Problem with Tolerance

wcx7v3 U cool ))

wcx7v3 U cool ))

wcx7v3 U cool ))

All possible kind of questions asked by non Muslims about Islam answered on below web sites:

ALL MISCONCEPTIONS AND FALSE MEANINGS ARE ANSWERED:

1-www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm (on this site you will get all answers about Islam, CHRISTIANITY, JESUS, JUDAISM , ETHEISIM, HINDUISM and all other religions).
2-www.islamalways.com/
3-www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
4-www.jamaat.net/deedat.htm
5-www.islamtomorrow.com/yusuf.asp
6-www.justaskislam.com/index.php (on this site you will get answer of every question you have and asked, with in a day or by next day - IT’S A CHALLENGE !!!)

All possible kind of questions asked by non Muslims about Islam answered on below web sites:

ALL MISCONCEPTIONS AND FALSE MEANINGS ARE ANSWERED:

1-www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm (on this site you will get all answers about Islam, CHRISTIANITY, JESUS, JUDAISM , HINDUISM and all other religions).
2-www.islamalways.com/
3-www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
4-www.jamaat.net/deedat.htm
5-www.islamtomorrow.com/yusuf.asp
6-www.justaskislam.com/index.php (on this site you will get answer of every question you have and ask with in a day or by next day - IT’S A CHALLENGE !!!)

What's wrong with tolerance?

1) It's too vague. Of what, specifically?

2) As applied to belief systems, or as a general social virtue, it fails to account for those who do not practice it. I cannot tolerate belief systems that are not tolerant of my own, or I risk my own survival. The virtue of tolerance must be enforced intolerantly.

NB: in this context "to tolerate x" = "to acquiesce in the existence of x", NOT "to agree that x is good" OR "to refrain from attempting to convince people who believe x that they are wrong". Both of the latter two actions are consistent with tolerance.

Garnett, "yeah, yeah, but I prefer music myself. If you don't have music in your soul and love dogs you are headed for trouble."

You need to get a grip!

Why do some people write a whole book on here? If I wanted that much information I would go to the source.

yeah, yeah, but I prefer music myself. If you don't have music in your soul and love dogs you are headed for trouble.

WITH ADDITION AND CORRECTION:

MODREN SCIENCE AND QURAN (ISLAMIC DIVINE BOOK)

Quran is not a book of science BUT a book of signs. It has more than 6000 verses out of which more than 1000 verses giving CLEAR signs about the modern scientific proven facts in recent couple of hundred years.

- For some people ONE sign is enough to believe.
- For some people 10 signs are enough.
- But some people don't come to believe after more than 1000 miraculous signs.

Not now but in couple of days I will quote all the verses I'm referring below. I only remember few so I'll quote later.

Verses about:

1- Big bang theory (in a nut shell).
2- Ostrich egg shaped earth (which is the exact shape)
3- Cosmic dust (referred more perfectly as smoke).
4- How water seep into the earth and rain cycle through AIR.
5- Sweet and salt water of oceans and barrier between them.
6-Expanding sun, solar system and universe for given period of time
7- Earth, sun and stars revolving on their axis and path (orbits).
8- Sun and moon have different paths (orbits).
9- Sun and stars consuming there energy.
10- Reflected sun light of moon. In Arabic mooneer (moon) it self means reflected light.
11- Upper thin layer of earth, which is hold by mountains as nails (bigger in size deep in earth) from shacking.
12- Perfect shape and stages of human embryo.

AND MANY MORE............

MODREN SCIENCE AND QURAN (ISLAMIC DIVINE BOOK)

Quran is not a book of science BUT a book of signs. It has more than 6000 verses out of which more than 1000 verses giving CLEAR signs about the modern scientific proven facts in recent couple of hundred years.

- For some people ONE sign is enough to believe.
- For some people 10 sings are enough.
- But some people don't come to believe after more than 1000 miraculous signs.

Not now but in couple of days I will quote all the verses I'm referring below. I only remember few so I'll quote later.

Verses about:

1- Big bang theory.
2- Ostrich egg shaped earth (which is the exact shape)
3- Cosmic dust (referred as smoke)
4- How water seep into the earth and rain cycle through AIR.
5- Sweet and salt water of oceans and barrier between them.
6-Expanding sun, solar system and universe for given period of time
7- Sun and stars consuming there energy.
8- Reflected sun light of moon. In Arabic mooneer (moon) it self means reflected light.
9- Upper thin layer of earth, which is hold by mountains as nails (bigger in size deep in earth) from shacking.
10- Perfect shape and stages of human embryo.

AND MANY MORE............

What is holy about below mentioned Bible verses?
Is it really a holy book?

I always wondered why every passing day west is going shamelessly promiscuous, vulgar, obscene, abhorrent to morality or virtue and repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles. OTHER THEN RUTHLESSLY VIOLENT AND BARBARIC TO OTHER RELIGIONS AND RACES!!

-Why kids are molested in there dark churches and convents by there priests. TURNED INTO MILLIONS OF GAYS OR ETHEIST, I GUESS BETTER CHOICE FOR THEM!
- Why children are molested by there parents (mostly adopted not blood related) in your society?
- Why every second women is raped in your society? Alone in USA more than 2730 women raped every single day.
-Why teenage girl’s pregnancy is out of control in your society?
-Why kids are not properly raised by there parents and why old parents are not been taken care by there kids in your society?
-Why your society is so violent and crime rate is so high in its civic fabric?

First I was shocked, immediately after reading bible realizing that, my eyes get wet, and I prayed and thanked God and asked for his mercy and forgiveness, that he saved me from the curse of twisted lies…….AS ALL THE ACTUAL VIRTUOUS VERSIONS, ALL THAT WE MUSLIMS KNOW ARE MOSTLY NOT AWARE OF THE WAY…VULGORLY THOSE HISTORY STORIES ARE TWISTED IN THE BIBLE.

I read your bible and came to realize what kind of twisted volgur atributes you have attached to your prophets and your God. YOU HAVEN’T LEFT ANYONE, FATHER TO DAUGHER, SON TO MOTHER, GOD TO SARAH, THERE BASTERED OFF SPRINGS.

HAVE YOU LEFT ANYBODY THERE?????

AND THAT IS THE CURSE IN REALITY WHICH IS REFLECTING UPON YOUR WHOLE SOCIETY, BELIEVE IT OR NOT!!!!!!!

VERY FEW EXAMPLES OUT OF THE BIBLE……..

PROPHET LOT AND HIS DAUGHTERS (YOUR BIBLE TELLS SLEEPING TOGATHER AND HAVING CHILDREN)

30 Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar. He and his two daughters lived in a cave. 31 One day the older daughter said to the younger, "Our father is old, and there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth. 32 Lets get our father to drink wine and then lie with him and preserve our family line through our father."
33 That night they got their father to drink wine, and the older daughter went in and lay with him. He was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.
34 The next day the older daughter said to the younger, "Last night I lay with my father. Let's get him to drink wine again tonight, and you go in and lie with him so we can preserve our family line through our father." 35 So they got their father to drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went and lay with him. Again he was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.
36 So both of Lot's daughters became pregnant by their father

PROPHETS SON SLEEPING WITH HER MOTHER YOUR BIBLE TELLS-GENESIS 35

21 Israel moved on again and pitched his tent beyond Migdal Eder. 22 While Israel was living in that region, Reuben went in and slept with his father's concubine Bilhah, and Israel heard of it.
Jacob had twelve sons:

PROPHET ABRAHAM MARRIED HER REAL SISTER ACCORDING TO YOUR BIBLE

11 Abraham replied, "I said to myself, 'There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.' 12 Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife.

THE BIRTH OF ISAAC (LORD DID FOR SARAH, WHAT HAD PROMISED) ACCORDING TO YOUR BIBLE IT WAS NOT ABRAHAM
Genesis 21 (New International Version)

1 Now the LORD was gracious to Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did for Sarah what he had promised. 2 Sarah became pregnant and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the very time God had promised him.

Now I clearly understand that why our Quran tells that Bible or any other divine book is not in its original form and are all tainted by the evil doers. And that why we do not believe or follow them, though we do believe in all divine books including bible revealed in their original form but do not exist. AND WE ALSO BELIEVE IN ALL THE PROPHETS INCLUDING JESUS CHRIST AND OUR QURAN REJECTS ALL KIND OF VOLGARITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THEM OR TO GOD. AND EXPLAINS AND TELL STORIES ABOUT HOW VIRTUOUS THEY WERE IN REALITY!!!!!

Deb & Dave,

Since you forget history and prefer not to discuss your religion (???) let me enlighten you:

- When Prophet (PBUH) finally entered Mecca with his army, not a single person was killed. And he gave amnesty to every one INCLUDING HIS WORST ENEMIES, people who for 13 years keep on killing his family, his disciples, newly reverted Muslims, tried to kill him so many time, who tortured and butchered Muslims through out his life, with the trail of all previous wars raged by them upon Muslims.

- In 13-14 century, Christian crusaders took Jerusalem by force and ruled over it with IRON FIST for 100 years, not allowing Muslims to practice there religion and extreme oppression. But when Sultan Salahudin Ayubi took it back, he gave unconditional pardon to all the Christians and Jews, following his Prophets (PBUH) foot steps. And since then all religions were practiced there with out any oppression until ISRAEL came into being.

-Israelis (Jews) forgot that when the European Crusaders thrown them out of ALL Europe. The only place they got amnesty, peace and lived freely for more than 800 years in Spain with Muslims under there rule. Finally, after that they were thrown out once again into Palestine.

-And you Hindus forgot that you are ruled by your own race converted Muslims for more than 1000 years. And as per your Indian records, audio / visual documentaries and movies, which until now tells and applaud about the justice of Muslim rules and rulers. IF we would have to convert you Hindus by sword, there was no Hindu left after 1000 year of Muslim rule. Look around the comparative world history of Crusaders, colonists and other nations, filled with forceful conversions and slavery, about which Christian Pop publicly apologized about 4 years back.

- I don't want to go into details why Indian Muslims ruled instead of Hindus there. All the reason hidden deep with in your religious discrimination to the very extend of killing each other, burning women alive, as per sacred religion still eating cow dung and pee and so many other ridiculous hate mongering practices...so and so...even today India is the only country where women are less in number, every day more than 3000 female fetuses are aborted there. And continuous genocides of different religious races including there own are still going on under Hindu rule.

Note: Muslims in reality never wanted to divide India. You can read my post in this regard in “Islam and Violence" dated Nov 04, 2007 with the topics.
- India / Pakistan History before Partition
- Pakistan history Politics after Partition.

And why Muslims killing Muslims. The answer is in very recent example:
Before American Invasion, Sunni Iraqi Tyrant leadership to please its master USA was in war with Shia Iran for more than 8 years. But there was no sign of civil war between Sunni and Shia Iraqi's, further more any kind of security forces killing and public bomb blasts on such every day mass scale level. It is USA who plotted TWIN TOWERS and by every means fueling the Muslim riots among the Muslims AND KEEPING THE FUEL!!!!!! EXACTLY THE WAY COLONIST DID IN THERE 300 YEAR ERA. IT IS NOT SOME THING NEW……..BLOODY DIVID AND RULE CRUELITY WITH RUTHLESNESS.
AND SAME IS THE BRITISH AND FRENCH LAST 300 YEAR COLONIAL HISTORY ON THE MUSLIM LANDS. WHERE ONLY MUSLIMS WERE CRUSHED AND OPPRESSED BARBARICLY. IT IS ALL VERY OPEN ON RECORD AVAILABLE EVERY WHERE. ALL YOU NEED TO JUST SEARCH GOOGLE.

And though suicide is forbidden in Islam. But after almost 60 years long BARBARISM OF ISRAEL AND SILENCE OF HYPOCRATE WEST, the hopeless tormented Muslims (now in many different regions starting from Palestine) are committing that forbidden sin, giving up hope in extreme frustration from there present state of destroyed life by every means. THANKS TO THE BEASTS BECOME MONSTORS………..

Wake up Deb & Dave from your ignorance
And CCNL get treatment for your Insanity!!

Why Muslims killing Muslims. The answer is in very recent example:
Before American Invasion, Sunni Iraqi Tyrant leadership to please its master USA was in war with Shia Iran for more than 8 years. But there was no sign of civil war between Sunni and Shia Iraqi's, further more any kind of security forces killing and public bomb blasts on such every day mass scale level, AND THERE CIVIL FABRIC WAS INTACT.. It is USA who plotted TWIN TOWERS and by ALL means fueling the Muslim riots among the Muslims AND KEEPING THE FUEL!!!!!!

Exactly the way colonist did in there 300 year era. IT IS NOT SOME THING NEW……..BLOODY DIVID AND RULE CRUELITY WITH RUTHLESNESS.

And same is the British and French last 300 year colonial history on the Muslim lands. Where only Muslims were crushed and oppressed barbarically. It is all very open on record available every where. All you need to just search Google.

And though suicide is forbidden in Islam. But after almost 60 years long BARBARISM OF ISRAEL AND SILENCE OF HYPOCRATE WEST, the hopeless tormented Muslims (now in many different regions starting from Palestine) are committing that forbidden sin, giving up hope in extreme frustration from there present state of destroyed life by every means. THANKS TO THE BEASTS BECOME MONSTORS………..

I am perplexed with the glossing over of the authenticity of "THE BIBLE". I read references on these posts that "THE BIBLE" says,therefore, etc etc... Whatever is written in " THE BIBLE" is accepted as some sort of authenic message from "the beyound." I see on TV grown men with tears in their eyes and a book in their hands,exhorting us that this book is the word of GOD!! Wow! Powerful stuff. If God has written to me , I better listen( but I still don't send them money for pieces of green clothe,or bits of saintly bones, or splinters from the cross, or water from a spring in Fatima!).I thought I better check this out. So I took a course, and surprise, learned that in the first few centuries after Jesus, there was no official new testament.Christians followed many scriptures that were later discarded!And what about authentication of scriptures which were not discarded?? A touchy subject there. And of course,over time, conclaves of christians were held where it was hammered out what would be included in "THE BIBLE" and what writings would not be included.So it would seem that "THE BIBLE" is more the work of man than word from on high received in seances in catacombs.Accordingly, argue for or against the existance of a GOD, or for or against certain conduct,etc. But please, do not blindly state that "THE BIBLE" says so, and is therefore dispositive of the issue. Think for yourselves, and see if you can support your religious positions without reference to a very questionable book.

I am perplexed with the glossing over of the authenticity of "THE BIBLE". I read references on these posts that "THE BIBLE" says,therefore, etc etc... Whatever is written in " THE BIBLE" is accepted as some sort of authenic message from "the beyound." I see on TV grown men with tears in their eyes and a book in their hands,exhorting us that this book is the word of GOD!! Wow! Powerful stuff. If God has written to me , I better listen( but I still don't send them money for pieces of green clothe,or bits of saintly bones, or splinters from the cross, or water from a spring in Fatima!).I thought I better check this out. So I took a course, and surprise, learned that in the first few centuries after Jesus, there was no official new testament.Christians followed many scriptures that were later discarded!And what about authentication of scriptures which were not discarded?? A touchy subject there. And of course,over time, conclaves of christians were held where it was hammered out what would be included in "THE BIBLE" and what writings would not be included.So it would seem that "THE BIBLE" is more the work of man than word from on high received in seances in catacombs.Accordingly, argue for or against the existance of a GOD, or for or against certain conduct,etc. But please, do not blindly state that "THE BIBLE" says so, and is therefore dispositive of the issue. Think for yourselves, and see if you can support your religious positions without reference to a very questionable book.

Friend of JC:
"When it comes to serving my Lord and Savior I happily accept being called intolerant. I don't mind being tolerant of the other things that do not affect my future after I'm put in the ground."

Then I take it that since legalizing same-sex marriage, maitaining a woman's right to choose whether or not to carry a pregnancy or abort it, and any other issues that involve relationships among consenting adults have no effect on your future after you're put in the ground, or before you're put in the ground for that matter, that you stand with those of us who support BGLT rights and women's reproductive freedom.

To the gospels beleivers:
You have the mind of who you worship, you are as wise as a serpent. The words of your god "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" This is one of your gods "therefore wise as serpents" You are a god. Look "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:" Do you see "Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him" Look "And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." Do you see "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven" This is your god "and lighting upon him" "beheld Satan as lightning" You have the spirit of your god, you are a god. The judgment of the LORD is clear "And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." You are the seed of the serpent. "thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field" You have the mind of christ "carnally minded is death;." the words of Paul are clear "For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."
Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same. By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed. The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the fierce lion, and the teeth of the young lions, are broken. The old lion perisheth for lack of prey, and the stout lion's whelps are scattered abroad.
Now a thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof.

Look “they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same” “By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed” All word of GOD is breathed in, according to the faith of sinner creatures, “by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed”. Who is it that destroys you, God. Look “The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the fierce lion” Who came to destroy the gentiles. Who is sent in his image to speak the gospel to the world. Do you see “Now a thing was secretly brought to me”, have not I revealed a secret.

The priests said not, Where is the Lord? and they that handle the law knew me not: the pastors also transgressed against me, and the prophets prophesied by Baal, and walked after things that do not profit. Wherefore I will yet plead with you, saith the Lord, and with your children's children will I plead.

This is who stands behind the pulpit of the churches of the gentiles “pastors also transgressed against me, and the prophets prophesied by Baal” Look “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” Is not this an answer “Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?” Christians are God’s chosen, “the world is the enemy of God.” “preach the gospel to every creature.” “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” The missionary work of the gentiles is clear “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” Look “ye therefore wise as serpents” Here is the kingdom for the Christians “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” Look “Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.” The words are clear “pray for them which despitefully use you.” “ye therefore wise as serpents” “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” “how can ye escape the damnation of hell?”
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

Do you see who is with the sons of God, “when the sons of God came, Satan came also among them” It is Satan who dwells with the sons of God. The LORD dwells with Israel, is it not your desire to have the LORD with you.

Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord.

Look, “Again there was a day when the sons of God” “Satan came also among them” It clearly represents Satan is always with the sons of God before the Lord.

While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep, and the servants, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.

Look, “The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep, and the servants”, I ask you wise creatures of the Christian and catholic faiths who are the sheep. Who is with you at the judgment seat. Look “God layeth up his iniquity for his children: he rewardeth him, and he shall know it. His eyes shall see his destruction” “and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.”

Look "Everyone including the ones posting here will have to answer one day for their actions" You will have satan with you forever.

Everyone including the ones posting here will have to answer one day for their actions. One word of caution, there will be a lot of tolerant people in hell. There will also be a lot of people in hell that believed in everything except Jesus Christ. The bible teaches us that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the light. Only those that know him and have a personal relationship with him will be saved. I do not wish any harm on anyone that doesn't believe in Jesus, instead I pray that one day you will get to know the one and only Lord, Jesus Christ. When it comes to serving my Lord and Savior I happily accept being called intolerant. I don't mind being tolerant of the other things that do not affect my future after I'm put in the ground. This life is not the end. Prepare for the afterlife.

Everyone including the ones posting here will have to answer one day for their actions. One word of caution, there will be a lot of tolerant people in hell. There will also be a lot of people in hell that believed in everything except Jesus Christ. The bible teaches us that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the light. Only those that know him and have a personal relationship with him will be saved. I do not wish any harm on anyone that doesn't believe in Jesus, instead I pray that one day you will get to know the one and only Lord, Jesus Christ. When it comes to serving my Lord and Savior I happily accept being called intolerant. I don't mind being tolerant of the other things that do not affect my future after I'm put in the ground. This life is not the end. Prepare for the afterlife.

Everyone including the ones posting here will have to answer one day for their actions. One word of caution, there will be a lot of tolerant people in hell. There will also be a lot of people in hell that believed in everything except Jesus Christ. The bible teaches us that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the light. Only those that know him and have a personal relationship with him will be saved. I do not wish any harm on anyone that doesn't believe in Jesus, instead I pray that one day you will get to know the one and only Lord, Jesus Christ. When it comes to serving my Lord and Savior I happily accept being called intolerant. I don't mind being tolerant of the other things that do not affect my future after I'm put in the ground. This life is not the end. Prepare for the afterlife.

I find it interesting when one directly quotes scripture that many believe in, they attack the messenger who reveals the secrets of the Word. What I teach is of no benefit to me other than to fulfill why I am here, I hope it is a benefit for those who have eyes that see, ears that hear, and have a heart to perceive. Look below.

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

Do you see who is with the sons of God, “when the sons of God came, Satan came also among them” It is Satan who dwells with the sons of God. The LORD dwells with Israel, is it not your desire to have the LORD with you.

While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep, and the servants, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.

Look, “The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep”, I ask you wise creatures of the Christian and catholic faiths who are the sheep.

Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord.

Look, “Again there was a day when the sons of God” “Satan came also among them” It clearly represents Satan is always with the sons of God before the Lord.

But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

Look, ” shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil”, Do you not know God is good and evil. Then so are the sons of God, both good and evil. Have I not proven the LORD is Holy Holy.

Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same. By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed. The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the fierce lion, and the teeth of the young lions, are broken. The old lion perisheth for lack of prey, and the stout lion's whelps are scattered abroad.
Now a thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof.

Look “By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed” Who is it that destroys you, God. Look “The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the fierce lion” Who came to destroy the gentiles. Who is sent in his image to speak the gospel to the world. Do you see “Now a thing was secretly brought to me”, have not I revealed a secret.

Then answered Bildad the Shuhite, and said, How long wilt thou speak these things? and how long shall the words of thy mouth be like a strong wind? Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice? If thy children have sinned against him, and he have cast them away for their transgression; If thou wouldest seek unto God betimes, and make thy supplication to the Almighty;

Look, “Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice?” What is revealed “make thy supplication to the Almighty” One prays to the LORD not God.

Behold, God will not cast away a perfect man, neither will he help the evil doers:

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

Do you see “God will not cast away a perfect man” “Job; and that man was perfect and upright” Is it not your desire to be like Job “and eschewed evil”. Who is evil, God is good and evil.

Then answered Zophar the Naamathite, and said, And that he would shew thee the secrets of wisdom, that they are double to that which is! know therefore that God exacteth of thee less than thine iniquity deserveth. Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?

Look “he would shew thee the secrets of wisdom” Does not Moses and David teach you wisdom in the law. Does not Solomon have wisdom for judgment from. LOOK “canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?” Who does Abram walk before.

And Job answered and said, No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you. But I have understanding as well as you; I am not inferior to you: yea, who knoweth not such things as these? I am as one mocked of his neighbour, who calleth upon God, and he answereth him: the just upright man is laughed to scorn.

Look at what Job says, “wisdom shall die with you” Look “the just upright man is laughed to scorn” Do you not understand “laughed to scorn”.

Then answered Eliphaz the Temanite, and said, Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his belly with the east wind? Should he reason with unprofitable talk? or with speeches wherewith he can do no good? Yea, thou castest off fear, and restrainest prayer before God. For thy mouth uttereth thine iniquity, and thou choosest the tongue of the crafty. Thine own mouth condemneth thee, and not I: yea, thine own lips testify against thee.

Loo “Thine own mouth condemneth thee” whose words are in your mouth “For thy mouth uttereth thine iniquity.” Do you not see “thine own lips testify against thee” Look “thou choosest the tongue of the crafty” whose words are on your tongue.

Then Job answered and said, They have gaped upon me with their mouth; they have smitten me upon the cheek reproachfully; they have gathered themselves together against me. God hath delivered me to the ungodly, and turned me over into the hands of the wicked.

What does Job say “they have gathered themselves together against me”, why? Because of the Truth in him. Do you see “God hath delivered me to the ungodly, and turned me over into the hands of the wicked.” Why, God wants all that know about him to be destroyed. He is both Good and EVIL.

Then answered Zophar the Naamathite, and said, He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again: God shall cast them out of his belly. When he is about to fill his belly, God shall cast the fury of his wrath upon him, and shall rain it upon him while he is eating. This is the portion of a wicked man from God, and the heritage appointed unto him by God.

Look “He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again” Who is the dog who eats his own vomit. “God shall cast the fury of his wrath upon him” The words are clear “This is the portion of a wicked man from God, and the heritage appointed unto him by God.” Who has the mouth of God, “hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God” Have not I revealed another secret. Whose table is that of the Christian and catholic faith. They eat the flesh and blood of the son of man.

But Job answered and said, How oft is the candle of the wicked put out! and how oft cometh their destruction upon them! God distributeth sorrows in his anger. They are as stubble before the wind, and as chaff that the storm carrieth away. God layeth up his iniquity for his children: he rewardeth him, and he shall know it. His eyes shall see his destruction, and he shall drink of the wrath of the almighty. For what pleasure hath he in his house after him, when the number of his months is cut off in the midst? Shall any teach God knowledge? seeing he judgeth those that are high.

Do you not see “God layeth up his iniquity for his children: he rewardeth him, and he shall know it.” Are you a son of God, the children of God. Is it not your desire to be among the children of the LORD. What is revealed “His eyes shall see his destruction, and he shall drink of the wrath of the Almighty.” What is the cup of the gentiles, their own blood.

Therefore they say unto God, Depart from us; for we desire not the knowledge of thy ways. What is the Almighty, that we should serve him? and what profit should we have, if we pray unto him?

What does it say “say unto God, Depart from us” Look “What is the Almighty, that we should serve him? and what profit should we have, if we pray unto him?” What is revealed “make thy supplication to the Almighty” One prays to the LORD not God. The LORD will deliver you from evil (God).

Moreover Job continued his parable, and said, For what is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained, when God taketh away his soul? Will God hear his cry when trouble cometh upon him? Will he delight himself in the Almighty? will he always call upon God? I will teach you by the hand of God: that which is with the Almighty will I not conceal.

Loo “the hope of the hypocrite” “when God taketh away his soul” What does Job say “I will teach you by the hand of God” Do you not see “which is with the Almighty will I not conceal” The LORD uses God to destroy God’s children.

Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Do you see “who laid the corner stone thereof” who is the corner stone of the churches of the gentiles. Look “the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy” Is this not the house of their God.

Moreover the Lord answered Job, and said, Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.

What did the LORD say “he that reproveth God, let him answer it” I answered it with the Word of the LORD, not my own words. I make up nothing but reveal the Truth. The LORD is TRUTH.

Why there is no need for fatwa.

Muslims get all hot and furious whenever an infidel makes a joke or mocks fun at their religion or their Prophet.

If someone were to denigrate Hindus or their beliefs and "their God", I, as a Hindu, would not be upset one bit. Why is that? The logic is:

Lema 1

Infinity - Infinity = Infinity

This logic implies that even if one were to shower infinite abuse on the Infinite, infinity still remains infinity. No one can detract from infinity. Then who am I to defend the Infinite?
Issuing a fatwa in defense of the Infinite is plain stupid.

There is no such logic as a Hindu God, a Christian God, a Muslim God, a Jewish God, or any other God.

Lema 2

The infinite cannot be partitioned. Any partitioning of infinity results in infinity, i.e.

Infinity / Infinity = Infinity

Even if the Infinite were to be divided an infinite number of times, the result is still infinite.

Therefore, an insult against any God is an insult against one's own God, since you are denigrating God's infinite character and He cannot be partitioned.

So Allah, God the Father of the Christians, Krishna, Rama, Moses, and all other names of God refers to the same Infinite principle and force. Any other understanding of a ethnocentric God is our own narrow-mindedness and stupidity. The sooner we understand and appreciate this truth, the sooner we can achieve lasting peace on earth.

This is to the "Bible-weilding evangelical Christians" who serve their God. "But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins" "For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day" "the Son of man" is not the name of the LORD.

And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord. In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.

Look at to whom Job Blesses, “blessed be the name of the Lord” Do you see “Naked came I out of my mother's womb” The LORD is his Mother.

Wherefore, Job, I pray thee, hear my speeches, and hearken to all my words. Behold, now I have opened my mouth, my tongue hath spoken in my mouth. My words shall be of the uprightness of my heart: and my lips shall utter knowledge clearly. The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.

Look at what Job said “The Spirit of God hath made me” But to whom does he Bless, “blessed be the name of the Lord” And this is the reason why “the breath of the Almighty hath given me life” What does Job do “nor charged God foolishly”

Let them shout for joy, and be glad, that favour my righteous cause: yea, let them say continually, Let the Lord be magnified, which hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant. And my tongue shall speak of thy righteousness and of thy praise all the day long.

Look at the Words of David, “Let the Lord be magnified” “my tongue shall speak of thy righteousness”

The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever. The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment. The law of his God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide. The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him. The Lord will not leave him in his hand, nor condemn him when he is judged. Wait on the Lord, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.

Look at what David said “his tongue talketh of judgment” remember “Let the Lord be magnified” He said “The law of his God” but who is David’s God. David said “Wait on the Lord, and keep his way” The words are clear “when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it”

Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said,
The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue.

Look “the man who was raised up on high” David was raised up on high. Do you not understand “the anointed of the God of Jacob” Who led Israel into over the Jordan. Who anointed the head of Joshua. Do you not know who the God of Jacob is.
"Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Because I will publish the name of the Lord: ascribe ye greatness unto our God."

What does Moses say "hear, O earth, the words of my mouth" "I will publish the name of the Lord"

And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live.

What does Moses say “but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live” What does Moses say "hear, O earth, the words of my mouth" "I will publish the name of the Lord"

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall be holy: for I the Lord your God am holy. Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the Lord your God. Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods: I am the Lord your God. And if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the Lord, ye shall offer it at your own will.

Do you see “for I the Lord your God am Holy” Do you not know “Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father” Do you not understand Israel the LORD is your Mother The LORD is your Father. Look at to whom Job Blesses, “blessed be the name of the Lord” Do you see “Naked came I out of my mother's womb” Wht did the LORD say to Abram “And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.” There is the God Almighty and Almighty God. Moses said the path is straight, Almighty Almighty or LORD LORD, or JUDAH JUDAH. Moses was clear when he said turn neither to the right (God) or to the left (God).

On that day the Lord magnified Joshua in the sight of all Israel; and they feared him, as they feared Moses, all the days of his life.

Who does Israel fear, Moses and Joshua. But why? They came in the name of the LORD.

That all the people of the earth might know the hand of the Lord, that it is mighty: that ye might fear the Lord your God for ever.

Look “hand of the Lord, that it is mighty” “fear the Lord”.

And the Lord said unto Joshua, Fear them not: for I have delivered them into thine hand; there shall not a man of them stand before thee.

What did the Lord say to Joshua “there shall not a man of them stand before thee” “for I have delivered them into thine hand”

And Joshua said unto them, Fear not, nor be dismayed, be strong and of good courage: for thus shall the Lord do to all your enemies against whom ye fight. And afterward Joshua smote them, and slew them, and hanged them on five trees: and they were hanging upon the trees until the evening. And it came to pass at the time of the going down of the sun, that Joshua commanded, and they took them down off the trees, and cast them into the cave wherein they had been hid, and laid great stones in the cave's mouth, which remain until this very day.

Look at what Joshua said “for thus shall the Lord do to all your enemies” “and they were hanging upon the trees” “cast them into the cave” “great stones in the cave's mouth” Let me ask you wise creatures of the Christian and catholic faith, who hung on a tree and was put in a cave and a stone put at the cave’s mouth.

Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the Lord.

What does Joshua say, “fear the Lord” “serve ye the Lord” Do you not know “Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father”

And Joshua said unto the people, Ye cannot serve the Lord: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. If ye forsake the Lord, and serve strange gods, then he will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that he hath done you good. And the people said unto Joshua, Nay; but we will serve the Lord.

What did Joshua say “Ye cannot serve the Lord: for he is an holy” The response from Israel is clear “but we will serve the Lord”

And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord his God, and humbled not himself before Jeremiah the prophet speaking from the mouth of the Lord.

Look at ‘Jeremiah the prophet speaking from the mouth of the Lord” He spoke speaking fro the mouth of the Lord.

And this is the blessing of Judah: and he said, Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him unto his people: let his hands be sufficient for him; and be thou an help to him from his enemies.

Look at the Words of Moses “the blessing of Judah: and he said, Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah” “him from his enemies” Remember ‘Jeremiah the prophet speaking from the mouth of the Lord”

The lion is come up from his thicket, and the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way; he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate; and thy cities shall be laid waste, without an inhabitant. For this gird you with sackcloth, lament and howl: for the fierce anger of the Lord is not turned back from us. And it shall come to pass at that day, saith the Lord, that the heart of the king shall perish, and the heart of the princes; and the priests shall be astonished, and the prophets shall wonder. Then said I, Ah, Lord God! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace; whereas the sword reacheth unto the soul.

What does Jeremiah say “The lion” “the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way” “thou hast greatly deceived this people” “whereas the sword reacheth unto the soul” Christians and catholics did not receive peace but the sword from the Lord.

In the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah was this passover kept. After all this, when Josiah had prepared the temple, Necho king of Egypt came up to fight against Carchemish by Euphrates: and Josiah went out against him.But he sent ambassadors to him, saying, What have I to do with thee, thou king of Judah? I come not against thee this day, but against the house wherewith I have war: for God commanded me to make haste: forbear thee from meddling with God, who is with me, that he destroy thee not.
Nevertheless Josiah would not turn his face from him, but disguised himself, that he might fight with him, and hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God, and came to fight in the valley of Megiddo.

Look “Necho king of Egypt came up to fight” “hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God” Look who has the mouth of God, the king of Egypt.

But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

This is what Christians and catholics believe “out of the mouth of God” Look at the Law “Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, who vexed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and according to thy manifold mercies thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies.” “thou gavest them saviours” “saved them out of the hand of their enemies.” Who is the enemy, the Roman dogs. Who did the Lord send as a saviour, the king of Egypt “to fight against the world.” What was Josiah mistake “Josiah would not turn his face from him” What did Moses teach, turn not to the right or left, the path is straight. Israel has not made the mistake of Josiah and in joining with Jesus/Jesus Christ to fight the Roman and Greek dogs.

And Moses said, Thus saith the Lord, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt: And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts. And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it, nor shall be like it any more. But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how that the Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel.

What did Moses say “, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts” Look “against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue” Do you see “know how that the Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel” the same is said of Christians and Israel. Christians and catholics are the children of pharaoh, and the LORD sent the king of Egypt as a “thou gavest them saviours” to destroyed them all. Look at what Joshua said “for thus shall the Lord do to all your enemies” “and they were hanging upon the trees” “cast them into the cave” “great stones in the cave's mouth” Let me ask you wise creatures of the Christian and catholic faith, who hung on a tree and was put in a cave and a stone put at the cave’s mouth. That is where you faith is “cast them into the cave”.

Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.

Look at the Words of Isaiah, “cease to do evil” “seek judgment” “be willing and obedient” “for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it”

The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. O house of Jacob, come ye, and let us walk in the light of the Lord.

Do you see “mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains” “all nations shall flow unto it.” “he will teach us of his ways” “we will walk in his paths” “the word of the Lord from Jerusalem” “let us walk in the light of the Lord” What does Moses say "hear, O earth, the words of my mouth" "I will publish the name of the Lord" Look “hand of the Lord, that it is mighty” “fear the Lord”. “Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my Sabbaths”

It is the choice of the world “hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God” or Moses say "hear, O earth, the words of my mouth" "I will publish the name of the Lord" Choose being servants of God, as gods knowing good and evil, “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” Eating from the “tree of knowledge of good and evil.” Ye are gods who forgive sins, "But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins" Ye have lords who have their own sabbath day. "For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day" “the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way” You will never have peace only the sword.

Or Choose being servants of the LORD, Holy Holy. Look at the Words of Solomon, I will leave His Wisdom for you to ponder, “Length of days is in her right hand; and in her left hand riches and honour. Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace. She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retaineth her. The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.”

Some 35 years ago when I came to this country, I was visited by some Bible-weilding evangelical Christians. They asked me if I believed in Jesus. I said that I did (I truly do, even today). But they were a little suspicious and asked me if I ONLY believed in Jesus Christ (to the exclusion of all others). I said that I did not. This is an example of intolerance. Thankfully, most Americans are not intolerant--otherwise it would be impossible for us immigrants to live in this country. I ask, if Christians are going to be so intolerant, then what is the diffeence between you and those mullahs in Saudi Arabia--except that they preach in Arabic instead of English.

I have observed many posts about different faiths that call upon their God. But they know not who God is and they certainly know not the name of the LORD.

Look and see if you belief's are in the True LORD. Many believe the following quotes.

"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call."

Do you see and understand "whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered"
Do you know the Name of the LORD.

" And the Lord said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.
And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a Clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen."

Do you see "for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name." The LORD knows Moses by name. What is written "I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee"

"And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,"

Look "Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God" Thou shall not have any other God's before me. There is the God Almighty and the Almighty God. Do you not see "The Lord, The Lord God" Do you notn understand "Almighty Almighty God. HOLY HOLY or Judah Judah.

Look "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death."

You call upon your God but look at the Law "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death"

"Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Because I will publish the name of the Lord: ascribe ye greatness unto our God."

What does Moses say "hear, O earth, the words of my mouth" "I will publish the name of the Lord"

Do you see "And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord."
Look "then began men to call upon the name of the Lord." Do you see "for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name." The LORD knows Moses by name. What is written "I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee"

Who do the christians, muslims, and other religions call upon. To whom do you pray to and in what name.

The question was "What's wrong with tolerance?"
"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call." "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death"

"What's wrong with tolerance?" The LORD does not tolerate other gods or those who worship them. If the LORD does not tolerate these infidals how can one tolerate thy neighbor.

Here is what David said "For there is no faithfulness in their mouth; their inward part is very wickedness; their throat is an open sepulchre; they flatter with their tongue.
Destroy thou them, O God; let them fall by their own counsels; cast them out in the multitude of their transgressions; for they have rebelled against thee. But let all those that put their trust in thee rejoice: let them ever shout for joy, because thou defendest them: let them also that love thy name be joyful in thee. For thou, Lord, wilt bless the righteous; with favour wilt thou compass him as with a shield."

It is very clear "For thou, Lord, wilt bless the righteous" them that love thy name"

Where is your faith ""For there is no faithfulness in their mouth" "Destroy thou them, O God; let them fall by their own counsels; cast them out in the multitude of their transgressions; for they have rebelled against thee."

Another example:

The last time Samhain (Halloween) fell on a Sunday, the small bass-ackwards town I was living in at the time changed the night for trick-or-treating to Saturday, October 30th. Why? Because the Christians in the town didn't want kids trick-or-treating on "the Lord's day." Local law enforcemnet threatened to charge anyone who went trick-or-treating on Sunday with disturbing the peace.
I realize that trick-or-treating is not really part of the religious aspect of Samhain, but it is a part of the holiday nonetheless.
Caroling isn't really part of the religious aspect of Christmas. What do you suppose would happen if complaints were filed against people who went out caroling on December 24 for disturbing celebrations of the birth of Mithras? Would Christian carolers be charged with distubing the peace?

Matthew Joseph:

**Look at what happens when we tolarate politicians getting away with lying cheating and stealing, but we have come to except that as the norm. Just like religion we except homosexuality, pedophilia in our churches and evangelists laughing at their followers while they spend all the millions of dollars they decieved people out of.**

The lying/cheating/stealing/rape aspect of corrupt politics and corrupt religion are criminal activities and, as such, are most definitely not to be tolerated.
And no one can force a church to accept homosexual members or ordain homosexual clergy.
That's not the problem. The problem is that many of the churches who don't accept homosexuality want to make their theological view of the subject (their god says it's icky) the basis for legislation that affects all of us, whether we agree with that theology or not.
Look at so-called Blue Laws. They're based on recognition of the Christian Sabbath. I guess Christians think it's wrong to drink alcohol on Sunday. So because someone else believes it's a sin to drink on Sunday, I, who see no sin in drinking any day of the week, any time of the day, am s-o-l if I run out of tequila after my Sunday breakfast Margarita. Why should I be barred from purchasing a bottle of Cuervo on Sunday morning just because a religion I don't practice frowns on it?

It depends on the tolerance, we all have to have tolerance with each other and other things, such as pets, kids, work, etc. This is the tolerance that is to be expected and in our human nature.
But we need to stop tolernace with our faith, politics, etc. With those situtations tolerance needs to be very small. Because we all know people change things so they benefit themselves and can careless about the effects to others. This is the tolerance we have to get rid of. Look at what happens when we tolarate politicians getting away with lying cheating and stealing, but we have come to except that as the norm. Just like religion we except homosexuality, pedophilia in our churches and evangelists laughing at their followers while they spend all the millions of dollars they decieved people out of.
SO yes tolerance can be acceptable and not acceptable. We have to start doing things the right way instead of trying to gain every little penny from anyone we help. Maybe if we knew what the word selflessness really meant then tolerance would be a little easier to swallow. God Bless and Peace always. Matthew

A message to the Religious Extremist and World Class Hypocrite in the White House Re Tolerance:

Yes, yesterday was 9/11, a vivid reminder that we are at war with radical Islam.

And if we were not illegally and immorally occupying Palestine and Iraq, slaughtering millions of innocents (mostly women and children), and driving millions of families into refugee camps; then we would have the moral high ground in this battle; not Osama bin Laden.

There's nothing wrong with tolerance - provided it is reciprocated. Often, however, it is not. Modern liberals and their ideologies - notably tolerance and multiculturalism - are good hearted and well meaning. Few can argue otherwise. However, they are throwing that tolerance into a void. Most Muslims, for example, have no interest in peaceably living alongside those different from themselves. They say the right things about doing so, but their actions speak louder than their words. Indeed, a high ranking Muslim imam recently admitted that he instructs his followers to leave peacefully among the heathens until there are enough Muslims, then to engage in violence.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/018083.php

Personally, I think the Western world has made some amazing strides over the years. From medicine to technology to human rights, we are at the forefront. It is simply stupid to throw all of these things away (including things that liberals claim to cherish, such as women's and gay's rights) simply out of "tolerance" for cultures that hate and despise ours. What we have is worth fighting for.

People of every religious, and spiritual faith including agnostics and atheists must understand that despite our philosophical views of life and the world around us, human virtue exists in every culture, religion, nation and region. What's going on in our troubled times in terms of inter religious tensions are caused by ethnocentrism that also exists worldwide, which only proved to be counterproductive toward our social advancement.
Especially when religious leaders who inspire and guide a significant population has a profound responsibility to insure the faithful doesn't mistakenly conceive another culture or religion unfavorably. Despite any religious beliefs and disbeliefs, people should not be judged upon what they are but how they are?
What I mean is how this person treats others? Is this person generally trustworthy? Is this individual safe, sane, stable, secure and sincere? Such a different approach toward conceiving other people of different cultures as well as our own would overcome prejudice and bigotry. What's more is that we would also overcome our unwarranted fears.

Aug 1, 08:53
Finally, The Smoking Gun

One of the most fascinating exhibits presented by the prosecution in the Holy Land Foundation case (provided by researchers for the NEFA Foundation) is a memorandum on the Muslim Brotherhood’s multifaceted plan to convert the United States to an Islamic nation. It is the smoking gun of the Ikhwan’s long-standing efforts to destroy the Western world as we know it.

The most interesting exhibit is a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum by Mohamed Akram, dated May 22, 1991, where he outlines the Ikhwan vision of the future. He leaves no ambiguity as to the nature of the Ikhwan calling. (The exhibits will be posted and written about more completely in the NEFA website in coming days).

Under the heading “Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America,” he writes:

“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated ad God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

But wait, there is more:

“Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.”

Akram then spells out in some detail the role of the Brotherhood in moving the project forward: “As for the role of the Ikhwan, it is the initiative, pioneering, leadership, raising the banner and pushing people in that direction (the Jihadist process). They are then able to employ, direct, and unify Muslims’ efforts and powers for this process. In order to do that, we must possess a master of the art of ‘coalitions,’ the art of ‘absorption’ and the principles of ‘cooperation.’”

The document then gives rationale for setting up Ikhwan organizations across the country: “We must say that we are in a country which understands no language other than the language of the organizations, and one which does not respect or give weight to any group without effective, functional and strong organizations.”

The document also deals with the criticism among the Brothers that the focus on the United States will drain support for the establishment of the global caliphate. The response is two-fold:
1) “The success of the Movement in America in establishing an observant Islamic base with power and effectiveness will be the the best support and aid to the global Movement project.”
2) The global (Ikhwan) movement has not “succeeded yet in distributing roles to is branches, stating that what is needed from them as one of the participants or contributors to the project to establish the global Islamic state. The day this happens, the children of the American Ikhwani branch will have a far-reaching impact and positions that make the ancestors proud.”

The document ends with a list of Ikhwan groups trying to coordinate, including all the usual (ISNA, ICNA, IIIT etc.)

What is so interesting about the document is the breadth of ambition, the conviction of ultimate success and the care with which the campaign we see today was being thought about 16 years ago. So is the the clarity of the ultimate objective of ending our years as a functioning democracy, built on the rule of secular law, minority rights and freedom of religion, press etc.

The infiltration of the government by members and sympathizers, the coordinated role of the organizations in pursuing specific objectives, the recruitment of the best and the brightest into the movement, and other objectives are far advanced, perhaps further than the author could have imagined in so short a time.

The rationale, for those like Lieken et al who want play footsie with these groups bent on our destruction, is truly mindboggling. I don’t think the Brothers who have been on the cusp of the new PR campaign, from Ramadan to Akef, have bothered to spell this out like the Brothers do for themselves.

But here we have it, in their own words, written by their own hands. There is much more to say, and I will revisit the topic as more information comes in.

Will anyone pay attention?

posted by Douglas Farah

Someone has to quietly and calmly present the evidance you have shown, without name calling where ever Ikhwan forces choose to speak in the US.

Ikhwan spokesman then have 3 choices:

-deny and call you names

-change the subject abruptly

-question your integrity

But either way this information is

Peter Pace does not get to use his appointment as a Government official to state his personal views. Diana Eck made this clear and I am surprised and disappointed that Reverend Colson would take issue with a clear point.

As the first PAGANPLACE stated in the first comment, he does not seem to "get it." DKM also made several good points.

Elected and appointed positions of power, in a secular, diverse government and people, are not a soapbox for personal views. This would indicate that the government or government officials, as in the case of the Air Force that Diana Eck referred to, have the right to impose and promote specific personal beliefs.

They do not.

Reverend needs his wings clipped.

I think Rev. Colson just plain doesn't *understand* tolerance: For one, he doesn't even see the question in terms of human behavior, or tolerance itself at *all,* ...he sees it in terms of what intolerant behavior *his* view of his beliefs considers acceptable or justified: that's pretty much by definition bigotry: claiming that whatever *you* happen to want to do is "Bi Gott," or essentially, commanded or justified by the Christian God, essentially portraying *your* will as 'higher' than anyone else's rights, life, or dignity.

He says this:

"I'm not sure what more you would propose. All religions consist of truth claims which by their very nature are exclusive."

Not so, actually. *His* religion happens to believe that 'All religions consist of truth claims,' and that furthermore, that all of these are by nature exclusive of one another.

He actually just belongs to one of those few aggressive ones which make extraordinary 'truth claims' (and also make claims to possess absolute authority) that happen to not get along too well with all the worldviews of all the others.

Now, if you make a claim that 'My God is the only God, and my law is the *only* law,' well, *of course* you're not going to find agreement with, well, anyone else, even followers of the same God. To say this is inherent and essential to all spiritual paths *demonstrates* a failure to understand just how diverse in manifestation 'the truth' really *is.*

To take that a step further and say that 'For you to do this harmless act which I believe would be against my beliefs if I did it makes you a lesser or immoral person,' ...is *definitely* religious-based intolerance. Bigotry. It says, 'Bi Gott, my beliefs are more *important* than yours, even more important than your freedom, life, and human dignity.'

For example, I honor a little tradition that's fairly common among a number of urban Pagan tribes: I refrain from killing spiders in honor of a related Goddess and some other meaningful-to-me things.

This doesn't mean I go around calling anyone *immoral* or 'spiritually criminal,' or 'lesser' when they casually kill a spider rather than taking the extra minute to bring her outside. (Or , for that matter, try and convince anyone of the old superstition that it's 'bad luck' to do so, and that supernatural beings will punish them for being 'wicked' or any such thing if they do it.)

"So the only real honest basis of dialogue is my willingness to listen to something that I believe is not true."

Actually, Reverend, there's an honest basis of dialogue which says your beliefs about 'what's true' aren't the most important thing in the room.

"But tolerance means that I have to be open to the possibility that I am wrong and someone else is right. I don't know on what other basis you could have a dialogue. Maybe I've missed your point."

Actually, Reverend, the only point you necessarily should consider being wrong on is your belief that the universe is first and foremost concerned with 'judging' and even *evaluating* human interactions based on what *you* walked into the room thinking is absolute and ultimate 'Right' or 'Wrong.'

That's just you. And maybe your perception of a crowd.

You voice being pretty uncomfortable with even *listening* to someone you didn't already agree with. With the possibility that your preconceptions may not be absolutely correct.

But you're the one putting your idea of 'truth' over the human interaction and understanding. Even if you condescend to 'listen to what you believe is a false truth claim.'

You put the priority in your *self,* rather than in the discussion, and that, really, is the basis of intolerance and bigotry itself.

Maybe if you worked on that, you wouldn't presume that all religions are simply out there to 'compete with your truth claims' in the first place.

People have lives, and all.

I, think ,we all need to be in perspective as to what is meant by "Tolerence" and all other "similar" words which cause great confusion in the minds of people if not properly
defined and understood; FIRST THING FIRST;simple
example first..Imagine yourself in the cozy corner of your house..suddenly you decide, tht,
you gotta go to 'stater brothers'..a few blocks
away.... Now, having decided ; you will have to
TOLERATE the weather conditions outside and also
TOLERATE the bother of going there..and the cost
TOLERATE ; and also the possibility that some-one
could very well 'set you on a wrong direction ..
if you don't know the place precisely..and ...
TOLERATE their 'prices' and also the 'service'
So, you see that the question of TOLERENCE cameup
the minute you DECIDED upon the errand..
You could further complicate the story by saying
As soon as he was 'ready -to go.. ' His mother
came out with a strong objection over his going..
If he insists on his journey is ..it.. intolerence; to his near and dear/??

Tolerance-; attitude of the mind?? Yes.. in my
experience , a positive attitude..yes..I admit.
very helpful?.. yes.. Life changing? yes.. irreplaceable ? yes.A BOON?
YES 1.. divine tool for personal and spiritual
understanding..helpful habit of the mind to
configure lifes direction.. an essential catalyst and ingrediant for correcting perceptions -a great MUST in the service of the
Great God D E C I S I O N ...!!!!

After all every-thing should cater to DECISION>>>
All knowledge, information,politics too!... for
all that mater..goodness, ability,capability
sciences ;physical and spiritual.. should be
could be and canbe..,in this case 'tolerence'
all ,in the final analysis handmaids and tools
for arriving at the RIGHT DECISION..

Tolerance-; attitude of the mind?? Yes.. in my
experience , a positive attitude..yes..I admit.
very helpful?.. yes.. Life changing? yes.. irreplaceable ? yes.A BOON?
YES 1.. divine tool for personal and spiritual
understanding..helpful habit of the mind to
configure lifes direction.. an essential catalyst and ingrediant for correcting perceptions -a great MUST in the service of the
Great God D E C I S I O N ...!!!!

After all every-thing should cater to DECISION>>>
All knowledge, information,politics too!... for
all that mater..goodness, ability,capability
sciences ;physical and spiritual.. should be
could be and canbe..,in this case 'tolerence'
all ,in the final analysis handmaids and tools
for arriving at the RIGHT DECISION..

Tolerance-; attitude of the mind?? Yes.. in my
experience , a positive attitude..yes..I admit.
very helpful?.. yes.. Life changing? yes.. irreplaceable ? yes.A BOON?
YES 1.. divine tool for personal and spiritual
understanding..helpful habit of the mind to
configure lifes direction.. an essential catalyst and ingrediant for correcting perceptions -a great MUST in the service of the
Great God D E C I S I O N ...!!!!

After all every-thing should cater to DECISION>>>
All knowledge, information,politics too!... for
all that mater..goodness, ability,capability
sciences ;physical and spiritual.. should be
could be and canbe..,in this case 'tolerence'
all ,in the final analysis handmaids and tools
for arriving at the RIGHT DECISION..

Tolerance-; attitude of the mind?? Yes.. in my
experience , a positive attitude..yes..I admit.
very helpful?.. yes.. Life changing? yes.. irreplaceable ? yes.A BOON?
YES 1.. divine tool for personal and spiritual
understanding..helpful habit of the mind to
configure lifes direction.. an essential catalyst and ingrediant for correcting perceptions -a great MUST in the service of the
Great God D E C I S I O N ...!!!!

After all every-thing should cater to DECISION>>>
All knowledge, information,politics too!... for
all that mater..goodness, ability,capability
sciences ;physical and spiritual.. should be
could be and canbe..,in this case 'tolerence'
all ,in the final analysis handmaids and tools
for arriving at the RIGHT DECISION..

"Thank you both for a fascinating conversation."

"Fascinating" is not the term I would employ as it applies to this vacuous ranting.

As to "dumbing down" effect, this "debate" gets a five star rating.

Mr. Colson is not tolerant, in any meaningful sense. To say that your religious faith is "truth" is intolerant, because you are making a claim to truth that negates the truth of other faiths, when you have no FACTUAL basis upon which to claim your faith is truth. The fact is, faiths are based upon faith, not truth, as there is no way to prove your faith describes demonstrable truth - you can't subject religious theories to proofs based on empirical evidence- and that is the only thing that separates factual truths from faith. Therefore, there is no basis upon which to say one faith is any more true than any other faith. Unless you can provide scientific, unbiased, and verifiable evidence that Jesus was resurrected, or that Moses communicated with God, etc.

In addition, Mr. Colson's assertion that declaring homosexuality is immoral is O.K., because it describes acts that are universally condidered wrong is incorrect and based upon falsehoods. Homosexuality has been amply demonstrated to be not just an act (i.e., something done by heterosexuals or homosexuals or bi-sexuals), but in most cases also a fact of one's physical make-up that cannot be changed. Moreover, homosexuality is not considered wrong by many people in this country and in other countries. Even if it was just a behavior, and a choice, it is still not considered immoral by many- and who is Mr. Colson to say those people (including me) are wrong?

Tolerance simply means we do not shoot those we disagree with on sight or imprison them out of hand regardless of where they live or what they do so long as it doesn't threaten me economically or physically. And response to mere economic threats depends entirely on the nature of the threat.

What's wrong with Tolerance?

(1) The word "toleration" may be outmoded. It has carried too many meanings for too many centuries. (E.g. we won't kill those people as long as they live only in that neighborhood, and don't try to vote.) We -cannot prevent- a great many beliefs from being held. We -permit- a great many faiths to be practiced (but not all.) Trying to use such a general word forces into the same category wildly diverse questions that need to be treated differently.

(2) Respect for others is probably an excellent idea, but there may be extremists who are so dangerous to others or to society that they need to be regulated or suppressed. It might help to notice the phrasing in section 9.2 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: "Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

(3) Some people hold to religious standards of behavior that they claim are universal rules of conduct. But telling the boundaries of this may be hard. I spoke some years ago with an anthropologist who had lived with and studied a small mountain tribe in southeastern Asia. This tribe believed that animals had multiple births and people had single births. Accordingly, twins were regarded as a particularly horrible birth defect, to be killed at birth. Now, I'm a "tolerant" fellow, but if those people lived near me I'd feel pretty strongly that they needed to be prevented from killing those babies. And the fact that I feel that way means that I have to listen carefully to some neighbors I have in the US who feel that abortions must be prevented (although I personally don't object to abortion, under certain circumstances.) Do we put prevention of polygamy in the same class with either of these? I would not. How about prevention of homosexual acts? I suppose that is yet another category.

(4) I don't have an answer to the problems of paragraph (3). I have opinions, I have reasons for them. In a democracy I have the right to try to convince my fellow citizens to go along with my views. I need to convince a majority in some cases, a large super-majority in some other cases, especially where I am going against someone else's claim of "personal rights" or "religious freedom".

(5) We need to be able to discuss our opinions and reasons, possibly in more frankness and detail than the structure of our press typically now supports. (See the parallel discussion on this site on press coverage of religion.)

(6) The interested individual has to take some effort to inform himself / herself of other's views and reasoning. In this context, what may be needed beyond "tolerance" is the sort of "respect" associated with a willingness to listen, a willingness to converse, a willingness not only to explain patiently but, more importantly, to listen to others' explanations. To me this means the view of my neighbors here and now, my fellow citizens, rather than a scholarly theologian of another time and place, and not second-hand views of what others say that someone else believes.

(7) At the cost of repeating myself from other threads - this is a time when intolerance, lack of respect, or failure to listen - call it any of these - runs the risk of promoting the sort of "war between civilizations" called for by bin Laden and which too many people are apparently prepared to go along with. To start with, we need less verse-choosing (from the Bible or from the Koran) and more listening and conversation. If you are a non-Islamic American, and have not yet visited a mosque in the US, I urge you to do so. Go, listen, meet the people. The typical American Muslim I've talked with is as nice and reasonable as the typical American Methodist - albeit newer to the US, and more scared of what society around them may do if it misunderstands.

One of my pet peeves is the idea that if God(dess)(es) are ideal beings or at least far superior to humans.

1 Why on Earth would they want, desire or even tolerate worship?
Any human that wants worship or at least of the religious type is severely mentally ill, or using the practice to maintain unjustified control over others. The only justifications for anything above a modest showing of respect is to maintain control when you lack the power. God doesn't lack power, and if a god lacks confidence, it seems unlikely that any human praise is going to help.

2. Why would an all powerful, ideal God respond to prayer, or at least respond in cases where the response isn't based on the person praying premission to intervene.
Admitted if God() respect free will, he, she or they might hold off help unless its asked for, but in any other case to change their actions in response to prayer would be to alter their devine plan based on the request/advice of a poorly informed and horribly (relatively) flawed human.

Am I the only one who will openly acknowledge to be intolerant of behaviors and acts that I find repugnant. Why should I have to tolerate things that really offend me? That isn't to mean that I will accost those people, but I will not be forced into condoning behavior that I find distasteful for the sake of politically correct tolerance. I am certaily tolerant of many things that are not part of my personal lifestyle and try to take a live and let live attitude. However, I am very intolerant when said behaviors intrude on my personal space or the personal space of my loved ones.

---I already know that no one on earth can prove there isnt a God----

LMAO!!!

No one can prove there isn't a giant invisible pixie at the centre of the planet called Michael who grew all the world's trees.

You obviously can't prove that something that does not exist does not exist...because there is nothing there to disprove!!

And in fact it is YOU LOT who should PROVE THERE IS A GOD seeing as it is you lot that pushes their beliefs and 'way to live your life' doctrines based on the existence of this God on everyone else!!!

YOU prove it! Or keep your dross to yourselves!

Tolerance is not an absolute value. I am tolerant of many other views, for without tolerance there could be no debate, advancement of understanding, or progress. But I am intolerant of those who believe 1+1=3, idiots, bigots, and fools. They offer no debate, advancement of understanding, or progress.

Colson's defence of bigotry against gays is a case in point. Set aside the point that Colson is defending tolerance of intolerance in the name of a tolerance he does not believe in. Should we tolerate hatred of gays just as we tolerate gays?

There is no rational basis for the hatred of homosexuals as homosexuals. So, to tolerate homophobia is as senseless as tolerating those who believe that 1+1=3. Colson is both insincere and wrong.

Any person who believes there is a God who is Omnipresent, Omnipotent etc believes that this God is also Super-Merciful and Super-loving. In other words any attribute that this God may have is super good and super-lacking-in-pettiness. Any attempt to describe God in a manner that even inadvertenly brings God down from this Super-high pedestal should bring scorn from the true believer. The two chief prosletyzing cults in operation today, Christianity and Islam, insult God by bring God down to levels at which even humans rarely operate. These two cults are the biggest blasphemers in the history of humankind. I post below sura 111 from the Koran to prove my point. In this chapter Muhammad puts words into the mouth of the god he created, Allah, words that are not worthy of a great and good God. It would seem to me that total intolerance towards Christianity and Islam are a must, as beginnings, for decent humans. Now here is sura 111 from the Koran. Allah's ire is directed towards the Abu Lahab and his wife who were the stuanchest critics of Muhammad. They were also his aunt and uncle. Muhammad spared their lives in contrast to that of other unarmed opponents of his because of the close relationship with them.

AL-MASADD (PALM FIBRE, THE FLAME)

Total Verses: 5
Revealed At: MAKKA
Maududi's introduction

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

111.001
YUSUFALI: Perish the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he!
PICKTHAL: The power of Abu Lahab will perish, and he will perish.
SHAKIR: Perdition overtake both hands of Abu Lahab, and he will perish.

111.002
YUSUFALI: No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains!
PICKTHAL: His wealth and gains will not exempt him.
SHAKIR: His wealth and what he earns will not avail him.

111.003
YUSUFALI: Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of Blazing Flame!
PICKTHAL: He will be plunged in flaming Fire,
SHAKIR: He shall soon burn in fire that flames,

111.004
YUSUFALI: His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood - As fuel!-
PICKTHAL: And his wife, the wood-carrier,
SHAKIR: And his wife, the bearer of fuel,

111.005
YUSUFALI: A twisted rope of palm-leaf fibre round her (own) neck!
PICKTHAL: Will have upon her neck a halter of palm-fibre.
SHAKIR: Upon her neck a halter of strongly twisted rope.

I am a faithful Christian and from my point of view is that I can tolerate anyones religious or non-religious views. Why should I care? I already know that no one on earth can prove there isnt a God and such words come with an empty and ignorant lack of knowledge. I know the truth and to whoever wants to recieve the grace given to us by the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, can recieve it for free. All you have to do is ask. Other than that I can tolerate if you dont want to believe it, just don't act like you know something but cannot bring the evidence to prove it. For example Willem said.."religion is the problem and NOT the answer!" Sure thing brother! Prove it!

PS: When I wrote accept and respect, I did not mean agree with or feel obliged to follow or integrate any ideas from any other religious or non-religious ideas. One may extend the acceptance and respect to opening oneself to the truth in other religions and enrich oneself in the process, without giving up one's religion in the process. But that is only an extra step, not an obligatory one.

Problem with tolerance. What is wrong with tolerance?

Are we discussing religious tolerance here? On the presumption that we are:

The word tolerance in the context of religions, is wrong. Tolerance implies that something is inherently wrong, but we put up with it, i.e. tolerating the irritating habit of someone we love etc. But what we are required to do is to ACCEPT and have MUTUAL RESPECT for the differences in other religions, and accept and respect those differences in the people who follow a religion different from our own.

We, as believers in one faith may be convinced that the believers of another faith are not following the right path. But that is merely our perspective. We have no right to impose our perspective on anyone else. Religion is a matter of the heart, and a personal choice, and it is the most fundamental right of every human being to relate to their Creator in anyway they choose, or not. While we have every right to defend our faith and our religious practice, we have an equal duty to respect the right of another person to choose a different path to relate to their Creator. When such a perspective becomes a deep conviction, then we will have no problem accepting and respecting people who worship God differently from us or choose not to worship any God at all.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

well that staement spurred some dialogue- which is a very good thing as far as im concerned-

now personally i will tolerate an intolerant person-

i have to tolerate and be tolerant of all people-

but intolerance isnt a person- its a mindset-
and i reserve the right to privatelty be repelled by it-
i dont have to react outwardly- but those are my feelings-

intolerance seems to be born of the - what i call "god loves me more than you 'syndrome-

it can translate into any sort of oneupsmanship

since most religions teach humility-

superiority of ones religion seems the worst kind of hypocrisy-

but we must let everyone have their opinion,

and even actively listen, because people seem to need it so-

sometimes people just wait til the other is done talking so they ca have their say-

in print- i think its doubly obvious when that happens
peace

Interesting. when Christians want to make their point they quote the bible against other religions and beliefs.

This is intollerance not tolerance.

I am not conerned with the source of people's respect, just whether people have the ability to respect others irrespective of their belief system.

I belive most American's lack the ability to respect others in faith or dialogue. This blog is an example of that inability.

Christians throwing bible quotes around as if they have any impact on aynone other than themselves.

To be tolerant of other religions, you have to have some degree of none belief or agnostic views towards your accepted religion to be open to the concept and respect for an alternative religous view. The only recourse i can see is a belief in a higher power of human life would promote tolerance. As an agnostic Christian, i question much of how our relgion is taught, the human influence on what it taught and the historic interpretation, etc. My faith is admittedly not strong. I see more beauty in fundamental human life than the worship of a god. and if I am true to my religion, I believe my God made us all. so they are still my brother, so why should i hate them? How does my god allow or take my brother on such a different journey, when its logical we could and should be one.

"Secular systems such as the ones that have evolved in western nations have been much more successful in taming humans than religions had been in the past."

No thanks Jai, this American and millions of others will choose freedom any day over being “tamed” by the government you are proposing. This country was built upon the tenants of freedom and liberty which were paid for by the blood of our veterans and continual sacrifice of our citizens. Despite our obvious shortcomings, we don’t want a government that controls, censors and silences a belief system or viewpoint, but rather welcome viewpoints, including yours, into the marketplace of ideas.

Whether we are talking about a government sanctioned official religion all must adhere to such as Christianity, or the communist utopia you are proposing, the answer from me and millions of others will be NO! Unfortunately, these days all too many people are obsessed with shutting down or controlling the other side in this marketplace through exerting pressure, name calling, belittling or intimidation. One can see countless examples archived on these boards. When these speech codes don’t work to silence the opposition, those who want control (or simply can’t compete) will resort to harsher tactics to silence the opposition such as legislation. If you can’t beat them, just shut them up, Right?

Wrong.

It is more important that we be equally and stridently intolerant of all religions. All these religions are cults centered around humans or centered around gods with human qualities created by humans. The cult of Christianity is centered around Jesus and Islam has Allah and Muhammad , Allah being a god with very human qualities created by Muhammad. Sura 111 is an example how the sometimes vile nature that is manifest in all or some humans is foisted on Allah by his creator, the prophet Muhammad.

Religions do play a role in stabilizing society but generally through the instrument of fear, the fear of everlasting punishment in hell after death. Christians until recently were made to behave and act according certain moral precepts out of fear of everlasting punishments. This fear of punishments in the afterlife is still a prime concept in Islam, for example Islam also imposes penalties such as the cutting of arms or limbs, 100 lashes etc for acts that Islam considers immoral.

But this same whip of fear also makes the cult members act in such a way as to become intolerant of humans not members of their specific cults. Thus Muslims will not allow non-Muslims into Mecca, a unique religious form of apartheid and Muslims are required to kill apostates. Christians were equally intolerant until recently.

Secular systems such as the ones that have evolved in western nations have been much more successful in taming humans than religions had been in the past.

The type of oppression that women are subjected to in an Islamic country or were subjected to when the west was strongly influenced by Christianity in its formulation and enforcement of laws (the burning of witches in France) would never be tolerated in western countries today.

On the other hand the stoning of women for adultery, with Muhammad setting an example in the hadiths(the written traditions of Islam documenting the words and actions of Muhammad) when he stoned a woman who had conceived out of wedlock, is still religiously accepted in strictly Islamic countries as happened in Afghanistan when the Taleban were in power and still is law in Iran.

Religions need not be considered as necessary for societal stability and we must not let it off the hook under the guise of tolerance. Because if we do so, such tolerance merely prolongs the misery that religion causes.

And most definitely we should make the foisting of religion on any one under the age of 21 a serious crime. We ban alcohol for anyone under the age of 21. Religion is much more harmful than alcohol and there is case to be made for making the lower threshold for allowing the teaching and practicing of religion 25 years or more.

And there is an immediate need to tax churches and mosques and temples on their properties and incomes.

Moreover states must license ministers and imams just as they require electricians to be licensed.

Why does this thread go backwards?

My posts aren't showing up, I guess I'll go away.

Dialogue goes beyond letting the other person speak. It also means listening to what he says and responding to her actual words, not your pre-conceived notion of what you expect "people like that" to say. Too much of this is a one-sided conversation between the commenter and a position he assigns to the other side. It's called a straw man. How about we all try to talk to each other and stop assigning straw men to those with whom we disagree.
Is that what you mean by tolerance?

As for tolerance, I think that a close approximation was made by saying that we have to remember that we may be wrong and for that reason, we need to listen to what other people have to say about their beliefs. Then we can reconstruct our own thoughts and feelings based on what we have assimilated from other people. For Colson to say that he automatically rejects other people's truth values because they conflict with his own is what intolerance and bigotry is all about. It is true that Pace is a bigot. Otherwise he would not be trying to put pressure on homosexuals.

By the way, some posters have been going on about how Islam is the only religion that executes homosexuals. Quite a few years ago I attended a service at a Baptist church in College Station, TX, where the preacher flat out said that homosexuals should be executed or else God would get us. The only reason he wasn't doing it is because our secular law would charge him with murder. The Reconstructionists that are gaining so much support among the religious right are openly calling for the murder of homosexuals and plan to use their political power, once they get it, to do just that. So the takehome lesson is that the fringes of every religion are more similar to each other than they are to the rest of their own religion. If our country were being run by the religious right, we would have the same conditions as Afghanistan as far as women being in their place, gays being executed, some knucklehead bigot deciding everyone else's life based on his own "religious" beliefs, etc.

And lastly, an experience I had in Mexico. Evangelicals and Pentacostals of all kinds have been making headway in converting the poor, thus removing a lot of the power base of the Catholic Church. Obviously the Church is upset and doing everything it can to hinder the process by all means except presenting a better product. A couple of women proselytizing for a local Baptist church knocked at my door and in the conversation it came out that the preacher was an ardent Bush supporter from Fort Worth. I commented that it I believe that being a Christian and a Bush supporter were contradictory positions. The woman agreed with me, but in true tolerance, she said that she ignores his politics and tries to focus on what he and the Bible have to say about Christ. That is what tolerance is all about.

As for the question, "Did you make Him or did He make you?", more than one person has pointed out that God always seems to hate the same things as the person who believes in him. What does that say about whether we make God in our own image or the other way around?

It seems to me the problem with many of the people in this discussion is a lack of listening. The various muslims, catholics and other believers on this site have been clear about what they (we) actually believe. Instead of assigning them with a set of beliefs based on your own prejudices or study elsewhere, address what they actually profess to believe. It is easy to win an argument if you assign your interlocutor with a position based on your own prejudices about his position.
As an example, my prejudices about evangelical christians and what I know of Chuck Colson elsewhere caused me to assume his arguments here would be bigoted and narrow-minded. Although I still disagree with him, I find his actual points make some sense. That realization took some effort; I had to (figuratively at least) listen to Colson's words without calling to mind the various Peter Paces and Pat Robertsons of this world...

Anytime you talk about religious tolerance or "inter-faith dialog, please don't forget to include believers in:

Scientology
Zeus
Apollo
Poseidon
Thor
Mythra
Etc.

After all, they all stand on equal (ly unstable) footing.

Jacob Jozevz "ABOUT Tolerence :
One ///OK one secular democratic Palestine for all now living on the land of Historic Palestine:Arabs-both Musilms and Christians-and Jews, not racist fascist zionists.
Two, be honest, Hagana, Shtern, Aragon-all these are Terrorist/Terror organizations that terrorised Palestinians in 1947/8 and thru atrocities such as in Dier Yasin where billies of pregrant Palestinian women were cut open to scare them and theri families to flee their homes to refugee camps.

Your Apartheid imposed on Palestinians is-by admission of many South African Blacks-is worse than that of white south Africa and your rasict WAll is worse than Berlin's.

I take the position of Diana, and I would strongly disagree that we have taken God out of public life...That is a red herring that feeds on the paranoia of Old Testament Christians...What we have taken out of public life is sectarianism, and that is a good thing...For if your God is sovereign, you have nothing to fear from heretical belief systems and may have something to gain from listening to their take on morality and ethics...

Never in my lifetime have I experienced so great an interest in things spiritual, and I have lived almost 7 decades...In fact, I would posture that we are for the first time in our history bringing God into public life - recognizing that people of faith are impacted by their world view and that it carries over into their obligations to Caesar...

What plagues the Christian Right is that they have fallen victim to a free-will doctrine that requires clever stories to convince people to salvation...In fact, that is not salvation; that is membership in the born-again club...

Paul tells us clearly to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling...When American Christians begin to do that, they will shine wherever they are...Until that time, I ask if Baal is the god of America...AND, I am an evangelical pastor and theologian...

As for General Pace, that was a stupid statement in his official capacity...He is an agent of Caesar...While he may very well be right, it adds nothing to the equation to let his troops know that disdain for homosexuality comes from the top...He ought to be fired...Better he had put together a prayer group of like-minded officers on his own time, asking God how to handle the situation...

Chuck,you're getting a bit senile - forgetting that God has used you in a mighty way to reach millions - all without any bit of public endorsement...I was once introduced to you as the next "Governor of Maine," thankfully wrongly...The first word out of your mouth was "Why?" Because it is possible to bring your faith with you into Caesar's court; that is why...But it will be impossible to do so if McChurch continues to insist that faith means to put the Ten Commandments over the courthouse portico...

Stan Moody, Christian Policy Institute, author of "Crisis in Evangelical Scholarship" and "McChurched: 300 Million Served and Still Hungry."

Religions have been around and tolerated for a long time. It is ime we started questioning religious tenets. All religions are cults and not much more. Let us put religions to the same rigorous questioning that we subject non-religious claims to. We should discourage foisting religion on children and ban people from adopting a faith until they turn 21 much in the manner of alcohol which we try to keep away from children until they are 21. We must also take away all tax benfits for religious institutions by having them pay property tax.

I will be honest. I am tolerant of the intolerant people as I find more of them. Sometimes I even like them, especially if they just happen to share some of my opinions. Personally, I enjoy someone with real good old fashion intolerance more than some wimp who does not know what they stand for and thinks they are morally superior for this reason. This because I think I may be intolerant also. Surprise! Really, I love all you you out there and I try but it is just a waste of time to listen to anymore augments on topics like homosexuality. It is exhausting and a waste of time to have to deal with some homosexual advance. Yes, they like me but I know better than to feel special. Besides, what new is there to say about such things? All this stuff about communicating ad infinitum, all of us listen to each others narratives is like saying let's all hug a tree, hold hands and .... well, you know ... sing kumbyeya. Dirty Harry is one of my favorite movies. Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry, now that's communications at a higher level.

Religions have been around and tolerated for a long time. It is ime we started questioning religious tenets. All religions are cults and not much more. Let us put religions to the same rigorous questioning that we subject non-religious claims to. We should discourage foisting religion on children and ban people from adopting a faith until they turn 21 much in the manner of alcohol which we try to keep away from children until they are 21. We must also take away all tax benfits for religious institutions by having them pay property tax.

True tollerance is listening without preconceived outocmes or judgements of another's faith. Some people have a real problem with this approach of resepct first, as most people listen for what they can disagree with instead of respecting the other person's faith, irrespective of their understanding or misunderstanding of the other pseron's faith.

The couple dialoguing over this isue,, appear to lack that basic tenent to listen without judging. faith is personla and public servants should express themselevs privately, not using public resources, which they obviously would not have available to them otherwise.

Christians alwasy want it their way and leave the rest of the people out of the equation. That consept is not tolerance, but inequality.

I am more conerend with tolerant people and not people telling me about someone they never met before..GOD!

Christians start acting nice around Easter time; inviting me to thbeir Church; until they find out I am Buddhist and not interesetd in attending their church. At that point they become intolerant to me and my faith and become judgemental teloing me I am gong to die and go to hell. Christian faith, I guess, works this way.

Judging others and their faith as being unequal to theirs. Buddhist study teh Conept of Boddhisatva never Desparaging; equality in faith no matter what you believe. All life is equally beautiful.

Davey, Concerned The Christian Now Liberated,

You are evident Muslim-haters. But that is your right, no doubt.

However, did you stop to think how much exactly you know about Islam and what proportion of what you know is derived from second-hand hate literature?

I am a Muslim-boderline-agnostic. I invite you to read my posting at 2:59 p.m.

I also invite you to read the books by Stephen Brams on "Superior Beings -- If They Exist, How Will We Know?" I also invite you to read his other works on the Game Theoretical basis of a practical morality.

The issue of Justice and the Toleration of Intolerance is treated with great lucidity in John Rawls' Book : "Theory of Justice". The book explains the nuances between justice and fairness and the role of 'power' and 'empowerment' in building workable institutions to facilitate justice, tolerance and morality.

There is a difference between being tolerant of a person's RIGHT to speak their mind and being tolerant of the policy implications of what they say.

I tolerate your RIGHT to hate gays, I do not necessarily tolerate any actions taken on behalf of your opinion or belief if it contradicts the laws that govern our country and its citizens.

General Pace is free to have his opinion, he is not free to act upon it and while he is certainly free to express it, he is equally free to deal with the backlash it received.

You are free to claim the world is flat, but I am equally free to pass judgment on your assertion based on empirical evidence. Faith should not be accorded any more respect simply because it is faith as opposed to any other uninformed guess. If you CHOOSE to pontificate based on irrational or uninformed faith/ideology, then you are CHOOSING to be judged on the rationality of your opinions. This isn't intolerance, it's refutation of a false or unprovable assertion or irrational hatred.

The Qu'ran speaks out against homosexual lust, not love. Can the same not be said for the Bible?

Does this phrasing sound better, "I don't tolerate intolerance," since we've concluded that "tolerate" and "tolerance" are not the same act?

Intolerant of intolerance?

So, does that mean I ought to be tolerant of your intolerance for the intolerant? What if an indignant person labels me intolerant or worse, tolerent of the wrong kind of intolerance because I tolerate your intolerance of the intolerant? I know! I will label the indignant person as intolerant thus presupposing anything he says against my tolerant/intolerant views as closed minded because anyone who is intolerant IS closed-minded. And being closed-minded is... whew... bad! Right?

I got dizzy writing that! I can't imagine trying to live it.

"We rarely think people have good sense unless they agree with us."
-Francois de La Rochefoucauld

Interesting use of the term "legal".

IF what you say is true, and I have no reason to think otherwise, then the only way it could be considered "legal" would be if their laws are governed by religious edicts that come from their interpretation of the Koran. So the problem isn't the RELIGION, it's the use of a system of BELIEFS codified in a book known as the Koran that is used as a means of governance.

Hence, the importance of the concept of the separation of Church and State. I think that we wouldn't be far behind if we chose to allow our laws to be nothing more than a reflection of the Bible or Old Testament or one of many religions. In fact, a simple Google search turns up a bevy of Christian fundamentalist sites that advocate Christian Law with just as many Draconian results.

To me it's not which religious text is better, it's whether ANY religious text should be used as a means of governance beyond the self.

Mr. Colson claims that it's "intolerant" of the NYT to object to General Peter Pace calling gay people "immoral." Odd, in that he raised no obection to an "immoral" gay man -- Irving Rapper -- directing the film version of his memoir "Born Again."

---For the Koran-haters...

Read the OLD Testament much?----

Who cares? Who cares what it says if in the real world it's not acted upon to the levels where actual state sanctioned/preacher supported murder happens?

is the Bible (or most holy books) full of anti-homosexual garbage? YES.
Which is why so many real Christians/Catholics/Jews etc etc are so rabidly homophobic...Nutters that they are.

But only one religion actually, legally, executes homosexuals (and has it's holy men openly call for those executions). And that's Islam.

Last year Iran hung 114 homosexuals.
This year in America a lesbian hosted The Oscars.

Despite the homophbia in America...THAT is still the difference.
And it's an example of how big (depsite the troubles) that difference is.

To answer Vanessa's questions: "Who is your God? Did you make him or did he make you?" My God made me -- and all the rest of creation, from the subatomic to the cosmic. My God is before creation, outside of creation, and will continue to exist beyond the end of creation. My God, by the way, is neither male nor female. My God encompasses all of creation. God is in everything and everything is in God. Designating God as male arises from the patriarchal traditions of the major (and many minor) religions.

I am a practicing, believing Christian, and as such, I believe Christ commissioned us all to "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." Mark 15:15-16. But I also believe it is God who will judge. It is not for us to determine who believes and who does not. Rather "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." Matthew 7:1-2. Or, consider that searing two-letter word in the very middle of the Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us our trespasses AS we forgive those who trespass against us."

I also believe my God is the God of Matthew 25:31-46. Simply put, "I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these my brothers [and sisters], you did for me."

Christ ministered to the poor, the diseased, the outcast, the disenfranchised -- and he did it primarily through action. We are called to do likewise.

I also believe the 10 Commandments are a reliable guide to determining what is right and wrong. They also conform to what most humans innately believe is right and wrong. "Thou shalt not kill" is pretty unequivocal. Now comes the challenge of living a Christian life in a pluralistic society -- one where freedom of religion and expression are firmly protected by the First Amendment.

Looking in the dictionary on my desk, I like the combination of several definitions of "tolerate", to wit: 1)allow the existence or occurrence of without authoritative interference, 2) leave unmolested, 3) endure or permit, esp. with forbearance. The words that speak most clearly to me of tolerance are "without authoritative interference," "unmolested," and "with forbearance." I believe tolerance is a worthwhile goal, but one we will struggle long and hard to achieve. In the meantime, what are we are to do in the face of intolerance, especially an intolerance that demands "molesting" others?

My tolerance ends at the point it is met by your violent intolerance. What do I do at that point? I must admit, I really don't know.

Peace and Love,
Deanna

Vanessa Wagner, I want no part of your vicious, vindictive, jealous God. You worship it if you want, but don't try to force me to agree with you!

I am perfectly willing to live and let live; IMO, that is the definition of tolerance.

as the one-true-religion says "An it harm no one, do as ye will" (okay, the "one-true-religion" crack was kinda sarcastic, LOL!)

The argument of Charles Colson argues is correct that the only real honest basis of dialogue is my willingness to consider the possibility that the credo of somebody with whom I may not, at the start, agree with truns up, upon my further reflection on the issue, to be closer to the truth.

However, beyond the purely hypothetical/ theoretical construct, what does tolerance mean in practical situations of conflict? And should we tolerate intolerance? These two questions enable us to discuss the difference between resilience and tolerance.

The question how far we are to tolerate intolerance boils down to the issue of how peacefully resilient should one be in the struggle to seek to have our point of view prevail over that of our interlocutor/adversary? And the only rational aswer to this better-defined question requires usage of the concepts of Game Theory, including minimax equilibrium, dominant strategy, optimal strategy, threat value Nash Value and Nash equilibrium, and optimal penal code, etc.

A working practical morality, of which tolerance is one of the essential ingredient, can be defined only in the context of Game Theory. Morality and tolerance is a survival strategy and it is religious because religion properly-construed, is not divine in the sense of a jealous, narcissistic God who cajoles and threatens in order to permanently have praise showered on Him but living-organism-centered (especially human centered) in the sense that it (religion) aspires to be the optimal code for a successful individual and collective survival strategy.

are you sayng RDP that you are intolerant of the entire holistic person- or their intolerance of others-

i dont mean tolerance in the sense of "tolerating"
which implies that you may be patronizing or secretly judging negatively-
but tolerance as a respectful acceptance and lack of judgement-
one of the GOOD things about religion is that one is exhorted to not judge each other-
people dont always follow the precepts of their religion but that is not the religions fault-

also id say most firmly that intolerance is not monopolized by religion-

ever see a roomful of academics at each other?

we all have what we accept in others and actively reject-

actually in america- tolerance is a rather new subject- only amended into our constitution about 40 years ago-

i agree with tonio- hate the sin not the sinner-

ex: CLCNL follows me everywhere defaming my belief system- i must go beyond passively tolerating him, and actively engage him trying to understand his views, and respect his personhood-
although he has an unnatural fear of meeting me on an airplane, i have to patiently try to imagine how his fears dictate his exchanges with me- and calm them if ossible through gracious manners-

to tolerate implies simply ignoring-

tolerance itself implies understanding

but as to how the question is framed-

what is wrong with tolerance?

someone must have been half asleep when they penned that one-

evidenced by not one panelist bothering to respond
peace all

Matthew 6:24 “No one can serve two masters..."
You have to have the courage to "Stand Up for what you believe to be True" To have one position that is public and one that is private will never work.

I also am keen on the "I'm intolerant of intolerance" idea.

However, Concerned, this is the second or third discussion on which I have seen you completely insult Islam. Instead of criticizing the religion as a whole, you should focus on the extremists who are purpetrating the violence and hate. Though, with your posts you've become an extremist yourself. I find your posts hateful and offensive, and I'm not even a Muslim.

I wonder if this question spawned from the discussions on the end of the world?

For the Koran-haters...

Read the OLD Testament much?

Let us not forget that there are many "Books" and Gospels left out of the Bible thanks to Constantine and is sanctioning of the Christian Religion for political stability purposes.

I find it interesting that many choose to disparage other religions and faiths because of the "truth" of the Bible when the Bible is nothing more than a collection, a subset of all the books and gospels written, of stories that were chosen by a council of HUMANS and sanctioned by a King who did not convert until upon his death bed.

By all means, practice the faith that allows you to control YOURSELF, just do not try and foist that faith on me or others or cast judgment because we find other ways of dealing with the human condition.

The idea of tolerance is insulting. Whether you’re talking race, religion or sexuality, we have to do better than to just “tolerate” people who are different. Merely tolerating others is not acceptable. Aim higher please.

So, who wants to define tolerance?

Is it as simple as "mind your own business"?

Tolerance - The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others.

No problem except for the militant passages and anti-female messages of the Koran which makes Islam a sham of a religion. Moslems who do not renounce these "dark side" passages and messages pose a significant threat to world peace and therefore we should show no tolerance for their activities.

The problem isn't a particular religion, but the idea of FAITH as a guiding light. HISTORY is full of shining examples of RELIGIOUS figures whose behavior is well worth emulating. Unfortunately, it is their subsequent followers and "story tellers" that get us into trouble.

What makes democracies special is that the rule or law is made up of the laws of man...NOT the devine. For every religious absolute, there are exceptions made by the pious, which makes them but hypocrites. Pro Life? Sure, as long as it means the fetus.

As soon as we begin to BELIEVE instead of KNOW, we are in trouble. Empirical evidence and reason, not faith and absolutes.

We tolerate because we KNOW we cannot even reconcile within ourselves the questions that arise from faith in that which is patently false or, at best, unprovable either way.

The questions of "tolerance" is actually quite complex, Vitoria.

I (like to believe I) am tolerant of everything except intolerance.

So when a religion says that some people--let's say gays--are unworthy because their Bible says so, I become extrememely intolerant of those people.

But then they say I am intolerant! So strange.

Must I tolerate your intolerance? Where does it start? Where does it end?

I am intolerant of people who look at science and say it must be a fluke because the science differs from their theology.

Joel Easton, I agree with you for the most part. I would add that some religious people respect others' private behavior, and some non-religious people do not. By "private behavior," I mean behavior that does not harm other people. To me, that means one is only entitled to pass judgment on others' actions when those actions cause harm to others.

i have a dark suspicion that if anyone bothers with this question at all- it will draw out a great deal of intolerance-

strange davey that you automatically associated ALLAH with tolerance-

tolerance of others is one of the basics of decent human interaction-

we are in the center of a great and new social experiment- the united states of america- where we are forced to live within the parameters of many very different cultural and traditional and social mores- living daily with so much variety of people forces us to either accept with grace and tolerance the beliefs and politics of many- or react in fear and loathing of the other

i vote for gracious tolerance and respect

religion is the problem and NOT the answer!

---my god is tolerant----

LMAO!!!!

Converted out of Islam then have you? As if not, you're speaking so much rubbish.

Allah (chances are It does not exist by the way) is even more intolerant than the other supposed 'one true Gods' and their prophets!

Islam is the only religion that, be it actually happening in Iran or being preached that it should happenin the Uk, that kills homosexuals with legal/church/state backing!

The problem with religion is that:

1) Many people consider their beliefs the most important thing in their lives
2) There's no basis for them

Once you admit there's no reason to think God hates homosexuality, it becomes awfully hard to come up with a reason it's any of one's business.

Here's an idea for you...

"ITS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DO IN THEIR BEDROOM, PERSONAL LIFE, OR FAITH LIFE. NO HUMAN IS QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON ANOTHER'S PRIVATE, PERSONAL BEHAVIOR"

I cannot tell you how annoyed I am by so-called faithful people who are nosey, intrude into the lives of others, make judgements, look down, cast doubt, etc.

Shut up ALL of you, and let us go about our own business in private. Faith is personal.. like a "personal relationship with Jesus?" Yeah, you talk about that but never let others be personal and private.

Its disgusting that you care about who other than yourself is having sex with whom, who they pray to, how they vote, etc.

SHUT UP ITS "NUNYA'S"

Like Victoria, I am often intolerant of intolerance. I recognize that this may be contradictory. When discussing religious tolerance, I tend to make a distinction between a person's beliefs and a person's actions.

As I've said before, I take offense at the believer/unbeliever concept pushed by many religions. (Specifically, the idea that someone could believe something that is so transcendentally incorrect that he or she will burn in hell for it.) But I cannot change someone else's mind about such doctrines even if I wanted to do so. That's where I think tolerance come in.

However, if someone used those doctrines to persecute or discriminate against others, it's appropriate to be intolerant of that behavior, because that behavior itself shows intolerance toward others' beliefs.

Having said that, I am unsure about situations where people believe their deities have ordered them to commit actions that harm others. The uncertainty arises because I cannot tell whether they honestly believe that or if they are using their beliefs as after-the-fact justifications. I do not know what separates people who say God wants them to relieve suffering from people who say God wants them to kill unbelievers.

heres a brilliant idea-

instead of building a tunnel or bridge- just DONT build a wall of shame-

and if you apologize - it tends to be negated when you alternately blame the apologee and then threaten their neighbor?

this is some freaky deaky stuff

id say palestinians dont really need a million dollars worth of concrete-

why dont you buy them a bulldozer to tear down that wall instead?

or better yet, just ask the what they need

Who is your God? Did you make him or did he make you?

my god is tolerant

We have turned our backs on our God. We can tolerate anything, except his Word, his condemnation of our evil acts. In a time of tolerance, I would ask you to remember a God, who is not tolerant. But a God that says, Repent.

We will suffer the wrath of God. America, Land of the Free. Are we free? Are you free? Free to post the Commandments of the Living God in your courts, in your squares? Do we adhere to his commandments? Do you adhere to his commandments? Are you free to say that Allah is not the one true God and that Mohammed is not the prophet of the true God? Are we free to say Jehovah is the one true God and Jesus is his son? Where are the brave? Where are the ones that will stand up for their God? The ones that are willing to say that …
Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the father but by Jesus.

There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ.

Jesus said, I am the door.

We need to examine our hearts and remember what is important and determine what road we are on. Now is the time. Behold I come quickly.

Vanessa Wagner

where did this question sneak in?

my pesonal motto is im intolerant of intolerance-

is this a real question?

if youve run out of ideas, im chock full of them

where did this question sneak in?

my pesonal motto is im intolerant of intolerance-

is this a real question?

if youve run out of ideas, im chock full of them