Religious Tolerance

[bobzills]

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.

this is why it is confusing to a Christian. If a Christian converts to Isalm,there is no penalty. But then there are two tiers in Islam, if I am understanding this correctly.
According to the tier of the Koran, there should be tolerance toward Christianity.
But according to the tier of practical application, if a Muslim converts to Islam then he is subject to the death penalty.
This does not sound to be too tolerant to many people.

 

[Lapell]

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.

I don’t see the first of these problems as something similar to 2+2=4! As for the 2nd problem, what does 2c/10 means? I don’t understand the term. Don’t forget I am not English, but French!

 

[Lapell]

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?

What is THIS having to do with ABSOLUTE truths? You seem to confuse absolute truths with absolute formulae of truths? Anyhow, from my understanding, the CCC made it clearer how the expression “Outside the Church, no salvation” should be understood… It seems to have involved a clarification, just like the older texts from the OT needed clarification, as God’s mercy was being better understood with time, especially after Israel and Judah were deported to Babylon…
Was Cantate Domino a text from the Vatican, by the way? I am not familiar with Vatican texts from before Vatican II

 

[Lapell]

That there were clarifications in the OT as to how to perceive things and truths doesn’t mean that there were no absolute truths revealed in the older texts of the OT, far from it!!!

 

[Pug]

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.

Planten, thank you for trying to understand my question. I found the additional chapter 109 interesting (I read all six verses of it). It seems to request one to say to disbelievers a particular saying. This saying seems to me to be about separation of ways or beliefs. Oh, here are all six verses, for those reading along:

109.001 Say: O disbelievers!

109.002 I worship not that which ye worship;

109.003 Nor worship ye that which I worship.

109.004 And I shall not worship that which ye worship.

109.005 Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

109.006 Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

I realize that I have a Western mind, and this may make it difficult for me to grasp the meanings in the Qur’an. I can see, though, how a person might view that last verse as indicating a live and let live philosophy (a tolerant philosophy).

I wish I could better express my thoughts about verse 2:256. I am sure the fault is mine, for my thoughts are mixed. How can I express what I do not fully understand? Also, I did check the “Ali” translation, which does express it in a way that sounds like a command and not an observation, to my ears. See how he used the word “let”, which sounds more like a command to me than “there is”, which sounds like an observation or comment.

Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from Error; whoever rejects Evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.

 

[bobzills]

What is THIS having to do with ABSOLUTE truths? You seem to confuse absolute truths with absolute formulae of truths? Anyhow, from my understanding, the CCC made it clearer how the expression “Outside the Church, no salvation” should be understood… It seems to have involved a clarification, just like the older texts from the OT needed clarification, as God’s mercy was being better understood with time, especially after Israel and Judah were deported to Babylon…
Was Cantate Domino a text from the Vatican, by the way? I am not familiar with Vatican texts from before Vatican II

Well the absolute truth has changed. For example, before Vatican II, it was the absolute truth that women were to wear headcovering in Church. After Vatican II, the absolute truth is that women are not required to wear hedcovering in Church.

 

[ralphinal]

Well the absolute truth has changed. For example, before Vatican II, it was the absolute truth that women were to wear headcovering in Church. After Vatican II, the absolute truth is that women are not required to wear hedcovering in Church.

Bob,
You know good and well that those head coverings had nothing to do with The Truth. Those were matters of discipline and decorum, not theological dogma.

 

[Lapell]

Well the absolute truth has changed. For example, before Vatican II, it was the absolute truth that women were to wear headcovering in Church. After Vatican II, the absolute truth is that women are not required to wear hedcovering in Church.

Really, bobzills! Again you are confusing things. An ABSOLUTE truth is a truth that will never change no matter what. For instance: God is eternal, God is holy.
Here you are dealing with ways to conduct ourselves. What hasn’t changed is that we have to show respect to our Lord and to our neighbour. How we show it can vary!!
Do you really understand what is meant by an absolute truth, bobzills? From the example you used here I’m afraid you don’t!

 

[bobzills]

Really, bobzills! Again you are confusing things. An ABSOLUTE truth is a truth that will never change no matter what. For instance: God is eternal, God is holy.
Here you are dealing with ways to conduct ourselves. What hasn’t changed is that we have to show respect to our Lord and to our neighbour. How we show it can vary!!
Do you really understand what is meant by an absolute truth, bobzills? From the example you used here I’m afraid you don’t!

Are the words of Almighty God, and His Divine Son, the absolute truth or are they things which are subject to change?

 

[Lapell]

Are the words of Almighty God, and His Divine Son, the absolute truth or are they things which are subject to change?

Jesus Christ is the One Eternal Word of God, and He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. And so the Word of God is truth.
Subject to change? No. However, subject to clarification? Yes! Can you interpret the Word of God just any way you like? No! Can you properly interpret the way the Word of God is interpreted? It depends… If in doing so you are not in accordance with the Sacred Tradition and the Magisterial teaching of the Church, then my answer will have to be: “I don’t think so!!!” If you on the contrary are interpreting it in accordance with the Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church, then… yes!

 

[bobzills]

Jesus Christ is the One Eternal Word of God, and He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. And so the Word of God is truth.
Subject to change? No. However, subject to clarification? Yes! Can you interpret the Word of God just any way you like? No! Can you properly interpret the way the Word of God is interpreted? It depends… If in doing so you are not in accordance with the Sacred Tradition and the Magisterial teaching of the Church, then my answer will have to be: “I don’t think so!!!” If you on the contrary are interpreting it in accordance with the Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church, then… yes!

Let’s look at Matthew 5:39 “But I say unto you, not to resist evil; but whoever shall strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other.” Is this the absolute truth or not?

 

[HashemEchad]

this is why it is confusing to a Christian. If a Christian converts to Isalm,there is no penalty. But then there are two tiers in Islam, if I am understanding this correctly.
According to the tier of the Koran, there should be tolerance toward Christianity.
But according to the tier of practical application, if a Muslim converts to Islam then he is subject to the death penalty.
This does not sound to be too tolerant to many people.

In medieval times, anyone who converted to Catholicism from another religion (whether by choice or by force), came under the wrath of the Holy Office (of the Inquisition) if they relapsed to their former faith (I am thinking of the Jewish conversos and the Muslim Moriscos, esp.)

Catholicism has seen the light and changed from doing that kind of thing. Judaism, in ancient times, also killed idolaters.

Only the militant forms of Islam have not yet ‘seen the light’ in this regard!

 

[elvisman]

In medieval times, anyone who converted to Catholicism from another religion (whether by choice or by force), came under the wrath of the Holy Office (of the Inquisition) if they relapsed to their former faith (I am thinking of the Jewish conversos and the Muslim Moriscos, esp.)

Catholicism has seen the light and changed from doing that kind of thing. Judaism, in ancient times, also killed idolaters.

Only the militant forms of Islam have not yet ‘seen the light’ in this regard!

The sweeping generalities you make sometimes make me laugh - but not always.

"Anyone" who converted came under the wrath of the Holy Office (of the Inquisition)?? You’re sure about that?
**These Inquisitions were sanctioned by the Catholic Church and not the state? **

ALL converts came under this “wrath”?

The burden of proof is on you.

 

[distracted]

I.
But after in prayer i have said to Him why bother me to speak essages I cant do it, they dont change.
It was inspired in me that I was only to deliver the message what people do with it is not my concern, this gives me peace and allows me to have many people in my life.

Been there… but it does get very discouraging preaching a msg that seems to go un-heeded - all the time… but then, a lot of times when i am doing the Lord’s work, i have no way of knowing what the outcome is… (do it anonymously)… and, being human, that is discouraging also…

 

[Lapell]

What exactly is your point, bobzills? You sound more like somebody who just plays with words. Maybe it’s not what you are attempting to do, but then could you clarify your point? I fail to see what you mean, really!

 

[Valke2]

there will never be a shortage of examples of religious intolerance. But this thread should be dealing with the question of whether religious tolerance is a goal worth acheiving and if so, what does it mean and how is it done?

 

[Lapell]

there will never be a shortage of examples of religious intolerance. But this thread should be dealing with the question of whether religious tolerance is a goal worth acheiving and if so, what does it mean and how is it done?

For one thing, it means there are good things in our religion and also in religions which are not ours. That some of the good things may be common to “their” religion and ours, and some others might be unique to each religion, to “theirs” as well as to ours.
Without such premises, interreligious dialogue would be pointless!

 

[bobzills]

What exactly is your point, bobzills? You sound more like somebody who just plays with words. Maybe it’s not what you are attempting to do, but then could you clarify your point? I fail to see what you mean, really!

The point is that although absolute truth may exist somewhere out there, it is not so clear if we have it or not. Take for example, the Bible pasage that I quoted. I don;t see anyone taking these words literally as absolute truth.

 

[bobzills]

In medieval times, anyone who converted to Catholicism from another religion (whether by choice or by force), came under the wrath of the Holy Office (of the Inquisition) if they relapsed to their former faith (I am thinking of the Jewish conversos and the Muslim Moriscos, esp.)

Catholicism has seen the light and changed from doing that kind of thing. Judaism, in ancient times, also killed idolaters.

Only the militant forms of Islam have not yet ‘seen the light’ in this regard!

There was a typo in my statement here, it was supposed to be if a Moslem converts from Islam to Christianity, then he is subject to being stoned.
One comment on your observation. I see a difference between a policy practiced in the past and one being practiced today.

 

[Lapell]

The point is that although absolute truth may exist somewhere out there, it is not so clear if we have it or not. Take for example, the Bible pasage that I quoted. I don;t see anyone taking these words literally as absolute truth.

“if we HAVE the absolute truth or not”… so that’s it, heh?
Excuse me, bobzills, but if you believe God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, doesn’t have the absolute truth and hasn’t revealed the truth to the Apostles, well, what kind of Catholic are you? Is God confused?
So you, a supposedly Catholic, don’t believe what the Catholic Church believes and teaches? (and has taught consistently throughout the centuries, defining some of its teachings more precisely with time and clarifying certain points that were not as complete as it seemed as soon as the clarification revealed itself from the Divine Revelation already there?) You don’t believe Jesus is the Eternal Word of God who took the human nature and became a man? Is it so hard for God to achieve that, He who has created the heaven and the earth and everything and every being there “ex nihilo” (out of nothing)?.. Do you want to tell God how to be God?
What exactly do you have a problem with, bobzills? Sorry to talk to you, a Catholic, in front of non-Catholics like this. But you forced me into this.
When you talk about truth, and absolute truth at that, you had better know what you are talking about!
We are not a syncretic religion, bobzills. No way!