Religious Tolerance

[Valke2]

Getting back to the topic of religious tolerance.

I think we can, or should, agree that our expressions of faith, our Love of God, is expressed in many different ways, even within the same religion, let alone among different religions. Just as I would not look over at the Jew praying next to me and criticize him or her for not praying the exact same way as me, I should not look across the street and criticize the muslim or christian for not praying the same way as me.

Instead, I should be happy for and encouraged by anyone I see communicating, struggling, embracing or otherwise engaged with God. In a sense, the Golden Rule demands religious tolerance on the most basic level.

 

[Pug]

I think we can, or should, agree that our expressions of faith, our Love of God, is expressed in many different ways, even within the same religion, let alone among different religions. Just as I would not look over at the Jew praying next to me and criticize him or her for not praying the exact same way as me, I should not look across the street and criticize the muslim or christian for not praying the same way as me.

I agree. One of the ways that people seem intolerant of other prayer methods is that some groups pray with the women separate from the men, say on different sides of the room. I wonder if this type of conflict is a world-view issue, and not a prayer issue. I don’t know. I only know that I’ve heard this type of complaint from people.

 

[Steven_John]

Getting back to the topic of religious tolerance.

I think we can, or should, agree that our expressions of faith, our Love of God, is expressed in many different ways, even within the same religion, let alone among different religions. Just as I would not look over at the Jew praying next to me and criticize him or her for not praying the exact same way as me, I should not look across the street and criticize the muslim or christian for not praying the same way as me.

Instead, I should be happy for and encouraged by anyone I see communicating, struggling, embracing or otherwise engaged with God. In a sense, the Golden Rule demands religious tolerance on the most basic level.

Amen

 

[HashemEchad]

I agree. One of the ways that people seem intolerant of other prayer methods is that some groups pray with the women separate from the men, say on different sides of the room. I wonder if this type of conflict is a world-view issue, and not a prayer issue. I don’t know. I only know that I’ve heard this type of complaint from people.

In traditional Judaism, men and women prayer separately and are seated separately.

As a woman I have never had any problem with this.

 

[planten]

In traditional Judaism, men and women prayer separately and are seated separately.

As a woman I have never had any problem with this.

The Muslims also do the same. There is no harm. I Believe the christian system in the old time was the same, if they had allowed the ladies to pray to God. I do not know what they do now.

 

[HashemEchad]

The Muslims also do the same. There is no harm. I Believe the christian system in the old time was the same, if they had allowed the ladies to pray to God. I do not know what they do now.

Not sure if they still do it this way, but there is a Ukrainian Catholic cathedral in my city where men and women are (or were) seated separately for worship. Some Eastern Orthodox churches still do this, too.

 

[Pug]

The Muslims also do the same. There is no harm. I Believe the christian system in the old time was the same, if they had allowed the ladies to pray to God. I do not know what they do now.

Most Christian groups have the men and the women in the same room, intermixed when praying and worshiping. However, you can still find times when they are separate. I also see no problem with this.

However, as a child, I had thought it was stupid. I had been raised to think so. With experience and age, I learned otherwise. In my life, much of my ability to understand and tolerate has come from experience. But perhaps this is just how my experience went. Does experience ever teach intolerance, I wonder? I guess I am asking, why do people tend to not tolerate?

 

[Lapell]

If one tries to use the old math thing of 1+1=2 ect to prove truth of religion one loses it.

50+50=100 and it contains lots more for maths folk 5 groups of 20 its only half of 200 ect.

For me in religous truth there can be a stack of messages in one.

a two edge sword can slice and dice, is truth that cuts both ways and so forth.

when you all post what you see in scripture and religion i learn stacks.

Thanks be to God for you all being in my life, well my pc at least.

Love yas

Steven John, I was replying to swan and to bobzills. My point was that there exist absolute truths. “2 and 2 are 4” is one example.
I also said there are absolute truths in faith matters. The “2 and 2 are 4” is a simple example. No matter how, 2 and 2 will always make 4.
Absolute truths are not just in the laws of arithmetics, by any means. I never meant to say a thing like that…

 

[bobzills]

No matter how, 2 and 2 will always make 4.

Like I said already, this is not true in some forms of mod arithmetic. For example, in mod three aritmetic, where 10 stands for 1x3 + 0x1, then 2+2 = 11.
And I can give further examples where it is not true. For example, if A is travelling at 2MPH in the NE direction and B is travelling at 2MPH in the N direction, it is not true that the speed of A+B will be 4MPH.
And another example comes from special relativity. If A is on a train which is travelling 2c/10 with reference to the earth and A himself, on that train is travelling an additional 2c/10 with reference to the train, it will not be true that A will be travelling at exactly 4c/10 with reference to the earth.

 

[Lapell]

Like I said already, this is not true in some forms of mod arithmetic. For example, in mod three aritmetic, where 10 stands for 1x3 + 0x1, then 2+2 = 11.

11 here means 4 in our usual way of counting, though, and always is equivalent to our 4, is it not? So actually, if you still say it’s not, you are like someone who shuts all curtains (dark ones) when it’s sunny outside and then declares: “There is no sun!”

 

[Lapell]

One still can say that, even though it would not be true…

 

[bobzills]

11 here means 4 in our usual way of counting, though, and always is equivalent to our 4, is it not? So actually, if you still say it’s not, you are like someone who shuts all curtains (dark ones) when it’s sunny outside and then declares: “There is no sun!”

But what about the example from the special theory of relativity, where in units of c/10, you will not have 2+2=4?

 

[Lapell]

But what about the example from the special theory of relativity, where in units of c/10, you will not have 2+2=4?

What do you mean? Is it an arithmetical theory? Please explain!
…I take it you don’t believe in the existence of absolute truths?

 

[bobzills]

What do you mean? Is it an arithmetical theory? Please explain!
…I take it you don’t believe in the existence of absolute truths?

I beleive in the existence of absolute truth. However, I am pointing out that in the special theory of relativity, that it will not always be true that 2+2=4 if you are adding velocities and using units close to the speed of light, say for example, units of c/3.
Also, it may be true that there is absolute truth in religion. But take for example, the statement of the Cantate Domino:"The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church” (Cantate Domino,” 1441).
If religious truth were as clearcut as mathematical truth such as 2+2 = 4, then why is it that many Catholics today do not take the words of Cantate Domino as literally as they would the mathematical expression of 2+2=4?

 

[planten]

But what about the example from the special theory of relativity, where in units of c/10, you will not have 2+2=4?

Dear bob, the subject (topic) is “Religious Tolerance”. Please bring something from your sacred scriptures, something real to support or oppose religious tolerance. I give the answer from the Quran on this subject:

Verse 2:256,

“There is no compulsion in (any) religion. The right way is clearly distinct from wrong…”

This verse is supporting religious tolerance. There should be no oppression in the matters of faith (any religion). The right way is distinct from wrong way. Every one can discern it. So let every one believe and practice what they believe, as long as they are peaceful.

 

[bobzills]

Dear bob, the subject (topic) is “Religious Tolerance”. Please bring something from your sacred scriptures, something real to support or oppose religious tolerance. I give the answer from the Quran on this subject:

Verse 2:256,

“There is no compulsion in (any) religion. The right way is clearly distinct from wrong…”

This verse is supporting religious tolerance. There should be no oppression in the matters of faith (any religion). The right way is distinct from wrong way. Every one can discern it. So let every one believe and practice what they believe, as long as they are peaceful.

Thank you. This is a nice way of looking at things. It sounds very good and decent as it is written here. You have brought up the question of tolerance and Islam, or at least, tolerance and the Koran. Questions have been raised as to how much tolerance toward Christianity therei s in Saudi Arabia. Can a Moslem freely convert to Christianity or would he be subject to the death penalty for doing so?
wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52057
jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/003323.php
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183879,00.html
speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=6705

 

[planten]

Thank you. This is a nice way of looking at things. It sounds very good and decent as it is written here. You have brought up the question of tolerance and Islam, or at least, tolerance and the Koran. Questions have been raised as to how much tolerance toward Christianity therei s in Saudi Arabia. Can a Moslem freely convert to Christianity or would he be subject to the death penalty for doing so?
wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52057
jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/003323.php
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183879,00.html
speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=6705

Thank you for asking. I have lived in Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Honest reply is that the muslim religious leaders do not allow conversion of Muslims to any other faith. The penalty is death (by stoning, I suppose). That is applicable in most so-called Muslim countries, Indonesia, bangla desh, Pakistan, Egypt etc. That is the general (anti-tolerance) principle.

The Quran is teaching one thing. But they are practicing quite the opposite things. That is due to some sayings of the prophet Muhammad. But every one knows that the sayings cannot over rule the strict teachings of the Quran.

The right principle by Islam is that nobody should be oppressed due to his/her faith only. It is alright to punish some one for stealing or robbery or murder etc. But not to punish any one for his/her religion. I will give some detailed post about that later on to explain the principle of Tolerance, later. Until then, Bye!

 

[Pug]

Verse 2:256,

“There is no compulsion in (any) religion. The right way is clearly distinct from wrong…”

This verse is supporting religious tolerance. There should be no oppression in the matters of faith (any religion). The right way is distinct from wrong way. Every one can discern it. So let every one believe and practice what they believe, as long as they are peaceful.

Can you help me understand why this verse is translated into English the way it is? If it is about religious tolerance, why does it not say “Do not (attempt to) compel anyone in matters of religion”? When I read the words as given in English, “There is no compulsion in religion”, this means to me that it is not possible to compel religion or belief, or that a method of compelling a man in matters of religion does not exist. There is only the truth before a man’s eyes that can be clearly seen.

Myself, I find what I perceive to be true to be compelling, in itself. But this is not a compulsion made by man. God is True, and when we see truth, it makes us want to follow it.

 

[planten]

Can you help me understand why this verse is translated into English the way it is? If it is about religious tolerance, why does it not say “Do not (attempt to) compel anyone in matters of religion”? When I read the words as given in English, “There is no compulsion in religion”, this means to me that it is not possible to compel religion or belief, or that a method of compelling a man in matters of religion does not exist. There is only the truth before a man’s eyes that can be clearly seen.

Myself, I find what I perceive to be true to be compelling, in itself. But this is not a compulsion made by man. God is True, and when we see truth, it makes us want to follow it.

I could not understand your point fully. When we say there is no compulsion then it means there is tolerance. There is freedom about the matters of (every) religion. The translation of the verse is exact, no doubt about that. If it serves the purpose or we are to look for some other verse which will support religious tolerance, that I do not know.

But as I said, I will give more detailed expalaintion about what is the principle of Islam in the matter of politics etc. Also I will give other verses which will prove that:

1. Islam upholds the lookafter (safety) of the places of worship of all faiths.
2. Islam tells that people of any faith (Jews, christians or Hindus or Budhists) as long as they believe in a God and pray to that God (in their own way, of course) and they believe in the hereafter and they are peaceful people (doing good deeds), they will have no fear of the future nor any sorrow for anything of the past.

If it is required to present any of the two above, I am ready to do that soon. Love and Peace for all…

 

[planten]

Can you help me understand why this verse is translated into English the way it is? If it is about religious tolerance, why does it not say “Do not (attempt to) compel anyone in matters of religion”? When I read the words as given in English, “There is no compulsion in religion”, this means to me that it is not possible to compel religion or belief, or that a method of compelling a man in matters of religion does not exist. There is only the truth before a man’s eyes that can be clearly seen.

Myself, I find what I perceive to be true to be compelling, in itself. But this is not a compulsion made by man. God is True, and when we see truth, it makes us want to follow it.

Sorry, I had to read and understand the problem again. The translation of the verse is "There is no compulsion in (the matters of any) religion. The other translation “There is no compulsion in religion” also means the same thing i.e. there is no compulsion in religion.

There is another verse ( 109:6) which says the same thing:

“For you is your religion (way of life) and for me is my religion (way of life).”

That also gives freedom to every one, even the strict opponents, to follow their own religion. i.e their own way of life. The word “Deen” is not religion. For religion the word is Mazhab. Deen means a complete way of life with its own principles and sets of code.