ALERT: THE VACCINE MIGHT BE THE MARK OF THE BEAST

Full disclosure: I have a chronic pulmonary condition that I've been under constant treatment for over 6 years. I could die from the common flu. It's not asthma or emphysema and it's not cancer. But I am particularly susceptible to dire consequence from respiratory infection. It is in my best interest to take every precaution even concerning the common cold.

As I said Mrs. Post will fill y'all in if my tabernacle suffers ruin.

I'm sorry to hear about your condition. I get zero joy from warning people about all the evil surrounding this virus. If I didn't care about you, and just wanted to be nice and get along, I'd be ENCOURAGING you to take what I believe is poison.

No I can’t see anything, but somehow I’m guessing it’s just more of the bitter bashing.

We all know what our moms said. The gossiping basher says more about them than the person they intend to bash.

But heck. I could be wrong and maybe the post was a swallowing of pride and apology.

But the prophesy is clear that it is a forced scenario. No conditioning is mentioned. Worship the image or die. That is how it is going to happen. It is not going to happen a different way than what it says.

They will be forced at threat of death. Those that don't take it will be beheaded.

And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands.

So that is how it will happen. No conditioning and no one will take it accidentally not even know that it was the mark of the beast spoken about in Revelation. They will have to worship the image and if they don't they will be killed. By beheading.

So wouldn't it be like saying "that's not really true" to make up a different scenario where people accept it as healthy and good and there is no threat of death? It would be like contradicting scripture. Wouldn't it?

So we don't do anything? Just take everything as it comes and wait for that day when we're forced? Should we warn people ahead of time or just let people continue on as if nothing is wrong? Will people know something is wrong if we don't talk about it? I agree nobody will take the Mark by accident. It'll be a choice. And the vaccine isn't the Mark. But couldn't it be possible that the vaccine is setting people up to accept whatever the "system" wants them to do in the future?

I'm honestly asking. Trying to wrangle my mind around the whole issue. Not trying to be snarky.

The research and development that spawned vaccines is a direct result of killing babies. N

Not all modern vaccines actually contain stem cells, but the ones without stem cells owe their existence to research and development started by abortionists.

Either way you look at it, despite the unsavory health benefits of vaccines, like the covid-19 vaccines, there are moral and ethical ground to stand out that there isn't a good alternative.

I think most places have religious exemptions for things, but many places don't. If they try to force a vaccine on you, maybe it's time to either move to a new start or take them to court.

This isn't even close to correct. Please keep reading on the history of vaccines. From the beginning to date. Using the fetal cells of two aborted fetuses from the 1960s was unfortunate as I don't believe in abortion. However, they could have used an ethically derived cell and nothing would have changed. There is more to vaccines than using the cloned cells which get continuously cloned for medical purposes. There are many cloned cells that are used in medical research. To discount all the benefits of vaccines or to paint all vaccines as having some connection to fetal cells is not accurate and really sounds like the kind of ignorance we saw in the Salem witch-hunts among the religiously zealous.

It is possible that the Mark of the Beast forced upon them will be a tatoo. It will be required to buy or sell. It is possible that current technologies are all part of whatever technology the antichrist will use.

But what we should do? The mission has never changed since the book of Revelation was written. We are to preach the Gospel and plant churches throughout the world looking eagerly for the coming of the Lord. By planting churches and those churches becoming evangelists to their community and planting more churches until Jesus comes again should be what we are busy doing about it.

We are not told to figure out the mechanism of the mark to be ready, or to get others ready with such explanations concerning the mark. We are told to preach the Gospel and to watch and to pray.

If we focus on our relationship with Christ and turning from anything that is not pleasing to God in our lives we can know that we will be able to resist the demand to deny Christ at threat of death. Loving Jesus with all our heart, soul, mind and body is what will ensure that we are ready and have the spiritual grace to resist the antichrist and the mark. If we resist sin today we can be sure we will die for him tomorrow if called upon. If do not deny the flesh today we are fooling ourselves if we think we will not fold under threat of death tomorrow.

This prophecy concerning the mark is going to happen and there is nothing that we can do to stop it. We can preach from the book of Revelation and certainly there is value in doing so as a method of "warning". Guessing exactly what the mark is going to be before it happens is not the best way to warn people. Instead we should warn them about eternity and the wages of sin. We should keep preaching the Gospel to every creature.

So we don't do anything? Just take everything as it comes and wait for that day when we're forced? Should we warn people ahead of time or just let people continue on as if nothing is wrong? Will people know something is wrong if we don't talk about it? I agree nobody will take the Mark by accident. It'll be a choice. And the vaccine isn't the Mark. But couldn't it be possible that the vaccine is setting people up to accept whatever the "system" wants them to do in the future?

I'm honestly asking. Trying to wrangle my mind around the whole issue. Not trying to be snarky.

You aren't a voice of reason if that's your honest opinion of me.

You didn't know that vaccines have their origins in two babies murdered back in the 1960s who's stem cells are still being grown right now up until this present day?

Germs for human vaccines tend to grow best in cells from humans. That's why they use the stem cells to create the vaccines. Modern vaccine research and development owes it's existence to abortionists.

You sound like you're defending the usage of vaccine and, by proxy, dignifying abortion.

Your understanding of vaccines is not accurate. Yes there are vaccines that have used cloned cells from two two aborted babies. But not all and not the first ones since vaccines got started full swing in the 40s. Not all vaccines used fetal cells. The vaccines don't grow in cells. The viruses they use infect cells and in the development stage when they modify the virus they need cells for it to multiply. Some vaccines use ethically derived cells. Flu shots for example use several kinds of cells. Some dog liver cells, some chicken egg cells, there is even a vaccine coming out that uses moth cells. And the very first vaccine did not use these fetal cells therefore your premise that all vaccines have their roots in aborted fetal cells and are therefore immoral is false.

Vaccines have saved millions of lives. God has blessed us with effective COVID19 vaccines and I thank Him for it. People who would scare people away from vaccines are not doing a good work. If someone dies because of antivaccine misinformation I believe those who spread the misinformation are guilty of an immoral act. We have different views of reality.

Vaccines for varicella (chickenpox), rubella (the “R” in the MMR vaccine), hepatitis A, rabies (one version) and COVID-19 (one U.S.-approved version) are all made by growing the viruses in fetal cells. All of these, except the COVID-19 vaccine, are made using fibroblast cells. The COVID-19 vaccine (Johnson & Johnson (J&J)/Janssen) is made using fetal retinal cells.
Fibroblast cell history
Fibroblast cells are the cells needed to hold skin and other connective tissue together. The fetal fibroblast cells used to grow vaccine viruses were first obtained from elective termination of two pregnancies in the early 1960s. These same fetal cells obtained from the early 1960s have continued to grow in the laboratory and are used to make vaccines today. No further sources of fetal cells are needed to make these vaccines.
The reasons that fetal cells were originally used included:

• Viruses need cells to grow and tend to grow better in cells from humans than animals (because they infect humans).
• Almost all cells die after they have divided a certain number of times; scientifically, this number is known as the Hayflick limit. For most cell lines, including fetal cells, it is around 50 divisions; however, because fetal cells have not divided as many times as other cell types, they can be used longer. In addition, because of the ability to maintain cells at very low temperatures, such as in liquid nitrogen, scientists are able to continue using the same fetal cell lines that were isolated in the 1960s.

As scientists studied these viruses in the lab, they found that the best cells to use were the fetal cells mentioned above. When it was time to make a vaccine, they continued growing the viruses in the cells that worked best during these earlier studies.
Retinal cell history
The retinal cells used to make the COVID-19 adenovirus vaccine (J&J/Janssen) were isolated from a terminated fetus in 1985 and adapted for use in growing adenovirus-based vaccines in the late 1990s.
Adenovirus-based vaccines that cannot replicate when administered to people need to be produced in cells that have the necessary gene to allow for large quantities of the virus to be made. The retinal cell line, called PER.C6, was adapted to enable production of these altered viruses.

Even though fetal cells are used to grow vaccine viruses, vaccines do not contain these cells or pieces of DNA that are recognizable as human DNA. People can be reassured by the following:

• When viruses grow in cells, the cells are killed because in most cases the new viruses burst the cells to be released.
• Once the vaccine virus is grown, it is purified, so that cellular debris and growth reagents are removed.
• During this process of purification, any remaining cellular DNA is also broken down. To learn more about DNA and vaccine, visit the “Vaccine ingredients – DNA” page.

Source

We know this. But not all vaccines use cloned fetal cells. And the first ones predate the 60s. Keep reading about the history of vaccines in general. You cannot say that all vaccines are connected to fetal cell technology because that is not true.

Yeah we clearly do see reality different. You have a secular view of vaccines and I have a spiritual view. I'll keep my views but thanks anyway.

Here is an excellent summation of why these vaccines with fetal tissue cells are unacceptable:

Vaccines using fetal tissue: 12 faulty assumptions
Some beliefs about the morality of vaccines using fetal tissue are flawed because they rest upon faulty assumptions — thus, whichever side you stand on, it’s worth considering the most common ones.

April 1, 2021 (Fetal Tissue Vaccines) — As with the MMR [1] vaccine, the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine are produced in cell lines derived from abortions [2] — by contrast, Moderna and Pfizer’s vaccines used them in testing.[3]

The debate around the morality of fetal tissue vaccines frequently has at its heart three beliefs: In receiving the vaccine we are not cooperating with past evil; In receiving the vaccine we are not contributing to present or future evil; There is almost no connection between the vaccine and the murdered baby.

These beliefs are flawed because they rest upon faulty assumptions — thus, whichever side you stand on, it’s worth considering the most common ones.

1. “Only a few babies were used.”
While each individual cell line contains the cells of just one baby, many aborted babies are used in the process of creating a cell line.[4] For example, under oath, scientist Stanley Plotkin admitted that there were 76 aborted babies used in just one vaccine study.[5] Furthermore, with cell line WI-25 we know that it was the 25th specimen from the 19th baby.[6]

The two cell strains used by COVID vaccines are named HEK293 and PERC6.[7] The name HEK293 stands for a Human Embryonic Kidney from the 293rd experiment [8] — we can be confident that more babies preceded the final baby used for HEK293.[9]

2. “The babies were of a very early gestation.”
Most of the babies whose tissue formed the basis of the different vaccine cell lines, were over 3 months when aborted.[10] For example, under oath, scientist Stanley Plotkin admitted that all of the 76 unborn babies used in the study were 3 months or older.[11] At 3 months, a baby is fully formed: “she has begun swallowing and kicking … facial muscles are getting a workout as her tiny features form one expression after another …”[12]

3. “Consent was given, so usage is ethical.”
Parties to a murder cannot ethically donate the body of their victim to research. Thus it follows that no meaningful consent exists. (Though the mothers involved are often, to varying extents, victims themselves.)

4. “The baby was dead when the tissue was taken.”
With fetal tissue research, cell death renders the tissue unfit for purpose: tissues and organs must be harvested “within 5 minutes” [13, 14] and at times this occurs while the baby’s heart is still beating [15, 16] — this was also revealed during a Planned Parenthood court deposition.[17, 18]

Thus, harvesting the organs can be a type of torture [19] beyond the normal abortion procedure. Though we have no definitive proof live harvesting occurred specifically in the making of vaccine cell lines, since it is “no rare event” [20, 21, 22, 23] there are legitimate grounds for concern.[24]

5. “Some were from miscarriages.”
“The requirements for ‘freshness’ of many human foetal tissues” [25] mean it is extremely unlikely any were from miscarriages.[26] “To obtain embryo cells, embryos from spontaneous abortions cannot be used…”[27]

6. “Using a dead body is distinct from abortion.”
Some imagine that those involved in creating the cell lines have nothing to do with the abortion itself. However, in advance of the abortion of a fetus whose tissue will be used for research, there are a number of steps that take place. These include obtaining consent, conducting genetic screening,[28] selecting the abortion method [29] and other steps for optimal harvesting [30] — all of which impact the abortionist’s conduct, creating considerable interplay with the agent seeking human material, who thus “becomes to some extent an accessory”.[31] A parallel to Saul at Stephen’s stoning [32] exists — Saul didn’t throw a stone, but as a consenting bystander he was not without moral guilt.[33] In cases of live tissue extraction, research is still more directly connected to murder.

7. “No one now profits from the abortion.”
Companies who developed the cell lines continue to be rewarded by their use, including in vaccines.[34] Thus direct benefit accrues to agents complicit in the original murder.

8. “Vaccines don’t contain the child’s actual cells.”
Vaccines produced in cell lines contain fragments [35] of the child’s DNA — one study even found “a complete individual genome” [36] of the aborted child. The divided cells the vaccine was grown in would have been the child’s as she grew.[37, 38]

9. “No extra abortions are necessary.”
Despite claims to the contrary, normal cell strains “are in fact ‘mortal’” [39], bound by the “Hayflick Limit” [40] of about 50 cell divisions. Since HEK293 becomes cancerous after time,[41] it will need replacing — just as other early cell strains did.[42] The use of vaccines eventually creates a need for further abortions to replace depleting stocks.

10. “The abortions were from decades ago.”
Though most abortions for vaccines were from before the 80s,[43, 44] time cannot make murder moral. Moreover, a new Chinese cell line, WALVAX-2 was created in 2015,[45] and as already explained, more lines will be necessary.

11. “No further babies are suffering as a result.”
While fetal tissue vaccines are widely accepted, general fetal harvesting is legitimized and impossible to ban [46, 47, 48] — so it has grown instead, leading to many more babies suffering.

For example, in 1982 a container of 16,500 fetuses was found at the US home of a former laboratory owner.[49] In 2003, the Dutch company behind HEK293 sought aborted babies as far afield as New Zealand [50] and Australia.[51] Journal articles discuss “the fetal tissue economy” in Britain.[52] In 2019, 2,200 fetuses were found at an abortionists home [53] and the court depositions of Planned Parenthood staff [54] showed harvesting continues at scale.

Moreover, both polls [55, 56, 57] (and some practice [58]) indicate that parents are more likely to choose abortion if “medical use” of a fetus is possible. Thus, if the option of having babies used for medical purposes was not available, less future babies would suffer and be aborted.

If even a percentage of the 2-3 billion nominal [59] pro-lifers rejected such vaccines, moral alternatives would be found and an “ethically, morally and biblically wrong”[60] industry might end.

12. “The ‘greater good’ outweighs concerns.”
To acquiesce with evil against an innocent unwilling victim for the sake of communal blessing enters dark waters — all historic child sacrifice is based on this premise. “However, it may then be argued that these baby body parts would otherwise be wasted, thrown away. But not only does this justify abortion, but it is pure utilitarianism, that says pretty well anything is justified as long as the end is (potentially) good. In good medical science the end does not justify the means.”[61]

Conclusion
From a Judeo-Christian perspective, the God of the Old and New Testament is set apart by not asking for the firstborn of men to die that others might live. Fetal tissue vaccines perhaps possess moral taint far beyond that of meat offered to idols.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vaccines-using-fetal-tissue-12-faulty-assumptions

We know this. But not all vaccines use cloned fetal cells. And the first ones predate the 60s. Keep reading about the history of vaccines in general. You cannot say that all vaccines are connected to fetal cell technology because that is not true. You made it up out of your own head. Also mRNA vaccines don't use any cells and they don't have any connection to fetal cell technology so therefore it is not possible to say that if someone receives an mRNA vaccine they are supporting abortion or some such nonsense. When you talk like that you just make yourself look like a religious zealot and you ruin any chance of anyone listening to you tell them the Gospel because they have already written you off as a dishonest fanatic who uses partial truths to make up a lie.

You didn't know that vaccines have their origins in two babies murdered back in the 1960s who's stem cells are still being grown right now up until this present day?