The New Judicial God: Tolerance

UntwistedTruth.com · 01-15-2008, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhDear

And I do believe that tolerance goes further in being a voice for one's own beliefs. If the first thing you hear from someone or a group, is the insult of intolerance, how much are you going to be receptive to any belief system offered after that? Any way to live? Any supposed hope for eternity?

Even the Bible says that it is the KINDNESS of the Lord that leads to repentance.
How can one be kind and intolerant at the same time?

OhDear

Sorry, OhDear. I think you have some apples and oranges here. We are not called to tolerate sin. How can one be kind and tolerate behavior that may lead to damnation?

We are called to discern and snatch from the fire without staining our own cloak. Tolerance and kindness are not synomyns.

Not all things are meant to be tolerated. Tolerance is not a virtue. Tolerance has been twisted into acceptance of all things, even against our own beliefs and the teachings of Jesus. Is that faithful Christianity?

waitingtables · 01-16-2008, 07:01 AM

You're right about tolerance, just ask the Catholic church. I suppose it's better to be a murderer, then to be tolerant. Most europeans were Christian back then, mostly because they didn't have a choice. For a very long time, if you went against the Catholic doctrine, you were dead or imprisoned.

But yes, the founders were of Christian beliefs, but not the beliefs that fundamentals or evangelicals follow today. And yes, the first settlers were very religious, that's why they came here, nobody else wanted to put up with their freaking crazy ideas.

fxashun · 01-16-2008, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waitingtables

You're right about tolerance, just ask the Catholic church. I suppose it's better to be a murderer, then to be tolerant. Most europeans were Christian back then, mostly because they didn't have a choice. For a very long time, if you went against the Catholic doctrine, you were dead or imprisoned.

But yes, the founders were of Christian beliefs, but not the beliefs that fundamentals or evangelicals follow today. And yes, the first settlers were very religious, that's why they came here, nobody else wanted to put up with their freaking crazy ideas.

I'm not advocating that by no stretch of the imagination. But if you want to promote a certain social order, you would have to irradicate anything that you find harmful to the society you are trying to promote. It's like if the Bible says no pork, and you have people running around with a bag of skins, you have a problem.
If you "tolerate" the skin eaters, eventually your followers will start wondering "why" no pork and next thing you know, you will have them reinterpreting your Bible and its teachings.

OhDear · 01-16-2008, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntwistedTruth.com

Sorry, OhDear. I think you have some apples and oranges here. We are not called to tolerate sin. How can one be kind and tolerate behavior that may lead to damnation?

We are called to discern and snatch from the fire without staining our own cloak. Tolerance and kindness are not synomyns.

Not all things are meant to be tolerated. Tolerance is not a virtue. Tolerance has been twisted into acceptance of all things, even against our own beliefs and the teachings of Jesus. Is that faithful Christianity?

EVEN IF I believed that there was a hell to snatch folk from, it is God's work to do so, not the work of the lawmakers or the community in general even...

When you want intolerance to be demonstrated by legislation, you have a problem with mixing apples and oranges, civil pursuits with spiritual endeavors...

OhDear

UntwistedTruth.com · 01-16-2008, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhDear

EVEN IF I believed that there was a hell to snatch folk from, it is God's work to do so, not the work of the lawmakers or the community in general even...

When you want intolerance to be demonstrated by legislation, you have a problem with mixing apples and oranges, civil pursuits with spiritual endeavors...

OhDear

OK, fair enough. You are not speaking from a Christian perspective. Christians are specifically called both in the Great Commission and the Great Command. No way around that.

Also have to disagree on the false dichotomy of your legislative comment. "Intolerance" as you put it is the purpose of every law: from speed limits to criminal penalties for murder to rape to property crimes to hate crimes.

Every law is meant to be intolerant of certain behaviors. I stand by my previous: not all things are meant to be tolerated from any perspective--Christian or otherwise.

The idea of tolerance today is anything but tolerance--it has been kidnapped by certain groups who believe only they have the right to define what is to be tolerated. In fact, tolerance has become a weapon of intolerance and mostly used against the principles that made this country great.

hevusa · 01-17-2008, 12:42 AM

UntwistedTruth

I think the greatest immorality that exists in the world today stems from people being dishonest about knowing if there is a god or not, and what said God likes and dislikes.

If you could lie and say you know there is a God, when not a single person in history has been able to provide objective evidence to support this theory, then there is no limit to your dishonesty and jaded world views in my eyes. There will never be peace and justice when people can lie about such a sacred topic.

The founding fathers were smart enough to know that religion and government needed to be separated, and for good reason. That is the only truly interesting point in regards to the founding father's faith.

OhDear · 01-17-2008, 06:30 AM

First UT, I AM a Christian. Though I do in part, agree with Hevusa. I do not believe that we can have a political integrity and make our belief a "fact" to base government on, without taking away the "religious freedom" that this nation was said to offer all.

And here is an interesting question I found on the world wide web.

OhDear

waitingtables · 01-17-2008, 06:57 AM

Ha, that's an easy one!

garysher · 01-17-2008, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhDear

First UT, I AM a Christian. Though I do in part, agree with Hevusa. I do not believe that we can have a political integrity and make our belief a "fact" to base government on, without taking away the "religious freedom" that this nation was said to offer all.

And here is an interesting question I found on the world wide web.

OhDear

Neither

Falwell refers to Judeo-Christian values, and Washington to the Christian religion.

Both are correct.

John Adams, one of the Founding Fathers and the third US President, wrote:

Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.

Was he a liar?

Don't fall into hev's trap of thinking that anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liar.

akuma · 01-17-2008, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garysher

Neither

Falwell refers to Judeo-Christian values, and Washington to the Christian religion.

Both are correct.

John Adams, one of the Founding Fathers and the third US President, wrote:

Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.

Was he a liar?

Don't fall into hev's trap of thinking that anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liar.

Ahem, the third president was Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson's phrase in the declaration of independence, "...all men are created equal..." truly defines the foundation of the United States for me. A christian american is equal to any other american.