WHERE IS THE TOLERANCE?

I find myself growing increasingly intolerant of the intolerance I see among the proponents of tolerance. Allow me to share here something written by Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, which aptly expresses what I have been thinking and feeling:

Tolerance has become the new watchword of our times. It is heralded as perhaps the highest virtue in Western culture that glues people of differing backgrounds and ideologies together for the sake of promoting cultural unity. And why shouldn't it be? It sounds good, right? In fact, it sounds so good that anyone who would dare talk negatively about this sacred cow of civility would almost be considered immoral. But that's just the point. The media and the governmental bureaucrats tell us to be tolerant of everything and anything except the Gospel of salvation, all in the name of political correctness. It seems almost ironic that Christians are not being tolerated by such a "tolerant" society.

So I admit, I get frustrated and a bit defensive when I encounter intolerance toward the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. In Western societies these days, just about any viewpoint, religion, or behavior is exempt from criticism in the name of "tolerance". It is "politically incorrect" to give anything but reverent respect to the most off-the-wall ideas that come from individuals. All of this is done in the name of "tolerance".

But such tolerance is not universal. One of the few loopholes in the "law of tolerance" involves followers of the Name of Jesus Christ. If you are a born-again Christian, don't expect the same tolerance that others enjoy -- the playing field is not level as it relates to other beliefs. For decades now, Christians have been on the run over issues like prayer in public forums and Nativity scenes erected on public property.

To illustrate: Since the September 11 attacks, there has been heightened interest in America concerning Islam. For instance, one California school district went so far as to require seventh grade students to learn the tenets of Islam, study important persons in the history of the religion, learn verses from the Koran, pray "in the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful," and chant "Praise to Allah, Lord of Creation."

Can you imagine the lawsuits that would raise their ugly heads if a teacher commanded students to memorize Bible verses, recite the Lord's Prayer, or pray in the Name of Jesus? Any teacher that would allow this would be fired, and the school district sued!

Christians are increasingly not tolerated because they are viewed as intolerant! In the past, "tolerance" in matters of faith meant respectful acknowledgment of different ideas. It did not mean that all such ideas were granted equal validity as truth. It makes me wonder why other religions are able to promote their theology in public forums. Even our government seems to bend over backward to give them a hearing. But these days if you mention the Name of Jesus or seek to discuss Christian ideas publicly, you risk being labeled by the media-created term "the religious right" and are considered a dangerous threat to the doctrine of the separation of church and state.

An FBI analysis show that Thomas Jefferson's views on church and state weren't what we've heard -- far from it. When Jefferson penned his now famous phrase, "a wall of separation between Church and State", in a letter dated January 1, 1802, to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, did he expect it to be memorable? Maybe. A 1998 FBI laboratory analysis of the letter showed that Jefferson labored over that portion of the letter, perhaps fussing over its political impact. But did our third president expect his words to effectively drive religion out of the public square? No. Jefferson's initial draft reveals his understanding that the federal government simply lacked jurisdiction over religion. So who gave us the wall of separation that renders prayers at graduations and in public parks unconstitutional? The author of that wall was not Jefferson, but U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, appointed by Franklin Roosevelt in 1937 and who served until his death in 1971. In a number of rulings he helped write, Black used Jefferson's language, but not Jefferson's meaning. Black's separationist leanings became more aggressive over time, resulting in rulings that ordered the removal of religious instruction, prayer and Bible reading from public schools and bans on graduation prayers and the posting of the Ten Commandments.

One of Jefferson's greatest achievements was the passage of the Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty, which was passed in 1786 after a long and heated debate in the legislature. This piece of legislation provided the basis for the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom as found in the First Amendment of the Constitution...Jefferson's wish had been turned into law: "An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom...that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintaiin, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."

The painful irony is that it was our Christian roots in America that created an environment supportive of free thought and behavior that has resulted in tolerance, as it is now understood. Regardless of what the media movers and shakers think about Christians, the truth remains that their very freedom to express such opinions is a result of this nation's Christian heritage. Our democratic system did not spring from Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, or Moslem traditions. The Bible -- not the Koran, Vedas, Tripitika, or other so-called holy books -- is the source of our nation's philosophy on the value of mankind and how they should treat one another and be governed. Even today, men and women are laying down their lives to preserve our Bible-based freedom.

America is infatuated with this false understanding of tolerance. To be truly tolerant is not to give every idea equal standing or to compromise the truth in the interest of keeping the peace and making everyone happy. Being tolerant does mean accepting the fact that every person is created in the image of Almighty God and that we each have a soul that will live for eternity. Jesus Christ paid the price for our eternal salvation through the shedding of His blood on Calvary's cross for all men -- equally.

As American citizens, Christians have the same constitutional rights as everyone else. I am offended when others display intolerance when I take my stand for Jesus Christ. Such intolerance should not totally surprise me either. The Lord Jesus Christ warns that His followers cannot avoid being hated for His "name's sake".

The Name of Jesus Christ is a lightning rod because Jesus Christ represents the division of life between good and evil, God and Satan, light and darkness, righteousness and sin, heaven and hell. The Name of Jesus shouts out a choice: "Whom will you serve, give your life to, depend upon?" Rebellious, self-willed people want to retain the right to decide for themselves which way they will take. Jesus denies this option. Speaking on His behalf, the Apostle Peter said, "For there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

Jesus is gentle, but He is not weak. He loves the sinner but is absolutely intolerant of sin. He is not a negotiator. He is Lord. It is this bristling truth that invites intolerance toward Christians. Jesus did not say, "Do your own thing; all roads lead to God." That would have made Jesus "politically correct", but Jesus is not politically correct. He is Lord.