The Jargon of Postmodern Panacea
"It (postmodernism) has deconstructed its entire universe. So all that are left are pieces. All that remains to be done is to play with the pieces. Playing with the pieces--that is postmodern."
-Jean Baudrillard
17th century rationalism, just another fancy word for modernism (or the other way around), was probably the beginning of this pragmatic thinking movement. Thus birthed the theory that knowledge can only be attained through reason and only then can truth be discovered. Only a fool would use faith as a means to attain knowledge. In Josh McDowell's [1]"The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict", he quotes CS Lewis as saying, "To be ignorant and simple now-not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground-would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense, but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. (Lewis, WG, 28)". But, when Christianity responded with reasonable linguistics that would in turn, prove the case of the empty tomb as well as the deity and absolute truth of the person of Christ, postmodernism was concocted.
Dictionary.com defines postmodernism as the following:
Postmodernism - n : genre of art and literature and especially architecture in reaction against principles and practices of established modernism
Now, the post - modernist doesn't reject tradition as a means to employ reason to discover truth. The post - modernist rejects the idea that truth is absolute. They'll accept your idea, if your idea is one that accepts other ideas. As I expressed in my poem, it really is just a dumbed down version of syncretism, just without all of the ties to anything religious and prohibiting the use of any ancient Egyptian wigs. Therefore truths come in many different shapes, sizes, forms, philosophy's, jokes, and social constructs. Truth is as easy to come across as a natural average woman's size twelve in the clothing store. And to insist that every woman must be a size 5 in order to be accepted, is preposterous!
I would much rather the postmodernist not refer to himherself as a pragmatist, for there is nothing pragmatic about postmodernism. So much more respect I would have for this creature if heshe would just label themselves a modernist. After all, if modernism does support reason, and reason supports truth, then that is the essence of the practical pragmatist. Of course then there is the "progressive pragmatist" who's reason and truth changes (a word they use synonymously with progress) with time. Okay, I'll subside with this one, defining themselves as a postmodernist. Can anyone see the vague hopelessness of this person? Maybe the picture would be painted clearer if I, myself decided to label myself a "progressive Christian". And then my definition would be, "a Christian who's entire worldview and basis for life and absolute truth in Christ, would change with time and this so called "progress" that us advanced humans have made." Or better yet, a "subjective Christian", in which my definition would be, "a Christian who believes that truth in Christ is just one of many ways to get through the pearly gates."
In my class, I teach my students to counter everything that could be seen as an argument against Christianity. But, in my class I also teach my students to counter everything that could be seen as an argument for Christianity. For example; in 1491 to the greater society in Spain, the world was determined to be flat. But, in 1493 to the greater in Spain, the world was determined to be round. Did truth change? No. The world was always round. Now the progressive postmodernist would argue that this proves their case against the absurdity of Christianity. With time, mental power, research and technology, the world was proven to be round and the ridiculous notion that the world was flat was thrown in the garbage. Out goes Christianity! But, I asked a question; Did truth change? No. You see, the progressive postmodernist believes that truth changes with time, mental power, research and technology. In the instance of the world being flat or round, truth never changed. It was round in 1491, it was round in 1493 and it is still round in 2004. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8) He is as true today just as he was yesterday, with or without your educational research.
Postmodernism is rebellion. Rebellion against anything and anyone that would enforce any rule of thumb to create structure and order in a chaotic society. They rebuff the idea that there can ever be a chaotic society at all. Chaos to them, is when there is order to us. We are on the verge of a post - primitivist movement.
Get ready; We are on the verge of a post - primitivist movement.
Postmodernism is rebellion. Rebellion against the authority of God. Merely a group of angry people, angry at God for not giving them all the answers. Rebellion against Jesus as being the way. And angry at God for having the audacity to give them only one choice and then if they don't choose that alternative, then not only are they left in a confused state of exclusion epistemology, they are left looking forward to an eternity spent with the green-eyed monster us Christians call the devil. These postmodernists are so creative with their euphemisms, no?
"Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.' " (John 14:6)
What's so sad is that it has come this far. Jesus, who came as a gift from God to redeem man back into just relationship with the Father, has turned into a dictating tyrant who gets His authority from a sadistic, gendered, HeGod. Who is to clean up this mess? Where are we the body: in the pulpits, in our snakeskin's, waving the offering plate to the blissful laypersons? Where are we the body: in the elderboard meetings tirelessly debating women preachers? We are those called to clean up this mess. I am not prophet, I am not apostle…I am garbage woman. (This example may be a bit radical, but bare with me) I am strong, I am confident, I am grassroots. I have the privilege of making sure that Christ's name as well as His message, is not tainted with the garbage of the world. I have the privilege of prohibiting Satan's dirty rumor about Christ's cruelty and instability doesn't go any further than it has already been allowed. Satan's whispering in their ears, "I am God. You are God. He is not God." He's whispering in their ears, "Christ the Savior? You mean the one that watched your Father walk out on you and never look back? Christ the Savior? You mean the one that started that corrupt church around the corner and named that lying, thieving, rapist a prophet? Christ the Savior? You mean the one that created you a homosexual, and then so conveniently put in His word that you are an abomination in His sight?"
Satan is liar. He's lying and defaming the character of Jesus. And there is no doubt that this misdemeanor with be brought to ultimate justice in his time. Until then, we have a responsibility as believers to present our case of absolute truth to the world.
"Therefore Pilate said to Him, 'So You are a king?' Jesus answered, 'You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, (to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.' Pilate said to Him, 'What is truth?' " (John 18:37,38)
We know the truth. And His name is Jesus Christ.
[1] McDowell, Joshua. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. Thomas Nelsons Publishers. Nashville:1999.
-Jean Baudrillard
17th century rationalism, just another fancy word for modernism (or the other way around), was probably the beginning of this pragmatic thinking movement. Thus birthed the theory that knowledge can only be attained through reason and only then can truth be discovered. Only a fool would use faith as a means to attain knowledge. In Josh McDowell's [1]"The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict", he quotes CS Lewis as saying, "To be ignorant and simple now-not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground-would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense, but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. (Lewis, WG, 28)". But, when Christianity responded with reasonable linguistics that would in turn, prove the case of the empty tomb as well as the deity and absolute truth of the person of Christ, postmodernism was concocted.
Dictionary.com defines postmodernism as the following:
Postmodernism - n : genre of art and literature and especially architecture in reaction against principles and practices of established modernism
Now, the post - modernist doesn't reject tradition as a means to employ reason to discover truth. The post - modernist rejects the idea that truth is absolute. They'll accept your idea, if your idea is one that accepts other ideas. As I expressed in my poem, it really is just a dumbed down version of syncretism, just without all of the ties to anything religious and prohibiting the use of any ancient Egyptian wigs. Therefore truths come in many different shapes, sizes, forms, philosophy's, jokes, and social constructs. Truth is as easy to come across as a natural average woman's size twelve in the clothing store. And to insist that every woman must be a size 5 in order to be accepted, is preposterous!
I would much rather the postmodernist not refer to himherself as a pragmatist, for there is nothing pragmatic about postmodernism. So much more respect I would have for this creature if heshe would just label themselves a modernist. After all, if modernism does support reason, and reason supports truth, then that is the essence of the practical pragmatist. Of course then there is the "progressive pragmatist" who's reason and truth changes (a word they use synonymously with progress) with time. Okay, I'll subside with this one, defining themselves as a postmodernist. Can anyone see the vague hopelessness of this person? Maybe the picture would be painted clearer if I, myself decided to label myself a "progressive Christian". And then my definition would be, "a Christian who's entire worldview and basis for life and absolute truth in Christ, would change with time and this so called "progress" that us advanced humans have made." Or better yet, a "subjective Christian", in which my definition would be, "a Christian who believes that truth in Christ is just one of many ways to get through the pearly gates."
In my class, I teach my students to counter everything that could be seen as an argument against Christianity. But, in my class I also teach my students to counter everything that could be seen as an argument for Christianity. For example; in 1491 to the greater society in Spain, the world was determined to be flat. But, in 1493 to the greater in Spain, the world was determined to be round. Did truth change? No. The world was always round. Now the progressive postmodernist would argue that this proves their case against the absurdity of Christianity. With time, mental power, research and technology, the world was proven to be round and the ridiculous notion that the world was flat was thrown in the garbage. Out goes Christianity! But, I asked a question; Did truth change? No. You see, the progressive postmodernist believes that truth changes with time, mental power, research and technology. In the instance of the world being flat or round, truth never changed. It was round in 1491, it was round in 1493 and it is still round in 2004. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8) He is as true today just as he was yesterday, with or without your educational research.
Postmodernism is rebellion. Rebellion against anything and anyone that would enforce any rule of thumb to create structure and order in a chaotic society. They rebuff the idea that there can ever be a chaotic society at all. Chaos to them, is when there is order to us. We are on the verge of a post - primitivist movement.
Get ready; We are on the verge of a post - primitivist movement.
Postmodernism is rebellion. Rebellion against the authority of God. Merely a group of angry people, angry at God for not giving them all the answers. Rebellion against Jesus as being the way. And angry at God for having the audacity to give them only one choice and then if they don't choose that alternative, then not only are they left in a confused state of exclusion epistemology, they are left looking forward to an eternity spent with the green-eyed monster us Christians call the devil. These postmodernists are so creative with their euphemisms, no?
"Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.' " (John 14:6)
What's so sad is that it has come this far. Jesus, who came as a gift from God to redeem man back into just relationship with the Father, has turned into a dictating tyrant who gets His authority from a sadistic, gendered, HeGod. Who is to clean up this mess? Where are we the body: in the pulpits, in our snakeskin's, waving the offering plate to the blissful laypersons? Where are we the body: in the elderboard meetings tirelessly debating women preachers? We are those called to clean up this mess. I am not prophet, I am not apostle…I am garbage woman. (This example may be a bit radical, but bare with me) I am strong, I am confident, I am grassroots. I have the privilege of making sure that Christ's name as well as His message, is not tainted with the garbage of the world. I have the privilege of prohibiting Satan's dirty rumor about Christ's cruelty and instability doesn't go any further than it has already been allowed. Satan's whispering in their ears, "I am God. You are God. He is not God." He's whispering in their ears, "Christ the Savior? You mean the one that watched your Father walk out on you and never look back? Christ the Savior? You mean the one that started that corrupt church around the corner and named that lying, thieving, rapist a prophet? Christ the Savior? You mean the one that created you a homosexual, and then so conveniently put in His word that you are an abomination in His sight?"
Satan is liar. He's lying and defaming the character of Jesus. And there is no doubt that this misdemeanor with be brought to ultimate justice in his time. Until then, we have a responsibility as believers to present our case of absolute truth to the world.
"Therefore Pilate said to Him, 'So You are a king?' Jesus answered, 'You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, (to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.' Pilate said to Him, 'What is truth?' " (John 18:37,38)
We know the truth. And His name is Jesus Christ.
[1] McDowell, Joshua. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. Thomas Nelsons Publishers. Nashville:1999.
posted by Khristi Lauren at
11:13 PM
6 Comments:
And how then does one speak truth to the emerging church movement?
A Post-Modern view of Christ?
Is it possible?
By
Dan, at 11:51 AM
You know Dan, I had the same question. How can there be a Post-Modern view of Christ? But, i've come face to face with those that proclaim to be so. I'm still trying to piece it all together myself.
By
Khristi Lauren, at 8:22 PM
oh, i don't see postmodernism as being an "unbeatable foe"...quite the contrary. though, it's interesting how our greatest enemies (situations, people, spirits etc.) can too be our greatest allies.
point well taken.
By
Khristi Lauren, at 10:55 AM
When I attended St. John's College, the scripture I had to cling to was 1st Corinthians 2. It was a tiny school in the English tradition complete with don rags and a gradeless education system. Gnosis was God. Logos was God. It's where I learend to speak, read and write Ancient Greek, where I learned to doubt my faith, and where I learned to argue rightly that feces smells like honey. It is the land of human construct and sophistry and dialectic. It's the original battlefield of the intellectual mind. I agree wholeheartedly with the quote about PostMod being a game of playing with pieces, because that has been my experience, and
I believe it is has also been the experience of anyone else who has been delivered from the demon of 'intellectualism'. Intellectual Absurdism will always lead to "god" but it will never lead to Christ. And that's the problem.
I think the principal problem is that men discuss God. Perhaps the only true fit that our tongues can have on God is when we praise Him--because as good-natured as we may be, God cannot be laid a hold of by means of anything that makes sense to us. And furthermore, when will God make an appearance on a stage we set without BREAKING the stage we set? What chair can I build that will support him?? (This is getting into some quicksand, but I've never been scared to do so). Both modernism and postmodernism set unspoken guidelines for God. Debaters never seek to grow. Debaters seek to prove. You better believe that Elijah grew in the understanding of God the day that God shamed the prophets of Baal. If not, then what was the purpose of Elijah's deep depressions? Look at Jonah's wild bouts of anger and doubt...not IN God, but ABOUT God. Sure, anyone can know that he exists. That's the easy part. Who he is, and the mystery of Christ is the mamajama. Debaters hold up pink and blue, and say "If not one, then the other." Blue is the only opponent to whom pink is willing to concede. There is no space in a debate for green and yellow and purple and brown. And it's our nature to think that we know the truth. I posit that we don't fully fathom the truth we cling to. That's why Christians always look stupid when they are not led by God to try to meet intellectuals on intellectual grounds. It's a setup. Just like 'Christian Art' is a setup. (Never thought you'd hear me say that one, eh?) Apologetics has a built in pride-factor on the part of the 'evangelist'. There are landmines throughout! Let's use the odious example of Christian hip hop. If I'm a Christian rapper and I want to meet you as secular rapper, when God is manifested in my rhymes and a you see the light, there is a built-in construct in hip hop that tells me that I should feel good, and that somehow it was my skill that brought you to the light. It's just too dangerous, and it must be held responsibly. And too often that pride takes over. Like evangelistic porn (JUST an example, LOL) Nothing tells me that it's impossible, but who's going to do it? Certainly not a pimple-faced pubescent who decides on night at 3:30A that he's finally found his niche. But in essence, God is strong enough to make even pornography bow to him and give him glory, and by it, to invite men into eternity. But we are not to be the clever originators of new baits and traps for unbelievers, nor should we argue pink against blue. Doing so reinforces some notion that blue has any particular significance...as if blue is any less-wrong than the other colors. It doesn't cast down the imagination...it repairs a hole in the imagination. I gues that's what I should have said to begin with. To meet someone on their ground is to imply that their ground has any intrinsic worth in reaching God, when it doesn't. No sinful man's ladder-to-God is any higher than another's.
I will say though, that I have been able to take hold of intellectualism as a dumbell, if you will, used for spiritual exercise with Christians. Like this. It inevitably pushes us back to the floor for worship because it inevitably ispires us and proves to us that our God is Holier than we know, Stronger than we know, and Greater than we know. Like boxing! It's better between friends than it is between oponents...better for Bible Study than it is for Evangelism.
I think you've inspired me to come out of my vacation-hiding and blog about this...
By
Puddleglum, at 12:28 AM
Brotha, how you gonna try and show me out on my own blog?!Bravo!!! Un un petite quandary: Vilify pseudo-lectualism, yet compose a piece with so much substance, that even the blogger herself has to reread? What would you call yourself my academician friend?
p.s. - Pun intended
By
Khristi Lauren, at 5:36 PM
Well, I don't have time to respond to this as I would like, but let me make a point or two.
In the past the church has held on to their understanding of truth (like the flat earth) and proclaimed it as the truth - and I think that is the problem. Christians today are perhaps guilty of the same yet we have yet to become aware of it.
Postmodern Christians or progressives or whatever you want to label them just want to acknowledge the fact that perhaps while Christians know truth that they may not know the complete truth. And this is biblical in my view since Paul wrote that we see through a glass darkly. We have an understanding of The truth, but perhaps not the whole truth on every subject. To know all truth would make us equal to God. The church seems to ignore the fact that it doesn't know all empirically nor could/should it know all. That is why the church is viewed as, and in many cases, is anti-intellectual.
Post-modernism is a reaction to this fundamentalism and anti-intellectualism. This topic also speaks to how modernity has caused fundamentalism in all religions. The differences in mythos and logos in the development of the great religions play a central part in this phenomenon. I recommend Karen Armstrong's "The Battle for God" as good reading to spur your thoughts on this and many other subjects.
By
Anonymous, at 9:33 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home