Thread: Forgiveness does not preclude justice. On the contrary, without forgiveness, you may pursue something less like justice for all and more like revenge for you- two eyes for an eye and two teeth for a tooth. Forgiveness and justice go together--our culture separates them. 1
If God wanted to forgive us without doing justice there would have been no need for the Cross. If God wanted to pursue justice without forgiving us there also would have been no need for the Cross. The Cross testifies that, with God, these two only exist together. 2/6
True forgiveness and justice exist together because (see Augustine) both are forms of love. A failure to do justice fails to love the human community and God. A failure to forgive fails to love your enemy and God. So forgiveness and justice can and must proceed together. 3/6
Our culture sees reality as mainly power. So forgiveness seems a failure to exert power over the perpetrator. But see Rom 12:18ff. Forgiving love is the only way to truly overcome evil--otherwise evil will capture, harden, use you as it did the perp. 4/6
Because of God's 'simplicity' we cannot pit his wrath/judgment against his love. A loving God will be angry at the evil that harms the creation and humanity he loves. God is too loving to shrug at sin and not do justice. But he is also too loving to just destroy & not forgive. 5
BTW - I'm working on a book about forgiveness (gulp!) I appreciate the various forms of pushback to these twitter posts and to the article. It helps me think it out. Thanks, all. 6/6 cardus.ca/comment/articl…
Some critique my account of Christian forgiveness saying that, based on my race, I shouldn’t speak to what other races should do. Here's the same view of forgiveness—from Miroslav Volf, a Croatian, against the background of the ‘ethnic cleansings’—the violence and genocide...1/6
...in the Balkans in the early 90s. Many say forgiving exploiters is unjust—but Volf says without forgiveness “both victim and perpetrator are imprisoned in the automatism of mutual exclusion” and 2/6 amazon.com/gp/product/B07…
"only those who forgive and who are willing to forgive will be capable of relentlessly pursuing justice without falling into the temptation to pervert it into injustice.” Some say you must not forgive until the exploiter repents, but Bible says otherwise (Mark 11:25) and 3/6
Thread: The early church was marked by a deep concern for the poor and for racial equality (Gal 2:10; 3:28). At the very same time, it taught that sex was only for within a mutually self-giving life-long covenant of marriage (1 Thess 4:3-8; 1 Cor 6:12-20). 1/7
To our modern ears, this sounds like a contradictory mishmash of liberalism and conservatism. And today the church is being fragmented by progressives and conservatives who want it to only serve one of these commitments and discard the other. 2/7
But to the church, the sex ethic & the justice ethic are a whole cloth. Sexual immorality and injustice go hand in hand because there is a unifying principle that unites them. In Jesus, we see one who had ultimate power and privilege sacrificing it in order to love and save us. 3
Thread: One common complaint made about Christians is that they believe in eternal consequences to our actions. Christians believe souls live on, therefore, they believe that moral errors affect us eternally. Secular persons also believe that there are terrible moral errors 1/4
...like exploitation and oppression. But since they don’t believe in an afterlife--they don’t think the consequences of wrongdoing go on into eternity. Does that mean secular people are more open-minded and Christians more narrow and coercive? I don’t think so. 2/4
Imagine arguing over a cookie. Jack thinks the cookie is poison, and Jill thinks it's not. Jack thinks Jill’s mistaken view of the cookie will send her to the hospital or worse. Jill thinks Jack’s mistaken view will merely keep him from having a fine dessert. 3/4
New thread: On Morality, Design, and Humanization.
A summary of Alasdair MacIntyre’s “master argument” in After Virtue:
Imagine trying to hammer a nail with a wristwatch and finding that the watch just breaks apart. Should you call it a ‘bad’ watch? 1/8
No-because its purpose is not to hammer nails but to tell time. Unless we know the “telos” or purpose of something, we have no way of evaluating it as good or bad. So how will we know if a human is bad or good? Such terms are meaningless unless we know what human life is for. 2/8
Why were we made? Why are we here? The Enlightenment Project was to “bracket God out" and seek a morality without reference to a telos for which humans were created. This project has failed—thus the fragmenting of western society over what is a good human life. 3/8
Hey Chrissy. Though we are all doing "binaries"--that doesn't mean all binaries are equally true. The first way to judge between binaries is, "does your binary lead you to love those you disagree with and speak humbly and respectfully, or does it lead you to exclude them?" 1/6
If you can’t speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15) even to the oppressors--even when you are simultaneously demanding justice—your quest for liberation often will replace one set of coercive power-brokers with another. 2/6
Christian churches have famously failed in doing this, but there are resources for this within Christian theology. See scshub.net/wp-content/upl…
This great Bauckham essay says : On the one hand, you can’t have a program of justice unless you have some moral absolute 3/6
I gave the podcast a listen. Ironically the "takedown" was filled with "binaries." Reminded me of this Terry Eagleton quote from 'The Illusions of Postmodernism that shows binaries and moral dichotomies in identity-making are unavoidable. Here it is: 1/7
“For all its talk of difference, plurality, heterogeneity, postmodern theory often operates with quite rigid binary oppositions, with ‘difference’, ‘plurality’ and allied terms bravely up on one side of the theoretical fence as unequivocally positive—and whatever their 2/7
antitheses might be (unity, identity, totality, universality) ranged balefully on the other….For all its vaunted openness to the Other, postmodernism can be quite as exclusive and censorious as the orthodoxies it opposes…[Like any other] form of identity [it] needs 3/7