should we embrace tolerance or just sort of lean into it?
should I tolerate say....date rape?
that's just silly. You should stand up and actively fight against that!
What if the person couldn't help themself?
murder? Well that depends....war time? Yes....but we weren't in the war. He just made me really mad....and I really wanted to do it.
then no.
the man boy society? They're men who love boys. Is that ok?
I should mention that that's just how they are. They really do love little boys. If the little boys love them back, is that so wrong? Where does tolerance fall on this one? How about the teacher that's sleeping with her 6th grade student? How about Fuller constantly hitting on Bragg?
Should I tolerate war?
Should I tolerate political views other than my own?
Should I tolerate someone punching me in the face?
How about my neighbor's face?
We've decided that some things shouldn't be tolerated (running red lights, stealing hubcaps, illegally downloading Hasselhoff's c.d.'s...) and made laws to say loud and clear, "This will not be tolerated!" So are we intolerant?
Should we abolish our laws and just let people be?
I'm just trying to stay with the times. Things seem to be getting better the more permissive we get as a society....um....well, back to my original question.
What or where is the line?
Ah the Man-Boy Society. I think they call that the High School Wrestling Coaches Federation here.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of boys, how are the girls doing Sean?
I can't stand people who are intolerant to lactose. Jerks.
ReplyDeleteAlso, wolfenberger...beautiful.
Can we say that we "tolerate" some blogs more than others?
ReplyDeleteFuller,
ReplyDeleteyou can give up on Wolfenberger...no matter how beautiful you think he is, he's taken.
Why is wearing a seatbelt no longer a choice for an adult? Why does no one fight this obvious governmental abuse of a citizen's personal liberty?
ReplyDeleteanonymous,
ReplyDeletehuh?
I'm with anonymous, why is crack illegal?
ReplyDeletei think i would get kicked out of most churches for my views on tolerance. let's just say josh mcdowell and i look at things quite differently. but that's all i'm saying...cause i only know murph and dave and just don't feel safe with the rest of you.
ReplyDeleteCarissa,
ReplyDeletethis is a safe/happy place. Take off your shoes and stay awhile. You were saying?
As for the seatbelt... If I accidentally run into you, or you run into me, and you aren't wearing your seatbelt and die, then it's not just a consequene for you. I've got to live with that.
ReplyDeleteSeatbelts are a good law.
As for tolerance, I think it's way over-rated. I think that the people that are asking for tolerance are really just seeking affirmation from others.
Hi Carissa, my name is Steve.
ReplyDeleteso, you know how when you read a book or see a movie or hear a song and the person puts into words something that has been in your mind and heart for a long time but you had never been able to say it so it would make sense? well, that is how i felt about the brick/trampoline chapter in velvet elvis. that is the tip of the iceberg on my thoughts on tolerance. but i think tolerance (which i might define as seeking to REALLY understand people - as they understand themselves -instead of making judgements based on their choices) is way UNDER RATED in christian circles these days. i'm not saying i would always agree with their perspective but i don't think we spend near enough time trying to HEAR it and UNDERSTAND it before we form opinions and put up walls.
ReplyDeletethis is weird, i don't know you people. i just read murph's blog cause i like him and he makes me laugh and we've been friends for over half my life. but, those are my initial thoughts on tolerance.
Heretic!!
ReplyDeleteI disavow anything that Carissa Lilly, Glen Campbell, Paul Anka or any other of the artists she hangs out with say. She's been polluted by the 1950's celebrities and their near idol worship of all things outré.
paul anka...now that was funny. and murph, you know i'm bad at math, wasn't trying to prematurely age us. realized we have been friends just about HALF our lives, but certainly not more than that. forgive the math error...i make those a lot!!!
ReplyDeleteoh, and, QUIT MAKING FUN OF ME. you begged me to expand my thoughts and then you make fun of me. WHAT???!!!! : )
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to say disavow. It's kind of fun, go ahead and say it....disavow....nice
ReplyDeleteCarissa,
ReplyDeleteI just reread the bricks and trampoline part of Velvet Elvis and it has gotten me thinking...
I am the biggest bricklaying wall builder around. It hit me like a ton of bricks you might say, when he talked about removing one brick and the whole wall tumbles. I have found there are many things that I am comfortable with and believe. If those things get challenged, I become an ostrich and rather than think through what challenged me, I cling to God being God and that is enough for me. I have always thought that that was a good, safe response instead of a chickenish one. I am learning I pride myself on being smart or at least thinking I am smart when a lot of it is just repeating what Sean has said. But being around thinkers like Jana, Steve, Adam and Sean has led me to try to really figure out some of the whys to what I believe.
So my point to all of this is that I agree with you when you said that tolerance should be defined as really understanding people instead of judgments based on choices. I am the first to admit I am the biggest pharisee in the history of ever and that I take huge leaps about people when I find out they ___________ when I think it is wrong. So tonight I am changing, I am going to understand instead of tolerate behaviors and love people better and invite people to jump on the trampoline with me instead of fighting for people to agree with my bricks. Because regardless of the bricks in my wall, Jesus is still the best possible way to live.
Aren't there things we should always be brick people on? like Jesus is fully God and fully man, the cross, the resurrection, justification by grace alone through faith alone?
ReplyDeleteI think I'm definitely a brick guy. I could be a trampoline guy on some things but not anything at the heart of the gospel.
Paul didn't say if there was no resurrection we should re-evaluate our faith and keep jumping. He said that if there is no resurrection, we are still in our sins, and are of all people most to be pitied.
Seems to me like he's laying bricks.
So, for the trampoline jumpers, do you think its okay to be brick layers one some stuff?
Dictionary.com defines tolerance as:
ReplyDelete"The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others."
Thank is the kind of tolerance I can get down with. I can (and need to, like most of us) learn to recognize and respect.
However, Tolerance is very often used to mean "to accept someone else's views and practices as equally valid."
That's what I'm not okay with. I'm not going to pretend (like a lot of people pretend) that I view other people's views on the nature of Christ or the Gospel as equally valid with mine. There are some things that I just think I'm right about, and I'm not afraid to say-so. I could pretend to be unsure, but that would just be false humility. It's not arrogant to think that I'm right about something - particularly if I recognize that these things were revealed to me, and not "figured out" by me.
I agree with Wes - there are some places where we need to be brick layers and wall builders. I won't budge on the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, or the Apostles Creed. I won't accept deviation from them in my fellowship circles, either. I'll allow for exploration and questioning, but the bottom line is that, if someone confidently affirms something that is contrary to those statements of faith and won't allow themselves to be corrected, I'll have to assume that they don't know Jesus.
That sounds incredibly harsh and judgmental, but that's where I'm at.
There are a lot of things that I believe to be true that I recognize a lot of room for variation among Christians. Things like eschatology (end-times stuff), soteriology (calvanism v arminianism), sacramentology (how you view and practice the sacraments), or ecclesiology (church structure and governance) leave a lot of room for dialogue and differentiation that is well within the bounds of being orthodox.
Here's the thing: it's impossible to be loving and never lay any bricks. For me to never hold anything to be objectively true means that I can't truly point to the offer of hope and salvation in Jesus. If I don't hold anything to be absolutely true, then I can't correct a brother when he has fallen into sin. There HAVE to be some things that I won't budge on in order to be loving.
Church history is chock full of times when the church has tended too far toward false doctrine and has needed some brick layers.
There have also been times when the church has tended too far toward wall-building and needed to allow some room for differences.
I think that the church is short on brick-layers, right now.
...but I'm sure that a lot of people disagree... I'm not a brick-layer about this post.
(I haven't read that chapter or any of Velvet Elvis, so forgive me if I'm using the terminology of laying bricks incorrectly... I'm assuming that it means, in this context, declaring something to be true and not being open to another idea)
With that attitude,"I need to correct you" you will alienate the very people who need your help to find Jesus and the only people who will listen to you are the people who agreed with you in the first place.
ReplyDeleteThere's a difference between having a knowledge of someone's need to be corrected and treating them like they need to be corrected.
ReplyDeleteThe first does not necessitate the second.
And without the attitude that you have something true to communicate, then the whole world might listen - but you will say nothing worth hearing.
ReplyDeletePeople can spot a person who needs to be right a mile away and they'll shut you down. People can also spot a tolerant person and then your message is tolerated in turn.
ReplyDeleteI'm just saying that if you have the right message but you've turned people off by your "I'm right and your not" then you've touched noone's heart. Your message is a tree in the forest. Full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.
?
ReplyDeleteI'm a little confused why it is that someone who is confident in what they believe and won't compromise on some issues (which the church has held as absolutes for 1700 years) is automatically assumed to be incapable of sharing in a gentle and loving way that engages people and tends to draw them to Christ?
I don't know that I've ever been accused of being dogmatic or unloving in the way that I share what I believe, but I'm very much a person who tends to distinguish between "this is definitely true and I won't budge" and "here's what I think, but I could be wrong, and so I'm open to other people's thoughts."
I think that confidence in the truth and the ability to share it in an effective and loving way are independent of each other - not mutually exclusive.
I won't budge on the Apollo Creed. I just won't.
ReplyDeleteIt's good to know that someone is finally taking a firm stand on the whole Apollo Creed controversy.
ReplyDeleteRegarding this other less controversial stuff...I have just never understood the idea of tolerance taken to the levels it has been. If I don't believe there is an absolute truth behind the tenets of my faith, then why would I subscribe to that faith in the first place? And if I believe that, isn't it then natural that I would have a heart, not to mention a responsibility, to reflect that truth to others so that they might hear it? It's not about who is right and who is wrong. It's about a passion for all to experience the freedom that knowing God brings.
Now, how that is done so that the message is actually heard and hopefully even taken to heart is clearly the challenge, but I guess I just feel like, when I press into God, He tells me how to do that in each situation I encounter. Honestly, it's not always the same. But I can't think of a time when I have done that successfully without being open to getting to know the person I am reflecting it to - including who they are and what they stand for - and being open to learning more about that. And usually I end up meeting an amazing person who I know God loves so much. I guess I also don't understand why so many people seem afraid to do this, like respecting a person by listening to their beliefs is somehow threatening to our faith. The God I come to know more and more everyday is bigger than that.
>>If I don't believe there is an absolute truth behind the tenets of my faith, then why would I subscribe to that faith in the first place? And if I believe that, isn't it then natural that I would have a heart, not to mention a responsibility, to reflect that truth to others so that they might hear it?<<
ReplyDeleteI'm focusing on the heart part of your comment. Some pretty awful leaders have tortured others into submission with their faith because they really thought their god wanted them to. They thought they were "saving" people by burning and maiming them into submission.
Faithful people can be capable of some heinous acts.
That's why it makes me so uncomfortable when people pound down their fist and say "I have the only truth" or "believe me because I have God/Jesus behind me".
I don't know if each individual here is kind-hearted or kind-of-mean so this comment is not pointing at anyone in particular. Bricklaying just seems to be a slippery slope toward becoming a tyrant.
since i brought up the whole subject 9000 comments ago i wanted to just say this one thing, okay, maybe two.
ReplyDelete1. my trampoline has a few bricks. but they are mainly used for providing a firm foundation with which to place to poles of my trampoline. we have to have a foundation. no two ways about that. but, as i have aged (and matured) i have learned that the bricks in my foundation are far fewer than i originally thought. and in learning this i have learned a bigger lesson...which is...God will NEVER fit in any box we make for him. and that is one of my bricks.
2. i think i can be a trampoline jumper mainly because i truly believe that God will work in other peoples lives with or without me. he is SO NOT DEPENDENT on me to work in someone else. knowing that, the pressure is OFF of me to always have the right answers or the right thing to say or the right way to convince someone. that is God's job. i get to jump on the trampoline, live life, and be in relationship with people and TRUST that the Lord will use me their lives and use them in my life (even if they don't know Him) to draw us each closer to Him.
What is bricklaying? Is it not dealing with people that disagree with your bricks because they're wrong?
ReplyDeleteIs it trying to correct people who are wrong?
Is it holding to your beliefs when people who disagree try to sway you?
Is it trying to understand others' points of view even though they disagree with yours (but still refusing to be swayed)?
I read the Athanasian Creed and one of them (#43) talks about doing good gets you life everlasting and doing evil gets you everlasting fire. Isn't that "works"? I get the rest. Believing in the Trinity being one God with no beginning and no end.
#1 Yay Carissa. I think that is kind of the bottom line for me too. I know the things I won't budge on like Wes said.
ReplyDelete#2 I think that love and Gods motivation behind the things we do are the only things that keep us from becoming tyrants.
#3 Are there 2 anonymous-es? Because one seems to have LOTS of opinions on this subject that the other seems to not know what the subject is. It would be funny if there is only one.
And #4 How hard is it to put your name in as the commenter? Help me understand. Because it seems like anonymous commenters are sometimes mean and then don't say who they are. Unless I am missing a reason to not put your name, if there is a good one, let me know and I wil slip into the shadows.
And I really want to post this as anonymous.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.
ReplyDeleteI think that this is probably more an observation of the truth, rather than a basis for salvation. The Bible makes all kinds of statements about the evil being punished and the good being saved. This isn't intended to explain the basis for salvation. It's descriptive - not prescriptive.
"He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death."
Revelation 21:7-8
I'm not big on proof-texting, as is tends to lead to abusing the context of scripture, but I'm just using this as an example of where the Bible observes that those who do good/overcome will be saved and those who do evil will be condemned.
Again, the 43rd statement in the Athanasian Creed is DEscriptive, not PREscriptive.
And so I still hold to the Athanasian Creed.
Athanasius Contra Mundum!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteJohn 6:29 "Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.""
ReplyDeleteSometimes "works" gets a bad rap. It's works of the law that don't save us.
Believing in him who He has sent DOES save, and Jesus calls it a work... although probably just as an ironic statement to people who were asking what to DO to be saved... he basically says is "What should you DO? You should BELIEVE." Which is ironic, because "believing" wouldn't strike his audience as actually doing much of anything. Poetic irony, there, to drive home the point. Jesus is smart.
Athanasius Contra Mundum!
ReplyDeleteAthanasius... what a dog.
I'm glad he was "against the world" and fought for the truth.
i think there are building materials other than springs and bricks.
ReplyDeletei think when i jump on a trampoline too long i get out of breath and my legs feel wobbly when i get back on solid ground.