The only thing held in common by the two subjects of this blog are controversy -- huge controversy. First, unless you've been on another planet you know that there is a growing opposition to the use of vaccines and that many Christians are a large part of that opposition. But they have very little support from Christian doctors, especially in the argument that vaccines are not safe. An article in a leading Christian magazine by a Christian physician argued that being vaccinated, and having our children vaccinated, is an important way of fulfilling the command to love our neighbors as ourselves. All in all, the "unsafe" argument seems to carry little hard scientific weight. Another instance of where the rare exception seems to prove the rule.
But there is another objection to vaccines that some Christians, both Evangelicals and Roman Catholics, raise from time to time. That is the claim that vaccines are derived from the cells of aborted babies. This was brought to a pastor friend of mine years ago and he immediately contacted one or more Christian physicians. They told him that while it may have been true a long time ago it was not now. I heard the issue raised again about six years ago by the same person to the same pastor. He had a man in the church do more research on it and that man concluded the charge was baseless.
This morning I saw the matter raised again on a Facebook post and did some research of my own. What I found was that there is something to the claim that anti vaccine people make but it is not the way it sounds. There are two lines of cells used in making many, but not all. vaccines that utilize human diploid cells derived from two fetuses that were aborted in the 1960's. The two infants were not aborted for the purpose of creating two cell lines. That use of the cells was a decision by physicians and researchers after the fact. This will be important in considering the ethics of all this.
My research concluded that all MMR vaccines are derived from these two lines of cells. Does that mean that my wife and I sinned against God when our children received MMR vaccines in the 1970's? Let us look at it this way. Suppose one of my children will die if they do not receive a heart transplant. Suppose also that a hypothetical young person is shot in the head in a robbery attempt and dies while on life support in the hospital. Would I then allow my dying child to receive a heart transplant from the murder victim. Yes. The victim was not murdered for the purpose of giving my child the badly needed heart.
You can find out which vaccines are or are not derived from the two lines of cells from the 1960's by going to www.know-vaccines.org. The impression given by anti vaccine people that vaccines are derived from current victims of abortion is misleading at best and at worst deliberate deception. This applies also to their implied claim that virtually all vaccines are so derived. I respect their convictions but not their arguments.
Subject number two for this blog: Joel Osteen. "Oh no", you say, "not that subject again". Well, like vaccines, this keeps coming up and some recent research on my part sheds a bit more light on this. His recent purchase of a 10.5 million dollar home put him back in the news and renewed simmering criticisms of him and his wife Victoria. But, I had occasion to read an article in a source I trust; an article by someone who has observed him first hand for a long time. This writer said that he appreciates Joel because: l) like Jesus he is a "friend of sinners"; 2) many of those sinners come to faith in Christ through Joel's messages and books; 3) Joel conducts himself honorably in all situations; 4) his wealth has come from his books, not his salary; 5) he takes no salary and is the largest contributor to the church he pastors; 6) his private jet, paid for by book royalties, is used to go directly to his many speaking engagements and immediately back to his church for Sunday mornings.
This writer brought forth other reasons to put Joel in a different light than his critics see him. All these things being true we are still left with the problem of Joel's (how shall we say it) somewhat deficient teaching and theology which to many fair minded Christians seems to minimize sin and judgment. I have no desire to heap more criticism upon Joel. When I stand before the Lord I want to be able to say with a clear conscience that I prayed for Joel, Victoria and many other believers who had obvious faults and shortcomings. I have a few myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment