The advent
of postmodernism has opened up the door for a renewal of presuppositional
apologetics.[1] Postmodernism is skeptical of the claims of
modernity, even including the certainty of science in discovering answers to
life’s questions. A rational, systematic
approach to thinking and living has a bad rap, because the promises of science
and Enlightenment philosophy have not been fulfilled. Postmodernism emphasizes a radical
perspectivalism, in which we recognize that our beliefs and values have been
shaped by our own life experiences and cultures – our presuppositions, so to
speak.
Simply stated, we all have our own
personal stories. The Christian
presuppositionalist believes that the truth of Scripture needs no “evidentialâ€
defense, based on the presuppositions of science and philosophy. Since sin is the problem, the revelation of
Christ is its only solution; therefore, the answer is first of all the proclamation of the Christ of Scripture,
and not defense. Furthermore, the advent
of postmodernism is paving the way for Christian believers to see once again
the narrative of Scripture, rather than simply “to abstract large chunky
doctrines from the Bible and hurl them at the heads of people who believed
large chunky modernist doctrines.â€[2]
Especially in a postmodern world, where
individual stories rather than metanarratives are valued, our kerygmatic task
is to tell the story of Christ, not to submit it to the tests of modernity.[3] Here, Brian McLaren is right on the mark:
If you ask me about the gospel, I’ll
tell you, as well as I can, the story of Jesus, the story leading up to Jesus,
the story of what Jesus said and did, the story of what happened as a result,
of what has been happening more recently, today even.[4]
We tell
this story trusting that God will do the convincing.[5] The failure of much Christian proclamation in
the modern era can be attributed to the desire to rationally convince someone
to “make a decision for Christ.†Being
able to recite the “plan of salvation†in a quick, five minute presentation to
all people was valued; but the five minute presentation never took into account
the vast complexities of the human experience. It did not listen to other people’s stories; it simply told of a logical
plan of action to get to heaven. Modernist presuppositionalism could be just as guilty as this on a
different basis: If God handles who hears and receives the Word, as Reformed
theologians believe, then we do not need to do anything but preach the same
gospel message over and over, no matter what the context. This is just as grievous an error.
A
postmodern presuppositionalism does not employ such a simple presentation, nor
does it desire to logically convince someone to “make a decision.†We furthermore need not first convince
someone on philosophical grounds of the reality and knowability of absolute
truth, as though we needed to convert someone from postmodernism back to
modernism before speaking about Jesus. The presuppositionalist in a postmodern era listens to the personal
stories of others and intersects them with the story of Christ, trusting God to
apprehend the heart and transform the life with His regenerating power.
Let us then proceed to our great
story, set forth in the propositional truths of the Apostles’ Creed, but
telling the old, old story of the triune God.[6] The goal in the following pages is not to
establish a direct and thorough evaluation of postmodernism based on the
Creed. Rather, the intention is
demonstrative, making manifest the belief that classic ecumenical Christian
theology is as able as ever to stand in the current cultural climate, and to
put that belief into the context of Reformed theology, letting it challenge and
inform us.
[1] This is
not to succumb presuppositionalism to postmodernism. Instead, it is always proper for us to take
into account how we are going to
communicate the gospel to this or that culture. See below on the error of preaching the same message the same way to
every culture based on false presuppositional bases.
[2] N.T.
Wright, “The Bible for the Post Modern World.†http://latimer.godzone.net.nz/orange_lecture/orangelecture99.asp.
[3] McGrath,
174.
[4] Brian
McLaren, “The Method, the Message, and the Ongoing Story†in The Church in Emerging Culture: Five
Perspectives ed. By Leonard Sweet (Grand
Rapid: Zondervan, 2003) 214.
[5] None of
this is to say that Christians should not engage in philosophy, science, or
other disciplines, as though theology were all the mattered to the
presuppositionalist. Rather, what we do
in those fields should be rooted in the knowledge of God Himself.
[6] My use
here of the word “propositional†is deliberate, referring to the ongoing debate
as to whether or not Christian truth is intended to be communicated
propositionally or in narrative form. The debate is rather absurd, ultimately, since the obvious answer is a
blend between the two. Scripture speaks
in narrative form as well as propositionally, and the two work together, rather
than opposing each other.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Well done. This is the strongest piece so far. Also, it rings very true in a sense. I am impressed.
Here is a challenge for you, if you want one. Clearly, you are writing this for a certain audience of erudite Biblical scholars and such- your intellectual masters. My challenge to you is to, when you are done, rewrite this in terms that any intelligent lay person who does not have an English or Philosophy or History degree can thoroughly understand the points you are making.
Let me know if my suggestions on the writing life are obnoxious or unhelpful.
Sarah
I’m planning to do that very thing, actually, along with lengthening it and submitting it for publication, should this writing career take off.