Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Hymns & Psalms for This Coming Sunday

Our congregation is provide with the song selection for each coming Sunday at the beginning of the week in the hopes that they might review and practice the Hymns and Psalms with their family and/or personally so that we all might learn the great songs of praises to our King.


Morning Service:


Trinity Hymnal: 678
Trinity Hymnal: 454
Psalm 119B
Trinity Hymnal: 626
Trinity Hymnal: 132

Afternoon Service:

Trinity Hymnal: 487
Trinity Hymnal: 488

Click Here for the Trinity Hymnal This link will provide you with the words and a mdi file to listen to the music or have it play along while you sing.  Click Here to see an example of Hymn 132...the music file will be at the bottom of the page.

Click Here for the Psalter
Hymns & Psalms for This Coming SundaySocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Evangelist Vist #2 ~ February 2010


We were very blessed to have Pastor Stanfield come down from Georgia this past February to teach, visit, instruct, and induct a new member into the Church body.  Welcome Kenneth (Ken) B.!!!  It was a great time of blessing and fellowship and we look forward to being able to host Pastor Stanfield down in Texas again soon!


Gathered around the table for food and conversation.
Left to right: Sue M., Pastor Jess Stanfield, Kristen D.,  & JR W.


Right to left: JR W., David M., Garrett R. & Jayme R.


Nancy W. and the
Kidos playing and having fun






AJ with a big smile


Phoebe playing



Cromwell playing



Welcome Ken B. Officially to the body of Westminster Reformed Presbyterian Church!!!  We are blessed to have you!


Evangelist Vist #2 ~ February 2010SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Friday, March 19, 2010

Hymns & Psalms for This Coming Sunday

Trinity Hymnal: 218 (1st)
Trinity Hymnal: 34
Psalm 119A
Trinity Hymnal: 460 (2nd)
Trinity Hymnal: 449
--
Trinity Hymnal: 584
Trinity Hymnal: 542
Hymns & Psalms for This Coming SundaySocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Article by Albert Mohler: This is LIFE We're Talking About~Abortion and the Health Care Bill


Ground Zero for the sanctity of human life is now the U.S. House of Representatives, where the Democratic leadership is pulling all the levers to come up with the 216 votes necessary to pass the Obama health care bill. While most of the nation seems preoccupied with the politics of the issue and the political machinations of the frenzied legislative process, the preeminent issue is abortion and the sanctity of human life.
While President Barack Obama and Democratic congressional leaders have insisted that the current bill is "abortion neutral," it is not. As Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for LIfe argues, the bill represents "the single greatest expansion of abortion since the 1973Roe v. Wade decision."
Some background information is in order. Federal funding for abortion is prevented by the Hyde Amendment, passed by Congress in 1976 in order to prevent taxpayer funds from paying for abortions. The concept behind the Hyde Amendment is simple and important. Abortion is a highly divisive issue, and the federal government should not require American citizens to violate their consciences by subsidizing abortions. Just a few months ago, the House of Representatives adopted language similar to the Hyde Amendment in the form of what became known as the Stupak Amendment, named for Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan, who introduced the legislation.
The bill currently before Congress does not include the Stupak Amendment, not anything like the Hyde Amendment. When the President and congressional leaders insist that the current bill does not subsidize abortions, they mislead the American public.
The bill requires all Americans to purchase health insurance through qualified government-approved policies. The current version, based on the bill passed by the Senate, would require qualified plans to cover abortion only through a separate policy, paid for with a separate check or payroll deduction. Yet, as Dr. Yoest argues, this leaves plenty of room for American citizens to be coerced into financial involvement with abortion.
At the first level, this is true because the entire health care insurance system, complete with mandates to individual American citizens, would effectively reset the economy of scale, meaning that we will all, in effect, be subsidizing abortion services in an indirect subsidy. More directly, employees of companies that choose a policy with abortion coverage will be coerced into a direct subsidy -- required to pay what would amount to a abortion tax.
There is also the issue of mandated coverage through action of the federal courts. The Hyde Amendment became necessary because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in 1996 that abortion must be covered by Medicaid as a "mandatory" category of medical care. The Hyde Amendment is all that stands between that ruling and taxpayer funding of abortion.
The creeping coverage of abortions is what Dr. Yoest has in mind when she writes: "Without specific language prohibiting the practice, history has shown that the courts or administrative agencies end up directing government dollars to pay for abortions."
Beyond all this, the current bill lacks the conscience protections necessary to prevent medical personnel from being required to participate in abortions.
Why are the Democratic leaders so determined to exclude the Stupak Amendment from the bill? The most stunning and revealing explanation comes from Rep. Stupak himself. Consider this:
What are Democratic leaders saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”
If Obamacare passes, Stupak says, it could signal the end of any meaningful role for pro-life Democrats within their own party. “It would be very, very hard for someone who is a right-to-life Democrat to run for office,” he says. “I won’t leave the party. I’m more comfortable here and still believe in a role within it for the right-to-life cause, but this bill will make being a pro-life Democrat much more difficult. They don’t even want to debate this issue.
This language is nothing less than horrifying. "If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more."
As James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal insists, this is nothing less than a call for eugenics. Where does this logic lead?
He writes: "In order to be effective, a policy of using abortion as a cost-cutting measure would have to aim at preventing the birth of babies with such pre-existing conditions. The goal would be not a reduction in the number of babies, but an "improvement" in the "quality" (narrowly defined in economic terms) of the babies who are born."
Americans may disagree on virtually every dimension of this health care bill, but there is now about far more than health care. As Rep. Stupak asserts, "This is life we're talking about." Unless adequate protections for the unborn are added to this bill, we are indeed witnessing a radical turn in this nation's moral character. Time is running out. The adoption of adequate protections for the unborn should be beyond debate.
Rep. Stupak's words bear repeating, over and over again. "This is life we're talking about."
_____________________________________
I have refrained from extended comment on the health care reform bills -- not because I do not have multiple concerns about the bills, but because I recognize that committed Christians can and will disagree over the political and policy issues involved. The trip-wire for me is the issue of human life. The current bill spells disaster when it comes to abortion. I cannot remain silent in this crucial moment where the sanctity of human life is at stake.
I am always glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/AlbertMohler.
Charmaine Yoest, "Abortion and the Health Bill," The Wall Street Journal, Thursday, March 4, 2010.
James Taranto, "ObamaCare and Eugenics," The Wall Street Journal, Monday, March 15, 2010.
Robert Costa, "They Just Want This Over," National Review, "The Corner," Friday, March 12, 2010.

Click Here for the original article
Article by Albert Mohler: This is LIFE We're Talking About~Abortion and the Health Care BillSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Thursday, March 11, 2010

For a Little End of the Week Humor...ENJOY!


Typography from Ronnie Bruce on Vimeo.
For a Little End of the Week Humor...ENJOY!SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

The Scandal of Gendercide — War on Baby Girls By Albert Mohler


The reality has been known for years now, though the Western media have generally resisted any direct coverage of the horror. That changed this week when The Economistpublished its stunning cover story -- "Gendercide -- What Happened to 100 Million Baby Girls?"
In many nations of the world, there is an all-out war on baby girls. In 1990, economist Amartya Sen estimated that 100 million baby girls were missing -- sacrificed by parents who desired a son.  Two decades later, multiple millions of missing baby girls must be added to that total, victims of abortion, infanticide, or fatal neglect.
The murder of girls is especially common in China and northern India, where a preference for sons produces a situation that is nothing less than critical for baby girls. In these regions, there are 120 baby boys born for every 100 baby girls. As The Economist explains, "Nature dictates that  slightly more males are born than females to offset boys' greater susceptibility to infant disease. But nothing on this scale."
In its lead editorial, the magazine gets right to the essential point: "It is no exaggeration to call this gendercide. Women are missing in their millions--aborted, killed, neglected to death."
In its detailed and extensive investigative report, the magazine opens its article with chilling force. A baby girl is born in China's Shandong province. Chinese writer Xinran Xue, present for the birth, then hears a man's voice respond to the sight of the newborn baby girl. "Useless thing," he cried in disappointment. The witness then heard a plop in the slops pail. "To my absolute horror, I saw a tiny foot poking out of the pail. The midwife must have dropped that tiny baby alive into the slops pail!"  When she tried to intervene she was restrained by police. An older woman simply explained to her, "Doing a baby girl is not a big thing around here."
The numbers of dead and missing baby girls is astounding. In some Chinese provinces, there are more than 130 baby boys for every 100 baby girls. The culture places a premium value on sons, and girls are considerd an economic drain. A Hindu saying conveys this prejudice: "Raising a daughter is like watering your neighbors garden."
Midwives even charge more for the birth of a baby boy. But the preference for a boy rises with both economic power and the number of children born to a couple. The imbalance of boys to girls is no accident -- it reflects a prejudice that runs throughout the societies where the abortion and killing of baby girls is considered both understandable and routine.
Add to this the widespread availability of ultrasound imaging services. Even though the governments of China and India have officially declared sex-selection abortions to be illegal, they persist by the millions. (And, interestingly, the magazine notes that Sweden actually legalized sex-selection abortions in 2009.)
This sentence from the investigative report is particularly horrifying: "In one hospital in Punjab, in northern India, the only girls born after a round of ultrasound scans had been mistakenly identified as boys, or else had a male twin."
In other words, even as the spread of ultrasound technology has greatly aided the pro-life movement by making the humanity of the unborn baby visible and undeniable, among those determined to give birth only to baby boys, in millions of cases the same technology has meant a death warrant for a baby girl in the womb.
There are multiple factors that lead to the preference for boys over girls. In China, the government's draconian "one child only" policy has led to both forced abortions and an effective death sentence for baby girls when a couple is determined that, if their children are to be so drastically limited, they will insist on having a son. As the magazine explains, "For millions of couples, the answer is: abort the daughter, try for a son."
Consider this:
In fact the destruction of baby girls is a product of three forces: the ancient preference for sons; a modern desire for smaller families; and ultrasound scanning and other technologies that identify the sex of a fetus. In societies where four or six children were common, a boy would almost certainly come along eventually; son preference did not need to exist at the expense of daughters. But now couples want two children—or, as in China, are allowed only one—they will sacrifice unborn daughters to their pursuit of a son. That is why sex ratios are most distorted in the modern, open parts of China and India. It is also why ratios are more skewed after the first child: parents may accept a daughter first time round but will do anything to ensure their next—and probably last—child is a boy. The boy-girl ratio is above 200 for a third child in some places.
The social consequences of this imbalance are vast and uncorrectable. China and India now face the reality of millions of young men and boys who have absolutely no hope of a wife and family. In China, these young men are called guanggun or "broken branches." Just consider this -- the 30 to 40 million "broken branches" in China are about equal in number to the total number of all boys and young men in the United States.
These young men represent a a looming disaster on the societal level. Young males commit the greatest number of criminal acts and acts of violence. Marriage has been the great taming institution for the social development of young males. Without prospect for marriage and a normal sex and family life, these multiple millions of unmarried young men are becoming a significant social challenge in China and India. Some observers even argue that this may lead to an increased militarism in the region.
Of course, the greatest disaster is personal for the young men and boys who face the future as "broken branches." The parents who insist on having boys are dooming their own sons to lives of brokenness, frustration, and grief.
And the future looks even more ominous for baby girls. Nick Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute points to "the fatal collision between overweening son preference, the use of rapidly spreading prenatal sex-determination technology and declining fertility." As the magazine adds, "Over the next generation, many of the problems associated with sex selection will get worse. The social consequences will become more evident because the boys born in large numbers over the past decade will reach maturity then. Meanwhile, the practice of sex selection itself may spread because fertility rates are continuing to fall and ultrasound scanners reach throughout the developing world."
While imbalances such as now found in China and India are unknown in the West, the practice of sex-selection abortion is found here as well. Indeed, there is no current law against the practice in the United States, where abortion is legal for any reason, at least in earlier stages of pregnancy. In reality, sex selection abortions happen here, too. After all, proponents of abortion in the United States infamously insist on a woman's unrestricted right to an abortion "for any reason, or for no reason."
The Economist is right to call this tragedy gendercide -- the targeting of baby girls for death and destruction simply because of their gender. The magazine deserves appreciation for its no-holds-barred report on this tragedy, and for forcing the issue to be faced. Furthermore, The Economistends its editorial with the right message, "The world needs to do more to prevent a gendercide that will have the sky crashing down."
Will reports like this awaken the conscience of the world to the unspeakable crime and global tragedy of gendercide? If not, what will it take? The blood of millions of murdered and missing baby girls cries out to the world's conscience. Will we hear?
________________________________________
I am always glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/AlbertMohler.
"Gendercide," The Economist, March 6, 2010.
"Gendercide -- The Worldwide War on Baby Girls," The Economist, March 6, 2010. The extensive investigative report is available in the magazine's print editions but is available online only to subscribers.

To see the original article click here
The Scandal of Gendercide — War on Baby Girls By Albert MohlerSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Pray for the Christians in Nigeria


Over 500 Christians were murdered in Muslim machete attacks on Sunday in Nigeria.  Click Here to view to full article from Yahoo.
JOS, Nigeria (AFP) – UN chief Ban Ki-moon and Washington led calls for restraint on Monday after the slaughter of more than 500 Christians in Nigeria, as survivors told how the killers chopped down their victims.
Funerals took place for victims of the three-hour orgy of violence on Sunday in three Christian villages close to the northern city of Jos, blamed on members of the mainly Muslim Fulani ethnic group.
While troops were deployed to the villages to prevent new attacks, security forces detained 95 suspects but faced bitter criticism over how the killers were able to go on the rampage at a time when a curfew was meant to be in force.
Media reported that Muslim residents of the villages in Plateau statehad been warned by phone text message, two days prior to the attack, so they could make good their escape before the exit points were sealed off.
Survivors said the attackers were able to separate the Fulanis from members of the rival Berom group by chanting 'nagge', the Fulani word for cattle. Those who failed to respond in the same language were hacked to death.
One local paper said the gangs shouted Allah Akhbar (God is Great) before breaking into homes and setting them alight in the early hours of Sunday. Churches were among the buildings that were burned down.
The Vatican led a wave of outrage with spokesman Federico Lombardiexpressing the Roman Catholic Church's "sadness" at the "horrible acts of violence".
The UN chief told reporters he was "deeply concerned".
"I appeal to all concerned to exercise maximum restraint," he said.
"Nigeria's political and religious leaders should work together to address the underlying causes and to achieve a permanent solution to the crisis in Jos."
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged "all parties to exercise restraint", but also called on the Nigerian government to "make sure the perpetrators are brought to justice."
"The Nigerian government should ensure that the perpetrators of acts of violence are brought to justice under the rule of law and that human rights are respected as order is restored," the chief US diplomat said.
The death toll was initially put at a little over 100 but then shot up. The information ministry said pregnant women were among those killed and around 200 people were being treated in hospital.
"We have over 500 killed in three villages and the survivors are busy burying their dead," said state information commissioner Gregory Yenlong.
"People were attacked with axes, daggers and cutlasses -- many of them children, the aged and pregnant women."
Survivors wail as children, women buried in Nigeria
Much of the violence was centred around the village of Dogo Nahawa, where gangs set fire to straw-thatched mud huts as they went on their rampage.
The explosion of violence is the latest between rival ethnic and religious groups. In January 326 people died in clashes in and around Jos, according to police although rights activists put the overall toll at more than 550.
"The attack is yet another jihad and provocation," the Plateau State Christian Elders Consulatative Forum (PSCEF) said.
However the archbishop of the capital AbujaJohn Onaiyekan, told Vatican Radio that the violence was rooted not in religion but in social, economic and tribal differences.
"It is a classic conflict between pastoralists and farmers, except that all the Fulani are Muslims and all the Berom are Christians," he said.
Fulani are mainly nomadic cattle rearers while Beroms are traditionally farmers.
A curfew imposed after January's unrest is supposed to be still in place but Christian leaders said the authorities did nothing to prevent the bloodshed.
The PSCEF said it took the army two hours to react from the time a distress call was put through and "the attackers had finished their job and left".
Witnesses said armed gangs had scared people out of their homes by firing into the air but most of the killings were the result of machete attacks.
"We were caught unawares ... and as we tried to escape, the Fulani who were already waiting, slaughtered many of us," said Dayop Gyang, of Dogo Nahawa. 
Gbong Gwon Jos, a Muslim resident of Dogo Nahawa, told The Nation daily he received advanced warnings of the attacks.
"I got a text message about movement of the people."
Rights activists said the slaughter appeared to be revenge for the January attacks in which mainly Muslims were killed.
Locals said that the attacks on Sunday were the result of a feud which had been first ignited by a theft of cattle and then fuelled by deadly reprisals.
Acting President Goodluck Jonathan placed security services in Plateau and nearby states on red alert to contain the violence before he sacked his chief security advisor.
Pray for the Christians in NigeriaSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Thursday, March 4, 2010

A Great Hymn of Faith

"The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the hear; the commandments of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes." Psalm 19:8


This is a beautiful and powerful hymn on the nature of God's perfect law, our standing to it, and how Christ alone kept it, and how through faith in Him we have eternal life! May this great hymn of faith be a blessing to you all!


The Law of God is good and wise
And sets His will before our eyes,
Shows us the way of Righteousness,
And dooms to death when we transgress.

Its light of holiness imparts
The knowledge of our sinful hearts
That we may see our lost estate
And seek deliverance ere too late.

To those who help in Christ have found
And would in works of love abound
it shows what deeds are His delight
And should be done as good and right.

When men the offered help disdain
And willfully in sin remain,
Its terror in their ear resounds
And keeps their wickedness in bounds.

The law is good; but since the fall
Its holiness condemns us all;
It dooms us for our sin to die
And has no power to justify.

To Jesus we for refuge flee,
Who from the curse has set us free,
And humbly worship at his throne,
Saved by His grace through faith a lone.

Amen!
A Great Hymn of FaithSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

A Gloriously Particular Redemption by Keven DeYoung


An excerpt from chapter 15 ofThe Good News We Almost Forgot:
*****
The doctrine of particular redemption is worth talking about because it gets to the heart of the gospel.  Should we say “Christ died so that sinners might come to him”?  Or, “Christ died for sinners”?  There’s a big difference.  Did Christ’s work on the cross make it possible for sinners to come to God?  Or did Christ’s work on the cross actually reconcile sinners to God?  In other words, does the death of Jesus Christ make us save-able or does it make us saved?  If the atonement is not particularly and only for the sheep, then either we have universalism–Christ died in everyone’s place and therefore everyone is saved–or we have something less than full substitution.  If Jesus died for every person on the planet then we no longer mean that he died in place of sinners, taking upon himself our shame, our sins, and our rebellion so that we have the death of death in the death of Christ.  Rather, we mean that when Jesus died he made it possible to come to him if we will do our part and come to him.  But this is only half a gospel.  Certainly, we need to come to Christ in faith.  But faith is not the last work that finally makes us saved.  Faith is trusting that Jesus has in fact died in our place and bore the curse for us—effectually, particularly, and perfectly.
Reformed people talk of “limited” atonement not because they have an interest in limiting power of the cross, but in order to safeguard the central affirmation of the gospel that Christ is a Redeemer who really redeems.  “We are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ,” Spurgeon observed, “because we say that Christ has not made a satisfaction for all men, or all men would be saved.”  But, Spurgeon argues, it is the view of the atonement which says no one in particular was saved at the cross that actually limits Christ’s death.  “We say Christ so died that he infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ’s death not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved.”
I belabor this point not to belittle Arminian brothers and sisters, but to give Jesus Christ his full glory.  Christ does not come to us merely saying, “I’ve done my part.  I laid down my life for everyone because I have saving love for everyone in the whole world.  Now, if you would only believe and come to me I can save you.”  Instead he says to us, “I was pierced for your transgressions.  I was crushed for your iniquities (Isa. 53:5).  I have purchased with my blood men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation (Rev. 5:9).  I myself bore your sins in my body on the tree, so that you might infallibly die to sins and assuredly live for righteousness.  For my wounds did not merely make healing available.  They healed you (1 Peter 2:24).”
“Amazing love!” a great Arminian once wrote.  “How can it be that you, my Lord, should die for me?!”  Praise be to our Good Shepherd who didn’t just make our salvation possible, but sustained the anger of God in body and soul, shouldered the curse, and laid down his life for the sheep.

A Gloriously Particular Redemption by Keven DeYoungSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Iron Sharpens Iron Radio Show

Here is a plug for a very interesting Reformed Radio Show hosted out of New York. It is worth listening to.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Listen to this LIVE, call-in radio/Internet broadcast
 MONDAYMARCH 1st at
OUR NEW TIME: 6-7PM EST
on WNYG-1440AM in New York & Connecticut
or listen WORLDWIDE via
live-streaming at
Then You Must Click on:
"Long Island
1440AM"
when it appears on the screen with 3 other station options
(If you tune in or log in early you will hear
Spanish programming before "Iron Sharpens Iron")
CALL IN
WITH YOUR OWN QUESTIONS
 at our New Number: 
(631)482-8300
(For those who missed the other End Times presentations all last week on "Iron Sharpens Iron" they are now archived on Free, Downloadable MP3 at www.sharpens.org)

Monday, March 1, 2010


Theonomic Postmillennialism Defended

Guest: Martin G. Selbrede, Vice President of the Chalcedon Foundation (see www.chalcedon.edu).
P.S.: The guest originally scheduled for this broadcast, Willard Ramsey, author of "Zion's Glad Morning" (see http://www.armageddonbooks.com/pmill.html), agreed not to participate in our "End Times Series" after he concluded that his Postmillennial position (unlike that of his replacement, Martin G. Selbrede), is essentially the same as the position already presented by Dr. John Jefferson Davis, author of "Christ's Victorious Kingdom: Postmillennialism Reconsidered", on last Tuesday's broadcast. Pastor Ramsey will be invited back on the program in the near future.
Iron Sharpens Iron Radio ShowSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend