Christians and atheists in peace

[Hikarifuru]

I imagine a town where believers and nonbelievers, christians, atheists, pagans, heterosexuals and homosexuals all live together happily and without arguments or fighting where everyone accepts and loves each other.

Is it possible? Why or why not?

 

[Lukaris]

I think in most of America there is enough of a live & let live attitude that makes this reality. There is massive crime that makes life hazardous in many places that undermines the ability to live peaceably in an otherwise tolerant society.

 

[ebia]

I imagine a town where believers and nonbelievers, christians, atheists, pagans, heterosexuals and homosexuals all live together happily and without arguments or fighting where everyone accepts and loves each other. Is it possible? Why or why not?

I'm not sure that world without robust argument is a good thing.

 

[Joshua260]

I imagine a town where believers and nonbelievers, christians, atheists, pagans, heterosexuals and homosexuals all live together happily and without arguments or fighting where everyone accepts and loves each other.

Is it possible? Why or why not?

I doubt they could live together without at least disagreeing.

I'm a Christian. So in this paradisic world you envision, would Christian preachers be forced to perform gay "marriages"? Would Christian doctor's be forced to provide abortion on demand? Would Hobby Lobby be forced to provide the "day after" birth control (which is really killing a living person)?

I really don't mean to start an argument with you or anybody else by asking these questions...but they help me answer your OP. I'll explain more further down.

These types of questions (referring back to your OP now) always remind me of the following quotes from Star Wars.

1) From episode II:
Anakin: "We need a system where the politicians sit down and discuss the problem. Agree what's in the best interests of all the people, and do it."
Padme: "That's exactly what they do, the trouble is that people don't always agree."
Anakin: "Then they should be made to."
Padme: "By whom? Who's going to make them?"
Anakin: "I don't know. Someone."
Padme: "You?"
Anakin: "Of course not me!"
Padme: "Then someone...?"
Anakin: "Someone wise."
Padme: "That sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me."
Anakin: "Well... if it works..."

2) From episode 3:
Darth Sidious (future evil Emperor): “Once more the Sith will rule the galaxy! And...we shall have...peace.”

Notice that what seems like "peace" to the future emperor really just means everybody doing things the way he wants them to be done.

So again, I wasn't trying to cause an argument above, but only asking those questions to get to a point, which is that I don't think we can have a world in which there is no disagreement because man is a fallen creature and he would rather do things his way than God's way. That was the whole point of what happened in Eden. Man decided to be his own authority regarding objective moral values and duties. It is only when we all submit to the one who truly is the authority regarding objective moral values and duties that we will have peace. Can this be accomplished on earth? Not yet.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Joshua

Thanks for providing your pov.

I ask that you refrain from actually discussing topics of sexuality and politics because i dont want my thread to go out of bounds.

 

[Hikarifuru]

I'm not sure that world without robust argument is a good thing.

Noted, assuming arguments are resolved or always layed to rest and people always resign theirself to letting others be... what then?

 

[Joshua260]

Joshua

Thanks for providing your pov.

I ask that you refrain from actually discussing topics of sexuality and politics because i dont want my thread to go out of bounds.

No problem. I was not going to discuss the immorality of those examples specifically, but used them simply to help answer your question of "why not" such a town would be possible.

Those questions were really meant to be rhetorical in nature, but now I'm wondering how you would actually respond. In this town you imagine, would Christians preachers be forced to "marry" homosexuals, and what would happen to them if they refused?

To be clear, I'm not seeking to actually discuss gay "marriage"...only whether or not Christian preachers would be forced to perform them and what would happen to them if they refused. So, this question is not really about gay "marriage" so much as it it designed to test the parameters of your imagined town.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Joshua

For your question... im not sure at the moment. Obviously its a complex and perilous issue. Im leaning toward marriage recognition being removed from a religious context or starting point altogether.

 

[jbearnolimits]

I'm thinking such a world can not exist because light and dark do not mix, salt in a wound hurts, and holy does not get along with unholy.

I am just thinking that a more perfect world would be one where we all walk in the light, have no wounds, and live in holiness.

 

[ebia]

I'm thinking such a world can not exist because light and dark do not mix, salt in a wound hurts, and holy does not get along with unholy. I am just thinking that a more perfect world would be one where we all walk in the light, have no wounds, and live in holiness.

Interestingly, the resurrected Jesus still bore his wounds.

And the point of being the light is to illuminate the dark, not to complain about it and wish it didn't exist.

 

[Hikarifuru]

I'm thinking such a world can not exist because light and dark do not mix, salt in a wound hurts, and holy does not get along with unholy.

I am just thinking that a more perfect world would be one where we all walk in the light, have no wounds, and live in holiness.

It sounds like you are saying the christians would not tolerate the nonbelievers.

 

[prov1810]

I imagine a town where believers and nonbelievers, christians, atheists, pagans, heterosexuals and homosexuals all live together happily and without arguments or fighting where everyone accepts and loves each other.

Is it possible? Why or why not?

Not possible. We could have laws against hate speech and hate crimes and have a more civil society. But people will continue to think all kinds of things. To try to implement a world where no one thinks or feels the wrong things - we have a century of authoritarian communism for a case study in how destructive this is. The kindest thing to do is to see the flaws of others from a place of understanding, because you know your own flaws, and you work on yourself.

 

[jbearnolimits]

It sounds like you are saying the christians would not tolerate the nonbelievers.

Or maybe I am saying the nonbelievers would not tolerate the Christians?

 

[gord44]

If people drop their ego and see others as themselves as Jesus did, then it could work. But people are too attached to their beliefs. So much so that they become who they are. So when their beliefs are threatened by other beliefs they react in a negative way. So I suppose in this current age, I doubt this 'town of peace' could exist. But if everyone followed Jesus's instructions to love you enemies then it could maybe be possible.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Or maybe I am saying the nonbelievers would not tolerate the Christians?

Your statement was that light doesnt get along with darkness. But if thats what you meant thats fine.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Prov1810

Good points. Though i wouldnt try to force people to get along, in my town we all love each other.

 

[Hikarifuru]

If people drop their ego and see others as themselves as Jesus did, then it could work. But people are too attached to their beliefs. So much so that they become who they are. So when their beliefs are threatened by other beliefs they react in a negative way. So I suppose in this current age, I doubt this 'town of peace' could exist. But if everyone followed Jesus's instructions to love you enemies then it could maybe be possible.

thanks for sharing this.