Friday, October 9, 2015

Postmodernism and our Post-Christian Culture (Part 2)


Ours is a post-Christian world.   Francis A. Schaeffer, Death In The City

Last week, I attempted to define and explain what we mean by the term postmodernism.  This week I want to continue in that vein and hope to take a bit of time to explore some of the implications that the postmodern mindset has on our society – particularly in the realms of our religious life together.  But before I delve into the specifics, I want to share just one more helpful way to understand postmodern thinking, which will launch us into some specific applications.

I owe the following example to something I stumbled upon a couple weeks ago which piqued my curiosity when I was helping my son with a theology assignment.  Joshua was reading selections from the book, To Know and Love God by David K. Clark.  Dr. Clark is an author, theologian, former professor and the current Vice President and Dean of Bethel Seminary in St. Paul.

In the writing I was most interested in, Dr. Clark was recounting a conversation he had with student, the account (and his interpretation) of which seems to perfectly illustrate the difference between modern and postmodern thinking.

His student started out by stating, “Christians in my generation don’t think like older Christians.”  She went on to describe how her generation believes “Jesus is the center” and that they focus on growing “closer to Jesus”, while “Older Christians focus on secondary issues,” (or boundaries).  We weren’t told exactly what theological issues she thought were secondary.

She described herself as a postmodern thinker, while accusing those of the older generation of being modernist.  Her implication being that postmodernist thinking was good, while modernist thinking was bad, outdated, possibly even dangerous.  Unwittingly, (and hypocritically) by making such a claim, she herself was setting boundaries of her own.

The young woman had stumbled upon a widely recognized distinction between so-called “centered-set thinking” and “bounded-set thinking,” first borrowed from set theory and applied to theology in 1978 by missiologist Paul Hiebert.  These days, academics have used these categories to distinguish modernistic thinking Christians from postmodern thinking Christians.

According to Clark, centered-set/postmodern thinkers describe a set (a set is merely a collection objects) by locating its center and mark the members of the set “by identifying objects that are moving closer to that center.”  They don’t focus on the outer boundary, but what is moving toward the center, or in the case of this young woman, those moving “closer to Jesus.”  “It’s less concerned about sharply defining a line in order to divide what’s ‘in’ the set vs. what’s ‘out’,” or what they consider “minor theological commitments.”  Instead, such thinkers would ask the question, “Is the trajectory of a person’s life and thinking toward Christ?”  At first glance this appears to be okay… but more about that, later.

On the other hand, bounded-set/modernist thinkers determine the members of a particular set based on a boundary.  The boundary, Clark continues, is what “identifies who’s ‘in’ and who’s ‘out’ by using litmus test issues” to define the outermost limits of the set or group.  It is the boundary that determines who is or is not included in a particular group.

Although Dr. Clark uses this explanation to make a slightly different point, I think he’s on to something here.  This distinction explains why moderns and postmoderns are talking past each other in so many areas.  And it explains the rise and influence of the church for the postmodern mind - what is called the Emergent Church.

As the leader of a seminary dedicated to the study of God’s truth, I trust Dr. Clark realizes the dangers of postmodern thinking.  And if he is right, Christians - while carefully acknowledging the limits of human reason - must be bounded-set thinkers at the very least in regards to the importance of divine revelation and absolute truth.  

While it is certainly a good thing for our lives to be moving towards Jesus, that in itself is too simple – deceptively so.  Don’t get me wrong, in a world full of distraction and temptation, oh that we all could have Jesus as our center toward which we are drawing closer every minute of every day.  But still, you have to admit, moving in a direction “closer to Jesus” is a fairly imprecise and nebulous journey.

There is more to the Christian life than that – including responding to the truth of the Gospel with right belief and right action.  Or as the Apostle Paul says in Romans 10:9, one must speak and act accordingly, “that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” (NASB)

Paul sharply contrasted (or drew sharp boundaries) in comparing living according to “the flesh” with that of living in accord with “the Spirit” in Romans 8:4-6 and Galatians 5:17.  Jesus drew sharp distinctions (or boundaries) between those that were ‘in’ – his “sheep” (John 10:27, Luke 15:6) – and those that were ‘out’ such as “the thief” (John 10:10), “false prophets” (Mt. 7:15), and “wolves” (Mt. 10:16, Luke 10:3).

The dichotomy between modern and postmodern thought is nowhere more stark than when it stands in opposition to the propositional truth found in the Bible.  Note that Jesus did not tell us to figure out your own way to heaven – He did NOT say “I am a way, a truth, a light.  Some may find a way to the Father through me.”  Rather, as we noted last week, Jesus made the ultimate, revelatory, exclusive truth claim when He said “I am the way… No one comes to the Father except through me.” (ESV)

But these definitions and boundaries eschewed by the Emergent church are important.  In fact, they are very important.  We must make distinctions between truth and falsehood so we know what truth is.  Without boundaries, we don’t know what – or who - is right and wrong. And while they must be defended with grace and love, boundaries are still important.

Postmodern thought stands in sharp contrast to the Christian worldview, especially so as wholeheartedly adopted by the Emergent church movement, which, in my view, is outside the bounds of orthodox Christian thought.  But I’ll leave that critique for another day.  Better minds than mine have already covered the topic of the Emergent Church. (For more information, see the notes below.) *

The problem, in my mind isn’t deciding people are outside of Christianity, thankfully that is God’s – not yours or mine – to decide, but whether they are outside the pale of Christian orthodoxy (the set of doctrines passed down to us by the early Christians).  The question then becomes, do we continue to give those who work outside of orthodoxy a platform to advance their views?  Whether it be open–theist Greg Boyd (Bethel Seminary) or Jesus Critics, John Dominic Crossan (DePaul) and Burton Mack (Claremont School of Theology) or the Emergent church pastors and thinkers, Doug Pagitt, Rob Bell, and Brian McLaren.  For that, we must soberly examine ourselves and our churches.

Not surprisingly, the same thinking has infected the political realm.  The recent revelations in regards to Planned Parenthood come immediately to mind.  One side is talking about observable facts and actions clearly visible in video tapes produced by the Center for Medical Progress.  They are pointing out that killing babies and harvesting baby body parts, and negotiating prices for them is a horrible evil reminiscent of Nazi Germany.

Faced with uncomfortable truths, the other side deflects the ethical issues by constructing a fanciful narrative about the importance of abortionists delivering women’s 'healthcare' to underserved communities, or obfuscating the issue by attacking the motivations of their critics, questioning the timing of the release of information, and challenging the editing techniques of the videos.  …Everything but addressing the observable facts before them.

Such is the way of the Postmodern mind in a post-Christian culture.





* For a detailed analysis and critique of the Emergent Church, see Dr. D.A. Carson’s Becoming Conversant with the Emergent Church or Kevin DeYoung & Ted Kluck’s Why We’re Not Emergent.

1 comment:

  1. John I agree with your comments completely, although I think your postmodern connection to the Planned Parenthood debacle is really not as much postmoderism as just plain they have no argument for horror of the videos so they try to rationalize and obfuscate on everything but the videos. They have NO argument for what the videos show us. And I might add that the videos have been examined and acknowledged that they have not been tampered with. Someone once said that human beings have the capability to rationalize ANYTHING and the protests regarding the videos prove it.
    An acquaintance of mine just published some thoughts on Postmoderism that I thought were especially on point...
    Our postmodern culture has adopted the poorly informed, yet profoundly tolerant stance that, “All paths lead to God!” We are all just spiritual mountain climbers taking different approaches to the same divine peak. While it is true that all religious paths do end on a summit, the problem is that each summit is located on a completely different mountain range. We can get out our megaphones and congratulate each other for reaching the top of our respective peaks, but let’s put aside the silliness that they all represent the same mountain.

    I’m actually giving these different peaks more credit than they deserve, because in reality they’re nothing more than mounds of mystical human refuse upon which we have defiantly stuck our spiritual flags. In order to make ourselves feel like we have somehow reached the thin air of divine significance, we place religious oxygen masks over our noses to make it appear as if we’ve scaled a mountain of consequence when in reality we are just shielding ourselves from the smell of our own spiritual poop. We can admire the rolling hills of the religious landscape, but in the distance, Holy Mount “God” looms, daring us to climb His cliffs of significance.

    All this talk of many pathways to the same god does, however, reveal something quite interesting. It appears that we humans assume that there is only one god at the end of all our religious searching. Where did we get that idea? Sadly, while most people believe in one ultimate Realty, they seem content playing in the safety of the sandy dunes of religious pluralism rather than scaling the Holy Mountain of God with “fear and trembling.”

    But where are your gods that you made for yourself? Let them arise, if they can save you, in your time of trouble; for as many as your cities are your gods, O Judah. (Jeremiah 2: 28)
    -Erik Strandness

    ReplyDelete

Keep it classy, short, and pithy!