And by definition the liberal version is not even tolerance.
Its we tolerate those that think like we do, and do not tolerate those who don’t.
That is not the true definition of what tolerance is.
I got no problem with tolerance. Tolerance is when I’m looking at your perverted twisted self with a barely-concealed disgusted sneer, like I smell something rotten. I treat you with basic good manners required by society, nothing more. I’m not your friend.... I am _tolerating_ you.
So yeah, I’m just fine with “tolerance”. It’s forced acceptance that I find repugnant.
Tolerance has nothing to do with Christian love. Tolerance is passive.
Christian love is active.
Next case.
No. God hates the sinner as well as the sin. A sinner is condemned from birth. He sends the sinner to Hell and eventually to the Lake of Fire.
But God does have patience (not tolerance) up to a point when He says, "My Spirit will not always struggle with man's spirit."
There comes a time when He gives up, and a Christian ought to do the same and go on, The Christin's goal should be far from becoming a co-dependent.
“Progressives” appeal to “toleration” and “rights” in order to muddle questions of fact and duty, and the dodge usually works because people are caught up in modern ideology which leaves authority dangling over the abyss by the flimsiest of threads. If the “progressives” would openly assert that their personal will needs to triumph over outside authority simply because it’s their personal will, then the scheme wouldn’t work so well.
It’s not Hollywood that turns me off to Christianity as much as the antics of the many denominations themselves. Almost all the refugee resettlement is fronted by the church, for instance.