I received a statement on “Diversity Education” the other day from the principal of my daughter’s middle school. It said, “Educators have an obligation to combat intolerant attitudes among students." The program contains "prejudice reduction strategies" and is designed to "promote the understanding of racial, cultural, religious, gender, physical, and personal diversity through activities that foster fairness, build empathy, and encourage the appreciation of both differences and similarities among people." Tolerance lessons will be "infused into existing curriculum." In a "pluralistic society," the principal concluded, the goal is "to help students gain greater awareness, appreciation and respect for the cultures and beliefs of those from different backgrounds."

As I read the principal’s message, red flags went up. It’s not that I am opposed to multicultural "understanding" (I Cor. 9:20-22). There is no question that awareness of and sensitivity toward differences is a noble aspiration. We do live in an increasingly diverse society. At the recent Florida College Lectures, Curtis Pope quipped, "I do not remember an Abdullah, Ali, or Saroja on any of the Little League teams I was on, but my children have had those names cheered at their games" (Jenkins, ed. A Place to Stand: Florida College Annual Lectures 1999, p. 120). In many respects, God is sending the people of the world to our doorsteps, which adds vigor to our society and gives Christians new opportunities to preach the gospel.

But this is precisely what the new preachers of tolerance do not want us to do. Recognition of other "beliefs" (religions) and "personal" orientations (e.g. homosexuality) is one thing. Acceptance is another thing entirely. In the new climate, "America is sick of intolerant people, and it’s not going to tolerate them anymore" (Daniel Taylor, "Are You Tolerant? Should You Be?" Christianity Today, 1-11-99, p. 43). Colly Caldwell writes,

"We have fought Catholicism, denominationalism, and institutionalism. In the 1960s when I came to Florida College as a student, the test of soundness in my parents’ minds was how the administration and faculty stood on the work and organization of the church. We need that conviction every bit as much today as then. But I dare say those issues do not threaten your children now as much as the philosophies of their peers regarding social mores and attitudes toward the Truth. Your children face unbelievable pressures. These new challenges attack their very way of thinking." (Jenkins, p. 11)

It is no longer fashionable to argue that truth is absolute (John 17:17), that God is "One" (Deut. 6:4), and that in religion there is but "one Lord" and "one faith" (Eph. 4:5). In many respects, the new multiculturalism is a throwback to the days of the first century church: "For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him" (I Cor. 8:5-6).

How should we respond to those who condemn us of intolerance because of our belief in the Bible? Here are a few points to keep in mind:

1. No one tolerates everything. If you want to know whether a liberal diversity advocate is really tolerant, ask him what he thinks of social and religious conservatives. You might get a very intolerant answer! Their agenda, and their list of intolerable "sins" may be different, but even the staunchest situationists condemn racists and murderers of homosexuals. The question is not whether everything should be tolerated, but where the line is drawn, and how one determines that line.

2. The tolerance gospel is self-contradictory. Undergirding the open acceptance of "alternative lifestyles" and contradictory religious claims is the belief that truth is relative or unattainable. This affirmation, however, is illogical. Postmodernists tell us there is no way to arrive at absolute truth, but can they be absolutely sure? They may absolutize this belief, but in so doing, they are claiming the very right they deny to those who oppose them.

3. Everyone reserves the right to convince others of his core beliefs. When we are accused of bigotry for suggesting that Jesus is the only way to God (Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12), we would do well to remember the passionate fervor with which feminists and homosexual advocates advance their agendas. Is the Great Commission an imperialistic intrusion, while the pluralistic acceptance of contradictory beliefs is humane? As Daniel Taylor says, "If I have a life-saving medicine and don’t share it, I am selfish and properly condemned. What am I to do if I believe I have a life-saving message?" (Taylor, p. 47). Once again, relativists are denying to others a right they claim for themselves.

4. There is no other option open to us. At the end of a list of vices which includes false religion (idolatry) and warped behavior (including homosexuality), the apostle Paul writes, "and, although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them" (Rom. 1:32). This "hearty approval" of sin is what we must never give. We may be accused of bigotry, but in reality there is no greater bigotry than a narrow-minded refusal to heed the revelation of God.

Perhaps this new arsenal of "diversity education" will give me, as a parent, the opportunity to talk with my daughter Megan about a host of important issues. I want her to model the actions of the Good Samaritan in a society full of prejudice and indifference. On the other hand, I want her to know, without a doubt, that there is a truth which sets all people free — "an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people" (Rev. 14:6). Pray for our children. They have their work cut out.