What does it mean to be tolerant?
The Financial Times had a wonderful review of a new show of ancient Persian treasures to be displayed at the British Museum in the coming months. (Link here, requires subscription.) It sounds grand and I wish I was there to see it. But the review (in last weekend's edition) is troubling in one important regard, its view of "tolerance."
Headlined "Enlightened Empire," the review is a song of praise to the Persian Empire. Here's a typical quote
Sounds grand, although the review takes an uncritical look at modern Iran, which is not quite as tolerant as the ancient Persians (that's not mentioned much). It isn't the only virtue, however, and defining tolerance as not claiming the truth is incompatible with Christianity.
Is tolerance measured by a religion's willingness to acknowledge other, perhaps logically incompatible ones as worthy of kingly worship (even if only "lip service")? This wasn't some precursor of the 1st Amendment's Establishment Clause, after all. The practice suggests, at least, that the recognition of "local gods" was possible because their status was not incompatible with the Persian gods. By this standard, however, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (and all other monotheistic religions) are "intolerant" since they do not recognize any other gods.
And what does the review's praise for Persian religion tell us is desirable in a religion? Tolerance, seemingly to the point of making no strong claims to the truth.
Tolerance is a virtue - no one should be forcing anyone else to worship in any particular manner. But tolerance shouldn't mean not proclaiming the truth.
Headlined "Enlightened Empire," the review is a song of praise to the Persian Empire. Here's a typical quote
Evidence shows the Persian empire to have been a tolerant one. "Archives describe the worship of other gods and when kings travelled abroad they paid lip service to local gods. It was clear that local religions were allowed to flourish." [quoting the curator, John Curtis.]
Sounds grand, although the review takes an uncritical look at modern Iran, which is not quite as tolerant as the ancient Persians (that's not mentioned much). It isn't the only virtue, however, and defining tolerance as not claiming the truth is incompatible with Christianity.
Is tolerance measured by a religion's willingness to acknowledge other, perhaps logically incompatible ones as worthy of kingly worship (even if only "lip service")? This wasn't some precursor of the 1st Amendment's Establishment Clause, after all. The practice suggests, at least, that the recognition of "local gods" was possible because their status was not incompatible with the Persian gods. By this standard, however, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (and all other monotheistic religions) are "intolerant" since they do not recognize any other gods.
And what does the review's praise for Persian religion tell us is desirable in a religion? Tolerance, seemingly to the point of making no strong claims to the truth.
Tolerance is a virtue - no one should be forcing anyone else to worship in any particular manner. But tolerance shouldn't mean not proclaiming the truth.
Posted by Andy Morriss on
Thursday September 8, 2005 at 12:52am
Isaac
I certainly agree that we can know very little as humans, but we can know some things - I know, for example, that God exists and loves me, that he sent his Son to die for me, and so on. That makes it impossible for me to not believe that religions that deny Christ's divinity are wrong. That doesn't mean I should be intolerant of those who believe otherwise, but I think they are wrong - just as I think those who believe price controls are an effective response to shortages of gasoline are wrong.
I can't prove either to a skeptic (the skeptic will always have a reason why any historical example of price controls was imperfectly implemented), but that doesn't make either less true.
That said, I take your point that for those who "embrace uncertainty as part of our faith" things are different. Perhaps you could elaborate a bit more on that to help me understand how uncertainty forms a part of faith?
- Josh
So what to do? When you realize that you cannot know, you must choose what to believe. If you keep the concept of uncertainty in the forefront of your thoughts, your choices (which occur all the time) are shown in sharp relief. Incomplete knowledge forces us to choose between trust or unbelief. Uncertainty is the mother of free will and the choices made are what determines if we are saved or not. If we had perfect knowledge, there would be no choice and our existance would not resemble what it does now.
Isaac