Okay, I admit it...I am glad when something I've been saying/writing/thinking is agreed with by somebody smart!
Here is part of what William Lane Craig (research prof at Talbot) wrote in the July issue of "Christianity Today":
"...some might think the resurgence of natural theology in our time is merely so much labor lost. For don't we live in a postmodern culture in which appeals to such apologetic arguments are no longer effective? Rational arguments for the truth of theism are no longer supposed to work. Some Christians therefore advise that we should simply share our narrative and invite people to participate in it.
"This sort of thinking is guilty of a disastrous misdiagnosis of contemporary culture. The idea that we live in a postmodern culture is a myth. In fact, a postmodern culture is an impossibility; it would be utterly unlivable. People are not relativistic when it comes to matters of science, engineering, and technology; rather, they are relativistic and pluralistic in matters of religion and ethics. But, of course, that's not postmodernism; that's modernism! That's just old-line verificationism, which held that anything you can't prove with your five senses is a matter of personal taste. We live in a culture that remains deeply modernist."
The entire article is worth reading; too bad most find even the extract above too long and too hard to read. If you made it this far, drop a comment and tell me what you think! Ah, there's that word..."think." And as Edison said, "Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is why so few engage in it."
Perhaps truer of most Christians than we'd like to admit...
4 comments:
I've never seen it expressed quite that way, but I agree that our evangelism panders way too much to personal (and therefore subjective) experience rather than Scripture's absolutes. Very sad. Didn't C.S. Lewis finally accept Christ because he was first intellectually persuaded that Christianity was true? (See his book, "Surprised By Joy,")
I agree to an extent. Even most definitions I've read and heard of for "post-modernism" describe it as being a type of "later modernism". However, I think the term is still useful because when modernism first came front and center, it wasn't the prevailing belief and theme in the arts, in people's lives, and in the world in general. We now live in an age in which it is and thus I think the term is applicable in describing a culture and society that is prevalently "modernist" in it's beliefs.
I have trouble thinking these days (not much in my life to challenge me in that area so i'm out of practice), but I made it through the article. Maybe it's time i find some things to think about.
Ok, so I’m just a late commenter... BUT, My husband's "God" brother-in-law is a Missional Pastor in Philly, since we visited his very modern building with its collection of very interesting folk, and art - I have been keeping my eyes open to what it means to be emergent and or missional. The topic has surfaced again because of Holiday family conversation. Emergent/missional is the same right? I think so but Pastor "Todd"(b-i-l) disagrees. I can ‘get it’ if one is living on a mission, a mission to spread the Good News, But, all the articles I have read are full of mumbojumbo... what’s the deal with that?...makes me think urban pastors are just trying to create a niche for themselves? Do they really teach this stuff in Bible School and Seminary? Is it just non-denominational with a modern style (appearance)? Perhaps I should learn to knit?
Post a Comment