--Rush Limbaugh, April 27, 2005; quoted from Yahoo News
This forces me to wonder whether or not Rush Limbaugh has ever READ the Bible, particularly the Gospels. Jesus deals in nuances all the time; that's all the Gospels are. If he dealt in absolutes, he wouldn't have taught with parables, and I fail to see how any who claims to accept the divinity of Jesus and has read even ONE PAGE of the Gospels can claim that God doesn't deal in nuance.
I don't like to say that people who think like him aren't Christians, because that, of course, would be the pot calling the kettle black. For all I know they ARE right about everything; God IS the close-minded, pig-headed (not literally) jerk they portray him as, and I AM doomed to hell, which really wouldn't be much of a doom at all because I wouldn't want to have anything to do with a rigid and cruel God like that anyway.
But I would like to know how they are getting these ideas out of the Gospels, from the teachings of Christ, because--at the risk of sounding like Mr. Limbaugh--the Christ they speak of bears little or no resemblance to the Christ I know and love.
Personally, I believe that God IS an absolute, an absolute good. But I believe that this absolute is so beyond our understanding that, when he* reveals himself to us, he MUST deal in nuance and in relativity for us to get even the merest idea of what he is. That, I believe, is why there are so many religions in the world: God needed/needs to relate to each culture differently. When one considers how much trouble we humans often have with understanding other cultures, one should be able to understand this necessity. Therefore, I believe all respectable religions (although I suppose there could be plenty of argument as to what constitutes a "respectable" religion) are equally right and equally wrong, and that no religion or denomination is completely right or completely wrong. But I do think that it's wrong to SAY that other religions are wrong, and if it's NOT wrong to say that God doesn't deal in nuance and to believe in moral absolutes, it's certainly very childish.