|
Anyone who declares that there is a moral right and wrong is viciously attacked. Yet it is our responsibility as members of society to make such declarations. Only by standing tall with the truth can we bring hope to our culture.
American coins all contain the inscription "E Pluribus Unum," which means "out of the many, one; out of diversity, unity."
North American society was founded on the principles
of diversity focused in a single direction,
that of unity in biblical faith. It meant
the establishment of a common law founded
on the Ten Commandments of the Bible. Yet
what has happened is that we crossed the
thin line separating the legitimate idea
of self-acceptance and the evil idea of
self-exaltation which fosters superiority
and alienation.
Pluralism is the acceptance of many competing world views, each considered equal with no view dominant or more 'true' than any other. It's a noble idea, except for one problem: it just doesn't make sense. All beliefs can be equal only if none of those beliefs are true.
Would you eat the chicken?
Imagine a kitchen full of cooks with different views on what constitutes an acceptable level of "doneness" for poultry. One says that raw is perfect. Another claims that it must be cooked but there could still be red meat. Another claims that the meat must be pink. Still another reports with a claim of exclusivity that the meat must reach a certain temperature to avoid bacterial poisoning. Now imagine--that in the interest of avoiding conflict--all these ideas are given equal status, none of them deemed to be more 'true' than any other. How then will the chicken be cooked? Would you be willing to eat blindfolded what comes out of that kitchen?
There's nothing wrong with believing that, for some situations, there is only one right answer. A clerk hands you incorrect change. Will you accept this amount in the interest of "tolerance," believing that his view of the right amount of change is as accurate as yours, or will you point out the error? If someone believes that breaking into your home or business and robbing you of your possessions is their right, will you accept this joyfully as their truth, or will you call the police?
Of course, with religious issues a certain step of faith is required. You can't scientifically prove or disprove the existence of God. But you can study all the evidence for each belief and make an informed conclusion. Unfortunately, for the secularist that isn't good enough. Because the secularist doesn't want to believe in the Bible. If the Bible is right she will lose her comfortable world view of a voiceless universe. And in this resistance lies the foundation of pluralism.
Who's really tolerant?
In our modern culture, the greatest sin is "intolerance"
and the greatest sinners are evangelical
Christians, who are presented as the most
intolerant of all people. According to
these attacks, conservative Christians
are demonized for their inability to compromise
with those who differ from the liberal
viewpoints being spread by liberal secularism.
But who is really intolerant? You can't
be tolerant of something unless you object
to it. If you already agree or like something,
it is impossible to "tolerate" it; so that
only becomes an issue when you have an
objection to something. If tolerance, then,
requires an initial objection, Christians
are more tolerant than anyone else, because
they object to so many things around them,
yet quietly accept that people are free
to make choices while helping them to understand
the choices that exist. Those who accept
everything are, ironically, the least tolerant.
The challenge for those who prize tolerance is,
as Daniel Taylor points out, "to distinguish
between healthy tolerance and a diseased
moral passivity or indifference." Taylor
goes on to show that too much of what passes
as tolerance in our culture is not the
result of principled judgement but simply
moral indifference. A morally
bankrupt culture is incapable of calling
evil for what it is. As a result of this
misguided world view, those who claim to
be tolerant are themselves so intolerant
that they call for the destruction of anyone
who disagrees with them! A guest commentator
on National Public Radio, clarifying his
view on Southern Baptists, said, "The evaporation
of 4 million [people] who believe in this
crap would leave the world a better place."
People complain that others are "forcing their values
on them," when they do the same by trying
to insist that their viewpoint is the only
one that should be shared by everyone in
society!
Jesus made the most exclusive religious claim in history. There's simply no room in his claim for another world view regarding the afterlife:
"I am the way and the truth and the life, No one comes to the Father except through me"
(John 14:6)
Of course, you may disagree with his claim about himself. In an ordered society people are free to accept such a claim or to reject it. But they are not free to silence it. That goes for Christians too, who wish to strangle other viewpoints. Jesus never told disbelievers that they had no right to disbelieve; he merely pointed out the truth and let them make their own informed decision.
|
