We must bear in mind the degree to which abortion is like a block in a Jenga tower of social evils and injustices. It is an evil injustice that plays some part in undergirding others in the areas of sexual relations, marriage, gender relations and ideology, economics, etc.
The weight of the evil injustice of abortion is also supported in part by other injustices. It becomes a lot more thinkable when you have our views about and social practices and forms surrounding marriage, economics, gender, sexual relations, etc.
Remove the block of abortion from the tower and suddenly those other evils and injustices may become a lot less stable, or be forced to be a lot more load-bearing. If the tower collapses, many lives will be destroyed.
Part of the challenge of dealing with issues like abortion is that, as blocks in such a tower, their removal can increase the pressure of other evils and injustices. Many people understandably justify abortion precisely as that which relieves their pressure.
The larger tower of injustices needs to be dismantled, as the mere removal of a key block from it, important though it is, will likely accentuate injustices elsewhere in the system, leaving people under the delusion that it was a good and a form of justice.
Towers of evils and injustice are inherently unstable, but injustices and evils do tend to compound themselves. Like lies, one injustice or evil tends to encourage other injustices or evils to back it up, until there is a great edifice of lies and wrongs.
Remove one element from such an edifice and it all can topple.

Part of the warning of Christ is that, if we do not build our lives on the rock of his true words, we will find that our lives and societies will collapse when their sandy foundation of lies and injustice is tested.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alastair Roberts

Alastair Roberts Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @zugzwanged

Jun 22
When people think of numerology, they tend to think of weird Bible code stuff. However, in the Bible, we see the frequent symbolic use of numbers (e.g. measurements of tabernacle and temple furniture and buildings, especially in prophecy) or the uses of numbers for literary ends.
Even in historical narratives, we often encounter numbers used for literary ends or with symbolic values besides those of immediate historical record. For instance, the Flood Narrative has a numerical chiasm (within a larger literary chiasm): 7, 7, 40, 150, 150, 40, 7, 7.
Sometimes numbers serve to connect characters or events. For instance, Daniel has a king who comes to the throne at 62, then 62 weeks, then three weights that could be taken to add up to 62. Outside of Daniel that number only occurs once.
Read 19 tweets
Jun 22
It hadn't occurred to me until this blew up, but cross-dressing just might not be as prominent a staple in American humour as it has been in British. That said, most Americans should at least have encountered it in imported forms.
Americans might have seen it in various Monty Python sketches, or in a character like Dame Edna Everage (you've hopefully been spared Mrs Brown's Boys). They might get an idea of it from a sketch like this one, which would never fly today: .
Such cross-dressing in comedy has routinely been performed by straight men, for laughs, not as an expression of identity. Even where it has been clearly related to gay culture (e.g. Paul O'Grady's popular Lily Savage), the differences with American drag are interesting.
Read 7 tweets
Jun 9
One of the greatest challenges facing Christians today is that of resisting a totalizing culture war mindset, of not allowing fixation on cultural battles to crowd out more fundamental matters.
There clearly are cultural battles to be fought, but the overwhelming majority of our Christian labours are not found in them, and where our primary labours are neglected, we will not be fit to fight them.

Without abandoning politics, we need to resist their totalizing impulse.
Prayer, worship, reading of and meditation upon Scripture, sharing of life with the people of God, the works of mercy, service of and evangelism of those without, etc. all seem to be diminished or distorted when culture wars and politics dominate people's horizons.
Read 14 tweets
Jun 7
Since it has been at the centre of so much drama and so many people seem to be missing the point, it might be worth discussing why people like @jake_meador have taken such issue with William’s rhetoric of ‘black supremacy’. What is the accusation that I am making here?
At the outset, I have never claimed that Wolfe is driven by deep racist animus here. I don’t know his intentions. What I find objectionable is his rhetorical approach. My claim is that he is being careless and irresponsible, mostly out of ignorance, but culpably so.
I didn't write Jake's post (mereorthodoxy.com/christian-nati…) and wouldn't have done so. My accusations are purely about the chosen rhetorical moves.

My main hope is that people wise up and knock that sort of stuff off and that those who don't are revealed for what they are.
Read 20 tweets
May 13
A prima facie concern—not an illegitimate one—that people raise about my approach is that it fails to take into account that people are constantly being bombarded by The Culture. We need regularly and loudly to speak against the sins of the culture to which people are exposed.
Yet this is perhaps where my approach is most important. I've often used the illustration of 'skin' to describe the sort of boundaries that we need. Skin provides both a boundary against and an interface with the world that surrounds us.
Skin is part of what enables us to preserve some degree of a homeostatic balance in our bodies, even as we move through various environments.
Read 21 tweets
May 13
A key matter, I have argued, is having defined and relatively bounded and grounded contexts and directed discourse. Without these, we will increasingly speak from nowhere to The Culture in general. We will constantly feel exposed to a totalizing zero-sum political fight.
In such a way of seeing the world, any challenge to 'the right' will be seen as an action for 'the left'. It will be seen to be imperative that we train the vast majority of our firepower upon those sins perceived to be dominant in The Culture—the sins of the left.
My argument is that it is imperative that we consistently bound and focus our discourse, speaking into very immediate and concrete horizons, not the horizon of The Culture as such.
Read 13 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(