I was trying to say that, assuming that Covid is as virulent and unchanging as they say, catching it at some point is inevitable, and the deaths are therefore unavoidable. (We are still many months away from a pie-in-the-sky, untested vaccine of unknown efficacy and unknown side effects, and several years away from a vaccine that is proven.) As for using masks, social distancing, etc, I have not said these things are bad or that people can't do them; I maintain that such measures should remain voluntary (subject to individual choice) rather than mandated by government. In my view, after weighing the evidence pro and con, masks have minimal positive effect (mainly it's placebo effect and societal conditioning) and the partial version of social distancing we've been employing can only delay, not stop, the spread of this virus with its resultant deaths. (Is that callous? Or merely facing reality?) I have no doubt that we're better off simply praying. God is faithful. Some people (although probably none on this forum) are now advocating a return to complete shutdown for an indeterminate period of many months, which could utterly decimate the populations of some 3rd world countries. I am taking the long, broad view rather than a short term, provincial. I would not, however, state that the latter view is callous or indifferent, but rather that it is myopic. We all want what we think is best for the people of this world, after all. Thus it is not at all callous or indifferent to say we should get it over and done with so the people who will live do not also have their lives destroyed, homes lost to foreclosure, health damaged due to subsequent malnutrition or exposure because they become homeless, etc, through another shutdown or similar harsh measures. This is what I fear we may return to.
Here is a compilation of over a dozen studies on the efficacy of masks with viruses. https://www.rcreader.com/commentary...f-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy As you can see, they don't really prevent virus transmission very well. We all expel water vapor, very tiny droplets one cannot see, with every breath; plus of course we expel much, much larger droplets when we cough or sneeze. The larger droplets can be large enough to be easily visible; these droplets are acted upon by gravity and will fall fairly soon to the floor or other surfaces. But the smallest droplets, the vapor, will be as small as 5 to 10 nanometers… super small. And there’s everything in between. What about filtration? When it comes to the Covid virus, it will piggyback inside all of the above. The virus itself is really tiny… someone else posted a video showing .1 micron (100 nanometers), but really they can be 60 nanometers or less. When Covid rides along with large droplets, it leaves the air rather quickly and falls to a surface. But researchers have found that the amount of viral transfer from surface contact is not very high. The vast majority of infections are coming from airborne Covid via respiration (breathing). Vapor particles in the 60-300 nm range (.06-.3 microns) tend to remain aerosolized and will travel with the air currents rather than fall to surfaces. Researchers are finding that the greatest quantities of Covid virus organisms, far and away, are found in the smallest vapor particles. Why do surgeons all wear surgical masks (not N95 btw) in the operating rooms? Here’s why. When you have an open wound on the operating table, the thing surgeons want to avoid is spewing large particles that would fall to the surface (into the open wound) and hugely infect the wound. Surgical masks cannot stop the small virus particles emitted through normal exhalation, but they don’t need to because those particles remain floating in the air and moving (dispersing) with the air currents. ORs have air filtration systems that tend to make pretty effective air exchange within a relatively short time. The quantity of viral particles that might manage to get blown into the open wound is so small, the viral load is usually light enough that the body’s immune system can usually fight it and eliminate it during surgery. Now, why don’t surgeons were the N95 masks even though they filter better than surgical masks? The answer is that N95 masks are too efficient to exhale through as well as necessary, so they have a relief valve that opens during exhalation and spews unfiltered vapor. N95 masks only protect the wearer and are made to filter inhaled air as well as can be managed in practicality. But in actuality, it is never possible to get a perfect seal around the edge when exhaling through any conventional mask (short of military grade gas masks and such). When we exhale, the breath blows the mask material outward from our faces and creates exit pathways around the edges. They’ll stop the large particles, but not the smaller ones. Surgical masks are pretty good masks, right? 60-80% efficient at catching inhaled particles down to .1 micron (100 nm). But exhaled particles that escape around the edges reduce that efficiency. However, most people are trotting around wearing, not surgical masks, but cloth masks. And poor-sealing ones at that. So mask wearers in public are doing very well at stopping the least-likely-to-infect large particles, but not so well at stopping the most plentiful, most-likely-to-infect 60 nm viral particles. There is no readily available filtration tool (one that all people can afford to wear) to stop these particles. Since the small particles stay aerosolized and move with the air currents, the best protections against them are: being outdoors in sunshine being in a large room maintaining distance from others. The goal is not to avoid all of the viral particles, because that’s practically impossible. The goal is to keep the viral load low. Mask wearing is not a very effective means of preventing transmission of viruses from one person’s respiratory system to another’s, because the masks we use are not effective enough; in practical terms the masks being worn today probably don’t even cut the exhale/inhale viral content in half. However, mask wearing does serve at least three other functions: reminding people to maintain distance virtue signaling mental/emotional conditioning of society to accept limitations on freedom
These things should not insense us or provoke us to riot in the streets, they should remind us that we are all flawed and have fallen from God's Grace only to be undeservedly raised up by God in his mercy and through the Atonement of His Beloved Son, Jesus Christ Our Lord. I speak as avowed universalist, Even Darwin. I hope to have long and interesting conversations with him in God's presence. .
I am not mindless of the many issues you refer to, and they are real. If the alternative is herd immunity, then conservatively that means and infection rate, (or a vaccination rate) of at least 75%, and probably higher. Now this chart has taken the current figures and calculates how many deaths would have occurred if we got to herd immunity on its own. In terms of the USA it would mean an additional 10 million lives. My view is that this cost in human life is unacceptable. Clearly humanity would be well served by a reliable vaccine as soon as is possible. Consequently I reject a view that suggests that we should 'let it rip' through our communities. At the moment I believe we are best served by tried and tested practices of Identification - Isolation - Improved Hygiene - Social Distancing. There is now some reasonable evidence to show that with good will and concerted efforts we can slow the spread of this virus in our communities. The current surge in Australia is due to lapses in protocols around quarantine. Most of our cases until this of late have been in returning travelers in quarantine. It is of course inconvenient, and economically costly, however the human cost of not doing this seems even worse.
So far no one has tried to revove the statue of Satan from the wall of Coventry Cathedral, I'm pleased to say. .
Not if you were being examined for skin diseases in Aaron's tent you couldn't. That coin only had one side. No one was about to allow you to spread whatever you had so that the Children of Isreal could eventually achieve 'herd immunity'. Not a bit of it mate. .
Botolph, I've seen estimates that, IIRC, around 20%-25% of US residents have already been exposed. This takes into account the folks who have remained asymptomatic or had such minor symptoms they didn't know they were infected. And an estimate that another 15%-20% are simply immune for one reason or another (never has there been a virus that was contracted by 100% of a population). So the final death estimates in that chart are absurd beyond reckoning. We're probably halfway or more to the final total, already.
Just wanting to make sure I haven't misunderstood what you typed. You are a universalist? Please explain your understanding of what it means to be a universalist.
I would still want to do better than another 100,000 deaths in the USA, especially when there are methods which with the encouraged good will of the people may well reduce that figure significantly.
I believe that God is universally more powerful and more successful than Satan in every respect, including the number of people God can, and is willing to, save. I believe if God wills something, it will happen, one way or another. Rom.9:10. 1 John 3:8. .
I had forgotten, we had some discussion last August about this. https://forums.anglican.net/threads/universalism.3699/ At that time you said you were not (yet?) a "full-blown" universalist. Now you are an "avowed" universalist? Jesus has already disclosed God's will concerning salvation, hasn't he? John 6:40 -- And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. John 3:18 -- ...he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Are you hoping that Jesus was just kidding, or that the Father told Jesus to lie in order to scare people into cooperating, or what?
But we shall ALL see what is the fellowship of the mystery that has been hid in God, (Eph.3:8-11), and every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess, and Job 19:26 for all of us. Then the judgement, i.e. the defining moment. A Judgment made with true judgment and not by appearances. Zech.7:9, John 8:16. Matt.7:2. Have you or I 'seen' Jesus yet? Does scripture say we will? Ezek.20:33-38, 1 Cor.13:12. .
What Russia sees as subversive tactics and American individuals see as 'freedom of thought' is actually demonic. Wake up America! Your President equits as innocent the very people who are doing this to you.
I'm wondering... in the way you look at things, is there any great impetus for proclaiming the Gospel? Is there any reason why people can't feel free to ignore God's will and live for the devil, unrepentant? After all, if you expect God to welcome into His eternal Kingdom the unregenerate and the unrepentant, simply because God's love is so boundless, what is the point of the Great Commission? Christ died to set people free from bondage to sin, so it hardly seems likely that freedom is of the devil. But setting that aside for the sake of argument, if Americans want to engage in "demonic" freedom from forced compliance, why should you or anyone care? They'll all get eternal life anyhow, right?
Short answer to your final question, is not "Right" as you suggest, it is "Wrong" for the following reason: The question ignores the fact that you also believe they'll ALL get eternal life anyhow, (either in heaven or in hell). So what would be wrong about me believing as you do, that they'll all get eternal life? Particularly when I suspect that they might not all get eternal life, while you apparently do, 'in the way you look at things'. The gospel is a message of reconciliation, not a threat of judgment and imprisonment demanding compliance with a set of rules dictating a conduct regulating regime. That was the Old Testament approach to the problem of human sin and St. John the Baptist was the last and greatest proponent of it. Matt.11:11-12. The New Testament approach is so much less forceful that it suffers violence itself and scandalises those who have a vengeful desire for retribution upon wrongdoers, by reminding them that ALL HAVE SINNED, including those presuming themselves 'righteous', and ALL fallen short of God's standards of conduct, so ALL face the judgment of Almighty God unless they are receptive of God's unfathomable GRACE. You ask I see your reasoning here and it seems to go along the following lines: (1) If I knew for certain that God will not punish me for being wicked, then I would just carry on being wicked. (2) Because I, still think this way, I am quite certain that everyone else also thinks as I do. (3) Therefore I don't believe there is any great impetus to preach the gospel unless my wickedness would have been punished but I have now managed to escape that punishment somehow and so must help others to escape God's wrath upon them. (4) The gospel, (for me), therefore is essentially about escaping punishment by a wrathful and vengeful, all powerful God. We are already "Free to ignore God's will and live for the devil, unrepentant". God allows us to choose to do that, but prefers that we would not. That way of living is mistakenly called freedom and sinners prefer it to, "The Kingdom of God", that Jesus spoke so much about during his time in the flesh, and encouraged us all to enter into here and now. Though sinners may call it freedom, they are unaware that it is in fact not freedom at all. They are enslaved to their own passions and bound in servitude to selfishness, prisoners to their own greed, ignorance and self interest, bringing misery to others and themselves. Only by knowing the truth about their abject condition can they be released from this bondage. John 8:32. Revelation 3:17. My Gospel is that of St. Paul and Jesus Christ. Yours is that of John The Baptist and Hezekiah. Mine is the Gospel of the New Covenant, Eph.4:17-24, 2 Cor.5:18-19, yours is the gospel of The Old Testament. Deut.11:26-28, 2 Chron.29:6-11. .
Let's clear up one thing right away. I was asking you the question, because you said you're a universalist. And universalists believe that God will save just about everybody (they will all have eternal life in heaven), regardless of faith. So when I said, "...right?" it wasn't because I thought it was right but because you seemed to be saying it was right. Now you are obfuscating. Now you claim that I'm referring to eternal life either in heaven or hell, but that was not the point of my question at all. Please don't presume to tell me what my Gospel is, because obviously you have no idea. Universalists believe that God will let unbelievers and unrepentant sinners into His eternal Kingdom (all, or practically all, will be saved). So your reasoning is that the Gospel should still be preached because of temporal benefits to people, but their eternal destiny does not hinge upon how they respond to it. Or maybe you are a somewhat 'conditional universalist,' for you seem to accept the concept that God might not give His grace to some, but you don't think there's any way for us to gauge who falls into that camp. The problem with such an idea is this: if we have no measuring stick to tell who will receive saving grace and who won't, then one can never know (but only take a wild guess) as to whether he is or will be a recipient. This ignores the deposit of the Holy Spirit in us; His Presence witnesses to our spirits that we are children of God.
Do you see the internal contradiction in this statement of yours? You, on the one hand, can berate others when they describe what you believe the gospel to be, as presumption, saying they can have no idea, even when based upon what you have yourself written, yet immediately then stating your definition of what universalists all believe and assume that my beliefs accord with your definition of 'universalism', as if yours is a definitive understanding. You then go on to tell me what my reasoning is. Actually I did not give my reasons for preaching the Gospel but I think you will find that the percentage of teaching by Jesus which dealt with 'eternal destiny', 'heaven and hell', is actually considerably less than His teaching on how we may enter and enjoy The Kingdom of God, here on earth. Another interesting fact is that Jesus directed his teaching not to those who were 'unsaved' but to the lost house of Isreal, Matt.10:6, Matt.15:24 who were children of The Covenant Promises, (the OT equivalent of Church people today). Those were the people he came to, and it was those who rejected him. Certainly Jesus was confident that he had come from heaven and would return there. He also promised his followers that he would prepare a place there for them. John 14:2-3 However, his teaching was aimed very much on getting people to understand how they should behave toward other and toward God while still very much here on earth. Heaven was not a juicy carrot dangled in front of them and Jesus did not carry a stick to beat them to there with, though he certainly hinted that there will be beatings in heaven. Luke 12:47-48. If you read Paul's letters to his churches you will actually find very little information on what it will be like in heaven and even less on exactly how to get there and not even that much on how to avoid the other place. Most of what Paul wrote was quite specifically about how to conduct ourselves as faithful disciples of Christ on earth. That will be what decides the conditions we will receive in heaven and probably also the conditions of entry or at least the right to remain there. I could go on at length about our 'eternal destiny' and what Jesus and St Paul said about it but that would be seriously off topic and a derailing of this thread. Are you tempting me into a rabbit run to avoid discussing the legitimate enforcement of hygiene laws under Levitical Edict Or attempting to wriggle out of the fact that there was never any attempt whatever to let diseases run riot in order to achieve 'Herd Immunity' under the Theocracy of Israel, and that was God's rule so presumably an authoritative example of how to achieve National Hygiene, Trump and his administration should have been following all along. But of course he daren't because you all so value what you think is your freedom from being told what to do by those whom you have yourselves so foolishly, put in authority over you. Now you see the results of his disobedience and lack of leadership. The highest rates of covid infection in the world, a new record broken every day in the USA, and the deaths will be following inevitably on. Not his fault though that the Chinese started all this covid stuff off by blatantly infringing The Law of God Lev.11:19 and Deut.14:18 by catching, selling and eating bats which God forbade for probably this precise reason. Arn't human beings ignorantly, disobediently, stupid. .