Tolerate this!
Tristan Emmanuel
Posted on 02/02/2002 7:11:33 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Tolerate this!
Tristan Emmanuel
I don’t know if I can tolerate one more letter or article on tolerance. This word has lost all meaning. It’s been relegated to the status of a swear word. You know, the four-letter type used by bar-hopping, dope-smoking, baby-making adolescents whose acumen for the English language is equivalent to that of a Neanderthal; the only problem is there are too many letters. But really, this word is used to justify every licentious practice under the sun, so it may as well be a swear word.
Tolerance, as a judicial concept, interestingly enough finds its origins in Christian jurisprudence. Tolerance refers to the discretionary acceptance of an opposing religious view. For example, the English parliament of 1689 passed a law that granted partial freedom of worship to dissenters from the established Church of England. They called it the Toleration Act.
Now, I’m not here to argue the merits, or non-merits of that act, but I want to point out a very important point, tolerance means: limited and discretionary acceptance. To be tolerant of something or someone doesn’t mean acquiescence, and it doesn’t mean that you can’t speak out in opposition.
But based on the flurry of articles all decrying the rhetoric of the religious-right and calling for toleration, it’s clear that this word has been co-opted by some of the least discretionary people. To add insult to injury, many of them are indiscreetly propagating their immorality and insisting that traditional Christians turn a blind eye, shut off their minds, empty their hearts, flush their moral and religious views down the toilet, and shut up! Tolerance to them means total capitulation to their view.
The irony is that while they’re clamouring for us to zip it up, they’ve got every Christophobic pundit out there preaching about their god-given rights. “If a man wants to sodomize another man—tolerate it!” “If a woman wants to terminate an inconvenient child—tolerate it!” “If the public schools are going to be used for the purposes of homosexual propaganda—tolerate it!” “If tax dollars are used to promote queer causes—tolerate it!” With one accord the hue and cry is: “Tolerate it, or else!”
Tolerance they say? Well, tolerate this. I don’t have to agree with your lascivious and self-destructive lifestyle. And I, and every other Christian, has the right to openly express our opinions, judgments and God-given wisdom—tolerate that. And, just like homosexual-activists, we have every right to promote our religious views and influence an uninformed populace—tolerate that! And if a homosexual embraces Christ and rejects his lifestyle all because we, by the grace of God, intervened, well, I guess you’ll just have to tolerate it.
Yes, tolerance. I believe in tolerance. I believe in it so much, I won’t harass people just because they disagree with me. In fact, I won’t use the Human Rights Commission to impose my moral disposition on those who propagate views and lifestyles which are inherently sinful and self-destructive. I don’t sue those who promote perversion. I don’t threaten. I don’t harm in anyway. No, I tolerate.
And I’m not alone, many others do the same. We tolerate. Our tolerance is a fait accompli, because we believe in the rule of law and respect for human life. We believe in civility, and we believe in due process. But we keep hearing the same tired song: “If only we would learn to tolerate each other.” Folks, our tolerance is tolerance!
But, our tolerance stops far short of complete capitulation. Toleration, doesn’t mean we’ll empty our minds and suddenly be overwhelmed with warm fuzzies for the opposition. It does not mean that we’ll shut up, zip up and go away. And tolerance does not mean we’ll stop being political and use the democratic process to gain the upper hand, influence society, and see the dawn of civility return to America, or Canada, where I live.
Let’s get something straight: Toleration doesn’t mean that traditional Christians will hide in the closet, which I suspect is what all Christophobes want. Tolerate that!
It seems to me maybe we are waking up!
Ha! I'm an evangelical, born-again Christian, and if you think YOU'RE intolerable.....well, kiddo, I could run rings around you. And you are most CERTAINLY welcome here. And anywhere else you want to go. Pffffftttttttt to anyone who implies otherwise.
I see! So, tell me, how many times over the course of January when you were "bad mouthing" me did you copy me on the message? Hmmm! The word hypocracy does come to mind.
And please name 1 single Christian that I hate?
Aside to RnMom: Ready for another 20 verbal lashes...
Name one Christian you hate? The Pope.
You hate Catholics in general. I'd refer you back to the thread about the Pope and the message of peace, but your not honest enough to remember your behavior on that thread.
I'll let you have the last word since there really isn't any reason for me to believe that you can admit your slight toward me. Good evening.
Why'd ya' call JMJ333! She doesn't tolerate my right to speak Biblically about the Pope. I'd tell you my nickname for her, but I doubt that it would be tolerated either.
33 posted on 2/3/02 6:46 AM Pacific by CCWoody [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To lurkers: He hadn't the guts or the manners to flag me in his rude post.
Bump for that!
I think feelings are still raw from the thread that got pulled.
I have never heard Woody say that he "hated " the Pope (needles to say he does not agree with him) so that is a harsh accusation.
Jesus was not always soft spoken in His criticism of the religious leaders of His day..He called them hypocrites and He told them to "beware". Sometimes all of us sound harsh.
Now be careful of those legos :>)..and have a Good Night!
I just ask for a modicum of decency. Brad's Gramma gave me a flag and I read the thread without comment--I enjoyed it. I made no slur or post to anyone. But woody *had* to single me out and slam me without a flag. Nothing personal--just asking to be included when someone trashes me.
I'll leave it at that. Hope your night is good also. And believe it or not--I am surrounded by legos as I type. I tripped over a boat launch and its in a jillion pieces! =)
Now how do you think a mother of 5 sons may have figured that out??
Just as I "tolerated" this past Friday when I put my arms around an HIV infected homosexual man at a funeral and told him that I loved him so much that I was praying that he would abandon his homosexual lifestyle and embrace Jesus Christ as his Savior. This man doesn't call me an intolerant homophobe, he knows that I really do love him.
(BTW, this Razormouth article is one of the best. Thanks.)
Great website!! Thanks!! My "Favorites" list keeps getting longer and longer because of you guys!
And as always, RnMomof7, thanks for the bump!
Sounds like BRAAD needs to rear its ugly head!
Shalom.
My point is that he was not roughly confrontational in a way of argumentative substance, but irrationally vicious in his stance against evangelicals. When I stood up to him in a way of firm civility, he blasted us with his bigoted charge that we are bigots. (Eventually I started laughing. I couldn't help it.)
What I would have you notice is the fact that he said that he admires the Pope. Not a good thing, in my opinion.
You must pardon me for refusing to admire the Pope or anyone who admires the Pope. Thoughtful evangelicals have Scriptural reasons for this refusal. The fact that you reject our Scriptural reasons out of hand just confirms that we are correct in our overall position.
To underscore what I am saying, let me say that you really do need to check out this post on another thread.
Honest lurkers will see that my arguments are pretty harsh, but only because they have real substance. And I think that they will eventually realize that you just gripe when we crush you with argumentative substance. You don't like it when evangelicals prove that you simply refuse to grasp any of this stuff we are talking about. You refuse to admit that you are way over your head in the discussion.
You don't grasp this stuff any more than Walter Cronkite does. You don't love the Truth any more than Walter Cronkite does. (The funny thing is, today's idolatrous fools admire Walter Cronkite!)
My bottom-line point is that this discussion is not child's play. This discussion is deadly serious--which is why it quickly gets too rough for you and your chatty, coffee table theology. What I am saying, then, is that you need to be spiritually mature. Unfortunately, that is anathema to RCism. Scripturally objectivity is utterly disallowed in RCism. Any fool knows that.
Even more ominious, it turns out that spiritual maturity is a supernatural gift from the God of sovereign regeneration. It has nothing to do with sprinkling holy water. You are at God's mercy in ways which you will not even admit.
So, you need to face what I said on the other thread. And the only way to face it is to leave RCism. Your position is bankrupt. I am just scratching the surface of your problems in what I have said thus far. And at some level of your soul, you know that I am.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.