Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear My voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with Me. To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with My Father in His throne."  {3T 256.3}  
     
Those who are reproved by the Spirit of God should not rise up against the humble instrument. It is God, and not an erring mortal, who has spoken to save them from ruin. Those who despise the warning will be left in blindness to become self-deceived. But those who heed it, and zealously go about the work of separating their sins from them in order to have the needed graces, will be opening the door of their hearts that the dear Saviour may come in and dwell with them. This class you will ever find in perfect harmony with the testimony of the Spirit of God.  {3T 257.1} 

Edited February 21, 2020 by BlessedMan

[BlessedMan]

14 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Sad commentary.  I attended a One Project gathering and was totally blessed.

"feeling blessed" doesnt mean we actually have been.

[Gregory Matthews]

Folks, several of you and me, have side-tracked the discussion here.  This section was established as a special place where HCH could promote his views.  In this section he has been given a greater freedom to promote them than he had elsewhere in this forum.  At t he same time, people responding to him also have a greater freedom to do so than they would have elsewhere in this forum.  I beleve that we ought to move this part of the discussion to another part of this forum.

I plan to establish a thread, titled The Status of the NAD Today in the  SDA Issues section.

Here we can talk about TOP, music and such issues that have entered the discussion here.

My expectation for that section includes:

*  Respectful treatment of others and their views.

*  Posts can include frank statements of belief.

*  We remain respectful of the SDA denomination and those who lead it.

*  We discuss from the standpoint as to where we individually are.

*  We do not become the highly critical website that some others are.

*  We do not become a thread that simply cites (references) other critical websites.

*  We have some responsibility for what we post, regardless of what others have posted.

 

I am willing to see how this goes, and give it a try.  As needed I will feel free to revise and add to what I have posted above.

 

 

 

[stinsonmarri]

On 2/19/2020 at 8:56 AM, B/W Photodude said:

Media Admits Corona virus is manmade

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=215332149864391

Photodue: No disease, be it virus or bacteria is man made. Any living organism is created period by THE ALMIGHTY ONES. The Bible clearly states that pestilence and disease will come because of people sinful nature. I spoke about the Canaanites and that they  knew about YAHWEH. However, they like Israel was given 430 years to get their acts together. Gen 15:16 The Chinese and all Asian people are trace back to Canaan. They are one of the most idol worshipping people. They also have a free sexual industry and they eat all types of unclean animals. It is sad but they are open to various diseases and pestilence due to their life style and the whole world today is becoming just like them.

Finally, scientist causes more maglignent strings of these diseases and with the over use of antibiotics. Bacteria are everywhere and the body has them to prepare for death. Viruses are organism that need a host to grow to attack the body. Just to close man can create anything what he does it make it worst.

  Ex 15:26; Psa103:2-4; Mat 9:35; 24:7;  Luke 21:11

Peace!

 

[BlessedMan]

56 minutes ago, stinsonmarri said:

Viruses are organism that need a host to grow to attack the body.

Some of them actually destroy the host, in their life-cycle process.

In it's most elementary form, the definition of a virus would be "an infectious agent that contains either DNA or RNA, surrounded by a protein coat."  While scientists cannot create life, such as virus or anything else; what they can do is to "adjust" by adding to or taking away from the DNA or RNA components of an organism. I think one term used for this would be "genetics," but that would be a looser definition, and need some refinement to get it precise. It seems to be well-known that by way of "genetics" scientists can create some very scary "products."

Granted, there are mixed reports being circulated about the "corona suite of viruses," and whats "really" going on. The long and short of this, is following with near-perfect precision, a propaganda track that history has recorded many times. It is certainly possible, scientifically, that some kind of experiment with this "virus" has gone awry. Other reports presume to know it was a failed attempt to "weaponize" the corona suite somehow.

Others yet, are claiming that it is actually some kind of "chemical" experiment in chemical warfare products gone wrong. Folks, lets realize that we were not there, and the only things we can know for sure is that there is a lot of propaganda out there regarding this. I do find it interesting that no political leaders or rich people have gotten this "disease" yet.

It is certainly possible that this is a man-made event. Even back in 1928, one Fredrick Griffith, a British medical officer, observed an interesting phenomena in his experiments with streptocaucus, a bacteria that causes a severe form of pneumonia to mammals. Griffin was trying to make a vaccine to prevent pneumonia infections in troops during WWI. He used two different strains of the bacterium in his attempts, the smooth strain, and the rough strain, so called. It was through these efforts that he discovered the "transforming principle" which later led others to develop a vaccine. Experiments like this can and do go wrong, all the time.

The other thing we can know is that this Face Book video IS propaganda. It is not fact. It uses the very same pictures that hundreds of others are using for this topic. Propaganda can be either true or false. It is usually not accurate. China is a reclusive, secretive country and we really have no good way of verifying anything like this that is going on there. What we can know is that most Big Media will jump on pretty well any kind of propaganda, as long as it generates "click-bait." They really, and very obviously do a poor job of verification; if they even bother to try.

The basic elements of propaganda are:

1/ selling F.E.A.R. (false evidence appearing real)
2) constant repetition
3) widespread attention-seeking behaviors and statement
4) combination of virtue-signalling and stigmatizing

It is usually the case that propaganda is used to sell the general public on an idea that is often not really associated with the applicable headlines/videos. Sometimes that idea is obvious, sometimes it is well-hidden.

History does repeat itself.

Edited February 22, 2020 by BlessedMan

[BlessedMan]

On 2/18/2020 at 8:53 PM, stinsonmarri said:

You would fiind HIM in the Temple or healing the sick somewhere on the Sabbath, never resting.

One can actually "rest" in God/Christ while working harder than any other day of the week on Sabbath. I highly doubt that "the sabbath" has much to do with being an Adventist Hot Couch Potato.

Sabbath rest, in its Biblical context has nothing to do in most cases with physically resting or "not working."  Ask any preacher worth their "salt" what day of the  week they "work" the hardest. How do such "rest" on Sabbath? Easy. "REST" IN Christ.

[BlessedMan]

4 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

It is certainly possible that this is a man-made event.

It is worth noting here too that recent events do show a current possibility that some viral experiment/researching has gone awol:

Glacier ice archives fifteen-thousand-year-old viruses

Quote

 

Abstract

While glacier ice cores provide climate information over tens to hundreds of thousands of years, study of microbes is challenged by ultra-low-biomass conditions, and virtually nothing is known about co-occurring viruses. Here we establish ultra-clean microbial and viral sampling procedures and apply them to two ice cores from the Guliya ice cap (northwestern Tibetan Plateau, China) to study these archived communities.

 

If you are interested in more info on this, just click on the link above and you will be able to download a paper explaining it more.

Edited February 23, 2020 by BlessedMan

[B/W Photodude]

20 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

Photodue: No disease, be it virus or bacteria is man made. Any living organism is created period by THE ALMIGHTY ONES. The Bible clearly states that pestilence and disease will come because of people sinful nature.

Perhaps you should have studied science instead of history. Living organisms while created by God can be manipulated in the genes up to and including human beings. Designer babies is one of the futures of dna manipulation in humans. 

Also, to be considered, there is the prophecy that Satan himself will bring pestilences about and will even cause illnesses and provide cures to magnify himself. His lab need not be equiped with the latest in scientific equipment, he need only mix the right pigs and sheep together! Numerous other examples of animal to human disease transfer could qualify.

Lastly, viruses are not even alive!:

Why is a virus considered Non-living 
A. a virus does not have a nucleus 
B.a virus does not contain genetic material (I question this one!)
C.a virus is to small to be considered a cell
D.a virus cannot reproduce itself without a host cell

A virus is considered non-living because it cannot reproduce itself without a host cell. Cells, which are considered living, use cell-division to replicate themselves. However, a virus must invade a cell in order to create more viruses, thus are not considered alive.

https://brainly.com/question/2276383

I tend to believe that with the scientific knowledge out there today, a man made virus is not far away. There are some valid beneficial reasons for a man made virus.

[BlessedMan]

2 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

I tend to believe that with the scientific knowledge out there today, a man made virus is not far away. There are some valid beneficial reasons for a man made virus.

I believe there is military and commercial "research" in the area of "viruses" that we don't get told about. The technology is already here, illegal in most countries.

[hch]

4 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

I believe there is military and commercial "research" in the area of "viruses" that we don't get told about. The technology is already here, illegal in most countries.

As a former employee of the virology department of USAMRIID (United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases) that has worked in both cold and "hot" suites, I will say that at the time of my service they had 5 mutant varieties of the plague on ice . They were cultivated and stockpiled to have on hand so that if the plague ever mutated along those lines there would be a stockpile available from which to produce a vaccine. The point of the comment is say that the plague did not mutate on its own while being cultivated there. The scientist facilitated the mutations preemptively.

[stinsonmarri]

14 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Perhaps you should have studied science instead of history. Living organisms while created by God can be manipulated in the genes up to and including human beings. Designer babies is one of the futures of dna manipulation in humans. 

Also, to be considered, there is the prophecy that Satan himself will bring pestilences about and will even cause illnesses and provide cures to magnify himself. His lab need not be equiped with the latest in scientific equipment, he need only mix the right pigs and sheep together! Numerous other examples of animal to human disease transfer could qualify.

Lastly, viruses are not even alive!:

Why is a virus considered Non-living 
A. a virus does not have a nucleus 
B.a virus does not contain genetic material (I question this one!)
C.a virus is to small to be considered a cell
D.a virus cannot reproduce itself without a host cell

A virus is considered non-living because it cannot reproduce itself without a host cell. Cells, which are considered living, use cell-division to replicate themselves. However, a virus must invade a cell in order to create more viruses, thus are not considered alive.

https://brainly.com/question/2276383

I tend to believe that with the scientific knowledge out there today, a man made virus is not far away. There are some valid beneficial reasons for a man made virus.

I know that you would not accept what I said. You like many people tried to limit THE MOST HIGH! HE does not have to make it with a nuclecus. It was made to reproduce with a host cell because it a disease making organism.

For about 100 years, the scientific community has repeatedly changed its collective mind over what viruses are. First seen as poisons, then as life-forms, then biological chemicals, viruses today are thought of as being in a gray area between living and nonliving: they cannot replicate on their own but can do so in truly living cells and can also affect the behavior of their hosts profoundly. The categorization of viruses as nonliving during much of the modern era of biological science has had an unintended consequence: it has led most researchers to ignore viruses in the study of evolution. Finally, however, scientists are beginning to appreciate viruses as fundamental players in the history of life.

It is easy to see why viruses have been difficult to pigeonhole. They seem to vary with each lens applied to examine them. The initial interest in viruses stemmed from their association with diseases—the word “virus” has its roots in the Latin term for “poison.” In the late 19th century researchers realized that certain diseases, including rabies and foot-and-mouth, were caused by particles that seemed to behave like bacteria but were much smaller. Because they were clearly biological themselves and could be spread from one victim to another with obvious biological effects, viruses were then thought to be the simplest of all living, gene-bearing life-forms.

Their demotion to inert chemicals came after 1935, when Wendell M. Stanley and his colleagues, at what is now the Rockefeller University in New York City, crystallized a virus— tobacco mosaic virus—for the first time. They saw that it consisted of a package of complex biochemicals. But it lacked essential systems necessary for metabolic functions, the biochemical activity of life. Stanley shared the 1946 Nobel Prize— in chemistry, not in physiology or medicine—for this work.

Further research by Stanley and others established that a virus consists of nucleic acids (DNA or RNA) enclosed in a protein coat that may also shelter viral proteins involved in infection. By that description, a virus seems more like a chemistry set than an organism. But when a virus enters a cell (called a host after infection), it is far from inactive. It sheds its coat, bares its genes and induces the cell’s own replication machinery to reproduce the intruder’s DNA or RNA and manufacture more viral protein based on the instructions in the viral nucleic acid. The newly created viral bits assemble and, voilà, more virus arises, which also may infect other cells.

These behaviors are what led many to think of viruses as existing at the border between chemistry and life. More poetically, virologists Marc H. V. van Regenmortel of the University of Strasbourg in France and Brian W. J. Mahy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recently said that with their dependence on host cells, viruses lead “a kind of borrowed life.” Interestingly, even though biologists long favored the view that viruses were mere boxes of chemicals, they took advantage of viral activity in host cells to determine how nucleic acids code for proteins: indeed, modern molecular biology rests on a foundation of information gained through viruses.

Molecular biologists went on to crystallize most of the essential components of cells and are today accustomed to thinking about cellular constituents—for example, ribosomes, mitochondria, membranes, DNA and proteins—as either chemical machinery or the stuff that the machinery uses or produces. This exposure to multiple complex chemical structures that carry out the processes of life is probably a reason that most molecular biologists do not spend a lot of time puzzling over whether viruses are alive. For them, that exercise might seem equivalent to pondering whether those individual subcellular constituents are alive on their own. This myopic view allows them to see only how viruses co-opt cells or cause disease. The more sweeping question of viral contributions to the history of life on earth, which I will address shortly, remains for the most part unanswered and even unasked.

The seemingly simple question of whether or not viruses are alive, which my students often ask, has probably defi ed a simple answer all these years because it raises a fundamental issue: What exactly defi nes “life?” A precise scientific definition of life is an elusive thing, but most observers would agree that life includes certain qualities in addition to an ability to replicate. For example, a living entity is in a state bounded by birth and death. Living organisms also are thought to require a degree of biochemical autonomy, carrying on the metabolic activities that produce the molecules and energy needed to sustain the organism. This level of autonomy is essential to most definitions.

Viruses, however, parasitize essentially all biomolecular aspects of life. That is, they depend on the host cell for the raw materials and energy necessary for nucleic acid synthesis, protein synthesis, processing and transport, and all other biochemical activities that allow the virus to multiply and spread. One might then conclude that even though these processes come under viral direction, viruses are simply nonliving parasites of living metabolic systems. But a spectrum may exist between what is certainly alive and what is not.

A rock is not alive. A metabolically active sack, devoid of genetic material and the potential for propagation, is also not alive. A bacterium, though, is alive. Although it is a single cell, it can generate energy and the molecules needed to sustain itself, and it can reproduce. But what about a seed? A seed might not be considered alive. Yet it has a potential for life, and it may be destroyed. In this regard, viruses resemble seeds more than they do live cells. They have a certain potential, which can be snuffed out, but they do not attain the more autonomous state of life. Are Viruses Alive? Scientific American

You see flesh Beings think they know more than THE MOST HIGH! The antediluvian world did accept their was going to be rain. Why? It never rain before. Yet, we want to believe scientists like they know more than YAHWEH! Now, they want to compare a virus to a seed which is a living organism! They don't know or refuse to understand that HIS WAY are not our ways, HIS THOUGHT are not our thoughts! We can not conceive how anything is actually made! If they knew exactly how a virus is made they would know how to destroy them and they can't! Why? Again, I say they are a organism that attaches to a specific host to cause the host cells to become diseased. But it is sad, we rather believe men who can't wrap their mind around the virus to know if it is alive. Nothing dead attacks the body only something that is alive and was created specifically to do so! I wanted you to know that man cannot create or make anything that is a living organism which include the rocks and the earth-period! But I can't make you believe, that's what THE HOLY SPIRIT does! Again, I just present and leaves it up to you and HIM! Maybe you should learned how to be kind and read your Bible more! Always, hate when I try to share something with you! I wonder why? Does it matter if I know history or science, the most important is knowing and honoring YAHWEH! And loving you inspite the things you say!

Be blessed!

 

[stinsonmarri]

On 2/22/2020 at 2:09 PM, BlessedMan said:

Some of them actually destroy the host, in their life-cycle process.

In it's most elementary form, the definition of a virus would be "an infectious agent that contains either DNA or RNA, surrounded by a protein coat."  While scientists cannot create life, such as virus or anything else; what they can do is to "adjust" by adding to or taking away from the DNA or RNA components of an organism. I think one term used for this would be "genetics," but that would be a looser definition, and need some refinement to get it precise. It seems to be well-known that by way of "genetics" scientists can create some very scary "products."

Granted, there are mixed reports being circulated about the "corona suite of viruses," and whats "really" going on. The long and short of this, is following with near-perfect precision, a propaganda track that history has recorded many times. It is certainly possible, scientifically, that some kind of experiment with this "virus" has gone awry. Other reports presume to know it was a failed attempt to "weaponize" the corona suite somehow.

Others yet, are claiming that it is actually some kind of "chemical" experiment in chemical warfare products gone wrong. Folks, lets realize that we were not there, and the only things we can know for sure is that there is a lot of propaganda out there regarding this. I do find it interesting that no political leaders or rich people have gotten this "disease" yet.

It is certainly possible that this is a man-made event. Even back in 1928, one Fredrick Griffith, a British medical officer, observed an interesting phenomena in his experiments with streptocaucus, a bacteria that causes a severe form of pneumonia to mammals. Griffin was trying to make a vaccine to prevent pneumonia infections in troops during WWI. He used two different strains of the bacterium in his attempts, the smooth strain, and the rough strain, so called. It was through these efforts that he discovered the "transforming principle" which later led others to develop a vaccine. Experiments like this can and do go wrong, all the time.

The other thing we can know is that this Face Book video IS propaganda. It is not fact. It uses the very same pictures that hundreds of others are using for this topic. Propaganda can be either true or false. It is usually not accurate. China is a reclusive, secretive country and we really have no good way of verifying anything like this that is going on there. What we can know is that most Big Media will jump on pretty well any kind of propaganda, as long as it generates "click-bait." They really, and very obviously do a poor job of verification; if they even bother to try.

The basic elements of propaganda are:

1/ selling F.E.A.R. (false evidence appearing real)
2) constant repetition
3) widespread attention-seeking behaviors and statement
4) combination of virtue-signalling and stigmatizing

It is usually the case that propaganda is used to sell the general public on an idea that is often not really associated with the applicable headlines/videos. Sometimes that idea is obvious, sometimes it is well-hidden.

History does repeat itself.

Read what I provided to Photodude!

Be Blessed!