Religious intolerance?

Question

What were some problamatic issues leading to religious intolerance within the colonies?

Sorry, the real question is what were some issues inherent in religious intolerance in the colonies! My bad!

Answer 1

In the context of your question, religious intolerance ultimately derives from the same thing, regardless the era:

man -- having created a god in his own image, and having therefore ascribed to that god certain attributes by which religion (organized ritual behavior) and piety are defined --

does not recognize either the legitimacy of another man's god, the validity of another man's religion, or both.

In that sense, religion is the mechanism by and through which man (a) exorcises his demons and, (b) in the interest of appearing sane while so doing, evolves a following comprised of both the feebleminded and the morally bankrupt.

These conditions are exacerbated by social perceptions: Religious Society of Friends (commonly known as Quakers) began in 1600s England by persons disaffected by Churchianity (or, perhaps more accurately within the context of their era, denominationalism).

Unlike other groups that emerged "within Christianity," the Religious Society of Friends has tended toward little hierarchical structure, and no creeds.

Obviously, contemporary religions demanding hierarchical structure and specific creeds found Quaker belief to be an incredibly hostile outrage intended to lure away people into "all manner of debauchery, sin and godlessness."

Personally, I'm amazed that Roman Catholics ("RC") and Episcopalians ("E") ever had a beef with each other: they seem to me virtually identical, having differences about as significant as would distinguish, for instance, a Baptist ("B") from a Methodist ("M") or a Presbyterian ("P").

Of course, there has been competition among the latter, but most BMP theologians consider RCE theology to be at best pagan -- and RCE theologians consider BMP theology to be a bastardization of their faith and an affront to the basis wherupon is founded their entire cult.

Thus, the disagreements are not trivial or inconsequential to the believer, and (at least to them) in the details rests the eternal salvation or damnation of a person's spirit.

Obviously, organizing a group around a false theology is perhaps the most unethical thing a human can do. To the adherents of an exclusive theology, all other theologies are false.

.

Answer 2

A lot of people were Puritan fleeing the religious intolerance in England. Others were Catholic - also fleeing. In England you had to be Episcopal. Many Puritans believed that they were the "chosen" and would be the only ones going to Heaven (knowing ahead of time is called pre-destiny). There's more, but I'm beat. Hope this helps - Good Luck

Answer 3

No issues relating to governance have affectedman's perseption of religion . I was the Imperialists Divide & Rule policy that started the chain reaction of terror we see today . What you sow , sow you reap !!