Running afoul of the enforcers

David Letterman is the subject of an 'on-line' jihadi's fatwa. Some typist wants Letterman butchered by scimitar strokes. Now, i have liked Letterman. He tries to get journalist guests to abandon false neutrality, and tell the truth. His friend, Brian Williams, always fends him off. Recently, he had on the actor replacing Charlie Sheen, he says to him [i am not certain about the wording], “I'm always with labor, I don't give a s### about management.”.

Letterman sees truth, not everyone likes that, e.g. gwbushjr, sarah the half term governor. Well, the jihadi was angered and wanted vengeance. His view, i don't know, how much was a mixture of politics and religion. Religion, say with a belief in God, is held by many; but, not all are the same, and some conflate/confuse/represent their view with the only view.

Now, i have not treated the ordinary of Cleveland with great adulation. Dickie-boy is a wretched pastor. Anyone who objects, in any manner, of Lennon or any other clerical figure is not an 'atheist' de jure, and de facto. I have noticed, that, his defenders do not acknowledge the possibility of his error. This is intellectual dishonesty. Some demand complete, servile obeisance to be shown. That is absurd, and probably blasphemous.

As per the disclaimer, i will choose not to broadcast some responses. Well, i have been told Hell is waiting for me, more than once. I have been described as a liar, and persecutor of Lennon. No, when one describes actuality, he is not a liar, nor a persecutor.

And Peter opening his mouth, said: In very deed I perceive, that God is not a respecter of persons. — Acts x. 34.

For there is no respect of persons with God. — Romans ii. 11.

For he that doth wrong, shall receive for that which he hath done wrongfully: and there is no respect of persons with God. — Colossians iii. 25.

But if you have respect to persons, you commit sin, being reproved by the law as transgressors. — James ii. 9.

To-day, i was tsked over the Cathedral of Tomorrow. “Clearly the person who wrote this article does not think there is a God and certainly would not accept a Bible truth preacher.”. No, it is not clear at all. Atheists do not approvingly quote Augustine, and Mary Flannery O'Connor on 'grace'. What may be clear, is the writer does not have a respect for certain zealous, or flamboyant protestants. The writer was rather pleased with his verbal cleverness, in that essay [he also doubts the level of knowledge his critic has on catholic writers and catholicism]. The term 'Bible truth preacher' was unfamiliar, and furthermore, the writer [me] will continue to mock those who predict the end of the world. When Jesus says, He doesn't know the hour*, i will not give credence to Bubba Rockhopper, and damn sure not to Hal Lindsey.

The truth does not respect persons. Peter and Paul spoke, and wrote, more than once on this. God does not hold in elevation, and give particular esteem, concern, preference, and deference to particular individuals by their birth, office, or status. WE are all equal in the eyes of God.

In a democracy, we are not obliged [forced] to respect certain individuals; within our religious lives we are not either. If I find Ernest Angley humorous, rather than authoritative—so what? If I find Richard Lennon deficient in truth, and sanctity, again—so what?
____________________
*But of that day or hour no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father. — Mark xiii. 32.
*But of that day and hour no one knoweth, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone. — Matthew xxiv. 36.