State and Religion

Steve - I agree that there is a need for ongoing dialogue about this - in almost every case when the state has a endorsed a "State religion" problems arise...and even in America, where there is a lot of freedom to choose one's religious practice and to carry it out unimpeded, we still see many trying to use courts and legislative actions to limit or remove one or another group's rights [sometimes even private citizens rights] to practice their own religion peaceably.

I certainly do not have any easy answers: this country was designed to allow tolerance of diverse ideas and views, but our international policies and actions seem to me, at times, to belie that. and internally, many of us are very intolerant of other's worldviews...I hope the Dalai Lama's decision plays out as he hopes...
As for the USA, If Christians would take the lead in promoting religious tolerance it might help...I find it hardest to be that person when it comes to my closest associates--because of my worldview I want to share about Christ and I hope for them to attain everlasting life...but I know that not all people believe this way, and they must have the right to freely make the decisions that affect their lives [without badgering from me!]...
I find it much easier to be accepting when first encountering someone whose views are different than mine...it gets harder when I have known them for awhile...that being said, on the other hand I have been roundly criticized for my own decision to follow Jesus, and I find less and Less tolerance in the USA to do so...what to do? How can America ensure that it continues to allow religious freedom for its own people as it loudly calls out for this to be so in the rest of the world?!

Comments

mtspace said…

I think tolerance in religious practice is a little like hikers ascending the summit of a very large mountain. The mountain may have many faces. In fact this mountain is so large that it is impossible for anyone to truly examine all paths, since the summit can not be reached in this life time. Therefore it is impossible to say of some other path "That path cannot lead to the summit." Instead, we see the path before us and intuit the way it connects with the summit. We must follow our own path because we believe it leads to the summit. Another person must follow his path because he believes it leads to the summit. And we need to trust other people to be able to follow their own paths to the summit.

Who knows, perhaps there are ways to follow Christ even in other religions? Doesn't it depend a bit on whether we believe more in magic words or in who we are trying to be?

March 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

TheGreatDialogue said…

Not sure what the last part means [about "magic words"], but it seems to me that you are requiring everyone to believe that all paths lead to the summit...really, if that were so, there would be no point to believing in a religion...some paths to mountain summits look promising, but in the end leave one stranded, below the top, awaiting death...Cf mt Everest!

March 14, 2011 at 7:10 AM

James said…

St. Augustine pondered this very question. He reasoned that God is the source of all good, so if he found pagans who in the name of, say, Apollo were doing good, they were actually serving God even though they thought they served Apollo. We human beings come into relationship with the Triune God through the God-Man, Jesus Christ, Who as the Second Person of the Trinity has taken our nature into Himself. This is why we come to God only through Jesus Christ. But the real question is, "How consciously do we come to God through Jesus?" Augustine seemed to say that some of his pagan acquaintances were mistaking Jesus for Apollo, so to speak. But God still seemed to be accepting them. Certainly, certainly, God was channeling grace through them and at least to that extent was in relationship with them.

March 14, 2011 at 7:14 PM

TheGreatDialogue said…

Jim...I like the idea of Jesus in the form of man being the way we come to the father...but I cannot say I am so assured that this is the only interpretation of Jesus' statement about this [which is one of the most difficult statements in Christian scripture]; in support of your view I would mention the verses about how people's consciences and actions may commend them to God even though they have not yet embraced the gospel of Christ...However, I suspect that Jesus was speaking of his saving work on the cross--His death and resurrection as the "gate" for us...

March 15, 2011 at 8:30 AM

James said…

Ah, his saving work on the cross. This brings up the question of precisely how the Atonement works. How does Jesus' death and resurrection save us? I confess I don't know. But I'm pretty sure the reality of it is a great deal bigger than we have any idea.

March 16, 2011 at 9:34 PM

TheGreatDialogue said…

Jim - See Romans 5:6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, when we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. 12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13 for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come. 15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.
18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. 20 The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

I know there are other verses in the Bible that speak of Jesus' saving work...This is Paul's take on it.

March 17, 2011 at 8:01 AM

Re: Science and Christianity--Can these both be believed?

David Moyer Posted: I am a Christian Engineer/Scientist and I have no problem with conflicts between the facts of science (as opposed to some hypotheses of science) and the teachings of scripture. I know literally dozens of other engineers and people with doctorates in technical fields including medicine, veterinary medicine, biology, etc. who also see no conflict. I was once a staunch evolutionist and I could easily teach a high school or community college course on evolution. There are some aspects of evolutionary theory/hypotheses with which I have no quarrel. But nearly the entire field is a matter of hypotheses with very little of it proven by the scientific method, because so little of it is falsifiable. It certainly does not deserve to be classified as a theory- that is a hypothesis that has been tests by real scientific methods so often that almost no one can devise another test that might disprove it. Remember, that scientific hypotheses are not proven, but rather

The Great Dialogue

Search This Blog