How tolerant do Christians have to be of other faiths? Is speaking out against idolatry something the average Christian should concern himself with? Who decides what is Truth? And if it is genuine Truth, is it wrong to defend it if others might be offended by said defense? If even one person is offended has the Defense failed its testimony.... its walk with Christ?
Who decides what is and is not true? And does one have a moral obligation to defend that truth?
8 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
First is how should believers respond to people who challenge your faith? Atheists, Comedians, Historians, etc. Do you go as far as muslims and declare them enemies of the faith, subject to death? Or does your faith lead you to not engage these people at all?
The second category is how strongly should you press to have those that aren't of your faith follow its dictates? I think that adolescents who are taught responsible birth control are better prepared to face the consequences of teen sexuality. The christian majority opposes this stance. It uses it's majoritative status to dictate the education of non-christian US citizens. Is that ethical?
Re. politics and birth control - Bent, are you seriously questioning whether it is ethical for Christians to vote and have their religious views inform their political views? What do you want us to do - vote the opposite? That would make me pro-murder of atheists and pro-stealing of their possessions.
Even without religious views the notions of condom distribution in schools is foolish. "A poor cohabiting teenager using the Pill has a failure rate of 48.4%. You read that correctly: nearly half of poor cohabiting teenagers get pregnant during their first year using the Pill. Over 70% of poor, cohabiting teenagers using condoms, will be pregnant within a year. By contrast, the middle-aged, middle-class married woman has a 6% chance of pregnancy after a year of condom use."
More here - http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2007/09/17/abstinence-still-the-best-option/
We all have a responsibility to try to discern the best we can what is True and Good and Right. Having done so, we have a duty to defend that Truth, but we have a duty to do so humbly, because one of the Truths that is out there is that we are fallible humanity, entirely and frequently capable of being wrong.
So, taking those three obligations (1. to discern truth, 2. defend truth but, 3. do so humbly) into consideration, it seems to me that we need to work to discern Truth for ourselves and allow others the freedom to discern Truth for themselves.
Therefore, it seems to me, that we ought to take action (be that physical action or political action) to interfere with the Others' truth only when the Other's action is risking taking away natural human rights - the right not to be oppressed, assaulted, tortured, killed, property taken, etc.
Therefore, the Muslim, Christian or atheist has a right to his/her religion without interference from us, but we have an obligation to intervene when the Muslim, Christian or atheist is attempting to kill or hurt another, or deprive rights to another.
I'd guess most folk could agree with that and only start disagreeing when we get down to the details (Does taxation = stealing? Does "intervention" mean that I can kill others to stop others from killing others? etc).
Still, good, conservative thinking would dictate a very prudent, limited response in most circumstances where we may be inclined to intervene, just because of our proclivity to be wrong. Although, as King noted, "When you are right, you cannot be too radical; When you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative."
I'm just of the mind that we ought to be humble about when we think we're in the right when it comes to interfering with others.
I am questioning how far the genuine Church of Christ should go in defending the Truth of the Gospel against those who pervert it.
Here are the articles that prompted my post, all from the same site, read in this order:
"Rick Warren: Evangelical and Mainline Churches Need to Reconcile"
"Rick Warren Wants to "Reconcile" With This?"
"National Cathedral: New Age Pantheon"
If we are commanded to "earnestly contend for the faith," how do we then earnestly contend while remaining true to the spirit of God's love? We should NEVER compromise with evil, and yet we are to be loving in the process?
Matthew 18:15-18 says, "...if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."
Surely Rick Warren and others have heard and rejected calls from the Church to repent and return to the fold. And he has clearly rejected those calls. How far then do we go in defense of GENUINE Truth?
This is a fair statement. How then does one know if he is right unless he has "studied to show himself approved unto God, who needs not be ashamed, because he rightly divides the word of truth."?
There are far too many Seminaries of Biblical Jabberwocky out there, churning out too many false teachers. How do you fight that lovingly?