What Does The Bible Say About The Intolerance of Tolerance?

"Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all" (Romans 12:14–18).

This past week a young man sent me a message after reading the last six personal reflections I've written pertaining to Biblical Perspectives on cultural ideologies gaining momentum in the United States.

He began his message stating, "I love you and your family. I hope you know that," but then proceeded to criticize me, determining with minimal explanation that my views were "hateful and hypocritical."

His reasoning? "The fact that you can dismiss issues such as 'white supremacy' is extremely disturbing. The fact that you can support a president who spreads messages of hate is hypocritical. I'm liberal. I will always choose the side of acceptance and love." 

Needless to say I was surprised by his judgmental message while simultaneously proclaiming himself universally loving and accepting. I rarely speak to this individual, so there has been very little dialogue through the years to warrant such claims or make knowledgeable accusations against me or my family.

Nonetheless, I calmly responded with one simple question, "May I ask what your stance is on the Bible?"

He replied, "My stance is I don't really believe in it. I side with scientists, journalists, facts... I think you and your family live in a bubble that is not reflective of the real world. You can believe what you want though. It's what makes this country so great. But keep your hateful rhetoric to yourself. I'm done seeing it."

Now accusing me and my family of living in a bubble is obviously intended to be an insult against our Christian faith and the Bible. However, as followers of Christ, we refuse to apologize for filtering our lives in obedience and submission to the absolute truth of God's Holy Word, because God sent His Son to die on our behalf and save us eternally.

Therefore, if someone attempts to label me and/or my family as "narrow-minded," I prefer it be Biblically accurate according to Jesus' Sermon on the Mount teaching.

"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few" (Matthew 7:13–14).

To set the record straight, neither "white supremacy" nor any reference to "President Donald Trump" can be found in the last six blog posts I've written. A quick word search on my blog verifies this fact.

Therefore, what is this young man's outrage based upon and why is he persecuting me (and my family) for my exposition of cultural, hot-button issues from a Biblical perspective?

Am I not allowed freedom of speech as a U.S. citizen to examine social issues from the lens of God's Word and respectfully argue the validity or lack thereof pertaining to cultural rhetoric from a conservative point of view? Nevertheless, I will address the judgmental stereotype in question to clarify the argument made against me.

For proper context, white supremacy is commonly defined as the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially blacks, and should dominate society. However, I have stated in multiple posts that according to Scripture, God has made us ALL equal in His image, for we are born with the same ethnicity derived from Adam and Eve, regardless of the amount of melanin in our skin. 

Keep in mind, "race" is not a Biblical term but cultural, because the Greek word for "nation" in Acts 17:26 is "ethnos" from which we derive the word "ethnicity" in our English language. 

"And he (God) made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place" (Acts 17:26). 

Moreover, as born-again believers, we are saved and united with Christ through His death, burial and resurrection. Therefore, Scripture declares, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). 

Where, then, is this accusation of white supremacy originating from and why is President Trump being thrown into the conversation when I have never made reference to him in anything I've written. It would appear the "Trump" reference was intended as an insult to either label me (and the President) as white supremacists or accuse us both of supporting KKK/neo-Nazi/etc. extremists.

What purpose does that serve, though, when it is completely false and essentially hate speech made against me (and the President) to silence our respective views?

I have certainly written extensively on the dangerous rhetoric of "whiteness/white privilege" used to promote ethnic hatred and white guilt in our nation by many left-wing, liberal progressives who proclaim the United States is systemically racist.

However, many highly respected, intellectual leaders within the black community wholeheartedly reject white privilege ideology altogether, which I have cited extensively in my posts.

The problem is victimization rhetoric propagated by liberal progressives has plagued our country since The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed and Great Society programs legislated and implemented by former President Lyndon B. Johnson, which enslaved blacks to the Democratic party through welfare subsidies, essentially destroying the nuclear family unit within black homes.

However, having an open dialogue about such issues in our country 56 years later is apparently prohibited by radical, social justice advocates, because simply questioning the validity of social justice rhetoric has now been reclassified by the left-wing as endorsing white supremacy.

It is a convenient weapon used to deflect responsibility, silence opposition, and gain sympathy and support, exemplified by the personal attack made against me. Consequently, it proves a greater point regarding the ridiculous demand for neutrality and impartiality in our country today by liberal progressives.

My personal example from this week echoes a topic I've been passionate about for years but have not had the opportunity to expound upon in great detail. However, it would appear now is the appropriate time to articulate and examine, "The Intolerance of Tolerance." It is quite the paradox at first glance and utterly confusing without careful consideration. How can tolerance be intolerant?

Well, we must first recognize that tolerance requires disagreement. We do not tolerate people we agree with, but rather those we disagree with. There is a difference of opinion present that an opposing party is unwilling to relinquish, therefore tolerance is necessary to maintain civility, respect and freedom of speech and expression.

Where tolerance has veered off-track is via the post-modern redefinition of tolerance as the acceptance of all values, all beliefs, all lifestyles, and all truth claims as equal. Therefore, non-Christians are quick to label Bible-believing, born-again followers of Christ as intolerant for making judgment calls on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, marriage, premarital sex, fatherlessness, etc. Why?

Because for post-modernists, their redefinition of tolerance (in actuality) requires Bible-believing Christians accept their position and reject Scripture's teachings even though, in theory, their redefinition should value and respect Biblically-based opinions as equivalent to their own.

However, how can a follower of Christ be intolerant if the post-modern definition of tolerance requires that all values, beliefs, lifestyles and truths are equal? Is the Bible somehow not a system of belief protected under the relative neutrality/impartiality banner of post-modern tolerance?

The truth of the matter is that from the perspective of left-wing liberals, tolerance is reserved for everything and everyone EXCEPT Christians who unapologetically stand on the absolute truth of Scripture as their theological foundation of morality.

In other words, as Christians, because we don't accept their ideology, we are the exception to their rules and labeled intolerant.

However, if post-modernists are unwilling to accept our viewpoint as equally valid to theirs, are they not being intolerant in the face of their so-called tolerance?

Case in point, that is the true paradox of "the intolerance of tolerance" opponents of the Bible refuse to recognize.

Consequently, Scripture warns, "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths" (2 Timothy 4:3–4).

Bottom-line, the true problem of the post-modern redefinition of tolerance is that all focus and attention is placed on the acceptance of IDEAS rather than PEOPLE, which is what makes it illogical and intolerant to begin with.

Common sense tells us not all ideas are created equal. Some are right, some are wrong. Some are better, some are worse. Some are foolish and some are incredibly dangerous.

Therefore, we must hold to the true definition of tolerance, as described by Gregory Koukl, renowned author, speaker and president of Stand To Reason in his article, The Intolerance of Tolerance, which rejects the post-modern vantage point of tolerance which is self-serving to their agenda. 

There is a modern myth that holds that true tolerance consists of neutrality. It is one of the most entrenched assumptions of a society committed to relativism. The tolerant person occupies neutral ground, a place of complete impartiality where each person is permitted to decide for himself. No judgments allowed. No "forcing" personal views. Each takes a neutral posture towards another's convictions.

This approach is very popular with post-modernists, that breed of radical skeptics whose ideas command unwarranted respect in the university today. Their rallying cry, "There is no truth," is often followed by an appeal for tolerance. For all their confident bluster, the relativists' appeal actually asserts two truths, one rational and one moral.

The first is the "truth" that there is no truth. The second is the moral truth that one ought to tolerate other people's viewpoints. Their stand, contradictory on at least two counts, serves as a warning that the modern notion of tolerance is seriously misguided.

Historically, our culture has emphasized tolerance of all persons, but never tolerance of all behavior. This is a critical distinction because, in the current rhetoric of relativism, the concept of tolerance is most frequently advocated for behavior: premarital sex, abortion, homosexuality, use of pornography, etc. People ought to be able to behave the way they want within broad moral limits, the argument goes.

Ironically, though, there is little tolerance for the expression of contrary ideas on issues of morality and religion. If one advocates a differing view, he is soundly censured. The tolerance issue has thus gone topsy-turvy: tolerate most behavior, but don't tolerate opposing beliefs about those behaviors. Contrary moral opinions are labeled as "imposing your view on others." Instead of hearing, "I respect your view," those who differ in politically incorrect ways are told they are bigoted, narrow-minded, and intolerant. 

Most of what passes for tolerance today is not tolerance at all, but rather intellectual cowardice. Those who hide behind the myth of neutrality are often afraid of intelligent engagement. Unwilling to be challenged by alternate points of view, they don't engage contrary opinions or even consider them. It's easier to hurl an insult—'you intolerant bigot'—than to confront the idea and either refute it or be changed by it. 'Tolerance' has become intolerance.

True tolerance doesn't require we treat all ideas as equally valuable, but that we treat all people as equally valuable.

In other words, there should be no presumption that all ideas are equal because tolerance by definition requires respectful disagreement. Ideologies have and will always ebb and flow throughout the course of time, which is why the emphasis of tolerance must be placed exclusively on PEOPLE as equally valuable, not ideas.

In doing so, we can choose to "agree to disagree" and still love and accept one another as unique human beings made in the image of God, regardless of ethnicity, gender, lifestyle, religion, etc.

In turn, it frees us all from promoting ethnic hatred and labeling one another as racists, haters, bigots, xenophobes, homophobes, sexists, etc., and causing further division, animosity and dissension by twisting popular, cultural language into weapons (i.e. black lives matter, defund the police, systemic racism, social justice, white privilege, etc.)

However, will left-wing liberals tolerate Bible-believing followers of Christ and allow us the freedom to debate our position freely without being labeled as intolerant? Or will their intolerance of their own post-modernistic redefinition of tolerance continue to persecute the church of Jesus Christ per their own self-righteous justification?

Again, Greg Koukl offers this phenomenal video summary to help clarify the current, cultural debate regarding tolerance between left-wing liberals and the Bible-believing church of Jesus Christ.

In the end, Scripture has the final word for those who profess themselves as followers of Christ, which is a stern reminder for Christians to resist emulating the pattern of this world. For this world is not our home, therefore the rules by which our culture operates will never be fair or just towards Christians.

However, that is not our ultimate concern. Our focus is on Paul's admonition to the church (Romans 12:14-18 listed above) which encourages us to live extraordinary lives of blessing rather than cursing, and forgiving others rather than holding contempt in our hearts. For we are all made in the image of Christ and bear His name to the world.

"Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls" (James 1:19–21). 

Therefore, let us recognize the war of words being used as weapons to bind the tongues of Christians in order to silence us from speaking truth in love to a fallen world bent on satisfying its fleshly desires.

For the day will come when we will all stand before the judgment seat of almighty God, and no semblance of justification will save any man's soul if he has not already accepted Jesus Christ and His Holy Word (before he dies) by grace through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8–9).

"Be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing" (James 1:22–25).

In closing, let us heed the words of Joshua who once said, "And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD" (Joshua 24:15). 

For if living for righteousness means living in a bubble and resisting the temptations of this world, then we should all be eager to do so because God holds us accountable as His born-again children to live contrary to the pattern of this world so others would see our actions and glorify His Holy Name.

Paul reminds us, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect" (Romans 12:2).

Therefore, may we carefully consider what is at stake in our country regarding the intolerance of tolerance, and embrace trial and persecution for standing boldly on the authority of God's Word in the midst of post-modern opposition which labels us as intolerant extremists.

To that end Jesus warns, "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness’" (Matthew 7:21–23).