Is God Tolerant? Or does He wants us to be Tolerant?

Question: Is God Tolerant?

First of all I want to say, I am not entirely set on the answer to this so I wanted to explore it more. The Bible references tolerance only 6 times in the KJV translation. However, it is not an instruction set of how to be tolerant, but as an example that explains how tolerant God would be to people who act a certain way at the judgement. 

Luke 10:12 - "I tell you, it will be more tolerable in that day for Sedom than for that city."

Luke 10:14 - "But it will be more tolerable for Tzor and Tzidon in the judgment than for you." 

Matthew 10:15 - "Most assuredly I tell you, It will be more tolerable for the land of Sedom and `Amorah in the day of judgment than for that city."

Matthew 11:22 - "But I tell you, it will be more tolerable for Tzor and Tzidon in the day of judgment than for you."

Matthew 11:24 - "But I tell you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sedom, in the day of judgment, than for you."

Mark 6:11 - "Whoever will not receive you nor hear you, as you depart from there, shake off the dust that is under your feet for a testimony against them. Assuredly, I tell you, it will be more tolerable for Sedom and `Amorah in the day of judgment than for that city!"

Each of these verses represent Jesus telling his disciples, that when He sends them out to these different cities, that those who are there and hear their teachings, yet they do not listen will not be tolerated during the judgement. 

Tolerate defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is 
1. 

    a. to allow to be or to be done without prohibition, hindrance, or contradiction

    b. to put up with

2.

    a. to endure or resist the action of (something, such as a drug or food) without serious side effects or discomfort

With the understanding of these definitions, then we can see that God, will Allow them to be until judgement, at which point He will not be as lenient. He will not hinder them, or prohibit them, or contradict their actions, until judgement. He will endure what they are doing. 

But, He will exact judgement on them for their lack of acceptance, or Belief in who God is and how their actions are contradictory to what He wants from them. 

From this I would say God has Tolerance, but only to a point, which means, His tolerance is of no consequence to Him, but it will have consequences when it comes to His judgement. 

Answer: God is Tolerant for now.

Question: Does God want us to be tolerant?

I have to say absolutely without a doubt He does want us to be tolerant. God is abundantly accepting of everyone, He will not turn any away, if they turn to Him. God accepts everyone, when they turn to Him, Believe in Him, accept Him as Lord and Savior, and through faith believe in His death on the cross as atonement for our sins, and His resurrection. The main elements that prove He wants us to be tolerant are in multiple verses that do not specifically say "be tolerant" but, imply that we as Christians should be tolerant and accepting of all people. 

Matthew 7:1 - "Judge not, that ye be not judged." - I reference this verse because it tells us specifically to not judge others in ways that we ourselves can be judged. If we couple this verse with the previous verses we can see that we, as a people, do not need to worry about judgement, since we all will be judged, and it is something He will take care of. 

Romans 14:4 - "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand." - I reference this as a supporting verse that confirms that God will be the ultimate judge. 

I use these following verse as the directives that Jesus has provided for how we are to tolerate others, no matter their offense. 

Matthew 5:44 - " But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;"

This verse is possibly the most simple to understand and yet the hardest to accomplish. It saysin the simplest of ways, if someone is your enemy, then  love them still.

There are some main definitions that say what an enemy is but without copying again the Merriam-Webster definitions I will just say that it gives us an understanding of how someone would become an enemy, they are potentially antagonistic, dangerous, harmful, a military adversary or are hostile. Each of these could cause someone to become another's enemy. I am sure there are other things and in today's day an age, just being a different political party, or saying certain things can categorize someone into one of these definitions. 

But, to radically treat them differently as Jesus suggests and to "LOVE" them. In the Bible it is not just love but "Agape" love which would be even more radical than, to just tolerate someone, but, given that this is the direction given to us, it means that we should love those who would have differeing opinions of us, because after all isn't an opinion or a simple action of someone that we may not accept a much lower offense than something an actual enemy would do?

Answer: Yes, God wants us to be tolerant. 

The bottom line, God will tolerate sin, because he is indifferent to it, until the day of judgement, then those people who used their free will to do as they please will be held to answer for their actions. God wants us to be tolerant because He is the ultimate judge and for us, we need to be tolerant because it is a good thing and shows that we are not someone else's judge, but we should keep our own lives straight and let God worry about judgement when the time comes. 

Remember being Tolerant, is not the same as acceptance. Tolerance is the act of putting up with something that we do not accept. 

Does God condone immoral actions?

 God's Morality

I am certainly not capable of truly contemplating God's Morality, however many people do and they do it in the form of questions which in many cases are the foundation of their unbelief. Some of the

Questions look like this. 

If God is Good, then why does he allow bad things to Happen?

If God is good why does Evil exist?

If God is so loving then why did he command people to be killed?

If God is Merciful, then  why did he kill everyone on the planet with a flood?

If God is Good why does he condone slavery?

If God is good then why do his laws seem immoral?

These are just a few questions that I have personally heard, some have personally been asked of me and have prompted me to want to attempt to answer these questions. I have said in some of my previous writings that of course I have presuppositions when providing my research, however I attempt to always provide accepted application of exegetical and hermeneutical concepts to my answers and interpretation of scriptures, and Biblical writings. 

I am not going to try to answer each of these Questions individually because most relate to the concept that God allows Evil and his actions and laws support that concept. I take the opposite stance and will provide my scriptural evidence to support my stance. 

During a recent outreach ministry with our church, I ran into an individual who really wanted to speak about things and professed immediately that he didn't believe. I asked him why and his answer was ( I am paraphrasing in quotes.) "I find it hard to believe that God would command someone to cutoff a women's hand just for touching a man's genitals, especially if it was in defense of her husband." Our conversation proceeded and he touched on many subjects, like war, and evolutionary probability and a few other elements and he professed that he was a recovering Alcoholic and that his Girlfriend's name was Iliana (which meant God's Answer), that he was in multiple car accidents, etc... His Girlfriend had told him that God was watching over him and protecting him but he wasn't having any of it. We left him and told him that Saul was an educated individual and still didn't believe but at some point in his life God will show him his truth and he will come to know the Lord. 

This interaction spurred me to write this post. Does God Condone Immoral Actions? I looked up the verse he was referencing and it is Deuteronomy 25:11-12 - "11 If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the genitals, 12 then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall not pity her."  This is one of the laws that are written in the Bible and come in a series of laws that come before and after the verse. This would be one of the things to help determine the context and meaning of this specific verse. 

Context is a helpful way to determine meaning and support interpretation. In context the beginning of the previous law starts around Deuteronomy 25:5 - "“If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband’s brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her." The other verses after this 6-10 relate to the different elements of this law which could be considered factors that assist in furthering defining the base element of the law. 

I want to step outside of interpretation to point out how laws were handled during this timeframe which would included the ancient Hebrews and their interaction with judges and judgement. Some of this reference is from a Tulane Law School writing from May. 2017 which considered "Law in the Ancient World" which indicates a typical law basis concept of "...previous cases and judicial opinions determine how new cases are resolved". The significance of this is that laws were written, perhaps initially without a specific case identified, but written as scenarios, which when reviewed would allow the judicial body to make comparative decisions and judgements based on what the similarities were in the actual offense and the offense as described in the written law. This then would be the basis for judgement and would begin building additional "previous" cases which could then be used to determine future offenses in similar fashion. This type of Law administration was practiced across Mesopotamia, Ancient Rome, Greece and China. 

Now if we go back to the verse and context you can start to see that we have two laws and if they are simplified to say what the law the first in general is about a Man dying with no heir and the wife is to be married to the next brother in the family in order to carry on the family name. The second is that a Woman who is a wife, should not grab another man's genitals in order to defend her husband, since this would potentially damage the carrying on of the family name. In context these two laws relate to the lineage and propagation of the family and the ancestral family name. Now lets look at the verse following these. 

The next law or verse is Deuteronomy 25:13 - "“You shall not have in your bag differing weights, a heavy and a light." This law is an indication of fairness and to have proper, accurate weights and measures. The typical interpretation is that when dealing with transactions things should be done honestly or fairly. Does this relate to the above? It could be considered such, in the thought that someone who is already fighting someone now has another assailant, that is now, however justified it might be to protect her husband, the manner in which it is accomplished is not necessarily fair fighting. The idea then would be this based on context. 

1. There is a fight happening.

2. There is a wife who decides to act on behalf of her husband.

3. There is a potential unfair action by the wife. 

All of these combined seem to make it that there is an issue against a family lineage, and an unfair action in the fight which has two implications. One, the action by the wife could impact the mans potential to bear children and causes an impact to the mans lineage. Two, the action is done in an unfair manner. 

Therefore we now fall into the level of punishment. Is the punishment just? To answer this we need to look at how punishment was handled in the Bible and in general in the Ancient world. Two concepts come to light. 

    One, which is Biblical which is an Eye for an Eye. Exodus 21:23-25 "23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." The Biblical support for like punishment is set in the earliest understanding of law and punishment in the Bible. 

    Two, is Talion, or in Latin "Lex Talionis" which is an early Babylonian concept which is also found in ancient Roman Law. Typically identified by the Latin representation and defined as, criminals should receive as punishment precisely those injuries and damages they had inflicted upon their victims. What this typically would require was, a person who caused injury, the punishment would be imposed upon the offending appendage. Meaning if the Hand caused the injury then the Hand would receive the punishment.  

Given this understanding, the Law is imposing punishment according to the understanding of how laws and punishment were enacted. The Idea then from those who are questioning the Biblical aspect of Laws and Punishment and then implying that they are now imposing a certain morality that comes from God are implying that God's Morals are in question because he is stating that immoral things should not be done. When in actuality, God and the Bible are stating emphatically that what is Morally wrong should be punished, and this one particular law should not be outside of that concept but should also be included to be reviewed in that manner and as such falls into the resulting punishment which would be immoral actions should receive punishment. 

Therefore from a resulting immoral action individuals should be punished appropriately and as was originally stated, there is the concept of "Eye for an Eye". As one can see the concept of this specific Law is very focused, however, when looked at it from the perspective of how Laws, Punishment, aligned with what God has put forth from a Moral perspective it does not indicate immorality but a standardized moral response. God has Moral Standards and those are what the Laws are based upon. 

If you Look at the above Questions with the Idea that God has Moral Standards you can see that it answers many of these. 

If God is so loving then why did he command people to be killed? (God did not command this he commanded adherence to Moral Standards)

If God is Merciful, then  why did he kill everyone on the planet with a flood? (God, punished those that did not adhere to his Moral Standards)

If God is Good why does he condone slavery? (God does not condone Slavery he demands a Moral Standard in how someone who puts themselves into indentured servitude)(This is also another idea that should be fully explored)

If God is good then why do his laws seem immoral? (God's Moral Standards exist and therefore, seemingly may be at odds of modern worldly morals)

There are two Questions that were not answered. 

If God is Good, then why does he allow bad things to Happen?

If God is good why does Evil exist?

These while not specifically addressed in this writing are easily understood within the concepts of Free Will and how man, creates evil through his actions which are not in alignment with God's Moral Standards. Additionally, Bad things happening are not something that God allows to happen, but are part of the aspects of the world and have purpose unto themselves which we may or may not be aware of the purpose. (this also is a topic for further exploration)

Does Free Will Create Evil

 The concept of Free Will is a centerpiece of the freedom that God created man with in order to allow man to willfully worship him. I have read an explanation of Angels about how when God Created them, He created them to specifically worship Him. Their sole purpose was to worship and praise God. The same story seems to imply that while they were created by God, He made a mistake while creating them and by creating them with the sole purpose to worship and praise Him, they were more servants and while their purpose was to serve Him, this also caused the fall and the rebellion against God. 

The problem I have with this story is that I do not believe there is any scriptural basis to it and I cannot remember where I read it but it brings to light one of the things about mankind. Man is also made to worship and praise God but he is made in the image of God and he has the ability to make decisions using his own "free will"

Free will is the philosophical and theological concept that refers to the capacity of rational agents, typically human beings, to make choices and decisions independently and voluntarily, free from external coercion or deterministic forces. Here are some key aspects of free will:

Autonomy: Free will implies the ability to act based on one's own desires, beliefs, and intentions. It allows individuals to make choices that are not solely determined by external factors, such as physical laws, social pressures, or biological instincts.

Conscious Choice: Free will involves conscious decision-making. It means that individuals can deliberate, weigh options, and make choices that reflect their values and preferences.

Moral Responsibility: The concept of free will is closely tied to moral responsibility. If individuals have the capacity to make choices, they can be held morally accountable for their actions. Moral responsibility implies that individuals can be praised for virtuous choices and blamed or punished for wrongful actions.

Alternative Possibilities: Free will suggests that, in a given situation, an individual has genuine alternatives or options available. They can choose to act in different ways, even if external conditions remain constant.

Compatibilism and Incompatibilism: Philosophers have debated whether free will is compatible with determinism (the belief that every event, including human actions, is causally determined by prior events) or whether it is incompatible with determinism. Compatibilists argue that free will can coexist with determinism, while incompatibilists assert that free will and determinism are mutually exclusive.

Limits and Constraints: While free will allows for autonomy and choice, it does not imply absolute freedom from all constraints. Individuals may face limitations imposed by their physical abilities, social circumstances, or cultural norms. These constraints can influence the range of choices available to them.

Debate and Complexity: Free will is a topic of ongoing philosophical debate. Questions about the nature and scope of free will have implications for ethics, morality, and the understanding of human agency. Different philosophical and religious traditions offer varying interpretations of free will.

It's important to note that the concept of free will has been examined from diverse perspectives and has implications for fields such as philosophy, theology, psychology, and neuroscience. The nature and extent of free will continue to be a subject of deep exploration and discussion in these disciplines

Considering the aspects of free will mentioned earlier, it becomes evident that various factors contribute to the concept of evil. Among these descriptions, terms like "one's desires," "moral responsibility," "external conditions," and "autonomy" all emphasize the role of human decision-making in determining actions. Notably, these references often center on human choices without direct reference to God's guidance.

The question then becomes What role does Free Will play in the existence of evil?

From a Christian perspective, the concept of free will plays a significant role in understanding the existence of evil. Here's how free will is typically understood in relation to the existence of evil:

1. Human Choice: Christian theology often emphasizes that God has granted human beings the gift of free will, allowing them to make choices and decisions independently. This gift of free will is seen as a reflection of God's love for humanity, as it enables genuine moral choices and the capacity for love, virtue, and relationship with God.

2. Moral Responsibility: Free will implies moral responsibility. Individuals are accountable for their choices and actions, whether they choose to do good or evil. This moral responsibility aligns with the idea that humans have the capacity to make choices that affect themselves and others.

3. The Fall: Many Christian traditions teach that the existence of evil can be traced back to the Fall of humanity. In the story of Adam and Eve, the first humans exercised their free will to disobey God's command, leading to a fallen and broken world where evil entered. This disobedience is seen as an abuse of free will.

4. Suffering and Redemption: The existence of evil and suffering in the world is viewed as a consequence of human misuse of free will. However, Christian theology also emphasizes the redemptive aspect of God's plan. Through Jesus Christ, Christians believe that God offers the possibility of salvation and the transformation of individuals and the world. Free will plays a role in accepting or rejecting this offer.

5. Spiritual Growth: Some Christian perspectives hold that challenges, trials, and even encounters with evil can lead to spiritual growth and moral development. Adversity can provide opportunities for individuals to choose righteousness, demonstrate love, and grow in faith.

6. God's Sovereignty: While free will allows for human choices, Christian theology also acknowledges God's sovereignty. God remains in control over all things and can ultimately work His purposes, even in the presence of evil. Christians believe that God can bring good out of evil circumstances.

In summary, from a Christian perspective, free will is a foundational concept that helps explain the existence of evil in the world. It emphasizes human choice and moral responsibility, tracing the origin of evil to the misuse of free will. However, it also underscores the potential for redemption, spiritual growth, and the ultimate sovereignty of God in the face of evil.