Day 55 – conflicting testimony
It is not intolerant to label someone’s views as false. That act can unfortunately lead to intolerance, but it becomes so only if I engage in some effort to try to keep others from holding and spreading their “errors” with the same freedom with which I would like to hold and spread my “truths.” –WINFRIED CORDUAN
On the first leg of our journey, as we explored the subject of God’s existence, I sought to avoid statements of faith peculiar to Christianity. I was able to do so for three reasons. For one thing, the conclusion I reached in book one was a belief common to all religious persons. Jew, Muslim, Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist would all answer the question posed then with a resounding “yes.” Secondly, my decision to use the universe around us as our common starting point made it less likely for me to alienate those of other faiths. And, thirdly, my decision to refrain from using the Bible to defend my position (5 Reasons, Day 56) served to keep us all on the same page.
As I have guided you up the slope of God’s nature, presenting an all-inclusive message has not been as easy a task. In fact, I have discovered it to be virtually impossible. The reason is simple: it is precisely when we begin to talk about the nature of God that we of different faiths begin to disagree. It is when we speak of what God is like that we cease to be in the same boat. For sure, there is much mutual agreement to be acknowledged concerning God’s nature, especially in regard to His creativity, power, knowledge, and righteousness. All three of the great monotheistic religions believe that God possesses these traits. They also consider Him to be a relating and revealing God, a loving and caring God, a fair and just God. Still, when we venture into the nature of God differences of opinion begin to bubble to the surface, disturbing the tranquil waters on which we have so peacefully sailed. Even if we were to find a body of water inhabited only by those of our particular religion, we still would find the waters somewhat turbulent. We would discover that disagreements about God’s nature are as common intrafaith as they are interfaith.
Such a rift of opinion between Christians and those of different faiths could not be avoided during this second leg (as was a rift between theists and atheists unavoidable during the first). While trying my best to focus on our areas of common ground, it was inevitable that I would in this book introduce beliefs exclusive to my own Christianity. Especially has this been the case over the last few days as we have considered the personal testimony of individuals about God. It was quite natural (and, I think, excusable) for me to include my own personal testimony along with the others. And to exclude from that testimony the focal point of my own faith, in an effort to keep the peace, would have been hypocritical and disingenuous. My deep and abiding belief in Jesus as my Lord and Savior has compelled me to make mention of him, even at the risk of alienating you.
If you argue that my testimony about Jesus, like personal testimonies in general, is merely an opinion, then you are partially right. I am the first to admit that my testimony lies partly in the realm of the subjective. This does not mean, however, that there are no objective reasons for believing in Jesus. Several do exist. But to remain consistent with the tone of the fifth argument, I will now speak only in the subjective sense of my faith in Christ. I will wait until later to undergird my testimony of Jesus with its proper objective foundation.
In the meantime, if you ask me how we are to treat those with whom we disagree, my answer is the same as that given by Winfried Corduan in today’s quote. We should never be intolerant of their beliefs (in the sense he defines it). By the same token, we should never feel obligated to sacrifice or compromise our own beliefs to placate theirs. We should continue, as we practice tolerance in an intolerant world, to cling to our beliefs without shame or equivocation. That is how Jesus acted toward those who differed with him. And that is how all of us should act, regardless of our particular religion or denomination, when we find ourselves floating in rough seas agitated by disagreement. The Golden Rule, embraced by almost every religion as true, should be our anchor and compass in such tempestuous waters. Not one of us caught in a storm would want to be abandoned, captured, or wrecked by foreign ships. We would desire respect and cooperation so that we could weather it together. According to the Golden Rule, what we desire should also be offered. We should treat others as we would want them to treat us.
Daily Quotation
Winfried Corduan, No Doubt About It, (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1997), 33.
No comments:
Post a Comment