Tolerance is a dirty word.

Don't get me wrong. I wish we could all, to reference the philosopher Rodney King, "get along". I don't really hate anyone on a person to person level, though I can say I hate groups of people, say, freeway drivers, mall crowds, and most of the time, teenagers. I hate people who talk too loud on cell phones in public, and people who talk on cell phones and drive. I hate people who jay walk. And I REALLY REALLY hate with a passion, people who refuse to get out of line to scratch lottery tickets. (I know I should love EVERYONE, but that's another post) So, the fact that I tolerate these people should tip you off that tolerance is not and act of love, or really even an act of "like".

I'm sorry liberals the world over, LOVE is corrective, and instructive. Love forces you to refuse to tolerate your son's drug abuse. Love will not let you tolerate your brother abusing his wife. Love will not let you tolerate theft, or vandalism. Love will not let you tolerate laziness or ignorance. And when you do tolerate these things, it is an act of petty selfishness. Leave me alone, and go do what you want. I've felt that before. I've SAID that before. And it's not an attitude born of love.
In science, tolerance is how much something is allowed to deviate from the standard or norm. And it's a good thing to keep tolerances pretty tight. Interesting then that people who allegedly claim this same world view are the biggest proponents of keeping social tolerance as loose as possible.

So, liberally, who do I not tolerate? I guess they would say I do not tolerate other religions. And I guess they'd be technically right, but practically wrong. I can co-exist with people who do not believe as I do, even like and love them. But to tolerate them would be to abandon them to their fate, deny the truth of Christ, and cease to care whether they lived or died spiritually, and possibly even physically. Do I tolerate people? All the time. But it's to my shame and it's certainly no compliment. And I am sure I will have to give an account for it, and the thought makes me tremble.

So the liberal will say, "but they don't believe in Christ." Well, I do. I believe it is the truth, and I believe it is a truth with grave consequences. So what am I to do? Leave them be? That is NOT LOVE. True, Jihads and Fatwas are not love either, but vigorous debate and apologetics is absolutely in order. The Crusades, The Inquisition? Pure evil. But the evil of men does not taint the Love of God or the Redemption of Christ. I have enough physical and spiritual conviction that I MUST preach Christ crucified for the sins of Man and raised again to redeem him, or I am a liar and a villain! And to "let them be" tempting as it is, surrendering to the temptation as I often have, is NOT in any way an act of love, and is in fact an evil unto it's self.

Do we preach Christ with the sword and the stick? May it never be so!! There is no greater corruption of the truth than to suggest we make belief compulsory. But to not raise an objection to the evil that men do? It's not right, and I hope I never tolerate it.
------

And that's enough for now.

Brian Norwood

Platypi Online: The Platypus Portal