Quoted section about the supporting data:
Data Supporting the Updated mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines (2023-2024 Formula)
The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines approved and authorized today are supported by the FDA’s evaluation of manufacturing data to support the change to the 2023-2024 formula and non-clinical immune response data on the updated formulations including the XBB.1.5 component.
- The updated mRNA vaccines are manufactured using a similar process as previous formulations. In studies that have been recently conducted, the extent of neutralization observed by the updated vaccines against currently circulating viral variants causing COVID-19, including EG.5 and BA.2.86, appears to be of a similar magnitude to the extent of neutralization observed with prior versions of the vaccines against corresponding prior variants against which they had been developed to provide protection. This suggests that the vaccines are a good match for protecting against the currently circulating COVID-19 variants.
- The benefit-risk profile of previously authorized and approved mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is well understood as these vaccines have been administered to hundreds of millions of people in the United States.
I will believe in climate change when billionaires are jailed for not complying with climate change initiatives.
23
Where is that from?
It's all about the money which is why they can't offer Ivermectin to patients. Healing patients is bad for revenue.
The red pill is entering the blood stream!
The categories of yes/no/undecided remind me of some prior viral questions
- What color is the dress?
- Is a hotdog a sandwich?
Cool they banned masks! Masks are facial cosmetics, right?!
“Sustainable development”
The picture on page 3 of this article is helpful to me in understanding how the people in that time understood the earth and the heavens. The whole chapter talks God’s glory on display through his creation and his law so I try to keep in mind the main point when studying the details.
An old man with a track record of garbled speech sometimes speaks sentences that are poor English.
In addition, the 72 hour rule applies. In 72 hours, OSINT or planefags might find out when he arrived on the island and bring clarity.
aLreAdY dEbOoOoOoOoOoNkEd By FaCt ChEcKeR!1!1!1
There's some wildfire related evacuating in Louisiana. I don't know if it is related.
What does brightly dyed hair normalize? I'm puzzled by that one.
Are you trying to bring logical thinking into a circlejerk thread?!
Things I don't need to live on this planet: an X account
This Seal is revocable, non-exclusive license, and the digital art file containing the Seal is non-transferable. Any entity that mimics or unlawfully uses the Seal without explicit approval from a representative of President Trump’s campaign may face legal action.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/news/044e9b3b-e83f-4291-a26b-2467146560e1
Assuming that OP’s stats are accurate, the statistics gathered about Christians and churchgoers show a lot of problems in the area of regular Bible engagement and understanding of essential doctrine. If statistics tell us that half or more of them are morally no different from self-proclaimed non-Christians, then having over 90% self-identifying as Christians doesn’t mean much.
Earlier I gave examples from the gospel of John where Jesus claimed to be the same as the God of the Old Testament. Here is another example where Jesus identifies himself as the son of man coming on the clouds of heaven which is a direct link to Daniel 7. When Jesus said that in Matthew 26, the high priest tore his robes and accused him of blasphemy.
Daniel 7:13-14; Matthew 26:64; Mark 14:62; Revelation 1:7
In another comment you wrote this:
He even told the Jewish leaders, you are of your father the devil.
Now put those two ideas together. The high priest accused Jesus of blasphemy because Jesus claimed to be the son of the God of his Old Testament law.
The truth is that the Bible has plenty of data points where Jesus identifies himself with the YHWH of the Old Testament. No amount of side arguments can reconcile the fact that Jesus made these claims.
There is nothing divine about innocent children dying
The children in the text aren’t innocent.
What is your working definition for “children”? The “children” in the text were old enough to have the mental capacity to jeer the prophet of the LORD in a way that indicated that they doubted him as Elijah’s successor.
In another comment you said
And yes I personally believe the God of the Jews is not the God Jesus called father.
Let us presume your interpretation of the mauling in 2 Kings 2 is correct. If you believe that there is nothing divine about innocent children dying, then why did your god, who isn’t YHWH God of the Old Testament, allow those innocent children to die? By your own line of logic, you defined your god as not divine because he allowed those children to die.
I’m the gospel of John, Jesus repeatedly identifies himself with the name of God that was revealed to Moses in Exodus 3 at the burning bush.
As for the Elisha event, see Leviticus 26:21-22 for precedent in the law of beasts destroying children as divine judgment for sin. The language for the youths isn’t strictly used to refer to pre-pubescent children. It is used of 17 year old Joseph.
When they jeered at Elisha saying “go on up”, there’s likely an association with Elijah being taken up into heaven. They rejected his authority as a prophet of God. See also 2 Chronicles 36:16.
Community notes are about as accurate as a community edited encyclopedia (Wikipedia)
Old men tend to thin out in the legs. This 80 year old guy can still take two steps at a time with those muscular legs…
Conferences are big gatherings consisting of worship, instruction, edification, and networking. Some are general purpose, and some target a specific audience.
Stop asking questions and obey the talking head on the news show!
Joking aside, great questions.