Most seeking a religious exemption from vaccination acknowledge that vaccination is a medical treatment. They should be arguing that vaccination is a religious superstition masquerading as medicine.
It seems that those who argue for religious exemptions from vaccines are coming to the plate with two strikes against them. They argue that they should be exempt from a medical treatment because of their sincerely held religious beliefs. They are overlooking a key historical fact. The argument should be that they should be exempt from a religious practice based on their sincerely held religious beliefs. That is a winning argument.
Once you argue that vaccines are a superstitious religious practice, it opens the door to bringing in evidence of the danger and ineffectiveness of vaccines, which is evidence that would ordinarily be precluded in a religious exemption case in the absence of that argument.
The book Vaccine Danger: Quackery and Sin documents that vaccines are based on a heathen religious superstition and are not supported by true science.
Most do not know that vaccination is actually a religious superstition masquerading as a medical treatment. Many attribute the practice of vaccination to the quack doctor Edward Jenner (1749-1823). The very word vaccine is from the Latin word for cow. Jenner pulled a trick. He renamed cowpox variolae vaccinae, from which we get the word vaccine. Jenner called the cowpox that he injected into humans variolae vaccinae. Jenner’s theory was that it would make them immune from smallpox. While Jenner is often credited with the cowpox/smallpox hypothesis, it can be traced past Jenner’s first experiments in 1796 to a farmer, Benjamin Jesty (1736-1816), who first used cowpox to innoculate against smallpox in 1774. Cowpox is a disease of cows’ udders and has no relation to smallpox, except they both have the suffix “pox” in their names. Indeed, variolae vaccinae, which means smallpox of the cow, is a made-up disease. There is a disease called cowpox and a disease called smallpox, but there is no such disease as smallpox of the cow. Jenner was running a medical scam.
The esteemed Dr. Charles Creighton, writing in the Ninth Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, described Jenner’s representation of cowpox as “smallpox of the cow” as “arbitrary and untenable.” He explained that cowpox and smallpox are infections that are quite unlike one another. Dr. Creighton further explained the dangers of Jenner’s cowpox vaccination. He listed five diseases caused by vaccination: “1) erysipelas, (2) jaundice, (3) skin eruptions, (4) vaccinal ulcers, and (5) so-called vaccinal syphilis.” Dr. Creighton noted a 50% increase in infant deaths from syphilis after compulsory vaccination was instituted in England in 1853. Dr. Creighton opined that vaccination may predispose infants to be beset by illnesses because the vaccines “produce a considerable constitutional disturbance,” rendering the infant’s immature immune system unable to resist diseases. Tragically, this often caused the premature death of children or, if they survived, lifelong illness and frailty.
The term vaccination did not exist until Edward Jenner (1749-1823). Before Edward Jenner, the method of gaining immunity from smallpox was called variolation, a name drawn from variola, the scientific name for smallpox. The Chinese of the 15th century practiced a form of variolation where a practitioner would use nasal insufflation, where the recipient would suck powdered smallpox scabs into his lungs. The more common method was for the practitioner to dip a swab or other implement into a smallpox pustule and then introduce that smallpox material into a cut or poke a needle containing the material into the recipient’s skin. This process was thought to give the recipient a mild case of smallpox but lifelong immunity from smallpox thereafter. This process of implanting a disease agent in a person is also called inoculation.
Although inoculation is based on the germ theory, it predates the alleged discoveries of Louis Pasteur (1849–1895) by hundreds of years. Indeed, both inoculation and the germ theory began their existence not as scientific discoveries but as religious superstitions. The Hindu superstition was transformed into “science” by Louis Pasteur through plagiarism and fraud. Pasteur falsely took credit for the discoveries of Antoine Bechamp. He then twisted the science of Bechamp through fraud to conjure the myth of his germ theory as the cause of illness. Pasteur’s germ theory for the cause of disease is the basis for the quackery and sin of the modern practice of vaccination. Bechamp’s legitimate science-backed terrain theory for the cause of illness did not serve Satan’s interest in killing, injuring, and enslaving mankind. And so Pastuer was promoted, and Bechamp was suppressed. Christians are called on to “keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.” 1 Timothy 6:20.
Burroughs Wellcome Pharmaceutical Company presented at the 17th International Congress of Medicine in London, England, in 1913, “The History of Inoculation and Vaccination for the Prevention of Disease.” In 2005, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceutical Company absorbed Burroughs Wellcome in a merger of the two companies. The 360-page International Congress of Medicine lecture memoranda from Burroughs Wellcome explain that inoculation against disease was started by Dhanwantari (1,500 B.C.), who was considered the Vedic Father of Medicine. In an account given in 1757 by one Howell, inoculation was practiced by itinerant Brahmins who went from house to house. Brahmin is the highest Varna in Vedic Hinduism. Brahmin came from the term Brahman, which is a magical force. The practice by the Brahmin required the recipients of the inoculation to “make a thanksgiving, Poojah, or offering to the goddess on their recovery.” Poojah is a Hindu word meaning worship, prayer, and offerings to a god or goddess.
The goddess to which an offering was to be made was Sitala, the goddess of smallpox, who “is the preeminent tutelary deity of villages in southwestern Bengal, and a goddess of the same name has a prominent role in Hindu pantheons throughout northern India.”
Pharmaceutical companies know full well that inoculation is a religious rite masquerading as a medical treatment. Below is a native drawing from India published in the Burroughs Wellcome lecture memoranda depicting a Malaba woman invoking the Hindu goddess of smallpox. The caption is as it appeared in the Wellcome Pharmaceutical Company lecture memoranda. Malabar is a region along the southwestern coast of India.
Dr. Charles Creighton, M.A., M.D. (1847-1927) was a recognized authority in epidemiology. He had orthodox views of vaccination and believed them to be efficacious and safe. He was selected by the publishers of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Ninth Edition, to write the article on Vaccination. He did original and exhaustive research. His research opened his eyes to the reality that vaccines were ineffective and dangerous. Dr. Creighton continued his research and wrote a book titled Jenner and Vaccination: A Strange Chapter of Medical History. Dr. Creighton explained that the book was written as he tried to find out “how the medical profession in various countries could have come to fall under the enchantment of an illusion.” One notable statistic that Dr. Creighton cited in his Encyclopedia Britannica article was that “in Bavaria in 1871 of 30,742 cases [of smallpox] 29,429 were in vaccinated persons, or 95.7 percent., and 1,313 in the un-vaccinated, or 4.3 percent.
The Hindu religion is a heathen religion. God commands us to have nothing to do with heathen practices. “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” Ephesians 5:11. We are called on to avoid such practices. “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” Colossians 2:8
We are forbidden to do evil in order to obtain some good end. Bad means corrupt the intended good. “And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.” (Romans 3:8) Indeed, “whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” (Romans 14:23)
Christians are religiously bound to care for their bodies as they are the temple of the Holy Spirit. It is a sin to defile our bodies by injecting them with the polluting poisons of vaccines. (1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19-20) The consequent death and illness that flow from vaccination fulfill God’s promise to destroy those who would defile their bodies through vaccination.
A person is injected with a pathogen on the theory that the recipient’s body will become immune to the disease. It is a sin to inject a person with an antigen to cause an immune response. That is to “do evil that good may come.” That is a sin. See Romans 14:23. But the good that is expected is a phantom; the medical theory of vaccination is fallacious. Job explains: “But ye are forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of no value.” (Job 13:4)
People have lost sight of the truth that “the life of the flesh is in the blood.” (Leviticus 17:11) They are thus easily tricked into polluting their blood with vaccines. They do not realize that vaccination is a religious ritual wherein the blood is contaminated.
The disciples in this new religion of Vaccinology are kept ignorant of the cost to their bodies and souls. But the cost is real; they are being sacrificed by poisoning and, tragically, unwittingly sacrificing their children to the gods of Vaccinology.
Vaccinology is a belligerent religion. It will seek to persecute those who are of a different faith. The heathen priests of Vaccinology are of the flesh. They will persecute those who have the Spirit of Jesus Christ. The Bible informs us “that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.” Galatians 4:29.
Vaccination is justified on the same basis as sacrificing children to Molech. God calls it an abomination to sacrifice children to Molech. The heathen religious practice was to immolate the children to appease the pagan god, Molech. God states: “And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.” (Leviticus 18:21) Parents would sacrifice their child to Molech to gain future protection against disease, famine, and war. There was tremendous pressure put on families to sacrifice their children for the greater good of the community. It was viewed as beneficial to sacrifice a few for the benefit of the many.
That is the same reasoning behind vaccination. It is understood that vaccines are inherently dangerous and will kill and injure some of those who are vaccinated. Indeed, the pharmaceutical companies and the government acknowledge that vaccines are inherently dangerous, which is the basis for the government granting pharmaceutical companies immunity from civil liability. The government thinks it is beneficial to sacrifice a few for the benefit of the many even when they know that there is no benefit to the many.
Vaccination has much in common with the religion of Molech. It is the sacrifice of the few to protect the many. Doctors know that a certain percentage of children will die and be injured by vaccines. But as with the sacrifice of children to Molech, the medical community claims that “the benefits outweigh the risks and costs for many vaccines including polio, pertussis, measles, mumps and rubella. Thus, the use of these vaccines provides a net saving to society.” As with the worship of Molech, the few must be sacrificed for the benefit of society. Vaccination is the perverse ethic of doing evil so that good may result. God calls such an ethic a damnable heresy. See Romans 3:8. God condemns it. The child sacrifices to Molech were ineffectual; it was based on mythology. In like manner, vaccination is ineffectual; it is also based on mythology. Just as Molech was no threat, so also viruses pose no threat. The sacrifice of the few to Molech did nothing to protect the many. In like manner, sacrificing the few to vaccination does nothing to protect the many. For example, it has been proven that the COVID-19 vaccine does not prevent the spread of the alleged virus known as SARS-CoV-2 and thus does not offer any immunity to the herd, as was alleged under the vaccine mandates.
There is scientific proof that the more vaccines administered to infants, the higher the infant death rate. A 2011 study compared the infant mortality rate (IMR) of 34 countries to the number of vaccines required by their 2009 national vaccine schedule within the first year of infancy. If vaccines were safe and effective, as the pharmaceutical companies and the CDC claim, the greater the number of childhood vaccines would mean a lower infant mortality rate. But the opposite was found. The study revealed a direct correlation between the number of childhood vaccines and the mortality rate. The more vaccines administered to infants, the higher the infant death rate.
Mark Blaxill and Amy Becker studied mortality rates during the COVID-19 lock-downs. They discovered a startling fact. Infant mortality actually went down during the lockdown. There was a significant decrease in the number of infant deaths. Blaxill and Becker attributed that drop to the inability of parents to do well-baby doctor checkups with the obligatory vaccinations. Fewer vaccines = fewer infant deaths.
Chart Created by Blaxill and Becker
Incidentally, since the publication of Bla
 |
Increased All Cause Mortality Excerpt Fr…
770KB ∙ PDF file
|
|
|
|
