When did 'love your neighbour' get superceded?

I'm currently reading "The Myth of Christian Uniqueness" for review. It's a set of restatements of the case for a pluralistic approach to religious diversity against exclusivist and inclusivist approaches. From what I'ne seen of it so far one of the biggest arguments is that anything but a pluralist approach ends up like this:

As Christians recognise the uniqueness and particularity of Christ what seems to happen is that this theological point is then internalised by some Christians in a way that is then externalised in being boorish, obnoxious and offensive in their manner, attitude, and speech.

The solution being offered is that we must become pluralists.
My own feeling is that it is not really possible to do that as a Christian without effectively eviscerating the faith of a vital organ or three. But I will leave more of that to another time when I write the review. In the meantime I want to commend Phil Johnson's approach. He goes on to say.

The problem here is not the theological issue about Christ, but rather the lack of reflection on how one is meant to behave as a believer in relationships and discourse with non-Christians.

While the pluralist 'driver' has a good point, the solution to abuse is not non-use but right use.

While Christians can feel repulsed by other Christians behaving forcefully, arrogantly etc, the problem is in over-reacting one then internalises the equally opposite error. The mistake is to assume that convictions about Christ and the call to repentance cannot be raised for fear of "imposing beliefs".

As I say in the title: love of neighbour is still top of the list of Christian "do's", ahead even of mission, which should be an expression of love not a contradiction in praxis.
circle of pneuma: Fruits of the Spirit and Dogma:
Filed in: uniqueness, Christian, pluralism, apologetics