[quote]Religious toleration is the condition of accepting or permitting others'
religious beliefs and practices which disagree with one's own.
The concept of toleration has evolved in modern Europe, and changed during its
development. For a contemporary reader there is a danger of confusing the modern
connotation of words like "toleration", "religious freedom " and "liberty of
conscience" with the historic meanings of these word

The use of these terms in John Stuart Mill's On Liberty or by 20th century
philosophers like John Rawls and Ronald Dworkin is different from the concept
of religious toleration in the 17th century.[/quote]

 Religious tolerance is not a New Age belief,but the modern definition is.
Tolerance does not mean acceptance of differing beliefs, but
acceptance of the right of others to be different.Roger Williams founder of the
Baptist Church and the religious tolerance movement in the 17th century, was very
much in favor of religious freedom.His purpose for founding the Baptist Church was for
religious freedom.He was firmly against tolerance and a foe of religious
establishments.

 [quote]God requireth not a uniformity of religion.

We find not in the Gospel, that Christ hath anywhere provided for the uniformity
of churches, but only for their unity.  Roger Williams[/quote]

The thing about definitions is that the one intended by the founder
is the only accurate one.It stands to reason that the intention of the inventor is the only intention that is
right.Any new modern use of religious toleration is a liberal interpretation. The use of
the new liberal interpretation is based on New Age beliefs.Believing that religious tolerance is
anti Biblical is New Age.All through the Bible people practiced religious tolerance,according to
the accurate definition of reliegious tolerance.The mingled with pagans,traded with pagans and even added
being kind to them in their laws.God used pagans. He even called one,Cyrus,His servant.Neither the Isrealites
or Jesus accepted paganism as the way to wroship, but both not only tolerated them, but
accepted them as children of God and felt there was nothing wrong with being around them.
Jesus dined with the Jews that he believed to be wrong in their worship of God.

 

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/409566/roger_williams_founder_of_rhode_island_pg2.html?cat=37
Tolerance does not indicate promoting a different belief.

The majority of Church leaders promote religious tolerance.Most people are set in
their religious beleifs and condemning them accomplish very little.
They will continue in their beliefs,and the intolerant one will have gained nothing
and perhaps lost a friend.Religious tolerance is not anti Biblical.Intolerance is.





Anon: "Religious tolerance is  not  religious indifference.Jesus was not
indifferent toward other beliefs, but He was tolerant of the believers.
It consists of valuing the right of another person to hold beliefs that you know
absolutely, and without a doubt, to be wrong."

 


Paul Copan wrote in "True for You, But not for Me",that Contrary to popular
definitions, true tolerance means ‘putting up with error’ - not ‘being accepting
of all views’…
It is because real differences exist between people that tolerance becomes
necessary and virtuous."

Most of those who are intolerant use the most modern definitions, which have been
changed to reflect the prejudices of Christians.

[quote]Others, particularly conservatives in many religions, describe "religious
tolerance" differently. They define it as accepting all religious faiths as being
equally true. This is one meaning of the phrase "religious pluralism."
Since religions teach different beliefs, this definition of tolerance implies that
absolute truth doesn't exist. Most religious conservatives reject these beliefs,
and regard their own faith as the only absolutely true belief system.
Thus, many conservatives believe that religious tolerance --
using their definition of the term -- is evil.[/quote]

 

[quote]Despite the continued presence of religious fanaticism and bigotry in the word,
the twentieth century has witnessed a significant growth in religious tolerance.
The idea that different religions and spiritual traditions have a valid approach is
more widespread than at any time. To a large extent up until the 19th Century a
defining feature of religion was the idea of the one true religion, and through
its adherence you were either saved or damned. There was little if any ecumenical
tradition and views of other religions were often clouded in myth, superstition or
even contempt.[/quote]



[quopte]Religious tolerance is a growing social movement in America, and it should be.
  We live in a world of religious pluralism.  
There are about about 2 billion Christians, more than 1 billion Muslims,
700+ million Hindus, 350+ million Buddhists, 150 million Atheists,
14 million Jews, etc.  It would seem that religious tolerance is a necessity if we
are going to get along.  We need to be tolerant of those who have different religious
beliefs.  We should not hate and persecute someone because of his or her faith.
[/quote]
Religious tolerance is especially important here in the United States since we have
such
a variety of people and cultures from all over the world.  
If our society is to function well, it needs unity and consistency.  
That is why it is good to have a common language, a common culture, and a
common form of government. But, do we need a common religion?  Of course not.
How is it that Jesus could be so loving and truthful and yet be so religiously
intolerant at the same time?  It is easy.  He, being the God incarnaterightly
pointed to Himself alone as the only way to God, the only one who could reveal
the true nature of God, heaven, salvation, and the divine will. This is not to say,
though, that Christians have an excuse to be intolerant, hateful, or judgmental
towards those of differing faiths.  On the contrary, we are called to live in love
and harmony.
http://www.carm.org/more-stuff/features/religious-tolerance-america

 In reference to the two sides during the civil war Abraham had this to say:

[quote]Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict [slavery] might cease with,
or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph,
and a result less fundamental and astounding.
Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against
the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's
assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces;
but let us judge not that we be not judged.
The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully.
The Almighty has His own purposes.[/quote]

[quote]I always distrust people who know so much about what God wants them to do to their fellows.
Susan B. Anthony [/quote]

[quote]Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those
who are not regarded as members of the herd.

Bertrand Russell[/quote]

[quote]
    Ultimately, America's answer to the intolerant man is diversity,
the very diversity which our heritage of religious freedom has inspired.

Robert F. Kennedy:[/quote]

[quote]Mark Heim,assistant proffesor of Christian theology at Andover Newton
Theological School said this about religious tolerance.
   ... pluralism in a true sense means that we live with each other and accept
   each other though we see clearly that we are not the same. America is a
   pluralistic nation, not because underneath cosmetic appearances we all
   think and feel and act the same, but because we do not. There are real
   differences in our families, our histories, and our convictions about
   ultimate matters.

      True pluralism does not mean coming to terms with my Buddhist neighbor
   by affirming that underneath it all we believe exactly the same thing. If
   that is so, we are not really distinct and plural. Pluralism means living
   with real distinctions, conflicting answers about what is most

Religious tolerance was practiced all through the Bible.




Pray, don’t find fault with the man that limps
Or stumbles along the road.
Unless you have worn the shoes he wears
Or struggled beneath his load.

There may be tacks in his shoes that hurt
Though hidden away from view.
Or the burden he bears placed on your back
Might cause you to stumble too.

Don’t sneer at the man who’s down today
Unless you have felt the blow
That caused his fall or felt the shame
That only the fallen know.

You may be strong but still the blows
That was his if dealt to you
In the selfsame way, at the selfsame time
Might cause you to stagger too.

Don’t be too harsh with the man that sins
Or pelt him with word or stone
Unless you are sure – yea, doubly sure
That you have no sins of your own.

For you know, perhaps, if the tempter’s voice
Should whisper as soft to you
As it did to him when he went astray
It might cause you to falter too.

© Author Unknown