“It is written, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God: this was our Saviour’s answer to the Devil, when he would have persuaded Him to the commission of a presumptuous action. There are angels, says the tempter, to take care of you, so that you cannot possibly come to any harm; then make the experiment, and cast thyself down. Now there is no great difference between this of the devil and the temptation which lies before us; both intimate the safety of the practice, and both pretend the blessing of God; our Lord’s reproof, then, will serve them both.”
Category: History
The Foundations & Effects of the Compulsory Vaccination Law (1892)
An excellent concise critique of vaccination and vaccine mandates in Vaccination Tracts (1892). It is the Christian duty to never go along with child-murder via vaccination, even when threatened by the sword of the state.
Dr. Abraham Capadose (1795-1874): a Model Opponent of Vaccines in Christian History
Dr. Abraham Capadose (1795-1874) was a model opponent of vaccination in Christian history. He was salt and light, willing to stand firmly against the evil of vaccines. Capadose called vaccines for what they were: evil, criminal, pagan, murderous, and prideful.
A Biblical & Medical Critique of Vaccination (1878) (The National Anti-compulsory-vaccination Reporter)
The following was written in The National Anti-compulsory-vaccination Reporter in 1878. It critiques vaccination on biblical and medical grounds, exposes it as a fraudulent and dangerous practice, and condemns the tyranny of compulsory vaccination:
Reverend William Hume-Rothery Ethically and Logically Refutes Vaccination (1872)
“The theory of this so-called Vaccination is that we must do evil that good may come : create a disease to prevent a disease; a minor, which may be followed by life-long sufferings or a speedy and untimely death, to prevent a major, which might never occur, and could not possibly occur if the laws of health were faithfully obeyed. This theory would justify every description of wickedness within certain bounds. It, and the practice alluded to, which is based upon it, must, therefore, be indefensible on any Christian or rational ground whatever.”