I'd like to share with you a paragraph out of the Bible Expository Commentary. These commentaries were written by several eminent scholars all preachers spanning the years of 1887 to 1895.
Many people today attempt to unite Christians in a way that is not biblical. For example, they will say: "We are not interested in doctrines, as much as we are love. Now, let's forget our doctrines and just love one another!"
But Paul did not discuss spiritual unity in the first three chapters; (speaking about the book of Ephesians) he waited until he had laid the doctrinal foundation.
"While not all Christians agree on matters of Christian doctrine, they should agree on the foundation truths of the faith. Unity built on anything other than Bible truth is standing on a very shaky foundation. Unity is not uniformity. Unity comes from within and is a spiritual grace, while uniformity is the result from pressure without."
Liberal Christianity does not accept the Scriptures as final and complete revelation. Instead they believe that Christian doctrine continues to evolve. Therefore, we might break with historic Christianity and still be led by the Spirit. In this mind-set we could contradict the Word of God by claiming a new word from God. But we run the risk of redefining the faith until we have lost it.
We must oppose the attitude that correct doctrine is not important. We must not embrace every wind of doctrine. We are to contend for the faith. But let us display the spirit of Christ as we defend His teachings.
Today the same lie is circulating in Christian circles. Some would convince us it's better to remain silent for the sake of unity. The world has introduce tolerance as an inclusive view to promote diversity and harmony. Not long ago, the word tolerance meant putting up with someone or something not especially liked. However, today tolerance has been redefined to mean "all values, all beliefs, all lifestyles, all truth claims are equal." Denying this makes a person "intolerant," and thus worthy of contempt.
In the beginning of the United States, our system of law and our standards of morality were lifted in principle—and sometimes almost verbatim—from the absolutes of the Bible. After the Civil War, the basis of our laws gradually switched from the absolutes of the Bible to human relativism, which claims there are no absolutes. It asserts that every system's values, indeed everyone's values, are as good as the next.
This philosophy began as mere advice to be tolerant, but as it became more popular its adherents urged people to be pragmatic, that is, to adapt, to make compromises in values, to do whatever needs to be done regardless of ones conflict with others' values.
Concurrently, situation-ethics systems arose so that even churches eventually looked upon the Ten Commandments as mere suggestions.
God was gradually erased from our public schools. Relativism has crept into every area of life so that it now dominates our moral and ethical thinking in education, religion, childrearing, marital relations, economics, agriculture, health care, social programs, etc.
Now what happens when your child is indoctrinated with this devilish belief? Tolerance by today's standards is evil and the name of the devil spirit whose assignment is to confuse, deceive and compromise the people of the world. This spirit has also clandestinely entered the professing Christian church. The church for the most part neither understands nor believes that we wrestle against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Thus this spirit family has made great inroads into the gospel of Jesus Christ and presently is eroding God's holy word from the pulpit of many churches.
NAS 2 Corinthians 4:2 but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
The Greek word rendered adulterating, means to corrupt. Here it means to corrupt divine truth by mingling it with false notions. Other translations of the Bible render it deceit, falsifying, tampering, distort, and corrupt. It's only used once in the NT. In secular history this word was used to adulterate wine and gold.
The new definition of "tolerance" makes the Christian claims to exclusiveness "intolerant", which supposedly justifies much of the anti-Christianity in the media and the education system.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
According to the world's standards of tolerance these scriptures are hostile, argumentative, and unwelcome. And yet the "intolerant" God of the universe states in the gospel of John…
NIB John 17:2 2For you granted him (Jesus) authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. 3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
There is only one true God and there is only one way to him and that is through his only begotten son Jesus Christ.
Now if the world teaches that tolerance means "all values, all beliefs, all lifestyles, all truth claims are equal," you cannot witness for the true gospel of Jesus Christ and subscribe to the doctrine of tolerance.
The hypocrisy of the new tolerance was shown recently at two universities.
At Texas Tech University (Lubbock), Michael Dini, professor of biology, said he would not recommend any students for medical school if they did not believe in evolution. Dini's university rushed to defend him on the grounds of "academic freedom".
Contrast that with what happened at Sydney University in Australia. A number of top academics signed the following statement in a full-page student newspaper advertisement:
"On any criteria, Jesus Christ is one of the great figures of history. More than that, his claims to be the Son of God, who has made God known and taken away the sins of the world, bear up under the closest scrutiny. This is our conviction, and we urge every student to thoroughly investigate this unique figure, Jesus".
This evoked hysteria about religious intolerance and misuse of academic freedom. Some anti-Christian students even raised paranoid fears about discrimination. Yet the above statement said nothing of the kind, unlike Dini's overt intolerance and discrimination against biblical Christians which was happily tolerated.
This argument is glaringly illogical and self-refuting. That is, if these "tolerance" advocates reject Christianity, then they are not treating this belief as "equal". So, in practice, to paraphrase George Orwell in Animal Farm, all beliefs are equal, but some beliefs are more equal than others.
The result is extreme intolerance towards Christianity from people who talk so much about tolerating all views. "In short, they are intolerant of intolerance, so logically they should be intolerant of themselves!" (Quoted from Josh McDowell on tolerance)
If you teach your children this tolerance you are teaching your children the devils doctrine and that's down right evil.