Postmodernism?

What do you mean by "useful?"

What do you mean by "real?"

I am not sure that just making it "real" means that people will accept it. A lot of people hear the gospel and reject it. They don't want a God who judges. They don't want to even believe in sin.

 

The "real" part comes from us being real. I mean, we have to show the lost that we really believe what we teach. There are too many just playing church, and if we as Christians can see it, then so can the lost. They are looking for us to mess up. (actually I think more are hoping we succeed than we think)

We don't need to pretend to be perfect.
When the lost see us mess up, they should also see the results of God's grace.

When they see us being judgemental, they should also see us being merciful.

Too many Christians just want to condemn people without giving them any hope.

Casting Crowns has a new song on their new CD called "Stained Glass masquerade" It is about Christians playing Church.

The postmodern generation has so many things to choose from, they don't need "Sunday Morning Only" Christians distorting their view of Christianity. If a person calls himself a Christian, but only gives God an hour out of each week, this generation will not believe they are Christian.
That is what being "Real" meant.

As for the part of "useful", They need to understand what the Gospel does for them.
It saves them, well Christ saves them, but you know what I mean. We do need to tell them why they need Christ. Once they understand the importance of what Jesus done, they are willing to accept it.
It is not enough now to just say, "repent from your sins and accept Christ or you will go to Hell." They will want to know why.

If you answer, " The Bible says so."
They want to know why they should believe the Bible instead of the Torah, Koran, or some other religious book.

We had better have an answer to their questions.
Since truth is "relative" to them we had better package it in a way that they can relate too.

And before someone says, "you are trying to compromise the Gospel to get numbers" Let me make this clear, The Gospel will never change, but our methods must.

 

TinyTim, thanks for your reply. I agree with many of your points, but I think that sometimes what is being said about the pomo generation is simplistic. That is one of my concerns.

The other concern is I am wondering what is happening with reaching out to those younger than the current pomo's (who are mostly in their 20's and 30's now). It seems the younger set (under 20) like to accomplish things, like things very structured (they were raised that way, in planned play groups, organized sports, etc.), do things in groups, and like goals. This is quite different from the pomo people. If the church gets carried away on making everything for the pomo people, they will miss out on seeing the others coming after them. I just read an interesting article on the teens today and how they like structure, which would indicate to me they may not be as relativistic. I could be wrong. Maybe that is yet to be seen.

You said:

I totally agree we need to give better answers. The church is woefully un-apologetics oriented, so I'm with you on that all the way.

I agree also that it's okay to change some of our methods, but sometimes it seems a fine line to cross between changing the methods and changing the gospel. There are some pomo leaders now saying that the Bible is not necessarily all true and that we are all on a journey together (with unbelievers). This is very deceptive and incorrect.

The other danger is that methods can seem patronizing. I read an article yesterday that a Catholic Church in India is doing readings of the Bhagavad Gita to attract Hindus. Many Hindus actually see this as an insult. (Of course, I totally disagree with doing this for other reasons as well).

 

You may be right about the younger generation.
We have to remember that they have the potential to not be Pomo.

I had the privledge of teaching over 200 children (k-5th) today in a Fall youth Rally, The lesson I taught was on King Josiah and how he made right choices even though he came from a line of bad kings.

The kids I taught today had a real grasp of truth, right and wrong.
I am praying that they will keep that grasp firm. And that they will realize truth is not relative, but is absolute.

I have also noticed in the middle school aged children, that they like quiet, reflective type worship instead of a lot of music. I'm not sure if this is in line with the pomo influence, or a reaction against it.
But it sure is refreshing!!

I am disappointed that some leaders would cast doubts on the Bible. It sorta reminds me of the blind leading the blind!
Maybe they need to see their need for the gospel.

 

Marcia,

I am sorry. I must have messed up the quote feature when posting this. Unfortunately, it is too late to edit the post. Perhaps, one of the moderators could help us out and clean that up. Again, my apologies.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Joseph, I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you talk about the POMO "movement".

It is not a movement, it is a world view that the lost have. It is wrong in some areas like not having absolute truth.
But it is right in some areas, because the whole basis of the post modern era was ushered in when people stopped believing that science had all the answers. Or that humanism could solve life's problems.

The POMO idea is to question everything. In some ways that can be to our benefit. People are searching for answers that they feel science and humanism can't give them.
I believe that is why "spirituality" is so popular today. People know they need something spiritual, they just don't know what.

That is where we come in. We know there is truth. We know it is absolute. We show them that we believe it by living it. That is the only way to convince some one of anything.

You are right, it is all about faith.
But we must guide their faith toward the truth.
Everyone has faith. It is what they have faith in that matters.

I'm not sure we have to resort to outside influences to "convince" the world the Bible is true. We do it the same way the Early church did. We can point to all the prophecies that only Christ could have fulfilled.

 

This is where we disagree. I don't live the Christian life in order to convince others of the truth of God. I do so because I am a Christian who is obedient to what God has commanded me. Further, there are some who will never be convinced no matter what. Jesus made this clear in the parable of the rich man in Hell pleading for him to send angels to his lost brothers on earth. Gandhi did not go to Hell because of a bigoted Christian he met in Africa. He went to Hell because of his sin. The only one who can convince the lost of the truth of the Bible is the Holy Spirit of God. Our job is to Preach the Word, not convince them it is true.

Joseph Botwinick

 

That is an interesting point. It is the Holy Spirit that convinces (convicts) a person.

I too live a Christian life because I am a Christian. But many that claim Christianity, do not live the life.

I am also aware that not everyone will be convinced. But some will.

We preach the Word.
We live the Word.
The Holy Spirit convicts from the Word.

What happens if we preach the Word, but fail to live it?

The world will look at us and call us hypocrites.
This has to do damage to our accountability.
And the world says, "since they are not trustworthy, what they are saying can't be trusted either."

You made a statement in the above post that, "Our job is to Preach the Word, not convince them it is true."
I believe it is also our job to Live the Word.

It may not do the convincing, but it will certainly help the Holy Spirit in doing His job.
When we are real with what we believe, some of the world notices.

 

1 Corinthians 2:14-16

We will be judged by God, not sinful man for our actions.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Yes we will be judged by God, but can you imagine standing in front of God with a record of sying you believe something and then not living it?

The fact is people are in Hell because they chose to reject Christ.
Some chose to reject Him because of how so-called Christians lived in front of them.

I saw a Christian hurt a lost person emotionally enough where the lost person ran out of church crying.
When this Christian was confronted, her response was, "She's just a sinner"

That is what I am talking about.
This POMO generation doesn't mind God.
It's his "children" they don't like.

All I'm saying is live what you preach because the lost are watching.

 

Of course we live a Christian life. But not to please man...but to please God and remain obedient to him. As to the whole idea that "This POMO generation doesn't mind God. It's his children they don't like", this is the same error Gandhi made. You cannot hate God's church and be ok with God. I don't know about the whole situation with this "Christian", but it is God who will judge her for her actions and attitudes.

Joseph Botwinick

Joseph Botwinick

 

"The fact is people are in Hell because they chose to reject Christ.
Some chose to reject Him because of how so-called Christians lived in front of them."--------------------------------------------------------

We should all be concerned about this and do our best, but any one who want to use Christian imperfection as an excuse to avoid God will always have a reason to avoid God. But in my opinion, anyone who avoids a perfect and rightous God because of something he saw an imperfect Christian do, well he is simply a fool.

 

Bunyon,

Exactly!

Joseph Botwinick

 

When we please God, we will not please man, but men will notice our actions because they will not be the norm.

You both are right. Some are just looking for any excuse to give, but I'm afraid that too many Christians are using the fact that we are not perfect as a loop hole to justify their sin.
We will be held accountable to God for how we live.

 

Had a conversation with a guy I work with about this. His daughter attends a non-denominational christian school, and he heard the pastor talk about how we are all human, no on has "arrived", and he viewed that as a cop-out.

I do not know the pastor in question, but I explained how I would say the same thing, but not be excusing wrong behavior. I explained that yes, my behavior does indicate my belief, in that if I am truly following Christ, I will live like him, but that I may still fail, I may still be inconsistent, being human. But it should be a progression. Unfortunately his experience with "christians" has been poor, those who would call him out for drinking too much, or his language, but got caught stealing from the company, and another who had a huge porn habit.

That does not excuse his personal position, that of rejecting Christ, but it does create a scenario where at least the spiritual maturity if not position of those "christians" could be questioned. The two are separate issues. They will be judged for their walk as it is measured by God, not their walk measured by my co-worker.

Gal. 5:13 "you, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love."

 

"We will be held accountable to God for how we live."--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is right TT, we are accontable to God not disgrunteled non Christians who want to point a finger at us who are humble enough to bow and ask for forgivness.

 

THe probbelm with addressing "Postmodernism" is that the term has become a generic wheelbarow in which to throw in anything contemporary that we don't like. Use of contemporary music? Let's call it postmodernism and condemn it. Wearing a polo shirt instead of a suit & tie? Let's call it postmodernism and condemn it. Say "God loves you" instead of "you're going to hell"? Let's call it postmodernism and condemn it. Having apastor who has a spiked haircut? Let's call it postmodernism and condemn it. Use a bible with a bright purple or hot pink cover? Let's call it postmodernism and condemn it.

So much that is being called "postmodernism" is nothing more than amoral personal preference. Once attributed with the postmodern label, that label becomes difficult to shake (since it's so ambiguous), and unwarranted condemnation of such becomes very easy.

 

That s ture Johnv. How do you define post modernism?