There is a great cry today against intolerance and bigotry, and a proportionate pushing of tolerance and liberality. Progress in the search after what the world calls truth is said to be hindered by dogmatic opinions or teaching. What man believed in times past is quite unsuited to this more advanced age. We are told that it is presumption for any man to express conviction in a settled opinion upon any religious question or doctrine. Many, indeed, are asking, “What is Truth?” and “Who will show us any good?” but very few wait for an answer.
Toleration, then, is the order of the present day, and men may hold what they please provided they will not interfere with their neighbors’ opinions and limit the suitability of their own opinions to themselves. But it was not always so, neither will it always continue, but it is the cry of the moment.
What, then, is toleration, and why and what are we to tolerate? The very word implies a state of imperfection. If all were of one mind, there would be no toleration needed; if good universally prevailed, there would be nothing to tolerate.
Toleration in the Right Sense
In a sense and in degree toleration is right, for God himself tolerates—exhibits patience and long-suffering. His own Word and every man’s experience teaches this. But with God, toleration has a limit, and it must be so, for though in grace for a time He may “endure with much long-suffering,” He could not always do so without a denial of His character. A Being who eternally tolerated evil would not be good, holy or righteous, and a state in which toleration was eternally called for would not be a perfect one. Toleration, even on God’s part, must therefore be limited, both in its extent and its duration.
But there is another side to the question. Though in patience and grace a being who is perfectly good may, for a time and for an object, tolerate evil, toleration exercised by beings in themselves not good but evil assumes another and very different aspect. If a being who is perfectly good tolerates evil, it must be for a good end, or he would not be good, but if an imperfect being exercises toleration, we must suspect both the motive and the end. To speak of evil tolerating evil sounds paradoxical, yet as a matter of fact we meet it constantly in the world, and it is the spirit of that which people call “agreeing to differ.”
Toleration, then, on the part of fallible or imperfect beings springs from several motives: first, from such self-condemnation as to render the judgment of others in like doubtful circumstances impossible; second, from the inability to enforce one’s own views and opinions, owing to a balance of power in those opposed to them; or third, from the lack of certainty and conviction of the truth of what they do hold.
Now, while the first is true of man in his natural state (Rom. 1:31; 2:131Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: (Romans 1:31)
1Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. (Romans 2:1)) and the second undoubtedly underlies all forms of doctrinal error, whether infidel or superstitious, the third, we believe, is the motive of much that is called religious toleration. Men are uncertain in their opinions; they have no solid foundation for their belief.
The power of some who have claimed to be unerring in whatever they believe is gradually waning. Their assumptions no longer raise fear in men’s hearts, but rather a smile on their lips. Another spirit and a superior power has been slowly developing. Man’s reason is asserting its claim, and the charity and toleration of our day is mainly the fruit of the coexistence. We say mainly, for we do not deny but say that there is also a measure of true Christian forbearance also in exercise, and often it is in combination with less pure motives. The world will yet experience again the intolerance of an overbearing power of evil. As the influence of superstition still further wanes and the present necessity of mutual toleration ceases (for toleration will always lessen as the balance of power tends more and more in one direction, and will cease when such power can assert itself), so will the tyranny and selfishness of man uncontrolled by religion, whether false or true, be developed in the Antichrist—the man of sin, the lawless, the wicked one, spoken of in the Scriptures (Dan. 8:23; 11:3623And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. (Daniel 8:23)
36And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. (Daniel 11:36); 2 Thess. 2; Rev. 13).
Hitherto we have been speaking of the character and spirit of the toleration now common in the world, but we also desire to say a few words for the help of those who, desiring to know and do the will of God, are yet in difficulty as to what to allow and what to refuse.
On this subject, as on every other in which the professing people of God are concerned, we can go nowhere for instruction but to God and to His Word. His ways must be our example, His Word our precept. All will admit that if there be any revelation of God, there must also exist in connection with it a standard of right and of truth, if it only be apprehended. But, while this is admitted in a general way, there is the greatest hesitation on the part of men either to grasp this standard for themselves or to admit that others may have attained to it. Christendom acknowledges Christianity as God’s revelation, yet for the most part argues as if the arrival at a divine certainty of God’s truth were impossible—as if, in fact, God, who gave revelation, had not intended or was unable to bring it home to the hearts and understandings of those for whom it has been made. Hence dogmatism is deprecated, and strong convictions generally demurred to.
Confidence
Before we can venture to be tolerant or intolerant, the first point to be settled is the confidence and ground of the individual soul. Unless we know and are persuaded that we have the truth, it is certainly impossible for us with any decency or power to exhibit intolerance of the opinions of others. If, for instance, one knows not for himself salvation as a possession, one cannot honestly be intolerant of the views held by others on the subject. One may not agree with them, but one must tolerate them.
On the other hand, the soul that knows by divine faith that it has salvation from God solely on the ground of the death and resurrection of Christ, this soul has a positive confidence and a standard on this point, and it renders him necessarily intolerant of every opinion which may be advanced against it. “I know whom I have believed” is the language of such. There are certain things in which theory will not stand against possession, and this is one. Opinions and theories about salvation may be as clear as the day, but the one that has the thing itself alone can judge their value.
Where Toleration Is Wrong
Toleration of sin and of evil doctrine are denounced by God, such as 1 Corinthians 5; 1 Timothy 5:2222Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure. (1 Timothy 5:22); 3 John; and Revelation 2:14-16; 3:15-1614But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. 15So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 16Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. (Revelation 2:14‑16)
15I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Revelation 3:15‑16). The warnings of Christ to the churches are solemn words in the present day, when men tolerate every form of evil under the common name of Christianity and deprecate the judgment of teachings that are most dishonoring to Christ and His work. How do the words of Malachi 2:1717Ye have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment? (Malachi 2:17) apply to such: “Ye have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied Him? When ye say, Everyone that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and He delighteth in them.”
When the heart and mind are persuaded and pervaded by the truth of God, we do not speak of “my opinions,” and we do not, and ought not, to set up our opinions against those of others. It is not that “I think one thing and you another, and we shall never agree,” but it is that I believe God, that I have submitted to His Word, I have accepted and adopted His thoughts, He has answered every question of my heart, and He alone can answer truly any question of any heart. What may be advanced to the contrary is not against the believer’s opinions merely, but against the Word of God in whom he has believed, and thus false doctrine or opinions contrary to such an one’s faith cannot be tolerated or admitted as having any weight or claim whatever. In dealing with them, grace and wisdom are, however, needed, and the believer has to judge, and has the ability also to judge (1 Cor. 2:11-1511For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. (1 Corinthians 2:11‑15)) the spirit in which they may be advanced. He will make a difference between the teacher of evil doctrine and those taught and deceived thereby. While after admonition he will reject the former and tolerate neither the teacher nor the teaching, he will have compassion on the latter—the one who is ignorant and deceived, and while refusing and correcting the error, will in no wise reject the person. The believer will “have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way”; he will lift up the hands that hang down and the feeble knees, and make straight paths for the feet, lest that which is lame be turned out of the way, but let it rather be healed. In meekness also he will endeavor to instruct those that oppose themselves. Here, however, there is danger of failure. Often we lack patience with those whose hearts are truly upright, but who are unskillful in the word of righteousness, or have been deceived by false teaching. Or, again, in tolerating the person who is ignorant we go too far, and tolerate, or appear to tolerate, his opinions and ways, and thus are unfaithful to the person, and to God and His Word. “Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity,” and if the believer sees one in ignorance, even linked with that which in any degree is contrary to the mind and truth of Christ, he must not touch the evil which he knows to be evil out of any consideration of love for the other. For instance, one dear to us may be linked with a false system of religious doctrine, which we know to be contrary to God. Are we to say that he believes it and therefore we must acknowledge his right to practice it and aid him in doing so? Surely not! We must no more acknowledge for another the right to believe and practice error than for ourselves.
Grace and Truth
In a sense there is nothing so intolerant as truth, yet the one who has truth knows that both “grace and truth came by Jesus Christ,” and he does not therefore separate what God has thus joined together in the revelation of Himself. On the other hand, error knows not grace, and cannot show it. When unchecked by a conflicting power, error propagates itself by force, fraud, and cruelty. To be persuaded in our own souls that so far as we have attained (for we only know in part; 1 Cor. 13:99For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. (1 Corinthians 13:9); Phil. 3:12-1312Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. 13Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, (Philippians 3:12‑13)), we hold the truth as God Himself, who enables us, while unsparing towards error, we seek to manifest the toleration and long-suffering of God towards those who are deceived thereby.
With regard to toleration of the religious opinions of others, which is so strongly advocated today, we would observe that nothing is more resented by many professing Christians than to have their profession judged. There is in Scripture a distinct recognition of a “without” and a “within.” All who call themselves Christians take the inside place. “Do not ye judge them that are within?” Every professing Christian is, therefore, open to judgment, and all that such can require is that they may be judged by the Word of God, and not by the measure of another’s, or even of their own, conscience. If we can bear that test, we can say with the Apostle that with us it is a very small thing to be judged of man’s judgment.
Finally, we need to examine our own position and practice as to toleration and ascertain whether in our own hearts we are persuaded and satisfied with God’s revelation (we do not say with man’s interpretation of it, but with the revelation itself)—Christ, the Son of the living God. Is not He the One who has the words of eternal life, God manifest in flesh, crucified in weakness, declared to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection of the dead, and now by the right hand of God exalted? Is He so the ground of our peace and confidence? Has the Word which reveals Him so laid hold of our souls that we can say, “Let God be true, though (if need be) every man a liar?” Do we believe God rather than man, and know and recognize the immeasurable claim which He has, not only on our love, but on our obedience and life?
H. B., Present Testimony (adapted)