So- is the Bible and Liberalism Really like Oil on Water?

I think this question deserves looking at, and we will do so and other things.  But first I want to do this little "outtake" I didn't want to include in that previous posting.  So now here it is.

It’s twenty five to four now and counting.  I just watched the Friday Chris Matthews show with that other host they have, and then Chris Matthews in at least two, maybe three segments of Thursday’s show where race came to the forefront.  In fact I had to restrain myself to keep from adding ANOTHER lead paragraph to the material I posted this morning.  I did add ONE lead paragraph on top, in difrerent font but the same color.  I remember that Pennsylvania guy talking about his “accomplishments” and one item in this laundry list of items was “Getting Voter ID to insure a Romney victory in the state of Pennsylvania”, which he didn’t win.  And they had another guy on who said that Voter ID was the thing responsible for “shaving five points off Obama’s lead over Romney- cutting the lead over Mc Cain in half”.   I don’t see how in your most active rationalization process, you can view either of these statements as anything other than overt bias.   And then there is this Oklahoma yahoo- - who lied when he spoke of the “massive exculpatory evidence in the George Zimmerman case” and then lies about sworn testimony saying that “A witness reported that Trayvon Martin was repeatedly bashing Zimmerman’s head into the ground”.  As I read the testimony- neither party was identified by name- - only their skin color (how convienient) and there was a direct Refutation of the notion that there was anyone bashing anyone’s head into the ground.  But if you’re a demagogic republican , you will build your whole case on lies.

We'll by default say in this font and color.  First of all many people have comprehension problems with the Bible or as Chich and Chong would say "Comprension".   For instance does St. Paul say that we are bound to thank God FOR our adversities?  No it does not.  Does the Bible say that we are to pass judgement on a person to be Innocent, even though it's the last thing we feel about him?  No it does not.  Does the Bible teach that "Church Elders should use all psychological means to insure that the people in their congragations give the largest ammount they can extract from them".   Does the Bible ever put mixed race marriage in a favorible light?  Yes it does.  In the case of Moses and an Ethopian woman- - God stands by her as his wife- - and doesn't take it at all kindly when Moses' own sister criticizes the union.   How does the Bible feel about someone pretending to BE God Himself as some kind of "role playing".   The Bible is against that.  The Bible is against taking the Lord's NAME in vain, so it certainly is against adopting the Lord's PERSONA in vain.  And the Bible is against Hypocracy - - which is pretending to be something that you are clearly not.  The Bible only justifies lying in cases where nobody will be hurt - - but clearly the Bible is against the "moral compromise of Justice" as in the case for example, the Trayvon Martin case.  I'm not sure whether the word is profaning or subversion or whatever- - but clearly the Bible admonishes that ALL aspects of the judicial system to be "clean as a hound's tooth".   The Bible teaches against judges or politicians taking a bribe.  Every member of Congress is sinning under this one.  The Bible forbids a witness purgering his testimony in court.  The Bible teaches the principle of being true to your word- - such as contracts involving Union and Pension frunds.  The Bible repeatedly says not to trust in Money.  The Bible says not to be greedy for riches.  The Bible on any number of occasions teaches compassion tword the poor and also hospitality to foreign soujerners among us.  In other words the Bible teaches to value People over Things - - and not the other way around.  I have said many of these things before but they bear repeating.  The Bible teaches that all races are equal and that "We are all of one blood".   The Bible also teaches "Many who are now last will later be first and many who are first now will later be last".  The Bible teaches that if a bad man forsakes his ways- -and does Good- - then his Evil will not be remembered against him.  But when a Good man turns bad- - none of the good things the man did will be remembered.  And the word "forsake' means just that.  It means to leave - - abandon- - never to return.  The Bible also teaches us to honor our father and mother- - even if they are liberals and we are junior Alex Keatons.   And I also think the Bible teaches that in a court trial- - that the Dead person - - has rights that should be represented in that trial as though he were alive - -because in Cain and Abel- - - God spoke as Abel as though he were still alive and calling out for justice to be rendered.  No, Black people did not invent this.  The Bible says to obey all the Oaths we swear before him.  I would imagine that means Congressmen pledging to support the constitution and "Well and faithfully discharging the office they are about to enter".  How many of you out there can claim that your own congressman does this?  This posting was just a little reminder that yes- - the Bible and liberalism CAN co exist, and do it quite well.  

These writings I've been doing lately is doing what's known in the business as a "Boehnerism", or other wise know as a "pre-buttal".   In other words- -why wait for the subject to actually deliver his Speech- - when I could be more wisely employing that time to Refute his words in advance, since some people are so darned predictable.  By the way Gambling is not a sin, per se, in the Bible.  Indeed "rick taking" is engaged in in the Book of Esther.  God only teaches "wise stewardship" or perhaps "responsible stewardship" of our resources, including Natural Resources, such as the Earth as a whole.  Hence God endorses the Ecology movement.  Islam, on the other hand, does employ an outright ban on all gambling.  I would not criticize this if someone were use it as a guiding philosophy.

Just as a comprehension test- - some people are not careful readers.  Dr Levy will often pull out one Line and say that the overall Essay is about that One Line, when it is anything but.  For instance there is one famous paragraph where I lead by saying "There is a possability that faster than light speed is possible".  So what support for this "topic sentense' is there in the following paragraph.  None.  In fact the Entire rest of the paragraph is arguing against the idea.  Here's another one.  Did I say recently that the C S N & Y was a bogus Album "because Neil Young joined the group".  I did not.  If you inferred that you are wrong.  And I did not mix up words- - I know the difference between Graham Nash and Neil Young.  If I'd meant Young I would have said Young.  Also- - here's a key test for liberals among you.  Did I ever say that "Ted Nugent lost his native cosmic Citizenship due to his attrocious statements?"  No - - I did not.  Like I say - - it's interesting the things you learn especially if you read carefully.