Postmodernism?

An easy read that came out earlier this year is D.A. Carson's "Becoming Conversant with the Emergent Church." It's focus is not on postmodernism per se, but it would make for a good intro. to the subject.

 

Another Cedarvillian!

I have mixed feelings about postmodernism. In many ways it is detrimental--relativism and a kind of apathetic nihilism both draw from postmodernism. On the other hand, postmodernism also allows for more flexibility in thinking, which may provide an opening for Christianity.

 

Postmodernism... What is that? I have never heard of it before. Would someone care to explain to me what postmodernism is?

 

I wouldn't spend much time on the BB trying to discuss or learn about postmodernism. Most of the discussions here tend to focus on issues reserved for the fundy world. There are some great emerging church books and sites out there where you will find a lot more help.

 

Excellent summary, Rhetorician.

 

As someone supportive of postmodern Christianity and the emergent church, I enjoyed the way this article describes postmodernism.

 

This is the concept of relativism, which is related to but not equivalent to postmodernism. It is entirely possible to be postmodern and not deny moral absolutes.

 

This is incorrect. Postmodernism doesn't deny that there is authorial intent, but our ability to perfectly know that intent.

Modernist hermeutics like the historical grammatical hermeneutic also acknowledge this.

You have made a faulty conclusion.

 

These are more liberal modernist issues. In fact, liberalism is a modernist position. But I would agree that liberals have been much quicker to understand and embrace postmodernism, but conservatives are starting to get on the ball.

I love talking about inerrancy, and authorial intent and don't go ballistic over it. I would say that modernists often miss the boat in overemphasizing concepts like inerrancy and authorial intent or thinking that authority comes from those ideas.

 

While I think the pomo church has some things to offer, I think that other views coming from them are dangerous.

For example, statements are made that sound good but, imo, are misleading, such as what Gold Dragon quoted:

This seems to ignore the fact that the primary way God spoke to the Jews was through his prophets, scriptures and the law. The "sensory" experiences were in addition to that. If there had been no revelation from God through the prophets and OT scripture, these "sensory experiences" would mean nothing.

I think the phrase, "the physicality of the parables" is a nice way to ignore the fact that parables were given in words. They weren't experiences. Sure, people had reactions to them but I would not call a parable an experience.

What I find most disturbing in the pomo movement is the denigration of the written word and propositional truth. I've had pomo Christians say to me that Jesus just "told stories" and did not give propositional truth. Well, I can quickly find a lot of propositional truth claims made by Jesus.

A page with links on pomo:
http://tinyurl.com/9jqtu

Someone good to read on this is Gene Edward Veith.

And don't me started on McLaren!

 

I would agree that Jesus used propositional truth. But he also used stories. Propositional truth has its place. But one that should be denigrated relative to the worshipful position it has been placed by modernism.

 

Gold Dragon, I don't think modernism elevated propositional truth. I think God did. Truth comes from God and is based on Him.

 

This is good advice for everything we read and hear anywhere from any source, especially if they agree with you.

I wouldn't know about that. But the points you present are quite a common charicature of postmodernism given by modernists and critics of postmodernism. Many aspects are true to some extent but still charicatures nonetheless. Either way they present good starting points for discussion, clarification and correction.

 

Truth definitely comes from God and is based on Him. That statement says nothing about propositional truth or how that truth is expressed.

 

The best way to "understand" postmodernism and the emerging church movement is to read its authors. Postmodernism prides itself in being undefinable, so an attempt to define it simplistic terms contradicts its very nature.

As one of the primary spokesman within the postmodern movement often says, "If you call yourself postmodern, you are not."

 

That is a good point. I would say that the pomo church excells in ambiguity.

 

In some ways I am thankful for postmodernism. I realize it has it's downfalls, but along with people questioning the aged authorities of modernism, comes people that are starving for truth. People want the real thing. people are searching for spiritual truth.

That is where we come in. We have the truth.
I have found that this postmodern generation accepts truth when it is presented as real and something that is beneficial to them.

Look, there is so much information out there. We are being bombarded by facts, advertisements, pop-ups, useless trivia, everyday of our lives.
We have to pick and choose what is going to be useful.

That is what this post-modernism generation does.
If it is not useful, then it is useless, and we don't need that stuff floating around in our heads.

So.... We need to present the Gospel (Truth) in a real and useful way.

When we believe what we preach we make it real.

When we make it real, others accept it.