King Dan of Great the 1st
Member
We all locked down we all locked down, we all come out we all come out together.
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
I don’t understand your question.So you said politicians are generally hypocrites, and a sin includes the same if they disobey any government health mandates that are given by politicians?
No, I never said that and the health mandates certainly are not random rules.So just submit and bow down and dont even question whoever makes some random rule?
If believers are being irresponsible and sinful in conducting their services, why should God protect them? Should God protect Christians who speed in the vehicles and don’t wear a seatbelt?If I wanted to go to church I will go to church. If I believe it's God's house of worship why should some human being tell me I'm not allowed , because God can't protect me but they can or something?. I don't know.
Most don’t give the issue this much thought or consideration. Regardless, life isn’t perfect. The best we can all do is the best we know how and often, those choices are unique to each of us.Yes, I certainly do disagree. People are free to assess the risks, the problem is that should they get sick, they will almost certainly get others sick, including those who made a different risk assessment, and become a burden on the healthcare system.
And this is a grey area. Society says don’t get married, get into debt and abort your child. So we need to be careful which lens we’re viewing things through.For believers, it has always been, or should have been, about doing what is best for society as a whole based on what the Bible teaches.
I may be wrong, but that sounds like I’m supposed to feel guilty. I don’t.But whether one views it that way or not doesn’t matter. If people feel they must stay home from church in order to not risk catching COVID, especially those more vulnerable, then something is wrong; it is showing favouritism to those who are “healthy” and putting one’s own interests ahead of others’ interests.
Should God protect Christians who speed in the vehicles and don’t wear a seatbelt?
Are we supposed to test God? Isn’t ignoring health measures that are known to protect people and just “trusting God,” testing him? It shows a real lack of wisdom and prudence.I think God could keep me more safe than a human being claims they can keep me safe if God really wanted, but aside from God sending his Son the greatest free gift of eternal life God does not promise me or anyone anything.
But speeding would be the key idea there. Speeding puts everyone’s lives in danger. Perhaps I should make it the case that the person drives the way they think they should be allowed to drive and the government shouldn’t be allowed to tell them how.Some claim the new safety speed and seatbelt cameras can help prevent accidents, by the time someone speeding and not wearing a seatbelt receives there penalty in the mail a few days later from the camera there drive is already over so it didn't really help prevent anything.
Wearing a seatbelt is for personal individual use and protection. I don't know anyone who wears a seatbelt to protect other people.
Perhaps I should make it the case that the person drives the way they think they should be allowed to drive and the government shouldn’t be allowed to tell them how.
But they should and therein lies the problem.Most don’t give the issue this much thought or consideration.
And above all, all our behaviour is to be guided by Scripture. The choice to do what is best for others instead of ourselves is before all of us, and is the central guiding ethic in a pandemic, as it is in pretty much everything.Regardless, life isn’t perfect. The best we can all do is the best we know how and often, those choices are unique to each of us.
Pretty much everyone has lived in fear in the pandemic. The issue is how just how justifiable that fear is. On one end is fear of the virus and COVID, and on the other is fear of government control, with fear of vaccines somewhere in the middle. Fear of the virus is the most justifiable and fear of government control the least.Some choose to live in fear, others choose to live outside of that fear, but in a respectful, considerate manner.
If they’re vaxxed and mask, they shouldn’t that afraid, but that is their choice.Others live with disregard for themselves and others. It’s the later I take issue with or those who live in extreme fear.
Certain segments of our population lived in constant fear including my step son and his paranoid wife. We’ve seen our grandchildren twice in two years based on their Covid fears.
Life isn’t meant to be lived in a bubble.
I’m not sure how it is grey. What I am not saying is what society dictates about how to live but rather how the Bible tells believers to live in society.And this is a grey area. Society says don’t get married, get into debt and abort your child. So we need to be careful which lens we’re viewing things through.
Yes, but context is key. Apart from looking at who and what was the issue, it also says a lot of other things.The Bible says we should not forsake the assembly.
And there have almost always been ways to do this during the pandemic, inmost justisdictions.I’m a people person. I need to be around people. Needless to say the transition to work from home was difficult. I needed church at that time in my life for my mental health. Now that the lockdowns have been lifted, I still need the weekly boost I get from going to church.
Not l, that was not my intent.I may be wrong, but that sounds like I’m supposed to feel guilty. I don’t.
While that is their choice, it is, imo, a foolish one. The favouritism is how I described: if people are forced to make the choice between attending a service and risking their health—no distancing, masking, etc.—or staying home, then the service is being done in a way that shows favouritism to those that believe they’re healthy. It is saying to the vulnerable that they don’t matter or at least not as much as the rest.We had many seniors with health issues attend church. All of them are ok. They made the decision to attend. Those who stayed at home, did so at their own choice. How then is it favoritism? I’m having a difficult time wrapping my head around that.
So give the people the information and allow them the respect to make the right choice. In our case, people socially distanced from one another, which by the way is far superior to any vaccine or mask.I’m supportive of the government doing what is necessary to protect people’s health, especially since most were either clueless about what to do or just didn’t care.
Christian deniers, just like non-Christian deniers, are going to do whatever they want to do and risk people’s lives and health. Enough people have proven that they will not do what is right, so the government necessarily has to step in.
It's not only about those who are sick that need to take responsibility. We all do and if we have concerns about becoming exposed, then we can also take the appropriate steps to minimize our risk.But, your statement also reflects, subtly, the selfishness of most Christians these days—“each of us taking responsibility for ourselves and our own actions.”
The church is a large space. It's not like being contained in a bubble. The virus didn't remain airborne like measles and that's why social distancing was the recommendation from the CDC and WHO. It's also why being in an airplane wasn't considered a serious risk. If the virus was aerosolized like measles, then social distancing would be of no effect.But this is putting other people at risk and is wrong, hence being selfish. It isn’t a matter of distancing when in an enclosed space. Any who may have the virus will eventually fill the room, and generally it doesn’t take long, but that depends on a number of factors, which many churches may not have taken into account.
But that is rather my point—some people still won’t make the right choice, and some are too many. The right choice is what is best for all.So give the people the information and allow them the respect to make the right choice.
It can be but that depends on the environment and what is occurring in that environment. Many churches are not great places to be, even with masks and distancing.In our case, people socially distanced from one another, which by the way is far superior to any vaccine or mask.
Yea, that is my point. And that is also why we can’t just let people make their own choices, why governments need to have health mandates in place.It's not only about those who are sick that need to take responsibility. We all do and if we have concerns about becoming exposed, then we can also take the appropriate steps to minimize our risk.
It seems you may not have fully understood what I have been saying. Churches are selfish when they conduct services in such a way that necessarily excludes such vulnerable people—by not limiting the number of congregants, by not wearing masks or distancing. I am against people, businesses, churches, etc., making their own decisions to mask or not mask, to distance or not distance. But a person making the decision to not go due to their own health concerns, even if health measures are in place, is being prudent.One of our church members did just that. Shortly before the pandemic she was diagnosed with breast cancer and because Chemo treatments compromise her immune system, she immediately began isolating herself. Not because she might spread something to others, but because she could easily become infected by others. She protected herself then and during the pandemic and continues to do so to this day. She is one that has benefited by our live streamed services. Is she selfish for doing this? I beg to differ. She showed great care by not putting the rest of us out in order to meet her needs.
But the CDC states that the virus spreads through “droplets and very small particles that contain the virus.” And that is what I’ve read since the beginning—that viruses can only spread through droplets and aerosol; they don’t just float around by themselves in the air. This is why people catch it in while being in an enclosed space for a prolonged period of time—it accumulates. It’s why it has spread in churches despite social distancing. Not to mention sneezing, coughing, and singing project those aerosols a long way.The church is a large space. It's not like being contained in a bubble. The virus didn't remain airborne like measles and that's why social distancing was the recommendation from the CDC and WHO. It's also why being in an airplane wasn't considered a serious risk. If the virus was aerosolized like measles, then social distancing would be of no effect.
Yes, droplets that fall to the ground rather quickly. This is why the WHO and CDC recommended social distancing. The WHO recommended 3' and the CDC doubled it to 6'. Measles is an example of a virus that aerosols or becomes airborne and capable of infecting people for longer periods of time, up to 2 hours after an infected person leaves an area.But the CDC states that the virus spreads through “droplets and very small particles that contain the virus.” And that is what I’ve read since the beginning—that viruses can only spread through droplets and aerosol; they don’t just float around by themselves in the air. This is why people catch it in while being in an enclosed space for a prolonged period of time—it accumulates. It’s why it has spread in churches despite social distancing. Not to mention sneezing, coughing, and singing project those aerosols a long way.