Christianity and Tolerance (long) - Page 10

To quote Mark Twain:

"Man is the only animal with the one true religion. Several of them."

If we all had that attitude the world would be a much better place. I don't understand why people do that. It's counterproductive. I don't think Jesus would approach people that way.

I completely agree with both of you. And mrblanche as well in regard to atheists who come across the same way, with a different message.

I've pretty much come to believe that those who make it a point to let everyone know that their belief is the only right belief are very likely pretty miserable in their own life, and also pretty likely very angry people. As angry, miserable people they must spread that anger and misery everywhere they go. They could be Christians and Atheists or Purple Spaghetti Monster Worshippers - they are still going to tell you that your way is wrong.

Anyone watch the cartoon on Adult Swim Metalocalypse? There's an episode where Murderface almost dies and decides he wants to find the religion that's right for him. So he tries everything from Christianity to Atheism to Satanism (all in remarkably similar buildings/churches), and finally decides that they are all pretty much the same and he doesn't like any of them. That's the way it is with any religion or lack thereof that leaves no wiggle room for right/wrong for someone else's beliefs. They are all pretty much the same because they all condemn anyone who doesn't believe exactly what they do.

Just a little something funny. I do believe this is my first and only post in this thread. First let me apologize because this thread has a serious vibe but the below poem is not exactly following suit ... Also, it might already be posted somewhere in 23 pages. Not easy to know jumping into the thread so late. However, imo, it is on-topic and worth a few chuckles.

I was shocked, confused, bewildered as I entered Heaven's door,
Not by the beauty of it all, by the lights or decor.

But it was the folks in Heaven, who made me sputter and gasp--
The thieves, the liars, the sinners, the alcoholics, the trash.

There stood the kid from seventh grade, who swiped my lunch money twice,
Next to him was my old neighbor, who never said anything nice.

Herb, who I always thought, was rotting away in hell,
Was sitting pretty on cloud nine, looking incredibly well.

I nudged Jesus, “What's the deal?, I would love to hear Your take,
How'd all these sinners get up here? God must've made a mistake.

And why's everyone so quiet, so somber? Give me a clue.”
“Hush, child,” said He. “They're all in shock. No one thought they'd see YOU.”

The problem with most Christians is that they really give Jesus a bad name and make Christianity something very difficult to believe, much less want to be a part of. I know that there are times I roll my eyes at some of the stupid things Christians say and how they behave, much less how fanatical they are. Sometimes I'm just downright embarrassed! The weirdo Christians give the rest of us a bad name.

I couldn't help but think of this thread Sunday when our minister gave a sermon on this very subject. It was great!

You absolutely have a point, but I wish you would rephrase it to SOME Christians. Also, as far as being fanatical, it's ok with me if they apply it to their own lives, but not so much when they badger others. Afterall, Jesus knocked. He didn't try to break the door down. Just MHO.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/08/23...pgXm&wom=false

Texas school rejects 4-year-old over lesbian parents

CNN) -- A private religious school in Texas has denied admission to the daughter of a lesbian couple who wanted to enroll the child in preschool, citing its "clear teaching of the Christian faith" for the refusal.

Actually, a private religious school is well within it's rights to do just that. Not to mention that it likely wouldn't be a good learning environment for the child.

I agree with Skippy here. I am in fact surprised that a Lesbian couple would try to enroll their child in a private religious school. They should have expected opposition. Enrollment in public school would not have been met with opposition. I am sorry for children who are caught in the middle of situations like this.

Within their rights but how does it score for tolerance?

Are you really looking for a serious answer? I would think it speaks for itself.

Just getting back to the title of the OP

I agree that it appears to be a lack of tolerance, but I look at it as a legal or constitutional issue, AND the fact that a child that young doesn't need to be thrust into such a hostile environment anyway.

You will find that there are those that can alter their constitutional stance at the drop of a hat. If it's THEIR rights they're talking about, then they have the right and anything you think about it is just "tough". But if it's YOUR rights, they will lash out at you for "not doing what's morally right", even though you have every right to do so.

Sort of like building buildings.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/africa...ex.html?hpt=C1

Godwin's story is typical. As he sat next to the quiet 5-year-old, Sam said that after Godwin's mother died, the church pastor told his family that "Godwin is responsible."

From his own investigation, questioning Godwin and talking with neighbors, Sam said that when a relative asked Godwin if he was a witch, "he said no and was beaten and made the confession that he actually killed the mother."

Sam said Godwin was locked up with his mother's corpse every night for three weeks with little food or water before a neighbor contacted Sam, who was able to rescue him.

"They can say your child is a witch and if you bring the child to the church we can deliver the child but eventually they don't deliver the children... The parents go back to the pastor and say, 'why is it you have not been able to deliver the child' and the pastor says 'Oh - this one has gone past deliverance - they've eaten too much flesh so you have to throw the child out.'"

And most pastors charge a fee for deliverance -- anywhere from $300 to $2,000.

One of the most notorious and influential pastors is Helen Ukpabio of Liberty Gospel Church

Wow, she puts the "rad" in "radical," doesn't she?

And here is just one of the many Christian groups condemning her and her "ministry," which seems to have no relationship with any American churches.

http://defendingcontending.com/2009/...ch-in-nigeria/

Now try to find a Muslim website condemning, in equally strong terms, the heinous preaching of many wahabist ministries around the world.

Although I HAVE found a pretty well-reasoned and well-researched condemnation of the Cordoba group's project by a Sunni Muslim, so obviously at least some Muslims are willing to speak up.

American Thinker: Esposito

There may be Christian groups condemming it but its' Christianity, religion, supernaturalism. And American or not they're tied to Sarah Palin.


http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...P35QuNXGRxkbmQ

LOS ANGELES (AFP) — An Internet video showing Sarah Palin being blessed by a Kenyan witch-hunter emerged Thursday in the latest online blast from the Republican vice-presidential nominee's past.

The video appeared on Youtube and several sites showing Palin taking part in a 2005 service at a Pentecostal church in Alaska where preacher Thomas Muthee calls for witches and other Palin enemies to be defeated.

In the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus, every form of witchcraft is what you rebuke. In the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus, father make away now," Muthee says in the video.

In the same sermon, Muthee calls on followers to seek positions of influence in government, education and business.

"If we have that in our schools we will not have kids being taught how to worship Buddha, how to worship (Prophet) Mohammed. We will not have in the curriculum, witchcraft and sorcery," Muthee said

Personally, I've seen very little evidence of the supernatural.

And that right-wing rag, the Boston Herald, says the flap about it is all smoke and no fire:

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_...ign&position=8

And on that, I would be foolish to disagree with you.

I haven't been on TCS much recently, and haven't been in IMO until yesterday for ages. In just this thread, I've caught up on a month's reading. It's been fascinating, and I'm truly impressed that especially this subject appears to have required no moderating! Kudos to everyone participating.

I probably wouldn't have jumped in here at this point, and maybe I missed it, but I didn't see anyone address the question from this perspective.

The way I see it, religions are institutions of people. Their doctrines are created by people. There are those that claim they are the doctrines of God, but even if so, they still must be interpreted by people. Religions based on events that occurred thousands of years ago are subject to the editing of time. ESPECIALLY Christianity, which occurred at a crossroads in time - and place (a crossroads of international trade) - of competing political wills, and its birth was a time when the globe was becoming truly international (e.g. Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia), so even the writings/texts that became "The Bible" were originally written in many languages.

What we know today as "the bible" and the roots of the dates of celebrations (the birth of Christ, the ascension of Christ, &etc.) were essentially established by numerous ecumenical councils, where they decided what was in, what was out, which phrases were kept, which weren't, how they were phrased, &etc.

That process has gone on for centuries, and still goes on today. In North America alone there are over 1,000 different faith groups that identify themselves as "Christian." And there are plenty of people who believe in the resurrection of Jesus that have no particular affiliation.

How many different versions/translations are there of the Bible? 100s? 1000s?

Belief itself is a matter of faith, and faith in what is personal and thus subject to interpretation.

So there are as many different "Jesuses" as there are people who believe in the resurrection.

Belief in and of itself does not preclude tolerance.

But institutionalize it, and some will preach tolerance, others won't. People will pick and choose the teachings they want.

Personally, I see "religion" as the manifestation of the belief in something larger than ourselves expressed at a particular place in time, according to the culture and point in history in which it was expressed.

That said, it ("it" being religion in general) was and is used repeatedly to achieve political power, and thus the very nature of its expression personally or institutionally is often intolerant.