I suppose that not everyone has tolerance for the beliefs of others.
I'm tolerating the hell out of it. But, when you drag your beliefs into the public square, other people get to make fun of them. Especially when ur doin it wrong.
Well, no, only those sects of Christianity which believe in this form of salvation/damnation, which certainly do not encompass the entire of Christian belief (although intellectual honesty forces me to admit that those believers make up the majority of Christians).
Ahh, I was taking you to mean salvation in the sense of human salvation from eternal damnation, as opposed to the salvation of mankind from the Old Testament God, who is a real asshole.
In the sense of human salvation, there's a number of Christian churches that are fairly open to the idea that God is complex and may include many beliefs which don't totally match up on the details, and that salvation is not achieved by picking the right one on the wheel-o-faith.
In the sense of Christ absolving the sins of man and what have you, the argument of the metaphor comes up frequently... Jesus was not a person who actually existed, he is this example of the theoretical concept of the son of God, he is an embodiment of the merciful side of God.
As it comes to more abstract Christian sects, such as the Quakers, The concept of the Biblical salvation is almost meaningless. It is our contemporary understanding of God, or the compassion of the mythical figure of Jesus Christ, which defines the belief-- not a two thousand year old book.
Well, I am compelled to bring the issue up as I am a Quaker, and the vast majority of Quakers consider themselves to be Christians-- and would cite their main holy book as the Bible, at that. Mind, most of them can actually quote numerous Bible passages on the spot, as well, and that ability in itself makes them a fair bit different than your average Christian.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 02:58 pm (UTC)I'm tolerating the hell out of it. But, when you drag your beliefs into the public square, other people get to make fun of them. Especially when ur doin it wrong.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 05:37 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 05:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 05:44 pm (UTC)That was pretty much the end of it.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:20 pm (UTC)majority of Christians).
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:35 pm (UTC)In the sense of human salvation, there's a number of Christian churches that are fairly open to the idea that God is complex and may include many beliefs which don't totally match up on the details, and that salvation is not achieved by picking the right one on the wheel-o-faith.
In the sense of Christ absolving the sins of man and what have you, the argument of the metaphor comes up frequently... Jesus was not a person who actually existed, he is this example of the theoretical concept of the son of God, he is an embodiment of the merciful side of God.
As it comes to more abstract Christian sects, such as the Quakers, The concept of the Biblical salvation is almost meaningless. It is our contemporary understanding of God, or the compassion of the mythical figure of Jesus Christ, which defines the belief-- not a two thousand year old book.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-28 06:38 pm (UTC)