The lights are flashing in your review mirror and you pull to the side of the road. An officer walks up alongside your car as you roll down the window. "You know why I pulled you over?" he asks. You shrug. "You're endangering every other rider on the road," he says.

"You mean driver?" you ask.

"No. You were driving. That's the problem here. Everyone else is riding. You're putting them at risk."

So as Google (see image) and others keep developing self-driving cars with sensors all over the place, eliminating blind spots and distractions of texting and the urge to speed or beat the light, how long is it before driving is considered as irresponsible as texting and driving is today? When was the last time you could see a deer on the road 100 yards away in the dark like a car with infrared sensors can?

But I like driving, I hear you saying. Me too, sometimes. I mean, I'd LOVE to have my daily commute as a time for reading or writing. I'd sure get a lot more done! But sometimes, driving is just fun. But if a computer is vastly safer than a human driver, will we be allowed to drive on public roads?

Today, cars kill three times more people in the U.S. each year than guns do, and they're not supposedly protected by the Constitution the way guns are meant to be. Yet look how many people want to do away with guns, despite the fact that they can be used for recreation and hunting and defense against an all-intrusive government ... you know, if the government ever became intrusive. So if driving became optional, and it was knowingly dangerous like this, wouldn't it naturally be relegated to private roadways?

Suddenly you're getting a Groupon for half price on getting to drive a real car for one hour.

Self-driving cars are so established by 2045 in Darwood & Smitty, it's only a matter of union power that riders are still used to deliver packages. Which amounts to a good thing, because otherwise we wouldn't have had that whole adventure.

But in the meantime, what do you think -- how long until driving is illegal on public roads; how much extra time would you have each day if your car drove you around; and what would you do with that time?

In my job, I spend a bit of time browsing through online articles and, along the way, see a lot of ads for other articles -- advertorials really (ads that are written to look like editorial content). One of those I've seen recently is about this guy who broke the Biblical code for how to invest and made a bunch of money. And of course he's selling something to show you how.

The obvious problem here is that the Bible can support just about any perspective you want it to. In one of the more obvious examples, the Old Testament tells us "an eye for an eye" while the New Testament tells us to "turn the other cheek." So what it boils down to is that the message you get from the Bible depends on the consciousness you bring to it. Kind of like life.

That doesn't mean the Bible isn't valuable. It doesn't mean it's not a legitimate holy book and that it wasn't honestly given in some means from God to humankind. It means that "Love thy neighbor" can be taken in vastly different ways by different people. To one person, this means telling a neighbor what they should do to fix their problems; to another, it means simply giving a shoulder to cry on while they tell you about their problems; to another, it might mean serving them in some way while, at the same time, demonstrating (without saying a word) how one can overcome problems.

In regards to investing, one could look at the verse about not storing up treasures on earth as a message not to invest at all. Meanwhile, one investor might look to traditional investments while paying capital gains taxes (render unto Caesar what is Caesar's) while another invests offshore so that nothing is gained which belongs to "Caesar." The first might say this is thwarting Jesus' message about taxes while the second says he gave us a loophole.

One could also say that tithing is necessary before one's investments will be maximized, and another might agree but debate whether tithing should be defined today as it was once upon a time. When described in the Bible, tithing is really a 10% tax that supported the priesthood and charity via however the priesthood cared for the poor. Our taxes today support the government and charity in a similar way. So since we're already giving to charity in that sense by paying taxes, are part of our tithes already given? Or are they partly (or wholly) given by donating to charities beyond the church? And if we give time to our church or other spiritual center (which was once only done by the priesthood), have we tithed in still another way?

At the end of the day, it might be useful to read someone's views on Biblical secrets to investing if only to spend time reflecting on one's own beliefs in regards to faith, money, and doing the right thing morally. But I think it's pretty clear that the Bible (or any other faith's holy book) is not a guide to investing, but more of a guide that reflects your own level of consciousness or your own beliefs. And I suspect (hope) for most of us that this matures over time.