Please, let's not sidetrack a perfectly good discussion about religious intolerance with other topics like who is or isn't the devil or how a passage from a holy book ought to be interpretted -- that is rightly so a whole other thread, isn't it?

We were all doing so good too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

Woah, Scot, I don't know what "deity" you have in mind, but the quote below is illuminating concerning Jesus Christ, at least, and I think this excahnge started with 31Pumpkin, so we seem to be talking about Christianity.(?)
John 10:10-11
10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

It is the devil, (or ourselves, sometimes), that gets us into hot water. Let's not place the blame in the wrong place.

---

I was referring to ANY deity. But lets look at your quote. Who created the thief? Who allowed the thief to exist? Are we sheep that we need to be led?

How can a deity that will save a child from choking allows hundreds of children to die in hurricanes and tsunamis? How can a god that will answer the prayers of some ignore the prayers of so many?

If you want to believe in such a deity, that I am happy for you that you can find comfort in such a belief. But I ask that you respect my right to believe in concrete facts.

Sees my discussion of religious tolerance and its growing significance in this country being drowned out by the old "my diety or lack thereof is better than your diety or lack thereof" argument and smiles over the irony of that! :eek:

I give up! LOL

You are right, Val. We need another thread on where the devil came from and why. Should generate a lot of interest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

The tolerance of all beliefs regardless of their consequeuences would create a lawless society.

---

Based on what evidence? You are guessing, and guessing very badly. By way of contrast, look and see what INTOLERANCE has produced in the way of a lawless society.





Does your argument extend to every sphere of endeavour?

Politics?

Diet?

Entertainment?

Hair color?



Must everyone be like you or else all is lost?




M:)RGANITE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

You are right, Val. We need another thread on where the devil came from and why. Should generate a lot of interest.

---

The Devil came down from Georgia. Didn't you know?





M:)

I thought it was "the devil went down to Georgia" which would mean he was from the Carolina's (one of Jesse's or Strom's folk). Unless the reference is to Yankees... but I can't imagine that. (unless it's the team)

I just watched a documentary last night about the Amish. It went into great detail about Rumspringa - a period where teens are allowed to experiement with the world at large so if they choose to join the church, they do so with a complete understanding of all that is involved... talk about tolerance, religious or otherwise... WOW!

The documentary concluded with the statement that 90% of the young adults choose, at the end of Rumspringa, to return to the Amish way of life and join the church. That impressed me.

That is impressive. I applaud them.

The Amish also suffer from too much inbreeding. They have a genetic disorder that many are choosing to go against the elders to seek treatment in hospitals. Sorry to rain on the parade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

The Amish also suffer from to much inbreeding. They have a genetic disorder that many are choosing to go against the elders to seek treatment in hospitals. Sorry to rain on the parade.

---

Well, I wasn't wholesale endorsing them Tal, lol, just pointing out one practice that I thought was pretty admirable... :p that's all! But I wasn't aware that they were opposed to seeking medical help from "english" sources?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valinors_sorrow

Well, I wasn't wholesale endorsing them Tal, lol, just pointing out one practice that I thought was pretty admirable.... :p that's all! But I wasn't aware that they were opposed to seeking medical help from "english" sources?

---

Yes I thought it was a testament to their beliefs that the young people where given that choice, truly enlightened on their behalf. But their closed society has brought them problems genetically similar to what American Indians faced. Only Indians raided other tribes for women (and men) to renew the bloodlines. Not to take away from the Amish though. Don't understand the english reference though, but they have been adverse to outsiders coming in with the necessary medicines and forbid anyone going outside for treatment either. Boy am I off thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Yes I thought it was a testament to their beliefs that the young people where given that choice, truly enlightened on their behalf. But their closed society has brought them problems genetically similar to what American Indians faced. Only Indians raided other tribes for women (and men) to renew the bloodlines. Not to take away from the Amish though. Don't understand the english reference though, but they have been adverse to outsiders coming in with the necessary medicines and forbid anyone going outside for treatment either. Boy am I off thread.

---

To an Amish - who are derived from Germans/Hutterites, etc - the 'English' are ordinary non-Amish Americans. Like you, Tal.



M:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K_3

Pumpkin, you have every right to be here. But to say you are not intolerant of other religions, but you say you would never choose an unbeliever for a friend. Is that a contradiction in terms? By being their friend you may bring them to your beliefs without pushing it on them. I have had people ask me how I have achieved such peace in my life. I tell them and they have found God because they want an inner peace.
If you choose to be intolerant of other religions, fine, that is your right. Just be honest and say you are. God bless you.

---

Pumpkin, I believe K_3 said contradiction not contraction. If you say you would not have a friend of another religion, that means you are intorlerant of that persons religion.

In thinking it over for a while now, I also see looking back that intolerance may be somewhat tied to insecurity too. It seems to me that those who really believe have little cause to require others to, and those who stand on thinner faith ice are often the first in line trying to jam it down someone else's viewpoint -- as if it would bolster their own if someone else would just believe too, you know?

A strong personal belief in one's own faith should not be confused with a person's ability to criticize another person's faith -- they are two very different and separate things that sometimes get all tangled together. I like to try to keep the debate to the topic.

Like Tal, I have friends of all kinds of faiths. I mentally "reviewed" every strong faith person I know and almost all are like Rick-- they are quietly demonstrating their conviction without the need to ruffle one feather about anyone else's beliefs. They practice either being respectful when they speak of other religions or not saying anything at all, from what I have witnessed. The only exception I personally know is a friend who is in trouble on a lot of levels and very hypocritical, even illogical, so its easy to imagine his faith might not be the strong version he claims it to be. Its as if his excessive prostelizing is a means of denial for him -- those who are so busy looking at others don't have time to look at self --this is an action people in the recovery community are more than familiar with. LOL

So while I applaud and even admire those of strong faith, I don't care for any practice of religious intolerance-- however I would have either type of person as a friend and do, actually!

Quote:

---

31pumpkin agrees: oops,meant to put the comment here. So why are you attacking my beliefs? Good ol fashioned jealousy Mom would say

---

!
I really don't think anyone is attacking your beliefs but you have to admit you sound so intolerant at times that people have to comment on it. Can't you love us the same way we love you without any strings attached? I really doubt if Mom would go along with the jealousy thing though.

I think there is some confusion. To be certain, not believing as you do is not the same as attacking beliefs Pumpkin-- yours or anyone's -- its just disagreement of beliefs. Please quote me directly where you think I have been attacking anyone's religious belief and I will do my best to clear up any misunderstanding. Without a direct quote of mine, its honestly hard to understand where you think it went wrong. And if I have done any attacking-- I would like the opportunity to make amends for it here... to you or to anyone that I have attacked. To deal in generalities is simply not fair so please, lets get specific. I value being tactful just like it says on my profile and I think I am pretty consistent in defending everyone's right to have their own religious beliefs too-- yours included. Besides, what is there to be jealous of, I am thoroughly confused there?

Pumpkin, I think you have a problem reading other people's posts. For some reason you are ready to jump at the conclusion that they are against you for some reason. In my post you disagreed with me and agreed with Cassie when we said the same thing. Val in no way put your religion down. She has not put anyone's down. I have not put anyone's down. I have certainly not put your religion down. Do you even know what faith I am? Do not take it so personally that this only is a discussion. I wonder if you are not comfortable in your faith when you feel you have to defend it so. I would like you to reread my post and tell me what is so wrong with befriending an unbeliever with the possibility of that person seeing what a beautiful life you lead to want to lead one also. Therefore becoming a believer. Again, I say, why is that so wrong?

I hope I have not strayed off the tolerance intolerance too much.

K 3 maybe you've hit on something we should all consider. In the zeal to affirm our faiths could it be possible we are all saying the same thing. Could we be just hearing what we want and are blinded by the fact we all say the same thing over and over. I don't know but it starting to sound that way to me and its hard to even see what the controversy is all about, until some one says " no your wrong" . Just me sometimes I loose it and don't always know it.

Not all refusal to comply with certain behavior or condemn it it either tacitly or overtly is wrong. Neither is intolerance per sey evil. It depends on what we are willing or unwilling to tolerate. In fact, tolerance under certain situations might be evil while intolerance might be morally correct. Amorality is not a virtue. Many people tolerated Hitler's views.
What were the results?

BTW
Being tolerant of other people's beliefs doesn't mean that we are obligated to make them our friends or to associate with them. It merely means that we grant them their right to their opinions.



Is Intolerance Of Sin Wrong Blog
... Is Intolerance Of Sin Wrong. If I refuse to condone a 45 year old man living with and... that make me intolerant? Is intolerance wrong?

http://christianblogs.christianet.com/1127831309.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

Being tolerant of other people's beliefs doesn't mean that we are obligated to make them our friends or to associate with them. It merely means that we grant them their right to their opinions.

---

Of course you are correct here but that wasn't the case we were discussing. Someone mentioned that here and in another thread that christian should not associate with non-christians. They were not saying that they are not obligated to be friends with them, they are saying they they are obligated NOT to be friends with them. Big difference.