Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :



Continuing our discussion from part three, this very same sentiment was expressed yet again in a November 2004 article published in Newsweek International. It stated in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

". . . you might think that the chief obstacles to turning stem cells into cures were political. But the technical ones are legion. Stem cells taken from days-old embryos have the ability to produce any type of human cell, which makes them potentially so useful. But harnessing this ability has proved to be challenging. Left on their own, a clump of stem cells begins to form a hodgepodge of human cells, which won't do much to repair a damaged spinal cord. Scientists have had some success in using chemicals to direct stem cells to grow into various types of tissue, but the cells have an annoying tendency to disobey, preferring certain types of cells over others. Perhaps the cells get subtle cues from surrounding tissue? Nobody yet knows."

"Even if the levers were found to make stem cells grow into replacement parts, scientists would still have to get them to work together with surrounding cells. To be a functioning replacement for damaged brain or spinal-cord tissue, for instance, neurons grown from stem cells would have to connect to the body's neural networks."

"If these problems sound tough, consider that scientists at present don't really even know how to identify stem cells. They can test cells by injecting them into animal tissue to see if they form embryonic tissue, but such tests are cumbersome. Scientists would like a way to identify whatever DNA mechanism makes a cell a true stem cell, but they don't yet know what that might be."

----- End Quote -----

The above quotes again beg the question: If non-controversial and more promising techniques exist, such as using adult stem cells, and "de-differentiation", why do some companies such as Stemagen still insist on conducting embryonic stem cell research? Is it just some fanatical fascination with feeling empowered like some god, because they can create and destroy human life at will?

In case you didn't realize it, a few moments ago, I pulled the old "switcheroo" on you. What am I talking about? Well, consider this: I just spent a major portion of this series explaining to you how President Bush has appeared to remain firm in his rejection of embryonic stem cell research for the past eight years. Bush has placed conservative-minded judges wherever he can, whenever he can, and he has beaten back those nasty pro embryonic stem cell research boys and girls in the US Congress whenever he can, by wielding the presidential power of the veto.

So the question is this: In light of everything that George W. Bush has done, how is it possible that Stemagen was able to achieve their task? Isn't this exactly what Bush has been trying to prevent over the past eight years? Sadly, just as with the abortion issue, and the gay and lesbian "marriage" issue, it appears that the American public was promised one package prior to his election, and even seemed to be getting that package with his two-time electoral victory, but in the end, it has never fully received the promised goods. In other words, technically-speaking, he kept his promise. Some would even say that he fought his hardest to prevent federal funds from being used to finance embryonic stem cell research. But you see, (and he obviously knew this all along), once he put up the legal roadblocks for federal funding, scientists who wanted to continue their research simply found other sources of financing, thus bypassing Bush's vetoes, and they broke no federal laws in the process.

In short, just as abortion is still the law of the land; and just as a pregnant minor can still obtain an abortion in some places without either parental consent or notification; and just as more gays and lesbians are now getting "married" than ever before, Bush's actions actually did very little to stop embryonic stem cell research. Scientists simply changed gears in light of the new situation, while the gullible American public has believed that Bush kept his word. After all, as I said, he did promise to hold back federal financing, and he did do that, as far as we know. Such is the shrewdness of all American politicians. They have the ability to make you think that they have done what you have asked of them, when all the while, they are doing something entirely different.

As I told our mailing list readers in February of 2007, the USA has very few righteous leaders left. They are all slowly becoming godless and corrupt; corrupted by power, by money, by powerful lobbyists, by self-interest and by fame. As God's Word tells us:

"Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people."


"But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."


A year and nine months ago, I asked our mailing list members what the American Christian Right was going to do during the 2008 presidential race. I predicted that as they had done during the George Bush/John Kerry race, they would probably end up choosing what they view as the lesser of two evils. They wouldn't find a worthy candidate, so they would settle for second best. But as I said earlier in this series, there really is no second best. Either a candidate is fully on the side of the Lord, and leads the nation by Christian example, and supports and promotes only Godly laws and principles, or else he doesn't.

While many American Christians voted for George W. Bush as a result of his publicly-stated position regarding the three key issues that we have examined in this series, and because they assumed that he would be a very Christian president, as we've now seen, if we dare to delve beyond surface impressions, and look deeper at these issues, George W. Bush has not been as effective in these three areas, as it would seem. I would like to say that perhaps Bush held back the tide of evil a little longer, but even that isn't true. In my view, in all three key areas, the situation has gotten worse during the past eight years. Millions of babies have continued to be aborted. Three states have now legalized gay and lesbian "marriages" whereas before there were none. Embryonic stem cell research has not been stopped, in spite of a lack of federal financing.

Add to the above America's two prolonged wars in which many thousands of people have died needlessly; and the fact that America is hated the world over more than ever before and is viewed as an oppressive bully and unilateralist; and the fact that the entire world is currently engulfed in a very serious recession such as it has not seen in many decades, which is a direct result of American greed; and the fact that George W. Bush has not come to the aid of the poor, the sick, the needy the elderly, or the young; and one must truly wonder what his legacy will be? How will history remember him? I suspect that the two wars, as well as the global economic collapse, will play a greater role in determining how the world remembers George W. Bush. The other internal national issues will seem minor by comparison, particularly if you realize that a large part of the world is not even Christian, and so won't judge Bush by Christian standards.

Let us briefly return now to our discussion of Senator Barack Obama and John McCain. In spite of his current attempt to try to distance himself from George W. Bush, and paint himself as some sort of free-thinking "Renegade Republican" who will do a much better job as the next president of the United States, the truth of the matter is that John McCain will continue to implement some of the very same policies as Bush, because he and George Bush are basically of the same stock. McCain is a friend of the rich and the powerful, and has publicly stated that he would make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Like Mr. Bush, McCain is a gung-ho war-monger, and he has no intentions of quickly pulling American troops out of Iraq or anywhere else. In fact, his goal is to have American troops remain in Iraq until 2013. This is an individual who still relishes telling the story of his years of captivity as a POW in Viet Nam. War is simply in his blood. Some people say that he would even be worse than George W. Bush when it comes to a choice between pulling the trigger, or relying upon slower diplomacy. I can certainly see John McCain taking the war to Iran in the blink of an eye.

As far as the gay and lesbian agenda is concerned, as we saw earlier, John McCain was one of seven Senators who failed to support the gay "marriage" ban amendment. He was obviously very wrong to do so. Concerning abortion, John McCain is in favor of repealing Roe v. Wade. He has supported most bills related to restricting the current laws pertaining to this ungodly practice, such as banning partial birth abortions, prohibiting the practice of taking minors across state lines in order to obtain abortions, maintaining a ban on Military Base Abortions, supporting notifying the parents of a minor when said child obtains an abortion across state lines, etc. While John McCain voted yes to ban human cloning, in April of 2007, he also voted yes to expand research to more embryonic stem cell lines. In short, John McCain is a mixed bag of tricks, just like George W. Bush.

The idea of John McCain being even worse than Bush is a very interesting point. According to a New York Times article from October 30, 2008, President Bush's approval rating remains at twenty-two percent. According to the article, this makes Bush tied for the lowest presidential approval rating on record. President Harry S. Truman's approval rating was also a very low twenty-two per cent, according to a 1952 Gallup Poll. In an editorial from November 1, 2008, also taken from the New York Times, Op-Ed writer Nicholas D. Kristof states that:

----- Begin Quote -----

"An unscientific poll of 109 professional historians this year found that 61 percent rated President Bush as the worst president in American history."

"A couple of others judged him second-worst, after James Buchanan, whose incompetence set the stage for the Civil War. More than 98 percent of the historians in the poll, conducted through the History News Network, viewed Mr. Bush’s presidency as a failure."

----- End Quote -----

Had John McCain won the 2008 election, and if he were to have kept American troops in Iraq until 2013, as he had intentions to do, and if he were to have bombed Iran, I suspect that his approval rating would have quickly dropped to zero. The world at large would simply not tolerate such actions, and under a McCain Administration, America would be even more hated than it already is. Likewise, given current American opinions of the Iraq occupation, in a Democratic-controlled Congress, it may have even lead to McCain's possible impeachment. America needs healing, not more wars, and that may possibly be one of the few good things that will come from Mr. Obama's victory.

And what about Senator Barack Obama? Once all of the election season euphoria has worn off, and Mr. Obama has settled into his new position as the President of the United States, what should we expect? If past Democratic administrations are any indication, and if we look at Obama's seriously left-leaning voting record over the past several years, then there is no doubt that America can look forward to the promotion of some very liberal causes with which we as Christians simply don't agree. Obama's public voting record, as well as his verbal record are quite clear. Consider the following points, and keep in mind that Vice President-elect Joseph Biden adheres to some of the very same positions. Among other things:

01. He supports Roe v. Wade.

02. He voted against prohibiting minors from crossing state lines in order to obtain an abortion.

03. He voted against notifying parents of minor children who obtain out-of-state abortions.

04. He voted in favor of expanding research to include more embryonic stem cell lines.

05. He is undecided on whether or not life begins at conception.

06. He voted against banning partial-birth abortions.

07. He stated that we should trust women to make their own decisions regarding partial-birth abortion.

08. He is opposed to a constitutional ban on gay and lesbian "marriage".

09. He believes that homosexual relationships are no more immoral than heterosexual relationships.

10. On one occasion, in reference to gay and lesbian marriages, he stated ". . . nor am I willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount".

11. He opposes gay marriage, but supports civil unions and gay rights.

12. On one occasion, he remarked that he does not believe that being homosexual is a curse, and also stated "I do not believe being gay or lesbian is a choice".

13. He has been strongly opposed to the Iraq war since its inception.

At this moment, many people are rejoicing, particularly those who are of Afro-American heritage. After a long, hard battle, they indeed have a good reason to rejoice, and this is truly their moment, a historical moment which they should cherish, and which will never be taken from them. In a strange sort of way, this victory by Barack Hussein Obama and Black America has a certain prophetic nature to it; for it was forty years ago, that another Black man was gunned down in cold blood. As one Black man fell by an assassin's bullet, another has risen to take his place forty years later, powered by an undeniable electoral victory. As Christians, we must recognize that for whatever His reasons, the Lord has permitted this historical moment to occur; for to deny this, would be to deny His Holy Word, which clearly tells us that God is sovereign above all, and He sets up one leader, and puts down another, according to His Divine Will. Consider the following group of verses which verify this point

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake."


"Lift not up your horn on high: speak not with a stiff neck. For promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the judge: he putteth down one, and setteth up another."


"Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:"


"This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men."


"I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me."


"The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will."


"For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king. And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice. Now therefore, I pray thee, pardon my sin, and turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD. And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king over Israel."


"And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost."


But what about us Christians? Should we too rejoice this day? Perhaps we can be happy in knowing that the hateful scourge of racism was defeated yesterday; and we can be happy because Black America is feeling vindicated today, but that is as far as it can go. From reading the previous points regarding Mr. Obama's record on the issues, it is obvious to me, as I hope it is also obvious to you, that no true Bible-believing, God- fearing Christian can fully support Obama's views or programs, unless they are really deceived. Similarly, John McCain does not possess a record with which we Christians can fully agree either; so in my view, to have voted for him would be a clear betrayal of some of our most cherished beliefs. So as I have said so many times before, it doesn't really matter who would have won this election insofar as we Christians are concerned because we would've lost out either way; because no political candidate is ever fully on the Lord's side when it comes to the important issues.

Some of you reading this may now be protesting, "Now, wait a minute! What are you saying? That we simply shouldn't vote if none of the candidates meet our expectations as Christians?" Well, obviously, I cannot tell anyone how to vote, or even if they should vote. That is a very personal decision which you alone must make, based upon your personal belief system, and what you have learned about each of the candidates.

Having said that, let me ask you a simple question; and we will base it upon the current election. If you honestly don't agree with or like all of the positions which are embraced by a particular candidate, or by any of the candidates, then why in the world would you vote for any of them? In the USA, lots of people like to talk about freedom, democracy, the precious right to vote, etc.; but here is something which perhaps you have never considered: If you are forced to vote for someone, or feel pressured to vote for someone, even though you really don't want to, is that really freedom and democracy?

The way I look at it is this: If I don't like or agree with a person, or if I don't like or agree with the positions of any of the available candidates, then I am not going to vote for any of them. By not voting for one person, or for any of the candidates, I have in fact cast my vote. I have expressed my right as a free citizen. I have expressed both my voice, and my voting choice. In other words, I believe that a "non-vote" is in fact a vote. It is a vote of "no-confidence". It is a vote of protest against a corrupt political system, and it is a vote which says "I don't like or fully agree with any of you, and I am not going to compromise my Christian beliefs, just because I may agree with you on a few issues."

There's no way that I could have voted for an individual like John McCain, who, like President Bush, not only is obviously a man of war, but who also would do very little to assist the sick, the elderly, the poor and the downtrodden. Furthermore, the fact that McCain voted against the federal amendment on gay "marriages", and also chose to support expanding federal financing for embryonic stem cell research, only served to further solidify my vote against him. In like fashion, there is no way on Earth that I could possibly have voted for a man like Barack Obama. While we were repeatedly informed that he is a Christian during the campaign, given the liberal ungodly nature of his campaign platform, his liberal voting record, and his obvious rejection of some of the core beliefs of our Christian faith, I seriously have to wonder how he can even dare to refer to himself as a Christian.

It might interest you to know that I sat here and listened to live ABC coverage of Obama's victory speech over the Internet. I was waiting, listening and hoping for something specific in his speech, which might give an indication that I was wrong about the man. Sadly, it never came. It was only at the very end of his speech, as he pronounced his parting words, that he said "God bless you all; God bless America!". Of course, that was not meant to be taken as a profession of faith. It was merely a popular, much over-used, meaningless political slogan which any candidate could have uttered.

Therefore, because of the aforementioned reasons, I remain fully convinced that neither McCain or Obama would have been a suitable wise choice for real Bible-believing, God-fearing Christians. It would have been a mistake for me to vote for either one of them; because by doing so, I would not only be giving him my support on the things that I agree with, but I would also be giving him the power to implement those things with which I do not agree. I would in effect become a willing accomplice to his sins against the Lord.

On the other hand, when you vote for someone even though you honestly don't agree with them on certain issues, as some of you obviously did, in my view, you have in fact surrendered your free will, and your right to choose, or not to choose. Perhaps without even realizing it, you have become a victim of political correctness. Why is that? Quite simply, because it has been bred into Americans over the years, that if you don't vote, then you must be unpatriotic. Maybe you are even one of those pinko commies. So rather than face being called unpatriotic, you bow to pressure, to political correctness, and you go out and vote for someone, with whom you don't even fully agree. Now is that crazy or what?

Now, I want you to stop and think about something. Right now, this very minute, there must be literally dozens, hundreds, or perhaps even thousands of very intelligent people in the United States, who are qualified to lead the country. If a one-term Black Senator, with no foreign relations experience can be elected to the highest office in the land, then so can many other equally-qualified individuals. So why aren't they? Every four years, you as an individual are told that you must choose between just two men, and if you don't go out and vote for one of those two men, surely you must be unpatriotic. Can you see the controlling factor in all of this? While you are constantly being pounded with all of this talk of freedom and democracy, the truth of the matter remains that your freedom of choice is intentionally limited by the powers-that-be; and the power that they use is vast sums of money. One of the big reasons why Barack Obama won the election, is because he was able to shout longer, louder and in more areas, because of his basically unlimited financial reserves. Money, and not just his message, gave him the vote.

Now that Obama has won the election, I suspect that he may owe so many favors to so many different powerful people, that in spite of his good intentions, (at least from his liberal point of view), he may become just another ineffective puppet leader whose strings will be pulled by the rich and powerful, while the poor will continue to suffer, and the principles of the Bible will be trampled under foot. Even if Mr. Obama does retain the freedom to be his own man, the Bush Administration has created so many serious problems which he will have to address, and in short order, that even trying to fulfill some of his campaign promises may be easier said than done.

While I have stated that I believe that Barack Obama has won the election by God's Design, please do not misinterpret the meaning of my words. Just because the Lord has allowed Obama to win, does not mean that he's a good person, or will make a good leader for America. Quite to the contrary, as I pointed out a moment ago, we Christians really have little to rejoice over with Obama's landslide victory. As you can see from the verses I shared earlier, while the Lord gave the Israelites a king, because that is what they truly wanted, He realized in advance that this is not what they truly needed. As a result, while He gave them the desire of their hearts, the Israelites later grew to regret their decision, as Saul was a terrible king, (just like Bush), and the Lord eventually rejected him. Saul was cursed, and he and his sons died in battle, as per the prophecy of the Prophet Samuel.

As I point out in other articles, you need to remember that God allows certain leaders to come to power for different reasons. Some may be blessings to their people, while others will be curses. Sometimes the Lord allows a particular person to come to power, simply so that He can use them to chastise the very people who have elected him to office. I have long believed that God gives the people the leader that they truly deserve, and Barack Obama is no exception to that rule. Black America may rejoice and the leaders of other nations may also rejoice, but it remains to be seen exactly what kind of king Obama will turn out to be. If there is one thing that can be said beyond a shadow of a doubt, it is that God has given a very liberal king to a supposedly Christian nation, which has has become increasingly liberal, and increasingly ungodly in its moral standards, as the years have progressed. Some of the developments of the past several years have certainly proved this point.

Regardless of what happens or does not happen during the next four years, as Christian believers, we must never forget that our loyalties must remain first and above all to the Kingdom of God. He is our Commander-In-Chief, and the One from whom we take our orders. As God's Word plainly teaches us, we are not of this world, and our Kingdom is not of this world. In light of these facts, we shouldn't participate in the affairs of the world, any more than what is absolutely necessary. If this seems like a strange doctrine to you, then I encourage you to consider the truth found in the following verses:

"If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you."


"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,"


"No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier."


"These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city."


"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God."


"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever."


So as you can hopefully see, like our spiritual forefathers of old, we are strangers and pilgrims in this world, and we are merely passing through it, on our way to a much better Home in Heaven. The things of this current world will soon pass away, because they are temporal; or as the Apostle Paul once wrote, they are like wood, hay and stubble which will ultimately be burned by the purifying fires of the Lord's righteous Judgment. Only God, and His holy Kingdom, are truly eternal; and as I mentioned at the beginning of this series, one of these days, perhaps when we least expect it, all of the corrupt worldly kingdoms and nations of human invention will be smitten by the Rock from Heaven, as Jesus Christ set ups His own righteous, literal Kingdom upon this Earth. Then, and only then, will all of the people of the world be treated righteously and fairly, because corrupt, partisan politics will have become a thing of the past; and there will only be God's politics. If you want a real reason to rejoice, I've just given you one. Think about it.

With these thoughts, I will bring this article to a close. It is my hope that you have found it informative, enlightening, and I pray that it has been a blessing in your life as well. If you have an account with Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr or with any other social network, I would really appreciate if you'd take the time to click or tap on the corresponding link that is found on this page. Thanks so much, and may God bless you abundantly!

For additional information and further study, you may want to refer to the list of reading resources below which were either mentioned in this article, or which contain topics which are related to this article. All of these articles are likewise located on the Bill's Bible Basics web server. To read these articles, simply click or tap on any link you see below.

From Armageddon to the New Earth
One From Beyond: Hebrew of Hebrews
Saddam Hussein's Execution and the Euro Dollar War
The Heavenly Vision: Have You Got It?
To Vote, or Not to Vote

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.