Kim Iversen: Pfizer Vax Docs Released By COURT ORDER, Data Will Tell The STORY About Side Effects

 

Charisma News: Why the FDA and Pfizer Covered Up the Lies About the COVID-19 Jabs

 MAT STAVER/LIBERTY COUNSEL

Writer's Note: The recent Federal Drug Administration (FDA) data dump shows that both Pfizer and the FDA have known all along that what Liberty Counsel has been saying is true: the COVID jabs are not safe. Yet the push to vaccinate everyone continues. Vaccine passports present a clear and present danger to our freedom. We must stop them now! Read on to learn what we found and what you can do. — Mat Staver

The FDA attempted to keep Pfizer's COVID shot data secret for 75 years, but thankfully, a Texas federal judge said no way. Now we know why they did not want you to know the truth.

The first 55,000 pages of data were released on March 2, and the second 11,000-plus pages were released on April 1. They reveal that as early as February 28, 2021, Pfizer informed the FDA it had to hire 2,400 additional full-time employees to handle the shocking number of "adverse events" suffered by those receiving the shots. The FDA and Pfizer also knew about 1,291 serious side effects from the Pfizer shot alone.

The new information is infuriating, particularly considering the push for vaccine passports designed to keep "the unvaccinated" out of public life. Vaccine passports present a serious threat to freedom. If accepted, they will continue long after COVID. The implications are startling.

Journalist Kim Iversen gave an overview of the following highlights from the 11,000 pages released by court order on April 1. Everything below was admitted by Pfizer and was known by the FDA for over a year.

Natural immunity works. Study participants who had natural immunity from a previous COVID infection were protected against future COVID exposure. Not a single case of severe COVID was reported from the participants with natural immunity.

The shots weaken the immune system. Pfizer knew that for seven days after the first injection, white blood cell counts drop sharply, disrupting natural immunity and making it more difficult for the body to fight off viruses, bacteria, illnesses, and serious diseases.

The true death toll is far higher than reported. People who died in the week following the first injection were improperly recorded as "unvaccinated" despite having received the shot. Thus, the number of deaths from the Pfizer shots was false and underreported.

Shot injuries are more common in younger groups. Pfizer admits the highest prevalence of shot injuries was found in people under 55. In fact, the number of adverse events increased as the age of shot takers decreased. Yet the FDA and CDC have been pushing propaganda campaigns to inject these age groups despite the evidence they are more likely to be harmed.

Pfizer lied about myocarditis. The shots have caused 10 TIMES more cases of myocarditis than Pfizer originally said.

Pfizer has no idea of the long-term side effects of these shots. Pfizer specifically notes it does not know the long-term effects on fertility, pregnancy, birth defects, or safety for nursing children.

Pfizer cannot rule out Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE). This is a phenomenon in which the shots cause a worse and more deadly reaction when the person later comes in contact with the virus. The FDA knew about this concern as early as October 22, 2020!

For over a year, Pfizer and the government knew how deadly these shots are, yet they withheld this information from the people.

Worse, they LIED about it. And the U.S. government deployed vaccine mandates and embarked on a $1 billion propaganda campaign to convince people to get shots they knew were deadly.

For over a year "fact-checkers," many of whom worked for media sources who received some of that billion-dollar propaganda payout, marked messages such as Liberty Counsel's as "fake news," while censoring truth-telling doctors, scientists, and even people who were injured from the shots.

Despite the evidence, the mandates and vaccine passports continue.

In New York City, unvaccinated individuals are not allowed to work in person or with the public. And the World Health Organization (WHO) has released "guidance" for all nations to participate in its global vaccine passport program. The WHO recommends this passport be used for domestic and international travel, as well as for jobs, school, events, and social gatherings.

In other words, the WHO is recommending its vaccine passports to be used exactly as we warned — to limit movement and freedom.

But it's not just the WHO. The Biden administration released its vaccine passport push last year. As of this writing, 25 states plus the District of Columbia have developed or are considering digital vaccine credentials: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.

We will not rest until the mandates are dropped and freedom is restored.

Liberty Counsel was in court again Monday, defending military service members from Biden's unlawful shot orders. I will update you as soon as I can. 

For the original article, visit LIBERTY COUNCIL.

Zelensky speech with Nazi AZOV BATTALION prompts Greek lawmakers to WALK OUT

 

Volodymyr Zelensky's speech to Greek Parliament ‘insulted Greece and Cyprus’

GREEK CITY TIMES

The recent speech by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to Greek Parliament raised quite a few eyebrows when he unexpectedly gave the platform to an alleged ethnic-Greek Ukrainian claiming allegiance to the neo-Nazi group the Azov Battalion.

Among the political parties that reacted strongly was the European Realistic Disobedience Front (or MeRA25) a left-wing Greek political party founded by former Syriza MP and Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis who issued a statement condemning  Zelensky’s speech.

In their statement, MeRA25 claimed the speech was an insult to Greece and Cyprus because Zelensky gave a platform to neo-Nazis in front of parliament while refusing to condemn Turkey’s 1974 invasion of Cyprus.

The full statement reads:

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky dealt a huge blow to his attempts of getting the support of the Greek and Cypriot governments on Thursday, first by broadcasting messages from the neo-Nazi Azov battalion and then by refusing to condemn the Turkish invasion of Cyprus.

Unfortunately, his attitude proved that he is not only no friend of the Greek and Cypriot people, but that he undermines the heroic resistance of the Ukrainian people.

By bringing Nazis into the video call in front of the Greek parliament to speak on behalf of his government and by failing to make any comment on the Cyprus issue, he insulted the parliaments and the peoples of our countries.

When the House Speaker brought up the issue of the Turkish invasion and continued occupation of Cyprus, his connection supposedly cut off due to ‘technical reasons’.

With his performance on Thursday, Zelensky handed a gift to Vladimir Putin by playing the role of one of his “useful idiots”, lending credence to the Russian president’s claim to need to “denazify” Ukraine. The Ukrainian president, in his address to the Greek Parliament, provided a platform to two neo-Nazis who supposedly represent the resistance of the Ukrainian people and indeed of the Greek homogeneity, thus undermining his country’s noble battle against Russia’s invasion.

In the land of martyred villages such as Kalavryta, Distomo and Kandanos at the hands of Nazis, Zelensky delivered a massive insult the Greek parliament and its people by broadcasting speeches from members of a neo-Nazi battalion.

NT Wright Explains Why the Apostle Paul Is So Misunderstood, Yet So Extraordinary (Interview)

 

New Testament scholar and retired Anglican bishop N.T. "Tom" Wright, 69, has a new book, Paul: A Biography, which aims to help readers wrestling with the words of the Apostle by highlighting his distinctly Jewish roots.

When Christians engage in the life and writing of the Apostle Paul, their assumptions and conclusions are all too often misplaced.

But that is because the man best known for his lofty epistles to churches in Rome, Greece, and Asia Minor has been divorced from his Jewish heritage and way of thinking over the centuries of Gentile Christianity. 

Paul never abandoned his Jewishness even as his ministry mostly occurred among Gentile believers, Wright argues; choosing to ignore or erase the Jewish significance to Paul's words is to disregard something profoundly important, rendering portions of the Scripture only partially understandable.

Wright's previous scholarship on Paul's theology and writing include Paul and the Faithfulness of God (2013), Paul: In Fresh Perspective (2009), and The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (1991/1992).

But biographers ask different sorts of questions, Wright notes in the preface, inquiries that search for "the man behind the texts." Substantive yet accessible, Paul provides a 432-page exploration of the Apostle's beginnings, his missionary journeys, his struggles and passion, and much more.

Below is a lightly edited transcript of The Christian Post's interview with the esteemed theologian and Pauline scholar.

CP: In all your years of biblical scholarship, ministry, and in the research and writing of this biography, what have you found to be the most common misconception among Christians and non-Christians about this man, Paul, whom the Holy Spirit inspired to deliver so much counsel to His Church?

TW: The most common misconception is that Paul was arrogant, muddled, misogynistic, and so on. Whenever people find something he says either difficult to understand (see below!) or too demanding on belief or behavior, the usual response is 'Oh, he just had a bad day when he wrote that bit' ... whereas in my long experience a little more thought and work on the passage usually reveals unsuspected depths and powerful meaning.

CP: The Apostle Peter famously wrote that Paul's letters contain things that are hard to understand and are distorted by ignorant and unstable people (2 Peter 3:16). Yet many sincere Christians also have a difficult time comprehending the words of Paul and would identify with Peter, as Paul's writings are often the subject of intense, vigorous debate about what exactly he is saying. Why has he been and still is so misunderstood?

TW: Paul's writings are dense. He was writing often in difficult circumstances (in prison, on journeys, etc.) and often didn't have a chance to correct let alone expand what he was saying. In particular, he was trying to tease his readers/hearers into thinking for themselves, not simply accepting pre-packaged formulae without reflection.

But this means that, like many poets and other artists, he has to risk leaving questions open (though he's pretty clear on a lot of things!). In particular, because he knows his Bible inside out he can assume that his hearers can follow him when he's stringing together ideas that for their full meaning demand a ready grasp of the larger contexts of the passages in question. And he was writing within the complexities of the larger Greco-Roman world in which the swirling philosophies of the time meant that the same sentence could easily be interpreted in different ways, particularly by people who didn't know Paul personally ...

CP: It could be argued that Paul's life constitutes one of the greatest if not the greatest redemptive stories in all of Scripture. A man who once murderously opposed the followers of the Way encounters Jesus, is blinded en route to Damascus, and is in the years that followed used by God powerfully and pens approximately 1/3 of the New Testament. What did it mean for him to exchange such zeal to do evil for zeal for the Gospel and the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ (Philippians 3:8)?

TW: It was of course a total turn-around from one point of view; but, from another, Paul firmly believed he was still following the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as he had throughout his life. There are parallels: Moses had killed the Egyptian and had to run away, but God called him to a new task; Elijah killed the prophets of Baal and then had to run away and God recommissioned him . . . But in Paul's case what it all meant was, of course, that Jesus of Nazareth really was Israel's Messiah, designated as such through his resurrection, and that he really had inaugurated the new world for which he (and all Israel) had longed – even though it didn't look like Paul had imagined previously.

If this sounds confusing to us, it was no doubt deeply shocking for Paul himself, which is why it took time – not least his trip to Mount Sinai in Arabia, like Elijah! – to get his head and his heart around it all. And then the ten 'silent' years back home in Tarsus after his early efforts to persuade people of the truth of the gospel ... that must have been a hugely demanding time, but all we later know of Paul indicates that he used it to go deeper and deeper in prayer and scriptural understanding which would then bear such fruit in his remarkable traveling work.

CP: In your book, you maintain that scholars and pastors have not sufficiently considered the "human side" of Paul. How and why have they failed to do this?

TW: When you treat Paul's letters as 'holy scripture' (as I personally have always done) it is very tempting to think of them as simply 'words from above,' not also 'the words of a human being, often drawn out of him through suffering...' But it's only when we examine the real human situations in which Paul found himself, particularly his imprisonments and often terrible circumstances, that we really understand what he was talking about.

He saw himself as a walking illustration or example of the truth of the gospel of the crucified Messiah. To understand that, we need to look long and hard at his human side. That is where we then discern the true word of God in his human words.

CP: You stress that although the main focus of Paul's ministry was to the Gentiles, Paul cannot be separated from his Jewishness, that his life and work can only be understood in the context of the Jewish world in which he once lived. Why is grasping that vital to understanding his subsequent endeavors in Rome and elsewhere?

TW: Paul never stopped thinking, speaking, and writing as a Jew – a Jew who believed that the One God had sent the true Messiah. Generations of Gentile Christianity have often tried to ignore or even erase that Jewish meaning, turning 'Christianity' into an essentially non-Jewish system and making most of Paul's major themes only semi-comprehensible.

Paul's message for the Gentile world was precise that Israel's God had defeated the idols worshiped by the pagans and had launched a new way of being human in which the scriptures had all come true in a new way. Non-Jewish groups from the second century onwards have always tried to flatten this message out into a 'new way of being religious' or of 'being saved' – a way which could then be played off against the world of ancient Israel and its scriptures. But every step in that direction is a step away from Paul.

CP: You also trace the Apostle through his missionary journeys, noting his perseverance through being shipwrecked, jailed, and nearly killed several times. Why is what he accomplished so extraordinary in light of the fervent opposition he endured?

TW: Paul's accomplishments rank him as among the greatest public intellectuals of all time – up there with Plato or Cicero. Yet they lived privileged lives – albeit in a dangerous world – and Paul was always on the move, only able to write short, tight-packed letters, not leisurely treatises and dialogues. His utter self-giving to his communities, and his modeling of the new way of life he was commending, was more powerful still, as people realized that there was indeed a new way of being human launched upon the world and this is what it looked like.

That's why when Paul told them that he was imitating the Messiah so they should imitate him they started to do just that ... and the rest is (church) history.

CP: It's rather remarkable that your book has come out around the same time as the movie Paul: Apostle of Christ. Have you seen it, and if so, what did you think?

TW: I haven't seen the movie  ... but yes, it's interesting as a coincidence. I suspect it will find it hard to condense what needs to be said into the normal time-frame for a movie. I would rather make a series of television programs ... but that's another story.

CP: It sure seems that many Christians in the West are now struggling to find a language with which to engage culture, not only because of the proliferation of digital technology but, as you mentioned in a London Times editorial last August, a resurgent Gnosticism overhauling once thought obvious definitions of things like 'male' and 'female,' which yields confusion about "the ultimate reality of the natural world." Yet these present challenges, while profound, are really not so new. As you document extensively in your biography of Paul, the Apostle faced all kinds of issues relating to the Gentile and pagan people groups among whom he ministered during his travels. He had to change his language radically (perhaps most famously when he addressed the Athenians in Acts 17) in order to communicate the Gospel message effectively. How might Christians take a page from Paul and learn to speak to an increasingly hostile, secular society that does not understand them?

TW: The Acts speech was a legal defense against the charge of 'introducing foreign divinities' – part of the accusation that had condemned Socrates. The 'Areopagus' was not a debating society; it was the highest court in the land. Paul's speech to the court was not a 'change of language'; it was addressing a different set of questions. His message was always about the one true God and his purposes, over against the pagan gods (see 1 Thessalonians 1, probably written at the same time when he was in Athens), and this is what comes across in the speech.

However, the point is important: Paul declares in 2 Corinthians 10 that he 'takes every thought captive to obey the Messiah', and it is vital that Christians in every generation learn to do the same, in particular (as Paul insists) to discern what matters, to distinguish things that differ, to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.

The message of the crucified and risen Messiah is of course not 'comprehensible' in terms of anyone's worldview – but as Paul discovered it possesses a strange power to go to the heart of things and to transform human beings and societies with the presence and power of the living God.

CP: How has writing a biography on Paul deepened your own faith?

TW: It has helped me to see myself as living within the long and often complex and troubling story of how the Jesus-movement makes its way in the world.

It has reminded me that being faithful to Jesus doesn't mean being 'successful' in the world's eyes, nor being free from pain and trouble; but that it will produce, again and again, a joy that transcends all of that.

Most Christians misunderstand what Heaven really is, says NT Wright

 Brandon Showalter 

Prominent theologian NT Wright says the New Testament does not say what most people believe it says about Heaven, which is that it's merely a place one goes after death. In truth, he says, it's about creation being restored through God's ever-advancing Kingdom.

In an editorial for TIME magazine, the former Anglican bishop and acclaimed author stressed that, contrary to contemporary believers, early Christians did not conceive of Heaven as merely a place they go when they die.

Those who did believe in the idea of "going to Heaven when you die" when the New Testament was written were "Middle Platonists" those like Plutarch, a pagan priest in Delphi.

"To understand what the first followers of Jesus believed about what happens after death, we need to read the New Testament in its own world — the world of Jewish hope, of Roman imperialism, and of Greek thought," he said.

"The followers of the Jesus movement that grew up in that complex environment saw 'Heaven' and 'Earth' — God's space and ours if you like — as the twin halves of God's good creation."

Instead of saving people from Earth, early Christians believed God was bringing Heaven and Earth together, making creation new, and restoring the world from all its pathologies.

"They believed that God would then raise His people from the dead, to share in — and, indeed, to share His stewardship over — this rescued and renewed creation. And they believed all this because of Jesus," Wright stressed.

Christ's resurrection was the starting point of this great work of renewal, He went on to say, and this was understood by the earliest believers.

"Jesus embodied in Himself the perfect fusion of 'Heaven' and 'Earth.' In Jesus, therefore, the ancient Jewish hope had come true at last. The point was not for us to 'go to Heaven,' but for the life of Heaven to arrive on Earth," Wright said, noting that Jesus taught His followers to pray for God's Kingdom to come on Earth as it is in Heaven.

"From as early as the third century, some Christian teachers tried to blend this with types of the Platonic belief, generating the idea of 'leaving Earth and going to Heaven,' which became mainstream by the Middle Ages. But Jesus' first followers never went that route."

To understand the Gospel in its fullness, Wright told The Christian Post in a previous interview that believers in Jesus must rediscover their distinctly Jewish spiritual heritage that is a given in the New Testament but has, for a variety of reasons, been lost over the centuries.

In his biography about the Apostle Paul, Wright said Paul "never stopped thinking, speaking and writing as a Jew — a Jew who believed that the One God had sent the true Messiah."

"Generations of Gentile Christianity have often tried to ignore or even erase that Jewish meaning, turning 'Christianity' into an essentially non-Jewish system and making most of Paul's major themes only semi-comprehensible," he told CP at the time.

Non-Jewish groups since the second century have attempted to flatten the message of salvation — into a "new way of being religious" or of "being saved" — from ancient Israel's understanding of it, he explained.

"Israel's scriptures had long promised that God would come back in person to dwell with His people forever. The early Christians picked this up: 'The Word became flesh,' declares John [1:14], 'and dwelt in our midst.' The word for 'dwelt' means, literally, 'tabernacled,' 'pitched his tent' — alluding to the wilderness 'tabernacle' in the time of Moses and the Temple built by Solomon," Wright wrote Monday in TIME.

"Studying the New Testament historically, in its own world (as opposed to squashing and chopping it to fit with our own expectations), shows that the first Christians believed not that they would 'go to Heaven when they died,' but that, in Jesus, God had come to live with them."

He added, "It's hard for us moderns to grasp this: so many hymns, prayers, and sermons still speak of us 'going to Heaven.'"

According to the Pew Research Center's 2014 Religious Landscape Study, 72 percent of Americans said they believe in Heaven. In the survey, Heaven was defined as a place "where people who have led good lives are eternally rewarded."

In that same study, 37 percent of those who do not affiliate with any particular religious tradition, known as "nones," said they believed in Heaven.

Courtesy of The Christian Post