When does tolerance become sin?

[MercyBurst]

"Tolerance" is the buzz word these days. It seems anyone that holds to the biblical standard of morality automatically becomes a "hateful bigot."

While I think that view is intolerant, that is not really the topic of discussion.

I want to know where we draw the line between spiritual witness and just plain old bible brow-beating. Maybe that is the answer -- look to see if your witness is spirit-lead.

On the other hand, we have church leaders that call themselves christian on one hand, but preach "another Jesus" on the other hand. They tell us that Jesus abolished the law, and it is no longer relevant in the life of a christian. Rather we just do as we please.

Shouldn't that doctrine be confronted? The apostle Paul had some rather rancorous words against "carnal teachers." He urged us in the church body to examine those that "preach another gospel", try their doctrine according to scripture, and "let them be accursed" as he put it in his own words.

Any comments, questions, or advice?

 

[Lisa0315]

Good question.

I work in a company where the buzzword is "diversity". This means that we allow domestic partners to take part in our company insurance. It has meant that we pay more for less insurance.

My question is this: If live in heterosexual couples do not get special treatment by the government and companies, why do homosexual couples?

Diversity in my company means that when some of us wanted to put on a traditional Christmas event, we were not allowed as it may be "offensive" to some. Why do they not care if Christians are offended? Why is diversity applied to only those who are not Christian?

It is appalling to me how being politically correct, tolerant, and diverse has become the equivalent to being biased against Christianity. If I had wanted to put on a secular Christmas show, then, I would not have been given any problem. However, <gasp>, a manger scene???? No way!!! Wise men and Shepherds? What??? Of course not!!!!

I suppose if I had allowed the Wise Men to be Wise Women, and had baby Jesus born to Joseph and Mark, it would have been considered diverse enough.

Lisa

 

[Tangeloper]

"Tolerance" is the buzz word these days. It seems anyone that holds to the biblical standard of morality automatically becomes a "bigot."

While I think that view is intolerant, that is not really the topic of discussion.

I want to know where we draw the line between spiritual witness and just plain old bible brow-beating. Maybe that is the answer -- look to see if your witness is spirit-lead.

On the other hand, we have church leaders that call themselves christian on one hand, but preach "another Jesus" on the other hand. They tell us that Jesus abolished the law, and it is no longer relevant in the life of a christian. Rather we just do as we please.

Shouldn't that doctrine be confronted? The aposrtle Paul had some rather rancorous words against "carnal teachers." He urged us in the church body to examine those that "preach another gospel", try their doctrine according to scripture, and "let them be accursed" as he put it in his own words.

Any comments, questions, or advice?

GREAT question! I'll have to think about this before offering a detailed opinion on it. I'm looking forward to seeing what others have to say as well about this.

Just a couple of quick observations: I feel that our society in general is more concerned with apathy in the guise of tolerance vs. taking a stand for beliefs, or defense of their fellow man (BTW: this can be applied to society in regards to a whole host of issues also -- not just issues of sin and morality).

One could perhaps also be correct in saying that terming someone a bigot for supposed intolerance is an effort (even if a subconscious one) on the part of those doing the name-calling to avoid critically thinking about the issues at hand, and/or avoiding introspection of themselves and their own beliefs.

However, as I said, I would like to contemplate this more in specific regards to sin and morality issues!

Thanks for bringing this up!

 

[ReformedChapin]

GREAT question! I'll have to think about this before offering a detailed opinion on it. I'm looking forward to seeing what others have to say as well about this.

Just a couple of quick observations: I feel that our society in general is more concerned with apathy in the guise of tolerance vs. taking a stand for beliefs, or defense of their fellow man (BTW: this can be applied to society in regards to a whole host of issues also -- not just issues of sin and morality).

One could perhaps also be correct in saying that terming someone a bigot for supposed intolerance is an effort (even if a subconscious one) on the part of those doing the name-calling to avoid critically thinking about the issues at hand, and/or avoiding introspection of themselves and their own beliefs.

However, as I said, I would like to contemplate this more in specific regards to sin and morality issues!

Thanks for bringing this up!

I think that people don't have trancedent ethical system like Christians do which causes them to result to relativism. Without that ethical base, we get byproducts such as abortion, pornography and homosexuality.

 

[MercyBurst]

If you tell someone that Christ died for sinners, and you tell them they need Christ, you have called them "sinners", and this is "hateful". Is it "hateful" on our part, our "prideful" on their part?

OK, I think I have it now: When someone calls a bible "hateful" it is nothing more than their own sinful pride at work.

So here's the response:

"The bible has no respect for your pride, but states the truth of the gospel which says Jesus died for sinners like me and you."

 

[MrJim]

Romans12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Colossians3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. 2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.
5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: 6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:

The charge is that we are to be created into something new, and stay that way. It would then seem that if we OK sin, say it's not what it is, then we are falling back to our old ways...

2Peter2:22 22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

 

[Lisa0315]

I think we all agree on the when. My question is what is the best way to deal with it in the secular world? We are in the world but not of the world. See my first post in this thread. What would y'all have done in my place with the Christmas play idea?

Lisa

 

[MrJim]

I think we all agree on the when. My question is what is the best way to deal with it in the secular world? We are in the world but not of the world. See my first post in this thread. What would y'all have done in my place with the Christmas play idea?

Lisa

That's a hard one for me; it would never occur to me to produce a Christmas program at work

I view myself very much as an ambassador to a lost world, even at work in the USA. So I assume people are hostile to the gospel and approach things in this manner~a representative of Christ, not a citizen/employee with "rights" to be treated "fairly".

It's a bit of a throwback to an anabaptist worldview...

 

[KitsapGirl]

"Tolerance" is the buzz word these days. It seems anyone that holds to the biblical standard of morality automatically becomes a "hateful bigot."

While I think that view is intolerant, that is not really the topic of discussion.

I want to know where we draw the line between spiritual witness and just plain old bible brow-beating. Maybe that is the answer -- look to see if your witness is spirit-lead.

On the other hand, we have church leaders that call themselves christian on one hand, but preach "another Jesus" on the other hand. They tell us that Jesus abolished the law, and it is no longer relevant in the life of a christian. Rather we just do as we please.

Shouldn't that doctrine be confronted? The apostle Paul had some rather rancorous words against "carnal teachers." He urged us in the church body to examine those that "preach another gospel", try their doctrine according to scripture, and "let them be accursed" as he put it in his own words.

Any comments, questions, or advice?

tol·er·ance(t

l

r-

ns)
n. 1. The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others.
2. a. Leeway for variation from a standard.
b. The permissible deviation from a specified value of a structural dimension.

3. The capacity to endure hardship or pain.


Definition #1 is Biblically acceptable. We aren't called to hate anyone who differs from us.

Definition #2 is where we get into trouble. We cannot tolerate deviation within the church.

Definition #3 is for us to remember that we will be persecuted, even hated by others. We need to have tolerance toward those who persecute & hate us.

The church has a sad history of being intolerant to people who are different than us. We need to take the log out of our own eye before attempting to take the sliver out of the worlds eye.

Me included.

 

[scraparcs]

I think we all agree on the when. My question is what is the best way to deal with it in the secular world? We are in the world but not of the world. See my first post in this thread. What would y'all have done in my place with the Christmas play idea?

Lisa

As far as I'm concerned, have the play anyway. Now if another group wants to have a secular play, sure, they can too. Getting out the message of Christ is so important. I used to think we were extremely oversaturated with it. Some places we are, but it isn't hard to totally ignore Christ. I'm shocked at how little people know of Christ and the Bible lately.

It's a fine line to know where we can tolerate difference and where we cannot. (Many say the Apostles and the Nicene creeds are good guidelines; they have stood the test of time also.)

 

[MercyBurst]

tol·er·ance(t

l

r-

ns)
The church has a sad history of being intolerant to people who are different than us. We need to take the log out of our own eye before attempting to take the sliver out of the worlds eye.

Me included.

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.


hypocrite

One entry found for hypocrite. Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
- hypocrite adjective


POINT 1:

A hypocrite is somebody that accuses other people for doing the same things he does.

I keep hearing about this log in the eye argument. I figure it's like the guy that corrects somebody for back stabbing on him when he does it all the time to other people (he's just a lot sneakier about it).

If he knows it's bad, why doesn't he quit first, instead of jumping on somebody else? It's like the blind leading the blind, so to speak.

If I'm not doing the same thing, then it is ok for me to correct my brother. Otherwise I'm just a hypocrite with a beam in my eye.

Hence, the beam is out of my eye whenever I'm NOT doing EVEN MORE of the same thing that's wrong (and trying to hide it).

Does anybody agree with that?

Hence my response is: I can correct you because I'm not doing this thing that is wrong that you are doing. Nobody is perfect, but that does not prevent someone from correcting me when I'm doing wrong or vice versa.

The standard is NOT perfection, rather a position that teaches by example.

POINT 2:

The verse ONLY applies to the family of God, because the word "brother" is used. It is not the same thing when you to tell the world they are in sin without Christ -- because they indeed need a Savior. You don't have to be perfect to tell someone about Christ.

Christ died for sinners. You don't need Him until you admit you are a sinner.

 

[Lisa0315]

As far as I'm concerned, have the play anyway. Now if another group wants to have a secular play, sure, they can too. Getting out the message of Christ is so important. I used to think we were extremely oversaturated with it. Some places we are, but it isn't hard to totally ignore Christ. I'm shocked at how little people know of Christ and the Bible lately.

It's a fine line to know where we can tolerate difference and where we cannot. (Many say the Apostles and the Nicene creeds are good guidelines; they have stood the test of time also.)

No, I am not allowed to have the play. It wasn't stated outright, but it was implied. It would have to be approved meaning, it could not be overly religious. With Christmas carols, we can mix in secular with religious and everyone will "feel good" and Christmasy. They have been allowing carolers going through the building for years now.

I will say this about our HR department. One day after 9-11, we were scheduled to have our Nascar car and driver there for an event. So, we were all outside and one of our engineers (who had never done this before) came strolling up with a giant turban on his head. Our HR department said, "We don't care about politically correct today. Take it off!" I mean it was the day after! He did it on purpose! It was so obvious.

At the time, we had many, many Muslims working in our plant, and we had to allow them to wash their feet at certain times of the day plus make room so they could bow to the east, west, whatever they do at certain times.

In my department, we are mostly Christians, very diverse ranging from Fundamentalist to Catholic to very liberal. However, we enjoy having the liberty to display our beliefs and discuss God. So, in a way, having that precedence of accomodating the religious beliefs of the Muslims really helped the Christians in the company.

However, no matter how much liberty we have, there always seems to be a great carefulness when it comes to Christianity. I keep telling them, "This is not the government. There is no separation of church and corporation." Plus, it IS a Christian holiday, no matter what the secular world may desire it to be.

Lisa

 

[KitsapGirl]

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.


hypocrite

One entry found for hypocrite. Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
- hypocrite adjective


POINT 1:

A hypocrite is somebody that accuses other people for doing the same things he does.

I keep hearing about this log in the eye argument. I figure it's like the guy that corrects somebody for back stabbing on him when he does it all the time to other people (he's just a lot sneakier about it).

If he knows it's bad, why doesn't he quit first, instead of jumping on somebody else? It's like the blind leading the blind, so to speak.

If I'm not doing the same thing, then it is ok for me to correct my brother. Otherwise I'm just a hypocrite with a beam in my eye.

Hence, the beam is out of my eye whenever I'm NOT doing EVEN MORE of the same thing that's wrong (and trying to hide it).

Does anybody agree with that?

Hence my response is: I can correct you because I'm not doing this thing that is wrong that you are doing. Nobody is perfect, but that does not prevent someone from correcting me when I'm doing wrong or vice versa.

The standard is NOT perfection, rather a position that teaches by example.

POINT 2:

The verse ONLY applies to the family of God, because the word "brother" is used. It is not the same thing when you to tell the world they are in sin without Christ -- because they indeed need a Savior. You don't have to be perfect to tell someone about Christ.

Christ died for sinners. You don't need Him unil you admit you are a sinner.

Thanks...That's what I meant to say, but apparently failed at it.

 

[MercyBurst]

Point 3

When we correct our brother it is done to help him, not to condemn him. The world only sees it as condemnation.

 

[Rosebaronet]

I am a liberal, but was told I behave like a conservative. lol I believe we should judge ourselves with conservative standard and judge other liberally. Tolerance is important to Christian, if we seek to convert a buddhist, the first thing we tell them is not "You are going to hell" but rather, Jesus agrees with you.

 

[Keenan]

First and foremost, we must question ourselves. Our thoughts, our words, our observations and our motives.
"If one of you is without sin, let him cast the first stone."

But

Jesus does not agree with all things. Jesus is no hippy, and that's for sure.
"He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the word of God."

We must accept all but condemn those things which impede people from Christ. Tolerance can be a great evil, instead we should care for their growth. That's our duty..

In all due respect.