PDA

View Full Version : Kingdoms in conflict


Reg
06-02-2009, 01:23 PM
Hi Carmen,

Here's the book I mentioned. Finished it at the cottage.


KINGDOMS IN CONFLICT - Charles Colson

pg 47....Christianity provided a transcendent spiritual end which gave Western culture its
dynamic purpose. It furnished the soul for Western civilization & provided its moral
legitimization.... “The firm principles which could mediate between the individual & society to
provide both with a sense of proportion & responsibility in order to inform behaviour.”

John Adams wrote, “Our constitution was made only for a moral & religious (Christian) people.
It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.

Today, increasing numbers of thinkers, even those who reject orthodox faith, agree that a religious-value consensus is essential for justice & concord. (Moral values)

“To disregard the historic Western consensus about the role of religion in culture is to ignore the foundation of our civilization.”

Men and women need more than a religious value system. They need civic structures to prevent chaos & provide order.
“Both the City of God & the city of man are vital to society - and the must remain in delicate balance........wherever they are out of balance, the public good suffers.”

Pg 90.... “crime is not the result of environment or poverty, but wrong moral choices.”

Pg 91....”The state is not a remedy for sin, but a means to restrain it.”

Pg 92....”In the Judeo-Christian view, law is rooted in moral absolutes that do not vacillate with
public taste or the whim of fashion.”

Pg 94...”This is why the Kingdom of God has had such an astonishing effect upon the most
powerful of human empires in every age. It is not a blueprint for some social order; nor does it
merely set the forces of radical cultural change in motion. Rather, God’s Kingdom promises radical changes in human personalities.

This is the crucial point. “While human politics is based on the premise that society must be
changed in order to change people, in politics of the Kingdom it is people who must be changed in order to change society.”

Pg 113....Can we conclude from this cursory overview that the church & the state must inevitably
be in conflict? To some extent the answer it yes. Dual allegiances always create tension. And in a
sinful world the struggle for power, which inevitably corrupts, is unavoidable. When the church
isn’t being persecuted, it is being corrupted. So as much as anything else, it is man’s own nature
that has created centuries of conflict.
But every generation has an obligation to seek a healthy relationship between church & state.
Both are reflections of man’s nature; both have roles to play. Christ’s teachings clearly delineates
these roles.
Pg 114....In God’s provision the state is not to seize authority over ecclesiastical or spiritual
matters, nor is the church to seek authority over political matters. Yet, the constant temptation of
each is to encroach upon the other.

*Oscar Cullman has written, “According to the Jewish, as to the early Christian, outlook - the
totalitarian state is precisely the classic form of the Devil’s manifestation on earth.” (“The State
of the New Testament”)

pg 118.... The crucial dynamic in the church-state tension is separation of institutional authority.

Pg 119.... “Nothing can be a true religion but a voluntary obedience unto His revealed will, of
which each rational soul has an equal right to act in all religious affairs according to the full
persuasion of his own mind.” (Comment by the Baptist minister Isaac Backus)

*One phrase in James Madison’s “Memorial & Remonstrate” presented to the Commonwealth of
Virginia in 1785, succinctly sums up the thinking of the Founding Fathers “......that Relgion or
the duty we owe our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason &
conviction, not by force or violence. The Religion of every man must be left to the conviction &
conscience of every man/woman; and it is the right of everyone to exercise it as these may
dictate.”

Pg 120.... It was this thinking that led to the First Amendment expressly to protect the individuals
right to freedom of conscience & expression, & to protect the establishment of a state church....
“A nation under God” was no idle phrase.

Pg 182.... in a spiritual vacuum, man can pursue only two options; first, to imagine that they are
gods themselves, or second, to seek satisfaction in their senses.”

Pg 197.... Collaboration with power, whether Communist or not, is always ruinous for the
church. If the church exists, it is to have legitimacy in the eyes of the people, it must always stand
erect as a counter-power to political power.”

Pg 202.... Today they (the churches in Nicaragua) resist the left’s demands to identify the gospel
with “equality, justice & peace.” They demonstrate the first law of survival for the church under
pressure from secular authorities: Do not legitimize tyranny. Remain aloof from the
enticements & threats of secular authority. Be faithful to God alone.

Pg 208... “When an institution that is voluntary in membership cannot define the conditions of
belonging, that institution in fact ceases to exist.”

Pg 211.... “......unilateral devotion to the concept of neutrality can lead to...not simply noninterference & nonviolence with the religious which the Constitution commands, but a brooding & pervasive devotion to the secular & a passive, or even active, hostility to the religious.” (especially Christianity) Confining it to a “neutral status” devoid of any inherent meaning.

Pg 212... The ideas of Nietzsche, Freud & Darwin finally set off an explosion of relativism. All
moral distinctions were equally valid & equally invalid since all were equally subjective.
(This is the new definition of what it means to be tolerant. ALL VALUES ARE EQUAL.)

Pg 213... There are no lasting values, no timeless truths, only artifacts of the moment.
(This is relativism’s principal tenant.)

Pg 214... Pascal’s second option has thus become the route of western experience: “Separated
from God, men must seek satisfaction in their senses.” This is more than mindless hedonism; it is
a world-view in which, according to professor Allen Bloom, “the self has become the modern
substitute for the soul.”

A 1985 study titled, “Habits of the Heart” calls this attitude “utililtarian individualism”.... What
this study reflects is simply the inevitable consequences of four decades of the steady erosion of
absolute values. As a result, we live with a massive case of schizophrenia. Outwardly, we are a
religious people, but inwardly our religious beliefs make no difference how we live. We are
obsessed with self; we live, raise families, govern & die as though God does not exist, just as
Nietzshe predicted a century ago.

Pg 218... This elimination of the transcendent from serious public discussion is merely a
reflection of the underlying cultural revolution that has eliminated absolute values from public
consciousness, thus ushering in an age of relativism..... “In an attempt to be neutral, we ignore all
values.”

Pg 239... Moral values do affect character, and the influence of individual character has an
impact on society....
.... What it does mean, as Plato & Cicero recognized, is that there are moral absolutes that govern
human behaviour; there is a law rooted in truth upon which the laws of human society are based.

Pg 241...But as history demonstrates, an as we have already discussed, the result of government
attempted to impose its own moral vision upon society or acting without the restraint of an
independent conscience is tyranny.

Pg 244... “Christianity rests on the belief that God is the source of truth & that He does not alter
it according to the spirit of the times.” When Christianity sever their ties o absolute truth,
relativism reigns, and the church becomes merely a religious adaptation of the culture.

Pg 245... The first responsibility for the citizen of the Kingdom, then, is to understand historic
Christian truth; to know Scripture & the classic fundamentals of the faith.......

When Christians either lack knowledge or are insecure about what they believe, as is the case
with many today, they forfeit their place in contending for theological truth, and secularism
advances.

Pg 246... Out of love & obedience Christians live in subjection to governing authorities, love
their neighbours, and promote justice. Since the state cannot legislate love, Christian citizens
bring a humanizing element to civic life, helping to produce the spirit by which people do good
out of compassion, not compulsion.

Pg 247... C. S. Lewis pointed out, however, “that in love of country, as in love of family, we
don’t love our spouses only when they are good. Similarly, a patriot sees the flaws of his country,
acknowledges them, weeps for them, but remains faithful in love.”

Pg 255... Culture is most profoundly changed not by the efforts of huge institutions but by
individual people being changed.

Pg 275... “Power involves the use of coercive force to make others yield to one’s wishes even
against their own will. Authority is achieved - or is conferred upon one - by virtue of character
that others are motivated to follow willingly.”

Pg 329... the churches primary function is evangelization & ministering to spiritual needs; as the
principal manifestation of the Kingdom of God, it must be the conscience of society, the
instrument of moral accountability.

Anna Marta
06-02-2009, 04:01 PM
Holy crap Batman, I just threw that book out!

I'd better see if I can salvage it!!! :eek:

AM

dougjb
06-02-2009, 09:55 PM
Hi Reg,

I read the book "Kingdoms in Conflict" and it is a great read. There are a number of books like this one and I hope that people would take a greater interest in exploring the dynamic of how worldviews impact culture, religion, politics, law, and the whole spectrum of the world we live in.
I believe that we live in an era where there is a tendency to compartmentalize life as though one part of life does not effect other aspects of life. This is a good topic, maybe we need to start connecting the dots and begin to develop a more distinct biblical view on things.

dougjb
some food for thought

Anna Marta
06-03-2009, 12:52 AM
I most certainly and whole heartedly agree that we need to adapt a Christian worldview. I am also against the hate crimes bill now in Congress.

I just read an article this morning posted on wnd.com about a group of Christians wearing (Jesus) tee shirts and having a protest-the-hate-crimes-bill were denied entrance to the Supreme court building because of their tee-shirts. The article also contained a U tube video which I watched.
BUT, when I saw that video and the pastor spouting "Christianese jargon" I was totally turned off. He was preaching not protesting and that is the achilles heel of the Christian conservative right leaders. No one wants to be preached-at on a public sidewalk! Preaching belongs in the pulpit.

WHEN are these Christians going to get it? The politician in D.C. doesn't care what God thinks, neither is he/she particularly concerned with hell-fire. He/she appears to be concerned with a public image that garners votes and helps them keep their job - regardless of the impact on society.

Now, IF they would use a good argument (based on Christian values in a language everyone could comprehend) - of exactly what the impact on the daily life and culture would be as a result of the passage of this bill, people would stop and listen. It IS possible to uphold the Christian standard and worldview without preaching and shoving God's and Jesus' name down people's throats.

I felt sick listening to that man, even though I basically agreed with him.

I am also sick of accusers saying, "Oh you are just reacting because of your past hurts." You know they are right! I am interpreting things through my wounds and there's nothing wrong with that!!! Why? Because- it is my woundedness that has awakened me to being able to see a clearer picture.

AM

Reg
06-03-2009, 05:31 AM
Hi Reg,

I read the book "Kingdoms in Conflict" and it is a great read. There are a number of books like this one and I hope that people would take a greater interest in exploring the dynamic of how worldviews impact culture, religion, politics, law, and the whole spectrum of the world we live in.
I believe that we live in an era where there is a tendency to compartmentalize life as though one part of life does not effect other aspects of life. This is a good topic, maybe we need to start connecting the dots and begin to develop a more distinct biblical view on things.

dougjb
some food for thought
Exactly Doug.

We need to be clear about what is happening around us as it will affect us sooner or later. Too many are unaware and get hit from behind. What we are seeing is a gradual assault on Christianity. The secular society is infringing on the Church and the moral foundations of what made the Western democracies great.

This one phrase summed it up for me...

Pg 211.... “......unilateral devotion to the concept of neutrality can lead to...not simply noninterference & nonviolence with the religious which the Constitution commands, but a brooding & pervasive devotion to the secular & a passive, or even active, hostility to the religious.” (especially Christianity) Confining it to a “neutral status” devoid of any inherent meaning.

There is no such thing as neutrality in this case. It is a brooding & pervasive devotion to the secular. or even an active hostility to the religious.

The Confessing Church in Nazi Germany stood up to it while many capitulated.

We need to be strong and sure of where we stand. There is an assault on our beliefs. We see it every day in the media and in our communities.

The NEW TOLERANCE & Relativism has taken a hold on people's thinking. Christians by-in-large are being labelled as Exclusivists & worst...BIGOTS to insist that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way.

Hope 98
06-03-2009, 10:13 AM
I am also sick of accusers saying, "Oh you are just reacting because of your past hurts." You know they are right! I am interpreting things through my wounds and there's nothing wrong with that!!! Why? Because- it is my woundedness that has awakened me to being able to see a clearer picture.

AM

Yes! I'm glad that you said that!

dougjb
06-03-2009, 10:13 AM
Hi Reg,

I believe that we have been going down the slippery slope for a long time. It is to the point now that Christianity is irrelevant at best or a major problem at worst. The thing is that everyone has a belief system and an ultimate authority that governs their lives. The only question is "what is that authority?" The quote below is very true, everyone is devoted to something, if not the true and living God, it will be something else like the secular state and all the accompanying philosophical presuppositions.


Pg 211.... “......unilateral devotion to the concept of neutrality can lead to...not simply noninterference & nonviolence with the religious which the Constitution commands, but a brooding & pervasive devotion to the secular & a passive, or even active, hostility to the religious.” (especially Christianity) Confining it to a “neutral status” devoid of any inherent meaning.

There is no such thing as neutrality in this case. It is a brooding & pervasive devotion to the secular. or even an active hostility to the religious.

I do not believe that there is neutrality in anything in life. If Christians seek to be salt and light, there is a need to become epistemologically self-conscious of who we are in Christ and role God has commanded us to play in this world. There is nothing neutral about this.

dougjb
some food for thought

ex-shep
06-03-2009, 11:13 AM
I most certainly and whole heartedly agree that we need to adapt a Christian worldview. I am also against the hate crimes bill now in Congress.

I just read an article this morning posted on wnd.com about a group of Christians wearing (Jesus) tee shirts and having a protest-the-hate-crimes-bill were denied entrance to the Supreme court building because of their tee-shirts. The article also contained a U tube video which I watched.
BUT, when I saw that video and the pastor spouting "Christianese jargon" I was totally turned off. He was preaching not protesting and that is the achilles heel of the Christian conservative right leaders. No one wants to be preached-at on a public sidewalk! Preaching belongs in the pulpit.

WHEN are these Christians going to get it? The politician in D.C. doesn't care what God thinks, neither is he/she particularly concerned with hell-fire. He/she appears to be concerned with a public image that garners votes and helps them keep their job - regardless of the impact on society.

Now, IF they would use a good argument (based on Christian values in a language everyone could comprehend) - of exactly what the impact on the daily life and culture would be as a result of the passage of this bill, people would stop and listen. It IS possible to uphold the Christian standard and worldview without preaching and shoving God's and Jesus' name down people's throats.

I felt sick listening to that man, even though I basically agreed with him.

I am also sick of accusers saying, "Oh you are just reacting because of your past hurts." You know they are right! I am interpreting things through my wounds and there's nothing wrong with that!!! Why? Because- it is my woundedness that has awakened me to being able to see a clearer picture.

AM


I know some men of that genre well. I have always been of mixed minds about street preaching. It can make a mockery of Christianity. It can also generate some conversation about the Christian faith. In the case of the you tube feed, I side with you on that one.

Reg
06-04-2009, 07:24 AM
Hi Reg,

I believe that we have been going down the slippery slope for a long time. It is to the point now that Christianity is irrelevant at best or a major problem at worst. The thing is that everyone has a belief system and an ultimate authority that governs their lives. The only question is "what is that authority?" The quote below is very true, everyone is devoted to something, if not the true and living God, it will be something else like the secular state and all the accompanying philosophical presuppositions.




I do not believe that there is neutrality in anything in life. If Christians seek to be salt and light, there is a need to become epistemologically self-conscious of who we are in Christ and role God has commanded us to play in this world. There is nothing neutral about this.

dougjb
some food for thought
Exactly Doug.

What I found amazing about it is when it was written. 1985.

If a person was not aware of that, one would think that it was written recently for the times we live in today.

What Colson saw back then was not clearly evident then as it is today. In today's society it is more so than ever before. It is a very current book although it was written nearly 25 years ago.

Pg 212... The ideas of Nietzsche, Freud & Darwin finally set off an explosion of relativism. All moral distinctions were equally valid & equally invalid since all were equally subjective. (This is the new definition of what it means to be tolerant. ALL VALUES ARE EQUAL.)

Pg 213... There are no lasting values, no timeless truths, only artifacts of the moment. (This is relativism’s principal tenant.)

This thinking is very prevalent today that the values of all others are just as valid as those of Christianity because they are equal. This thinking has managed to neutralize Christian teachings in many people's minds.

This kind of thinking is the height of cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive Dissonance is the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Josh McDowell wrote about this in his book "The New Tolerance" many years ago.

Comment:
This book is a "must read" for anyone who wants to understand the reasons underlying our nation's cultural collapse. It also explains why our society tolerates everything EXCEPT Christianity.

Basically, McDowell explains how today's definition of "tolerance" differs radically from the traditional dictionary definition. He discusses how and why the definition of tolerance has changed, how the new tolerance manifests itself in our society, and concludes by giving concrete ideas for Christian witness in the midst of today's culture.

The traditional definition of tolerance means to "endure" or put up with something, such as a person's behavior, attitudes or beliefs, without necessarily agreeing with them. In other words, love the sinner, hate the sin. However, today's definition of tolerance is more like "love the sinner, love the sin." Today's definition of tolerance states that a person's behavior, beliefs and attitudes are inseparable from who he or she is. Therefore, any attack on behaviors, beliefs or attitudes is seen as a personal attack.

The evolution of tolerance is the result of the evolution of other aspects of human existence, including the concept of truth, over three distinct eras. During the first era, ethical theism, people believed that all truth was revealed by God. In the second era, modernism, the emphasis shifted from God to mankind, and the concept of truth changed from being something that is revealed by God to being something that is discernible by man. Finally, in the third and present era, post-modernism, truth has changed from being something that is collectively true for human beings to something that is determined by each individual person, based on that person's culture, which in turn consists of behaviors, attitudes and beliefs.

Because each person's idea of truth is based on their unique culture, and because all people are created equally, the new tolerance decrees that no one person can claim to possess a superior truth, or a truth that is "more true" than other people's truths. Rather, all truth claims are equally valid.

The idea of equal truth claims has profound implications for those of us who believe in Jesus Christ and absolute standards of right and wrong. These implications include the death of truth, the disappearance of virtue, the demise of justice, the loss of conviction, the privatization of faith, the tyranny of the individual, the disintegration of human rights. the dominance of feeling, the exaltation of nature, and the descent into extremes.

Furthermore, it especially targets Christians because Christians believe that their truth claim -- Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior -- is in fact superior to any other truth claims. Because Christianity claims to have "The Way, the Truth and the Life" and does not accept other truth claims as equally valid or actively condone or participate in them, it is therefore "intolerant." And because Christianity is intolerant, it is therefore okay for a "tolerant" society to persecute it in any way necessary to force it to become tolerant. That is why the mere mention or presence of Christian concepts or symbology provokes rage and concerted efforts to obliterate them.

McDowell explains some of the "tactics of tolerance" and how these are being applied to make Christians conform. These include equating non-agreement with phobia, nonconformity with hate, conviction with fanaticism, Christian creeds, prayers and symbols with discrimination, and selective segregation with justice.

Having laid that groundwork in the early chapters of the book, McDowell goes on to cite how the "new tolerance" has invaded every sphere of our society and how it underlies just about every factor contributing to our culture's breakdown. He shows that the new tolerance is the common thread that explains why a crucifix suspended in urine is considered art, why animals and the environment are more important than people, why sexual perversion is encouraged while traditional families are discouraged, and a host of other societal phenomena. Following that, McDowell gives practical advice for witnessing to Christ without giving in to the new tolerance.

The entire book is fascinating, but what helped me most personally are two things. First, McDowell articulates the new tolerance using concrete terminology; he gives names and a new vocabulary for describing the effects of the new tolerance. Second, he shows how the new tolerance relates to and is responsible for a vast array of problems in society, how it is the common thread running between all of them.

I strongly recommend this book to any of you who would like to understand the new tolerance better and what you can do to fight it.
http://www.amazon.com/New-Tolerance-cultural-movement-threatens/dp/0842370889

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/tolerance.html

dougjb
06-07-2009, 09:39 PM
Hi Reg,
I am glad that more and more people are talking about this so called "Tolerance movement" thing going on. I find it just amazing that the "Tolerance" people are not being totally tolerant of the Christian faith. If they were truly tolerant, they would not be opposing anything Christians say because it would be intolerant.
I have had to deal with these people for years and there is nothing tolerant about them. What they are after is the introduction of new theological, philosophical, and ethical systems, especially, in the US and Europe for the purpose to recasting the foundations of society. Much of the push in the area of relativism is for the of purpose of breaking down the present systems in order to introduce new ones. Anyway, it sounds like an interesting book to read which could be very fruitful.
By the way, a good place to start researching this matter more is to examine the influence of "Monism" in the US and Europe.

dougjb
some food for thought

simka2
06-09-2009, 07:20 AM
I really debated wether I should respond to this thread...and I need to be honest and say that I don't agree with "much" of the Christian "anti-tolerance(acceptance)" movement.

The Colson's book looks interesting...

I think there is a fundamental flaw in the christian argument about the unfairness of non-christians demanding tolerance of their views while not being tolerant of ours. If our belief is the ultimate TRUTH then by default their's is not...so why are we SURPRISED and ANGERED when non-believers (who don't accept this ultimate TRUTH) don't treat us in a fair, rational, logical or way.

We in fact say...we have the ultimate truth ( or belife)...and yours is faulty...but I'm going to hold you to the standard of someone who has the truth.

I guess my point is why does their hypocrisy surprise us? They aren't playin with a full deck of cards...right? Why does it make us angry when non-believers act like non-believers? Should we be surprised that there is a double standard?

Or should we be more surprised at our own double standard..."You don't have the whole truth...but I expect to be treated by you as if you did."

I'm not saying that Jesus isn't the truth...just that to expect fair treatment from those who don't have that "truth" is an unrealistic expectation. To put it really simply it's like asking my 1st grader to do algebra...he doesn't have that knowledge yet...so there's no way. Doesn't mean he won't grow into that knowledge or that he's not intelligent enough...it's just that he doesn't have all the skills...yet.

It is my belife that as christians we need to be tolerant and loving of non-believers...just because they want us to accept their belifes...doesn't mean we have to. I don't accept many belife systems both christian and non-christian...but I can still believe in the persons foundational worth and value...I can aknowledge the thinking and rationalizing they've gone thru...and I with the help of the holy spirit can be loving...patient...kind...gentle...and self-controlled.

JaniceB
06-09-2009, 02:58 PM
If our belief is the ultimate TRUTH then by default their's is not

I don't think any of us has the ulitimate truth. Maybe the athiests if they happen to be right. The rest of us believe in Something but can we really say we understand it and know it? I think God is way above any of our abilities to understand and therefore how can we claim to be absolutely right?

And which of us is right? If we base being right on the Bible, oh brother! There are so many interpretations of everything in the Bible. Is everyone who disagrees with my interpretation wrong?

I try to stay away from Christianity is right. When I talk with people from other faiths I try to listen and learn from them. That gives them an opening to listen and learn from me too.

Carmen
06-10-2009, 02:50 PM
Not that I'm a fan of Colson, but in a way I think he does have something. We are expected to tolerate their expression of worldliness yet they will not tolerate our expression of Christianity. It isn't fair. But the world never was fair.

I agree with you, Simka, that we can't really expect fairness and tolerance from non-Christians, although I know quite a few unbelievers that could be classified as fair and tolerant. But is God tolerant of anyone else that doesn't share his view of things? No. He doesn't have to be, he's God and this is his universe. The bible has many descriptions of what happens to those that are not with God.

I'm not trying to imply that we be intolerant as Christians, but that we cannot make compromises that compromise our faith just for a show of "tolerance." Not being wishy-washy has made me a few enemies among non-Christians and Christians alike, but has also won me the respect of some non-Christians and Christians whose opinions I value. You can't please everyone.

Reg
06-11-2009, 07:06 AM
Not that I'm a fan of Colson, but in a way I think he does have something. We are expected to tolerate their expression of worldliness yet they will not tolerate our expression of Christianity. It isn't fair. But the world never was fair.

I agree with you, Simka, that we can't really expect fairness and tolerance from non-Christians, although I know quite a few unbelievers that could be classified as fair and tolerant. But is God tolerant of anyone else that doesn't share his view of things? No. He doesn't have to be, he's God and this is his universe. The bible has many descriptions of what happens to those that are not with God.

I'm not trying to imply that we be intolerant as Christians, but that we cannot make compromises that compromise our faith just for a show of "tolerance." Not being wishy-washy has made me a few enemies among non-Christians and Christians alike, but has also won me the respect of some non-Christians and Christians whose opinions I value. You can't please everyone.
Carmen, the deck is stacked against us in this society. It isn't fair. The tolerance theme is very one-sided. We as Christians are expected to be tolerant of others and yet they are not tolerant of what we believe.

I'll continue to be fair and tolerant as much as lies within me with other's beliefs and listen. I will not push my beliefs on others but expect at least a hearing also. For the most part, with a few exceptions, others will not listen.
So, until they start throwing us to the lions again, I'll try to be tolerant.

simka2
06-11-2009, 10:04 AM
I don't think any of us has the ulitimate truth. Maybe the athiests if they happen to be right. The rest of us believe in Something but can we really say we understand it and know it? I think God is way above any of our abilities to understand and therefore how can we claim to be absolutely right?

And which of us is right? If we base being right on the Bible, oh brother! There are so many interpretations of everything in the Bible. Is everyone who disagrees with my interpretation wrong?

I try to stay away from Christianity is right. When I talk with people from other faiths I try to listen and learn from them. That gives them an opening to listen and learn from me too.

Janice I actually agree with what you are saying :) I was only makeing the statement about us having the "ultimate truth" to illustrate a point in the argument I was making :)

I also agree that there are many who want Christians to endorse their choices. While I may disagree with the health of their decsions...they have the right to make them...and I will respect that.

I think there are many who have good reason to not be tolerant of chrisitians...and that often there stance is the consequence of coming into contact with a very judgemental form of Christianty...I have great compasion for their wounds.

I think there are others who are intolerant of Christians simply because they haven't taken the time to look at the hypocrisy of their stance...their immature.

And then I think there is a small percentage who are cognitively doing what they can to silence any voice they don't agree with...but the church does this as well:)

The problem is that when I come face to face...which is very rare...with someones intolerance of my beliefs I don't automatically know WHY they are responding the way they are. It would be easy to assume the worst about them...after all to some degree their doing that to me...but that doesn't help them, me, or advance the love of Jesus.

I once heard someone say "God is very patient with immaturity."

dougjb
06-11-2009, 10:46 AM
Hi everyone,

It is true that we should expect resistance to the Christian message along with the intolerance that accompanies it. Truth comes in two basic forms special revelation through Jesus Christ and general revelation that comes through the works of creation. Jesus said that "you will know the truth and the truth will set you free." As far as special revelation, the Bible states that those who are in Christ have access to truth that is outside the preview of the unbeliever.
This does not mean the unbeliever is completely devoid of truth because in Romans 1:1 states the the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness. [emphasis added] The point is that through general revelation even the unbeliever has access to certain level oftruth but they suppress that truth. This is where I believe that inevitable conflict between Christians and unbelievers will happen. When the truth is proclaimed, it makes it more difficult to suppress the truth especially when there are people out there proclaiming it. This is a source and cause of much irritation and consternation among many people.
For this reason tolerance toward Christians could be very difficult when the believer is speaking the truth while others are attempting to suppress it. In the end, conflict between kingdoms is an inevitability.

dougjb
some food for thought

JaniceB
06-12-2009, 11:32 AM
It is true that we should expect resistance to the Christian message along with the intolerance that accompanies it.

My problem is with people who act like martyrs and truly enjoy that resistance to the point of creating more of it by being obnoxious. "Oh, I must be a good Christian because no one likes me!" :rolleyes:

dougjb
06-13-2009, 10:45 AM
My problem is with people who act like martyrs and truly enjoy that resistance to the point of creating more of it by being obnoxious. "Oh, I must be a good Christian because no one likes me!" :rolleyes:

Hi JaniceB,
I have the same kind of problem with what I call the self-made martyrs. You are correct in that there is a world of difference between resistance to a message and resistance to someone who is completely obnoxious. I have run into people who directly identify persecution with the truth, in other words, if I am being persecuted then I much be telling the truth and automatically in the will of God. The wiring in their neuro-net, in my opinion, has short circuited somewhere.

dougjb
some food for thought