Giveaway from Cal.vini.st blog

The Cal.vini.st blog has announced a giveaway in honor of its first annivesary. Check it out here!

Another Piper Sermon Jam Video

Here is a link to another John Piper "sermon jam video". This one is being used to launch Desiring God & Reach Records' "Don't Waste Your Life" tour. It's only 3 minutes and will grab your attention.

The Cooperative Program

At the outset, I am fully prepared to be corrected for any misunderstandings I may have on how the Cooperative Program works within our Convention. I believe I understand how the money "flows" from a local church, to the state convention, and then to the national convention itself. But, if what I present below is incorrect, I encourage comments correcting my misunderstanding.

I am a Southern Baptist minister and fully support the Cooperative Program as one of the best approaches devised by man to financially support missionaries here and abroad. Based on their budget allocations, portions of the contributions made to Southern Baptist churches are sent to the Missouri Baptist Convention (MBC) and, from there, to the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) where they are pooled with contributions from churches around the world to support missions.

While my statement is true, it does not tell the entire story. Every year the SBC publishes its Cooperative Program budget such as this one for 2009 displayed at the top of this article.

When you read this breakdown, you learn $72.79 of every $100 given to the SBC is allocated to missions, $50 to international missions and $22.79 to North American missions. In addition, $22.16 is being allocated for Theological Education, most of it at the Southern Baptist seminaries. So, almost $95 out of every $100 is set aside for missions and theological education of ministers and missionaries.

Unfortunately, this is not actually true. As I noted earlier, the money a church designates to the Cooperative Program is sent to the MBC for distribution. What many Missouri Baptists do not know is how the MBC handles this money. The MBC has budget allocations for all incoming funds. For 2009, here is how every $100 received is distributed:

$36.25 is sent to the Southern Baptist Convention.
$42.75 is budgeted to the Missouri Baptist Executive Board
$2.60 is set aside for SBC Annuity and Insurance
$1.60 is set aside as Reserved funds
$3.30 is given to the Missouri Baptist Children's Home
$13.50 is budgeted for Christian Higher Education

In other words, for every $100 a church gives to the "Cooperative Program", $63.75 remains in Missouri; only $36.25 is sent to the SBC.

Such a distribution changes the picture when it comes to "mission giving". What this means is for every $100 a church sends to the MBC, only $18 plus change goes to the international missions and only $8 plus change goes to North American missions. If you throw in the theological education ministries line item, a total of less than $35 goes to missions out of every $100. That is quite a contrast to the $95 we thought was being allocated!

Furthermore, the line item which has the largest budget allocation in the MBC and SBC combined is the Missouri Executive Board Budget. They receive $42.75 out of every $100. While I do not know all this Board does for us (and I am certain there are many good things it does), such an allocation sounds "bloated" in my mind, especially when we are giving the people in the pew the impression their donations are supporting mission work.

I believe Dr. Danny Akin of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary is correct in calling for a Great Commission Resurgence within the SBC. One of the articles documented as part of this resurgence is Article IX which I quote here in its entirety:

IX. A Commitment to a More Effective Convention Structure.

We call upon all Southern Baptists, through our valued partnerships of SBC agencies, state conventions/institutions, and Baptist associations to evaluate our Convention structures and priorities so that we can maximize our energy and resources for the health of our local churches and the fulfillment of the Great Commission. This commitment recognizes the great strength of our partnership, which has been enabled by the Cooperative Program and enhanced by a belief that we can do more together than we can separately.

At the midpoint of the 20th century the Southern Baptist Convention was a convention characterized by impressive institutions, innovative programs, and strong loyalty from the churches. But the convention has too often failed to adapt its structure and programs to the changing culture. We are frequently aiming at a culture that went out of existence years ago, failing to understand how mid-20th century methods and strategies are not working in the 21st century.

Some of our convention structures at all levels need to be streamlined for more faithful stewardship of the funds entrusted to them. We must address with courage and action where there is overlap and duplication of ministries, and where poor stewardship is present. We are grateful for God’s gift of Cooperative Program dollars to both state and national entities. Both state and national entities must be wise stewards of these funds, and closely examine whether the allocation of Cooperative Program dollars genuinely contributes to Kingdom work or simply maintains the status quo. We are grateful for those churches and state conventions that are seeking to move more Cooperative Program dollars beyond their respective selves, and encourage this movement to continue and increase in the days ahead.

We must take steps toward simplifying our convention structures in an effort to streamline our structure, clarify our institutional identity, and maximize our resources for Great Commission priorities. We should ask hard questions about every aspect of our Convention structure and priorities and pray for God’s wisdom and blessing as we pursue wise answers to those questions. We must be willing to make needed changes for the good of our churches and the spread of the gospel. We believe that North American church planting, pioneer missions around the globe, and theological education are three priorities around which Southern Baptists will unite. Our Convention must be examined at every level to facilitate a more effective pursuit of these priorities.

The Great Commission, missions and theological education is the responsibility of the local church. As a convention of churches, we cooperate together to support theological education so that we can continually train competent shepherds who will lead churches through teaching, love and example, and who will see to it that the churches they lead are Great Commission churches that are promoting missions and advancing theological education. We are blessed as Southern Baptists to have such an avenue to serve the local church. Furthermore, we are grateful for the impact of the Conservative Resurgence that has given us seminaries committed to the inerrancy, infallibility, and the sufficiency of the Bible.

We believe the local church must be “ground zero” in a Great Commission Resurgence, and that our associations, state conventions and national agencies exist to serve and assist the churches in their divine assignment. We are convinced that as our people see our entities in this light, they will respond in even greater support of the Cooperative Program.

I agree with the call to reexamine how Missouri Baptists allocate the gifts of God's people and the structure of our MBC to see if we can, perhaps, reduce the amount of money remaining in the state and send more to the SBC for missions work. Surely such a need is critical in our present day as revealed by the International Missions Board's inability to send out some missionaries due to the lack of funds.

One of those Heartbreaking Sundays

This past Sunday I preached on the "gospel" based on Colossians 1:5b-8. I sense the Lord's presence very much during my message as I explained what the gospel is and how the Lord uses it in our lives. I don't recall how many times I told the people the need "to repent and believe" and in how many ways I said it. Over and over and over during the message I continued to call people to hear the gospel, repent of their sins, and trust Christ.

In the congregation were more than a few individuals who are listed on our church's prayer list as those needing salvation. Periodically I would find myself looking at them as I called for folks to heed the gospel. Some of them appeared to be sleeping. Others were looking around the auditorium. None of them appeared to be paying any attention to my plea.

Now this was not the first time I have experienced such a response to a message clearly aimed at those apart from Christ. Yes, I call sinners to repent and believe with each and every sermon I preach. But, every now and then, the text leads you directly to a message of salvation and this was clearly one of them. My heart is always broken when I see the word falling on bad ground and being stolen away by "birds" or choked off by "thorns". Oh, if only they could see and hear the message of God. Yet, they sit there, appearing completely unaware of the doom they are courting and the judgment that is awaiting them! Indeed it just breaks my heart.

But it does not surprise me. Clearly their response is to be expected from those who are spiritual dead and depraved as Paul teaches in Romans 3 and Ephesians 2. They will NOT respond on their own just as the Lord said in John 6:44. They are spiritually dead and without hope except for the grace of God.

May God's grace touch their lives and may His Spirit work a work of regeneration in their hearts before it is too late, no matter who might be preaching the Gospel to them.

My Present Reading List

Books in progress as of May 22, 2009:



"Kingdom of the Occult" by Walter Martin, et. al.

"Baptist History Celebration 2007"

"John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, & Doxology", ed. Burk Parsons

"Sermons Printed from the Manuscripts of the Late Rev. Benjamin Beddome"

"Theology for the People" by William Plumer

"Foundations of Grace: 1400 B.C. to A.D. 100" by Steven Lawson

"Law of God" by William Plumer

"Living for God's Glory" by Joel R. Beeke

"From Grief to Glory" by James Bruce III

"A Cluster of Camphire: Words of Cheer and Comfort to Sick and Sorrowful Souls" by Mrs. C. H. Spurgeon

English Standard Version

At the beginning of 2008, I decided on using a different approach for my daily Scripture reading. My two-fold change was:

1. Use a different daily reading plan than I used the year before.
2. Use a different translation each year until I have gone through the primary English translations.

So, my 2008 daily readings were all in the Holman Christian Standard Bible using the John R. Kohlenberger "Read Through The Bible In A Year" chronological plan. I found the HCSB to be very easy reading but the Kohlenberger plan more of a challenge. For obvious reasons, you read no New Testament passages until September 30th. I know the Old Testament is as inspired as the New but, really, don't we all enjoy some devotional reading in the New Testament before the last quarter of the year?!

This year I switched back to the Robert Murray M'Cheyne plan which I have used and enjoyed for many years. For my Bible translation, I am using the English Standard Version. The more I read from it, the more I am enjoying it.

When I am intensely studying God's Word for teaching or preaching purposes, next to the Greek and Hebrew I prefer the New American Standard version. I have found the NAS more often faithfully renders the text than do other translations. But, simply reading the NAS devotionally is a challenge. The wording does not flow as well as the KJV or ESV primarily due to its allegience to the text. It's "literalness" comes across as "wooden" and "stiff".

While I will continue to use the NAS in study, I would rather use the ESV for devotional reading as well as for worship and teaching purposes. I have switched to the ESV in my Missouri Baptist classes and have also found myself using the ESV more and more in my sermon delivery.

The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod has chosen the ESV as their standard translation. If you would like some reasons why, check it out here. Also, John Piper's church, Bethlehem Baptist in Minneapolis, uses the ESV. You may read Dr. Piper's reasons for selecting the ESV here.

Whatever translation you use, please read the Lord's Word each and every day. May He bless your efforts.

Bethesda Update #1

Yesterday was my first official day as interim pastor of Bethesda Baptist Church in St. Charles. What a privilege it is to be called to shepherd a flock but what an awesome responsibility it is as well. I do pray for the Lord’s wisdom, patience, strength, and blessing in this calling.

I renewed some acquaintances I have made over the past two months as well as met other folks for the first (or second or third!) time. What used to be a steel trap of a memory has quickly diminished in its capability resulting in my rapid forgetfulness of names or, even worse, membership status of some! A pastor always feels very badly when he greets someone as a visitor only to be told they are members! Hopefully, those to whom I directed my incorrect greetings yesterday will be forgiving since, after all, it was my first official Sunday!

I chatted with a few folks during Sunday School and then walked into one of the adult classes for the final 15 minutes or so. This was followed by our morning worship service in which I began an exposition of the book of Colossians, preaching on the first two verses of the book. After the service, we met in the fellowship hall for dinner and cake celebrating the graduation of two members from school plus my arrival as interim. In the evening, one of our deacons taught a lesson from Proverbs but I only made the last forty minutes due to a teaching commitment at Highland View. Afterwards I visited again with some of the people and then moved in several boxes of my library, stacking the books on a couple of the bookshelves in my office.

Overall it was a great day. The people have been so gracious to me and my family. God has placed some very talented and committed believers in this fellowship and I believe He is doing and will continue to do a great work there.

To be perfectly frank, the only disappointment of the entire day was my message. Despite hours of study and prayer, I have preached much better sermons than I did yesterday. For those who have never preached, it is difficult to explain the feeling a preacher has when he feels very prepared and yet the message comes across as flat. Yesterday was one of those days.

While my pastoral experience is somewhat limited, I have learned that Sunday afternoon is usually my most depressing time of the week. I approach most Sunday mornings with great anticipation only to have the air let out of the balloon by the end of the service. Rarely do I preach a message as well as I think I should and a long Sunday afternoon ensues. And, yet, I have also learned another, far more important truth:

“So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” (Isaiah 55:11)

While my sermon did not meet my expectations, I am thankful the Word of God I proclaimed yesterday will accomplish the Lord’s purposes even if I have no idea what those purposes are. Praise God that He is a sovereign God!

A Favorite Poem

There are days from time to time when one's mind is overwhelmed with all that is taking place and all that is left to be done. Such times may cause us to stop and consider whether we are, perhaps, losing our mind!

Today is such a day for me. When I paused briefly to reflect on what lies before me these next few days and found myself a bit dismayed by all I need to do, my thoughts turned to a devoted believer of a prior era who, in fact, fought insanity much of his life: William Cowper (pronounced "cooper"). Anytime I hear the name "Cowper", immediately I recall the words of one of his poems and one of my favorite hymns.

There is a fountain filled with blood
Drawn from Immanuel's veins,
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Lose all their guilty stains.

The dying thief rejoiced to see
That fountain in his day,
And there may I, though vile as he,
Wash all my sins away.

Dear dying Lamb, Thy precious blood
Shall never lose its pow'r,
Till all the ransomed Church of God
Be saved to sin no more.

E'er since by faith I saw the stream
Thy flowing wounds supply,
Redeeming love has been my theme
And shall be till I die.

When this poor lisping stamm'ring tongue
Lies silent in the grave,
Then in a nobler, sweeter song
I'll sing Thy pow'r to save.

The truthfulness of Cowper's words are always a soothing salve to my mind.

"No, Mr. President"

I am thankful for John Piper's boldness and his faithfulness to the Word of God no matter how "politically incorrect" he is! Take time to view this video.

Demographics

Perhaps you have already seen this little video. But, a link to it was in my e-mail today and, after viewing it, I thought it was worth watching. Please take the time to do so.

Christian Ethics Dilemma Question

Dr. Russell Moore has an interesting and quite challenging question posted on his blog today. His Christian Ethics' students must answer it as part of their course work. I'm glad I'm not in his class and I do pray I do not have to address this situation any time soon in my new pastorate! But, given our society as it is, I may be wise to work on my own answer prior to ever facing this situation.

Good Friday and Self-Salvation

Praise God for His Son who cried out from the cross, "It is finished." He has accomplished for me what I could have never accomplished for myself: the redemption and salvation of my soul!

In contrast, take a look at some who strive their entire lives to achieve their own salvation here.

Message to Pastors and Churches

A friend of mine just posted a link to this video on Facebook. In light of some ads I have seen on local television concerning a specific church and their "entertaining" Easter worship services planned for this Sunday, I thought I would add a link to this blog so those who might miss it on Facebook would be able to see it.

A Response to Mythbuster

When I first began this blog, I discovered almost immediately the necessity to monitor comments. The first comment posted (which I later deleted) was filled with unnecessary language as well as made absolutely no sense relative to my entry. So I have the capability of deciding whether to permit a comment or not.

Some blogger named “Mythbuster” attempted to post a comment to my March 12 entry in this blog. I decided to block the comment for one primary reason: most folks do not often view comments. Comments get lost in the “blog shuffle”. This comment demanded a reply and such a reply would also be lost in a simple comment. I believed this specific “comment” needed more visibility than a simple comment.

So, first, I am posting the comment in its entirety. Then, I will step through it paragraph by paragraph and attempt to address “Mythbuster”’s statements.

For starters, there was no word for embryo in ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew. For that matter, there was no word for abortion either, even though abortions were taking place during that period in history.

Furthermore, if we look more closely at the Bible we see passages which actually show that God does not consider an embryo/fetus to be a human life.

Take, for example, Exodus 21:22-25 which shows that a woman's health is more important than that of a fetus.(22)If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. (23)And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, (24)Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (25)Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.This clearly states that if a woman suffers a miscarriage due to two men fighting but she is not harmed then her husband can take the other man to court, but if she is also harmed the punishment must fit the crime.

In Leviticus 27:6, God commands that a monetary value be placed on children who were no younger than one month old. Any younger than that and they had no value.

In Numbers 3:15, God commands that a census be taken, but only of those one month old and above. Those younger than that, including fetuses, were not counted.

Even in Genesis 2:7 we see that God did not consider Adam to be a "living soul" until God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life".

I could go on but I think these examples state it best. Either human life does not begin at conception or God's words clearly contradict themselves and therefore could not be from an omnipotent being.

I do not want to be repetitive but I am going to respond to these statements one paragraph at a time by first repeating each paragraph.

For starters, there was no word for embryo in ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew. For that matter, there was no word for abortion either, even though abortions were taking place during that period in history.

Mythbuster is referring to my comment attached to Luke 1:36. This is what I said:

"And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has conceived a son" (not an embryo, or a blob of cells, but a SON; Luke 1:36).

Unfortunately, he misses my point. Whether Greek or Hebrew had a word for embryo is not the issue. The fact is the angel has confirmed Elizabeth conceived a son (huion in the Greek) and not some impersonal entity. The conception resulted in a male human. If that was not the angel’s intention, the statement could have read “has conceived an it” (auto in the Greek). In this verse, “son” (huion) is the direct object of the verb “conceived”.

Concerning the Old Testament passages I quoted (the Hebrew passages of which there are many more), my point, again, is not the absence of the word “fetus” or “embryo” in Hebrew but the use of the personal pronoun translated by such words as “me” and “you”, not “it”.

Were abortions taking place at that time? Almost certainly they were. But that does not justify abortion. Since the eating of the fruit of the tree in the Garden of Eden, man has been and is a sinner. Abortion has been and continues to be a sin no matter in what era it was or is practiced.

Furthermore, if we look more closely at the Bible we see passages which actually show that God does not consider an embryo/fetus to be a human life.Take, for example, Exodus 21:22-25 which shows that a woman's health is more important than that of a fetus.(22)If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. (23)And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, (24)Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (25)Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.This clearly states that if a woman suffers a miscarriage due to two men fighting but she is not harmed then her husband can take the other man to court, but if she is also harmed the punishment must fit the crime.

When I read this text it does not “clearly state” what Mythbuster is claiming. There have been debates on this passage among Christian scholarship but I believe the passage is better understood quite differently. Verse 22 states one side of the problem while verses 23-25 give us the other side. Using the English Standard Version, let me look at those two divisions.

“When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine.”

So, in this case you have some men fighting and during the fight they strike a pregnant woman who goes into labor. The result: the child (children) is born with “no harm”, i.e., the child was not injured by the men in this fight. The woman’s husband imposes a fine on them for hurting his wife and the judges demand the payment.

“But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”

This is case 2. The pregnant woman is struck and goes into labor. However, the child is born with problems (“there is harm”). In that case, what is the penalty to be assessed those who struck the woman? It is the “lex talionis”, the law of retaliation. If that child has lost an eye, the men will lose an eye. If that child has lost a foot, the men will lose a foot. If that child has lost its life, well, you get the picture.

Furthermore, Mythbuster said this passage shows a “woman's health is more important than that of a fetus.” Somehow that is supposed to prove that “God does not consider an embryo/fetus to be a human life.” As I have stated in other blog entries, there are cases when one must choose the life of the mother over the life of the unborn child. For example, a tubal pregnancy will result in the death of both mother and child if the child is not removed. In order to save the life of the mother, the child’s life must be ended before birth. The LIFE (not health) of the mother, in this case, is of more value than the LIFE of the unborn child. But that statement does not lead to the conclusion that I do consider the unborn child to be anything less than a human life and neither does God.

On to his next example:

In Leviticus 27:6, God commands that a monetary value be placed on children who were no younger than one month old. Any younger than that and they had no value.

If you read the entire chapter it becomes apparent the discussion concerns giving a monetary offering in place of an actual dedication of a person to the Lord. The NIV renders part of verse 2 as “If anyone makes a special vow to dedicate persons to the Lord by giving equivalent values…”. Following this are the various equivalent values for individuals. We find the following values:

- males, over 60 years: 15 shekels
- females, over 60 years: 10 shekels
- males, 20-60: 50 shekels
- females, 20-60: 30 shekels
- males, 5-20: 20 shekels
- females, 5-20: 10 shekels
- males, 1 month – 5 years: 5 shekels
- females, 1 month – 5 years: 3 shekels

Dedicated service to the Lord is valued more for those who are more capable of serving him, i.e., those in the 20-60 years of age. Those younger are of less value in terms of service as are those much older. Serving males are of more value than serving females.

Given the infant mortality rate was quite high, it isn’t surprising no equivalent value was placed on a one month old. Is Mythbuster implying that God does not believe an individual is a living human being until they are at least one month old?

In Numbers 3:15, God commands that a census be taken, but only of those one month old and above. Those younger than that, including fetuses, were not counted.

Mythbuster is attempting to use the same argument on Numbers 3:15 as he did in Leviticus 27:6. So there is no need to repeat what I said relative to that verse. In the Numbers passage, the Levites are being counted for service in the ministry. The census taken does not include those under one month which, again, is not surprising given the infant mortality rate. Once more I would ask Mythbuster if he is inferring that God does not consider an individual a living human until they are one month of age?

One additional note, though. If Numbers 3:15 implies God does not consider those under one month to be a living human, then God must not consider those under 20 years to be human either (see Numbers 1:3 for the counting of people in all tribes but Levi, the tribe being counted in Numbers 3).

Even in Genesis 2:7 we see that God did not consider Adam to be a "living soul" until God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life".

I’m assuming Mythbuster is implying life does not begin until the “fetus” takes a breath. Otherwise, I see no reason for even referring to this verse.

First, anyone who believes in the creation account (and I suspect Mythbuster does not which makes his using this text curious at best), understands the creation of Adam and Eve was a unique event. Obviously neither could be born in some normal way. In reality, this is the “which came first, the chicken or the egg” question. The answer: the chicken. God created Adam and Eve as adults. Therefore, using their “births” as a model for typical human births is illogical.

Second, Mybuster may consult his Hebrew and note that Genesis 2:7 reads “breathed into his nostrils the BREATH OF LIVES”. Sometimes Hebrew uses plural words to indicate majesty. Perhaps that’s what is happening here. But perhaps the plural is referring to the two lives God breathed into Adam: physical life and spiritual life. Adam’s heart was not beating prior to this act. Adam’s brain was not functioning prior to this act. Adam was not moving his arms or his legs prior to this act. In ONE ACT, Adam became a physical and spiritual being, i.e., a living soul.

Wow, that sounds like what happens at conception to me! The heart of the unborn is beating before the mother even realizes she’s pregnant. Physical life is present at conception because conception results in continual growth. Physical life exists for that child before it ever takes its first breath of air because it has already received the breath of God at its conception.

Now to his conclusion:

I could go on but I think these examples state it best. Either human life does not begin at conception or God's words clearly contradict themselves and therefore could not be from an omnipotent being.

Nothing Mythbuster has said or any passage he has quoted proves human life does not begin at conception. Perhaps he should go back and examine the passages I quoted. Interestingly, he never addressed them other than his comment on the word “embryo”.

Second, he has offered no proof that God’s Word “clearly contradict themselves”. I’m a bit perplexed how he could draw such a conclusion.

Finally, he claims if God’s words do contradict themselves then God could not be an omnipotent being. I’m sorry but that logic does not follow. God could be an all powerful (omnipotent) LYING being in which case His words could consistently contradict themselves. The correct conclusion would be if God’s word clearly contradict themselves He, therefore, is not a God of truth or He is not an omniscient (all knowing) God.

My suspicion is Mythbuster has grabbed a selection of “pro-death” arguments he has found at some web site and plastered them together to form his comment. I’ve seen these before. Nevertheless, I feel sorry for him and those like him who continue to fight for the “right” to murder unborn children for any case and at any time. May the Lord convict his heart and save his soul.

Following Christ and Killing Our Babies: Part 3 - Embryonic Stem Cell Research

While campaiging for the office last year, our President was very clear he was not a fan of the unborn. That was the primary reason I could not vote for him. Now that he is President, he is remaining faithful to his promises concerning our unborn children: killing them is just fine. In fact, the Federal government should help fund such murders in the name of research.

Despite all the claims from various Obama supporters, the handwriting is on the wall. This President is going to do whatever he can to perpetuate abortion on demand and the overused tag line "it's a woman's choice". Woman, your choice ends when you engage in the act! Permitting the flow of Federal money into embryonic stem cell research simply opens the door for more and more abortion. Check out a few articles here and here and here and here.

Some will argue that embryos (read babies) are not human but our God says differently.

"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." (Psalm 51:5; David's mother conceived HIM, not some embryo).

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you" says God to Jeremiah in Jeremiah 1:5.

"And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has conceived a son" (not an embryo, or a blob of cells, but a SON; Luke 1:36).

There are other references but these alone make it clear that, from God's perspective, a new life exists at the moment of conception. To take that life is murder. And now our President has permitted a new onslaught of human life on the grounds that new cures MAY be found for various diseases. Check out the stem cell cures check list here.

Another sad day among many lately in the history of the United States. May God be merciful to us, a people who have lost their way.