Religious tolerance, god or bad?

Mirage

Administrator
Staff member
V.I.P.
#11
Religious tolerance god or bad? Seriously, you spelled that wrong twice.

Anyway, how is it a bad thing? Everybody should have the right to believe how they please. You seem to have an agenda with this thread, to once again force your beliefs on others.

Correct me if I am wrong but it seems like you are leaning towards religious tolerance being bad because it means by being tolerant of other religions you have to accept the fact that not everybody will believe what you believe to be right.

Religious tolerance is good. I don't know how you could think otherwise. Everybody should choose for themselves without having ideas pushed in front of them.
 

Doc

Trust me, I'm The Doctor.
V.I.P.
#12
First off, why are you trying to create an obvious connection between the words "god" and "good?"

As for asking of tolerance is a good or bad thing: How could someone argue that tolerance is bad? Tolerance means that you may not accept a belief but you agree with yourself and those around you to deal with it. Tolerance is acceptable.

What would be better, though, is acceptance. Global acceptance that not everyone believes the same things, worships in the same way, and all life is sacred.

God preached like a presidential candidate on a campaign trail? Are you serious? Extremeists might push that hard but the majority of religious people aren't that bad. They just say "Hey, you should believe this or I'll shun you!"

And you say that churches are only tolerating people because they want more members? That's why the Christians took care of lepers? Why they take poverty vows and give the money they don't need to live to the poor? What about inner city Catholic churches that are robbed by the very people that they're trying to help and give money to?

Acceptance. Not tolerance.
 

manuel

Registered Member
#13
Religious tolerance god or bad? Seriously, you spelled that wrong twice.
Believe or not that was a typo and I copy and paste for the title (that should teach me, I‘m lazy).

Anyway, how is it a bad thing?
Thank for your question, I meant to ask if religious tolerance is good or bad, I say that it is bad, just have a look at what is happening to the church, two minister of the same sex in a major organised religion got married, the RCC in Sydney failed to dismiss a priest that sexually abused a young man arguing that it was consensual sex, the Uniting Church says that homosexuality is OK, they no longer insist in repentance and a change of life style. The same RCC priest later was accused of other incident in the place that the Church transferred him to. There are Gay Christian churches, gay priest, the Church accept ill gotten money, Christian and their churches compromised their standards in order to be popular, to be politically correct, to collect money.
Everybody should have the right to believe how they please. You seem to have an agenda with this thread, to once again force your beliefs on others.
Yes I do, I like to know if folks in here believe that God tolerate sin? In Christianity one cannot believe as one want, but as God want us to believe, that why He inspired the scriptures.

Correct me if I am wrong but it seems like you are leaning towards religious tolerance being bad because it means by being tolerant of other religions you have to accept the fact that not everybody will believe what you believe to be right.
No you are going in a direction that I didn’t intend this to go, It is more in the direction of tolerating sin, I am not big on the denomination bickering, I attend any service where the word of God is preached. God draws people to the saviour, after that he guide them to the Church that is just right for them, to grow and be fruitful.

Religious tolerance is good. I don't know how you could think otherwise. Everybody should choose for themselves without having ideas pushed in front of them.
I don’t know if you are a Christian, I am and this is the doctrine of Christianity
Act 10:42 And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead.
1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel; not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.
Act 8:31 And he said, How can I unless some man should guide me? And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him.
 
#14

Believe or not that was a typo and I copy and paste for the title (that should teach me, I‘m lazy).


Thank for your question, I meant to ask if religious tolerance is good or bad, I say that it is bad, just have a look at what is happening to the church, two minister of the same sex in a major organised religion got married, the RCC in Sydney failed to dismiss a priest that sexually abused a young man arguing that it was consensual sex, the Uniting Church says that homosexuality is OK, they no longer insist in repentance and a change of life style. The same RCC priest later was accused of other incident in the place that the Church transferred him to. There are Gay Christian churches, gay priest, the Church accept ill gotten money, Christian and their churches compromised their standards in order to be popular, to be politically correct, to collect money.
Yes I do, I like to know if folks in here believe that God tolerate sin? In Christianity one cannot believe as one want, but as God want us to believe, that why He inspired the scriptures.

No you are going in a direction that I didn’t intend this to go, It is more in the direction of tolerating sin, I am not big on the denomination bickering, I attend any service where the word of God is preached. God draws people to the saviour, after that he guide them to the Church that is just right for them, to grow and be fruitful.


I don’t know if you are a Christian, I am and this is the doctrine of Christianity
Act 10:42 And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead.
1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel; not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.
Act 8:31 And he said, How can I unless some man should guide me? And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him.
You ignored my post. That almost makes me want to cry.
 

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
#15
the Uniting Church says that homosexuality is OK, they no longer insist in repentance and a change of life style.
Isn't the whole point of denominations that their interpretation of Christian theology is different from all others?

If you think homosexuality is an abomination, then ignore them. The UCoC isn't the definite authority of Christianity, and they have no power to impress their values on you.
 

Doc

Trust me, I'm The Doctor.
V.I.P.
#16
Butchered some spelling

I say that it is bad, just have a look at what is happening to the church, two minister of the same sex in a major organised religion got married
Perfectly legal. We're all people. If you want to marry for love instead of the desire to procreate it's perfectly fine. I'm not getting into a homosexuality argument with you because you're way to devout and thickheaded to even attempt to apply simple concepts like equality. Two ministers marrying has no effect on their ability to lead the church. It's the exact same concept as allowing a man and a woman to marry only one couple has sex in a different way. Big deal. I never knew that sexual preference effects leadership abilities, intelligence, and belief.
There are Gay Christian churches, gay priest, the Church accept ill gotten money
I see what you did there. You're saying that because the church supports homosexuals that they accepted bribes or laundered money. It's the same argument as your "god = good" from the first post. You're trying to associate "gay" with "bad money" and using that argument to sway the crowd. I'm not buying it. They accepted bad money because they were bad people, not bad gay people.

Christian and their churches compromised their standards in order to be popular, to be politically correct, to collect money.
All churches need money. They're businesses, too. It's more of a stain on our econimic system than the church because they need money. Just like any other business you'll find corruption. You totally missed my statements that the churches have always accepted every walk of life. You're actually breaking the golden rule (or 11th commandment) by saying that someone shouldn't be let in because they're gay, or a thief, or a mobster. Doesn't everyone have the right to religion in your god's eyes?

Yes I do, I like to know if folks in here believe that God tolerate sin? In Christianity one cannot believe as one want, but as God want us to believe, that why He inspired the scriptures.
Where the hell did you learn that from? Even the strictest sects like the Mennonites or the Catholics allow their clergy to go out and see the real world and make judgments based on their faith. Fuck, the Catholics even promote it. They WANT you to question your faith. Of course a god or gods would tolerate sin. It's natural for humans to break rules. Now you're trying to act as if you don't sin and think that all fifteen billion people that have walked this planet should never have sinned and their respective gods won't forgive them for it.

You can reply directly to me but I'm done with this thread for now. I hate arguing/debating/talking to fanatics who cannot have an open mind.
 
Last edited:

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
#17
Let me take a shot at this. I think I say the same thing Manuel is saying but in a different light.

On A street is the 1st Community Church of Springfield and on B street is the Springfield Country Club. The Country Club lets anyone that would like to join in as long as they pay the $100/month. With that, they can swim, play golf and go to the Club's restaurant. Every 2 weeks, most of the members get together and go over the finances of the Club and what they would like to see changed. They also have guest speakers that come and help people with finances, motivation, relationships and the like.

The Church welcomes all people to come for the teachings and are welcome to any of the service the Church offers. However, if you want to join the Church, you must believe and abide by the beliefs of the Church. These rules may include a Biblical view on homosexuality, dress code, etc.

Lets say this Church did not have this statement of beliefs and 25% of the Church had a non-Biblical view of homosexuality, then any mention of homosexuality would essentially be voted out of the Church. Likewise views of adultery, salvation, Biblical accuracies, etc could all be voted out.

So, what are you let with? At the end of the day, the Church has become the country club. The preacher stands up every Sunday and gives the same speech that is being given on B Street every 2 weeks. He can't say anything that might 'offend'. And this is happening at a lot of churches. they are nothing more than nice looking Country Clubs. Many of them even offer similar services that you would get at a Country Club: daycares, dances, recreation , etc..

Its about what's real. If you want a real Country Club, don't get it from a Church, get it from a Country Club, they do it better. And if you want a real Church, don't go to the Country Club.

Its a tricky question because tolerance is always associated with good and in the world it is. But, in order to be a church, things have to operated differently.
 
Last edited:

manuel

Registered Member
#18
Well it seems that DaEstivez , let to discussion, he think that I am a fanatic, I like to clarify a couple of point though. I am a Christian debating a Christian issue, the way a successful Church is organised and run are based on the epistles of ST. Paul. Having said that any Christian reading our posts will be clear on what he taught about unrepented Homosexuals, fornicators, adulterers, thieves and murders, they cannot be part of the Church and remain in that state.
To my mind I was clear in stating that tolerance of sin and unrepentance is bad, and I like to add that it is bad for the Church and the sinner.
And this “ You totally missed my statements that the churches have always accepted every walk of life” make me ask in what planet did DaSteves live” from the foundation of the Christian Church, those that Paul established it has been clear that nobody should be accepted unless they repent and change (born again)

------
Kazmarov,
Isn't the whole point of denominations that their interpretation of Christian theology is different from all others?
But there are no Christian denominations that contradict scripture, and can be called Christian denomination.

If you think homosexuality is an abomination, then ignore them.
That is a good suggestion, and that is why these churches are disappearing. How can we ignore they if they have been brought into the congregation in contradiction to it tenet? I don’t thing that we should leave the field and let them corrupt the Church
The UCoC isn't the definite authority of Christianity, and they have no power to impress their values on
My intention is to discuss if this religious tolerance is good or bad?
You are right if one happens to be in a denomination that start compromising its tenets, moral standards, in order to be popular one should leave it, what keeps a congregation together is the Bible, if religious leaders turn their backs on scripture and treat the church as a money making business, and will do anything to achieve a return regardless of the damage that it causes you should leave, and tolerance have divided and destroyed your congregation.
The supreme authority of a Christian Church is the Scripture, and we can check what it has to say in any issue of concern, What does scripture says on these issues?

------

Good
.
Follow me on this one buddy.

I am agnostic. I don't completely believe in the text of the bible. Not to say that I don't think it hits on lots of good ideas, but I don't give myself to it unconditionally.
Well that says it all, you don’t completely believe in the text of the bible so you tolerate any behaviour because you are not even sure that God exist, I wish that these people that infiltrate our Churches would join the agnostic church and didn’t destroy ours and we don’t have to move to another.

SO, why am I a sinner if I don't believe in the teachings that accuse me of being a sinner?
Well if you don’t believe that you are sinner you will find out when you depart this life, in Christianity we believe that is the devil that accuses us and God judges us.
I didn’t ignore your post, I didn’t know what to say, my question is about tolerance. Are agnostic tolerant? Is there any thing that they don’t tolerate? How large is your Church?
 
Last edited:

Sim

Registered Member
#19
Of course religious tolerance is a good thing. And by "religious tolerance", I do not just mean tolerance regarding Christians, Jews and Muslims, but also towards atheists. Their worldview deserves tolerance as well.

For the state, this means the state has to be religiously neutral, must not advantage one religion over the other, and restrain from legislating religious morals. Religion has to be a private matter.

Some religious people confuse "tolerance" with bowing down to their intolerant bigotry. Like, respecting hatred against "sinners" such as homosexuals or other religions. As I see it, they are the most intolerant people on this planet.


Tolerance means respecting their beliefs. When they believe homosexuality is a sin, fine, then I say "you are free not to engage in homosexual acts yourself. That's your right, and nobody must force you against your will." But don't they have the nerve of telling other people, with other beliefs, how they are supposed to live their lives.
 

manuel

Registered Member
#20
Sim,
I think that unfortunately you are on different wavelength, from the beginning I have tried to guide this in the direction of religious tolerance, as in a religious organization, you say:Some religious people confuse "tolerance" with bowing down to their intolerant bigotry. Like, respecting hatred against "sinners" such as homosexuals or other religions. As I see it, they are the most intolerant people on this planet” you make it as if non-acceptance = hatred, I do not hate people what I hate is sin, as I said earlier, sinner can joint a Christian congregation provided that they repent of their sins and change, the Church is in crisis (moral crisis) because some churches have giving in to this idea (non-acceptance= hatred), homosexual cannot continue their life style and belong to a Christian congregation and they cannot be ordained minister of Christianity, and yes Christians are intolerant of sin, but they do not hate sinner, they just hate sin.
This is absolutely illogical “I do not just mean tolerance regarding Christians, Jews and Muslims, but also towards atheists” the populist churches that I am referring to ordain gay priest, they tolerated a female priest that left her husband for a woman, if we misunderstood religious tolerance as you seem to have done, we will go one day to our church and find out that an Atheist have been ordain our minister. Or a practising Muslim or Jewish Rabbi, I am not saying that if they convert to Christianity and change they should still be rejected. Christianity call us to live in this world but be separate of it. They have all the right that you say except continue thier practices, not in my church, not in Christianity.
 
Top