![]() |
and know that true information and power is not as much in the people’s hands as we’d like it to be. These concepts are not MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE: which means being related such that each excludes or precludes the other; incompatible; not both true. I can support police officers yet be against police brutality and mass incarceration. I can support the quality of ‘All Lives’ yet understand that particular emphasis might need to be on ‘Black Lives’ because of high abortion, murder and mortality rates and systems that steal away quality of life in a myriad of ways for those at the bottom of the US economy. I can desire equal pay and opportunity for women who have been disenfranchised without agreeing with the entire ‘feminist’ platform. I could go on and on. This reality poses dilemmas and sometimes internal wars. We were taught critical thinking skills in school, but the palpable emotions of this atmosphere make them difficult to use and acknowledge.
We can look at the Bible and shop for the Scriptures that suit our particular platforms and try to rank sin or God’s
![]() |
heart if we’d like. I’m not sure how He feels about that though. The God that cares about the unborn also cares about the living: the poor, the prisoner, the brokenhearted, the widow, the stranger and the orphan. (Matt. 25, Lev. 19:34, Luke 4:18-19; James 1:27) The God that tells us to pray for and respect governments, kings, and those in authority (Rom. 13; 1 Tim. 2:1-2) also made Nebuchadnezzar bow (Dan. 4), and tells us not to be conformed to this world’s systems (Romans 12:2), not to be greed filled lovers of money (1 Tim 6:10), and that ultimately the kingdoms of the world will become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ and He will reign forever. (Rev. 11:15) It’s important for us to understand the Bible from whole to part – not part to whole. Jesus was a lover, a savior and a teacher, but He was also a defiant insurrectionist to the religious and political systems of His day. So as we engage others before we become arbiters of our perceived ‘truths,’ maybe we should ask “How true is this?” and “Is it mutually exclusive?”