David,
Thanks for your some what rude reply to my last questions,but I will forgive your Xtian zeal.
Where do you draw the line in the sand of religious intolerance, because that is what you are preaching here.
You said:Put another way: We know that somewhere there must be a limit beyond which we cannot have Christian fellowship with the followers of other churches;. Who are we,who are you speaking for?
Religious tolerance means to refrain from discriminating against others who follow a different religious path.I understand tolerance is more difficult to maintain when you think that your religion is right and their religion is wrong,but to simply be tolerant doesn't feel too good. People should have a deep sense of appreciation of people who religious beliefs are different from their own.
Tolerance is only the first step towards actively enjoying the diversity that other faith groups contribute to a society. But it is a step that you seem not to have taken yet.
JONBOY | 03.16.06 - 5:34 pm | #

JONBOY You wrote:

"I understand tolerance is more difficult to maintain when you think that your religion is right and their religion is wrong"

is there anyone out there who thinks their religion is not right? Or is this a special pathology that you think only Christians suffer?


You are conflating tolerance with Christian fellowship. I am quite tolerant of Mormons. I feel no bias against Mormons. I do not think anyone should discriminate against Mormons. I appreciate Mormons. However, I cannot have Christian fellowship with Mormons, because I do not accept that they are Christians. You can argue that assessment, just don't argue that it is discrimination or a lack of tolerance, as easy as it is to make those charges.
David Heddle | 03.18.06 - 12:05 pm | #

Thanks David for identifying the difference between fellowship and tolerance (in your follow up comment). I have Mormon friends that I care for, have lunch with, but do not embrace Mormon theology. I guess another way to say it is that we love people and tolerate their theology and philosophy.
Kansas Bob | Homepage | 03.18.06 - 1:11 pm | #

Religious tolerance means we don't put people of other faiths in jail as they did in the old days. It does not mean you cannot believe Christianity is right, that it is only right, and others are wrong. It does not mean you cannot criticize another religion, and certainly Christianity gets its share of criticism. Tolerance also does not mean you have to enjoy the diversity other religions bring to the culture, because you may in fact not enjoy it. All those things are political correctness, not tolerance, and are almost always boosted by those who want to criticize or denigrate Christianity.
Larry Thompson | Homepage | 03.18.06 - 9:55 pm | #

For what it's worth, I don't think David is nearly as intolerant as this guy:

"Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers.' "
Tom | 03.19.06 - 3:24 pm | #

David,
Do you believe taht Catholics are Christian?
pfalk | 03.20.06 - 11:58 am | #

One simple sentence and I goofed it up. I meant 'that'.
pfalk | 03.20.06 - 11:59 am | #

David ,You said;" is there anyone out there who thinks their religion is not right? Or is this a special pathology that you think only Christians suffer?
Yes, I think Eastern religions tend to be far more open minded than the Abarahamic faiths.
You wrote;"You are conflating tolerance with Christian fellowship"
To an extent I would agree with that statment,but your position is still very precarious.
I don't see religion as obligatory except as a personal or cultural commitment. I am free to discard religion just as others are free to embrace it. Though Paul was incredibly religious, he acknowledged some things are more important than practicing the "right" religion.. In 1 Corinthians 9 Paul says:To those not having the law I became like one not having the law...so as to win those not having the law...I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. Paul is saying if he has to discard religion to save people, love demands he discard it. He would be disloyal to God if he didn't set religion aside in order that some might be saved. Why can Paul set religion aside so freely? Because he practices it out of a personal commitment, not because he believes he is obligated to practice it before God. Paul by his example is not denying others Xtian fellowship why should you?
JONBOY | 03.20.06 - 3:32 pm | #