The Golden Rule

"But how does the Golden Rule impact apologetic engagement? It applies in that believers need to treat nonbelievers the way they want to be treated. This includes treating other people’s beliefs, viewpoints, and arguments the way you want yours to be treated... It isn’t easy to always treat another person’s views with the same care and respect that you want afforded your own. And this is especially true when the person you are dialoguing with refuses to return the favor. But it is critical that Christian apologists strive for these invaluable intellectual virtues. When non-Christians become convinced that believers in Christ prize truth and intellectual honesty above all else, then the power of the Christian apologetic witness will be greatly energized." ~ Kenneth Samples

I think Mr. Samples has hit on a very important point that we Christians often forget. We feel that it is our duty to convince others that what we believe is correct and that they should believe it too. Certainly we should be prepared to give an answer for the hope that we have (I Peter 3:15). We should certainly strive to show why our beliefs are intellectually sound and not just superstition. We should certainly seek to help others understand the hope that we have for their sake. However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that how we conduct ourselves in a debate is just as important as what we say. We must make a genuine effort to respect the position of those we disagree with and not see it merely as something to be debunked. We must genuinely listen to their position and seek to understand the central points of their argument so that they know they are respected. We must not create straw men just so we can break them down or misquote an opposing viewpoint. As Mr. Samples says above, when others see that we value truth and the other individual more than proving we are right the witness shines like a city on a hill.

By His Grace,
Taylor

"Tolerance"

"...they have mangled the word 'tolerance' to a degree that is unrecognizable. The first sentence says, 'Americans of every religious stripe are considerably more tolerant of the beliefs of others than most of us might have assumed'. If one were to use the word 'tolerance' correctly it would mean that you would affirm that while you stridently disagree with another person's belief, yet you would defend that person's right to hold that belief, without using some coercive force to change him. It means liberty of conscience. But the way these reporters are using the term makes tolerance itself into a dogma. That is, you HAVE TO believe that all religions are equally right, or you are a bigot." ~ John Hendryx, Evangelical Christians "more tolerant" than Previously Thought (italics mine)

The article that Mr. Hendryx is citing can be found here. I completely agree with the above statement. The word "tolerant" has been twisted to dogmatically mean "you have to believe that none of your beliefs are exclusively true or you are a bigot." How is this "tolerant"? Really this is just doctrine of convincing yourself that there are no doctrines and everyone should be just like you. This is really a very intolerant view, for those who hold it are saying that everyone should be just like them (which usually means dogmatically believing that those who hold to dogmas strongly are bigots), while pretending to be neutral. It is not, however, neutral but it just as exclusive as Christianity, if not more. Under this new definition of tolerance you must exclusively believe that all religions are right to be "tolerant". It is a dogma wrapped in lip service to neutrality.

I agree with Mr. Hendryx, to be truly tolerant one would have beliefs that they hold (as strongly as they wish to hold them), yet also defend the right of another person to disagree with them. I believe it would also include defending the rights of all religions to respectfully attempt to show others why they believe they are correct. The Westminster Confession holds to this kind of tolerance: "It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people, in such an effectual manner as that no person be suffered, either upon pretense of religion or of infidelity, to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury to any other person whatsoever: and to take order, that all religious and ecclesiastical assemblies be held without molestation or disturbance." (23.3)

Tolerance is not holding that everyone should believe that everything is right (which is really just believing in nothing) but holding that everyone has the right to believe what they choose as strongly as they choose without "molestation or disturbance".

By His Grace,
Taylor