Ministering in a Post-Modern World

Several years ago, the Oldsmobile division of General Motors launched a successful advertising campaign designed to market the Oldsmobile product to a new generation of drivers. In an effort to change the image of their vehicles, the company launched a series of commercials all of which contained the phrase, “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile.” In a similar sense, we as believers are observing a generational and cultural shift taking place around us. While many aspects of the “old” world view still tend to dominate our culture, there is clear evidence that radical change is coming to all sectors of society. The world that our spiritual fathers and grandfathers lived in and ministered to is going through profound changes. Our world may look very similar to their world, but the similarities are on the surface. When one looks beneath the cultural surface to the philosophical foundations, it is clear we have experienced a change in world view as radical as the change in world view that occurred during the Enlightenment. Although the effects of this change are not immediately or fully evident in society and culture, the world that our children and grandchildren will inherit will be a very different world than ours. All the evidence seems to confirm that indeed this is not our fathers’ world!

For Oldsmobile, the solution to reaching a new market was to redesign and reposition the product they were marketing. However, believers do not have the option of redesigning or changing the message they have been called to proclaim. Intense pressure is being placed upon the Evangelical church to change the message or to accommodate and assimilate the gospel with the contemporary cultural context. This is not a new pressure. Paul admonished the Corinthian believers who were facing the same pressure at Corinth as they struggled to reach a pagan community that despised the message and viewed the gospel as foolishness (I Cor. 1-2). Like the ancient Corinthians, many modern believers are desperately attempting to market the gospel in new ways so that the pagan world will find it acceptable. Paul’s admonition and rebuke to the Corinthians is as relevant and necessary for our generation as it was for his.

However, maintaining the purity of the gospel does not eliminate the need for its messengers to understand the culture of the society in which they live. In order to maintain the purity of the gospel and to stand for God in a world that has gone astray, it is necessary to understand the cultural and societal context in which one has been called to minister. A review of Paul’s ministry in the New Testament reveals his familiarity with the different cultures in which he ministered. He never compromised the message or acted in such a way as to cast doubt on his character and identity as a messenger of Christ. However, he did understand the culture around him and utilized that knowledge effectively in his attempt to reach his world for Christ. He is an example of how we are to minister in different cultural settings without compromising either the content of the message or the character of the messenger. For example, when he ministered in Jerusalem among the Jews, he did so with sensitivity to certain cultural and religious issues (Acts 21-22). When he ministered in Antioch, he refused to let these Jewish customs dictate or hinder his ministry to the Gentiles. In fact, he strongly rebuked a leading Jewish apostle, who by his actions and accommodation to the customs of one culture in the context of another, was hindering the Gospel message (Galatians 2). He certainly understood the religious and cultural context of Athens as evidenced in his speech on Mars Hill (Acts 17). There certainly can be no compromise or participation in the sinful activity of any culture; however, there must be knowledge and understanding of that culture and its dominant world view in order for ministry to occur effectively.¹

As ambassadors for Christ to a Postmodern world, it is imperative that we stand against those elements in the world around us that threaten the gospel or compromise the purity and integrity of the church. However, we must also look for ways and develop appropriate strategies for reaching this new world. If we know nothing about the historical and philosophical underpinnings of Postmodernism, then we have no real means of evaluating the methodology employed in carrying out biblical ministry. As faithful ambassadors sent out by Christ to go into all the world, we must know, affirm, and defend the truth, and we must understand the world we are trying to reach. There is great darkness around us, but there is also great hope within us and above us. The same God who strengthened and empowered the early church in a pluralistic society can also open for us in our culture a “great door of opportunity which no man can shut!”

Defining Postmodernism

Typically Postmodernism has been defined either primarily as a period of time in the history of the World, or as a specific ideology or worldview. Some like theologian Thomas Oden define Postmodernism as the period of time that follows or succeeds the Enlightenment worldview that was in place from 1789 (the fall of the Bastille and the French Revolution) to 1989 (the fall of the Berlin Wall).² On the other hand, others see Postmodernism as primarily an ideology rather than a period of time.³ Perhaps the best definition comes from Evangelical and professing Postmodern theologian, Stanley Grenz:

“Postmodernism refers to an intellectual mood and an array of cultural expressions that call into question the ideals, principles, and values that lay at the heart of the modern mind-set. Postmodernity, in turn, refers to an emerging epoch, the era in which we are living, the time when the postmodern outlook increasingly shapes our society. Postmodernity is the era in which postmodern ideas, attitudes, and values reign – when postmodernism molds culture. It is the era of the postmodern society.”⁴

Describing Postmodernism in the World

Even a casual reading of the literature related to Postmodernism reveals that it is difficult to define. Many scholars have likened defining postmodernism to the mythical story of several blind men standing before an elephant with the task of discovering and defining what they were feeling. Their result was as predictable as it was humorous. Furthermore, it represents the danger of arriving at definitions that are more descriptive than they are definitive. Probably the best way to understand Postmodernism is to note four predominant aspects that makeup a Postmodern worldview.⁵ First, the Postmodern worldview can be described as a prevailing mood. Rather than a distinct set of doctrines or propositional truths, Postmodernism is best seen as a mindset or a mood characterized by two things: a deep distrust of reason (thus the rejection of modernity) and a fundamental rejection of absolute truth. For the Postmodernist, truth is constructed by the community and is therefore subjective and fluid rather than objective and authoritative.⁶

Second, the Postmodern worldview can be described as a prevailing methodology arising from the mood of the age. This methodology results in completely new ways of understanding and analyzing ideas and truth claims. Truth becomes “truths.” Truth claims are in reality complicated sets of ideas and claims set forth by a particular community and serve as a vehicle whereby that particular community gains power and ascendancy over other communities. In a multicultural world, each community has its “truth story” or narrative and there is no place for the concept that one narrative is better or more valid than another. The technical name for all of this is pluralism. Truth is no longer seen as something foundational, delivered, revealed, and to be studied for life change; rather, it is to be understood as something that is constructed, formed, or fashioned to fit the particular needs of a community and therefore must be deconstructed and exposed rather than believed and obeyed.

Third, the Postmodern worldview can be described as a prevailing philosophical movement. A growing army of philosophers and theologians⁷ have disseminated its ideology to every academic discipline and every facet of culture. Literature, History, Politics, Education, Science, Law, Sociology, Linguistics, Art/Architecture, and Music – all have been impacted, affected, and ultimately changed by the onslaught of Postmodern thinking.

Fourth, the Postmodern worldview can be described as a penetrating cultural metamorphis. Its influence is both deep and widespread, transforming every area of daily life as its philosophy and impact are spread by the vehicles of education, movies/media, and technology.

It is a new world – a very different world than that of our fathers. Postmodern guru, Leondard Sweet uses an image driven comparison to delineate the radical difference between the “old world” (our world – modernity) and the “new world”(NetGeneration – postmodernity). The modern world was grounded. Its favorite definition of God was “Ground of Being.” Its basic metaphors were drawn from a landscape consciousness that didn’t trust water. Scholars are trained to keep categories clean and “watertight.” We were taught to avoid watering down our insights. The surface on which we lived was solid, fixed, and predictable. We could get the lay of the land, mark off directions where we were headed, and follow maps and blueprints to get where we were going. Much time, energy, and even spilt blood were devoted to defending, maintaining, and marking off our boundaries. Border disputes were common and devastating. Postmodern culture has marched off all maps. Its environment is a seascape, its surface is fluid and not fixed. It changes with every gust of wind and every wave. It is always unpredictable. Old maps and blueprints are useless on an uncharted, ever changing seascape. The sea knows no boundaries. The only way to get where one is going on a seascape is through nautical skill and trajectories rather than through fixed and clearly identified roads and highways. In this world, fluidity wins over fixity. Instead of structuring and ordering and solidifying reality, cyberspace bends and melts it. Life is a fluid realm. Fluid however, does not mean anything goes, as any capable ship captain will quickly affirm. Fluid is a different kind of order, a different kind of going.⁸

The Impact of Postmodernism

The waters of Postmodernism have permeated the very fabric of our culture and society and have had radical effect on culture, reason/logic, theology, and practical Christianity all of which have major implications for the Church of God in Postmodern times.

Postmodernism’s Impact on Culture:⁹

There are at least five major shifts that have occurred in the 21st century that have given rise to Postmodernism. First, the popularization of the death of God movement. First stated in the late 1800's, by the 1950's, Nietzsche’s idea of God’s non-existence now either explicitly or implicitly permeates almost every major discipline in secular universities. We are living in an age where fools predominate and have shouted aloud what they have first concluded in their heart – the fool has said in his heart, there is no God.

The second shift relates to the disorientation caused by religious pluralism within Western culture. As the process of gobalization takes place, non-western societies have introduced the concept of Christian imperialism and Western society. As a result, Christianity has been attacked and huge accommodations are being made in the West to incorporate and placate other religious systems. This has had devastating effects on Western culture and society which has been predominately based on a Judeo-Christian ethic.

Third, the power to inform through image and the blurring of reality and imagination. The modern technology is predominantly image-oriented and directed to visual communication. Television and the computer screen have fundamentally changed the way we learn. There is a vast difference between reading a book (active participation and interaction with ideas and concepts) and watching television (passive participation). The modern media has blurred the lines between fiction and reality with docu-dramas and reality-based programming.
Furthermore, it has trivialized all of life so that reality is reduced to experience rather than ethic. One can see death and war and in the next moment see a commercial for soap. God intended for us to see through the eye guided by our conscience. Modern technology has catered to the visual and has desensitized and eliminated our conscience. We have become addicted to eye-candy.

Fourth, the loss of a center of cultural molding – the loss of meta-narrative. There is no center to hold our societal life together. There is no meta-narrative or overarching story by which all the particulars can be interpreted. Life needs a story to understand the details. Life needs to hold together at the center if we are to reach our destination. But our culture neither owns a story nor holds at the center. This vacuum is increasingly evident in the pop culture (music and movies) of recent generations.

Fifth, the shifting of power to a younger world. The center of power and influence no longer rests with the older, more mature and experienced generation. More and more influence has been garnered by the younger generation. With the rise of modern technology, the young net-generation has been given authority and power over their older generations beyond that given to any other generation including the Baby-boomer generation which was the first generation as a whole to be more educated than their parents. The implications of this for authority and societal structure are profound.

These profound shifts in culture have resulted in the move of Philosophy from Foundationalism to Existentialism; the move of art from beauty to sensual; religion’s move to the mystical; education’s move to the skeptical; and the individual’s move to the transcendental – he has become his own god.

Postmodernism’s Impact on Reason and Logic:¹⁰

Modernism valued creation/totalization/synthesis; Postmodernism values decretion/deconstruction/antithesis. Modernists value selection and boundaries; postmodernists value combinations and interconnections. Modernists cultivate presence; Postmodernists cultivate absence. Modernists are interested in depth; Postmodernists are interested in surfaces. Modernism emphasizes form; Postmodernism is antiform. These characteristics have impacted philosophy (reason/logic) in four significant ways. First, it has produced a philosophical Anti-Foundationalism – the death of the meta-narrative. Postmodernism tends to abandon all meta-narratives which could function as legitimate foundations for truth on the grounds that we neither need them nor want them. As such, it is itself a meta-narrative that denies the existence of meta-narratives.

Second, it has led to the rejection of objective truth – the death of truth. Postmodernism denies objective truth and replaces it with multiple truths. Furthermore, truth in reality is nothing more than an act of power by which one community, society, tribe, or culture dominates and marginalizes another.

Third, it has led to the deconstruction of language – the death of words. Postmodernism assumes that language cannot render truth(s) about the world in an objective way. This is due to the fact that language, by its nature, shapes what we think. Postmodernism assumes that language was invented by Man, not God, and therefore is a cultural creation and ultimately a social construction by which power is exercised against others. In other words, language does not reveal meaning; it creates or constructs meaning and as such, functions as a cover for the exercise of power. Language becomes a prison house which must be deconstructed and revealed for what it is. Because Christianity is based primarily on propositional revelation – it is a religion based on inspired words – this theory has profound impact for how a Postmodern world will view its truth claims.

Fourth, it has led to the departure from rationalism – the death of reason. While Christian theologians have always stressed the limitations of human reason, they have always contended that God’s propositional revelation must be understood and believed rationally and volitionally. Postmodernism rightly rejects the exalted status afforded to reason by Modernism. However, Postmodernism goes beyond making an adjustment to denying the value or validity of reason at all. This has led to the impossibility of rational argumentation. No longer does the age old law of non-contradiction matter. For the first time in human civilization, educated cultured individuals accept the concept that two mutually exclusive and contradictory truths may both be equally valid and true. Rather than exalting truth, this rejection of all reason actually destroys the possibility of objective truth. Truth is no longer true.

Postmodernism’s Impact on Theology:

Postmodernism’s greatest impact has been in the realm of theology. Particularly impacted are the primary or cardinal doctrines of our faith – these are those beliefs that comprise the faith once delivered to the Saints for which Jude instructs us to earnestly contend.
Postmodernism has affected the doctrine of inspiration and the Scripture. Because of the demise of truth and the move from logo-centric to image, the claims made by the Bible regarding inspiration are being re-challenged. Modernism rejected inspiration on the ground that it rejected the possibility of supernatural events. Postmodernism believes in the supernatural but not in truth. The ground is no longer merely do miracles happen but does truth even exist? We will have to re-fight the battle for inspiration but on entirely different grounds.

Postmodernism has radically impacted the doctrine of God. The rejection of propositional truth will have major implications for every area of doctrine and theology, but especially in our understanding and relating to God. Everything we know about God as a person is revealed to us through propositional revelation. If we reject propositional revelation, then all we can know about God is He exists and is powerful. In order to have a relationship with God, we must know about Him. Postmodernsim’s rejection of proposition is going to further distance mankind from knowing God. Paradoxically, Postmodernism desires to experience spirituality – to experience God. Some argue that it is through this experience that we discover and come to know God. While this seems innocuous at first hearing, further consideration reveals this is simply another way of constructing God. God for me becomes defined by my cultural experience and my subjective interpretation of my relationship with Him. In essence I shape and form God. While Postmodern advocates would strongly disagree and would contend that in experiencing God we are simply discovering who He actually is and what He is really like, on what basis does one distinguish the universal attributes of God that are not available to us by experience? Furthermore, how does one evaluate differing and conflicting experiences that lead to contradictory ideas about the nature of God? With multiple and differing subjective experiences of God, we will end up with multiple gods – each shaped in our own particular image.

Postmodernism has impacted the doctrine of Jesus Christ and salvation. Postmodernism’s commitment to pluralism has grave implications for the exclusive message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The idea that Man needs to be saved is viewed as a truth-construct designed to put power in the hands of those proclaiming Jesus as the way of salvation. Those who have the message of salvation are seen as “power mongers” who are out to marginalize all other faiths different from their own. Postmodernism’s alternative is to accept that which is attractive and good from all religions. It will be increasingly acceptable to see people from other religions as “Christians.” One can be a Christian-Muslim or a Christian-Buddhist.

Postmodernism had affected the doctrine of sin and eternal punishment.

Postmodernism has created an environment where sin has lost its sinfulness. Sin is no longer a moral problem; it is a social problem. It should be avoided because of its negative effects on the self or on the construct of society rather than because it offends an authoritative God. Postmodernism’s commitment to personal choice and relativism makes any choice which works for me or pleases me a right choice. Postmodern culture has lost the concept of guilt and has replaced it with the concept of shame. Because Postmodernism is about style and personality rather than substance and character, a person who sins and is caught feels shame rather than guilt. Guilt has to do with a moral assessment whereas shame has to do with societal evaluation. I don’t feel guilt because others know I have sinned, I feel shame or embarrassment in knowing that I have been exposed. My image or personality has been negatively affected. Guilt is what I feel when no one knows I have sinned. It comes from the knowledge that I have committed a moral infraction against an authority. When a culture loses or replaces the concept of authority as Postmodernism has done, then gradually that society loses the ability to feel guilt. What is called guilt in that context is really shame. The solution to shame and the solution to guilt are two very different things. We get rid of shame by fixing and repairing the loss to our image. We get rid of guilt by repenting. Postmodern people have rejected God’s true answer to their sin problem and replaced it with a culture of shame. This will have profound personal effect on the inner lives of Postmodern people. Pluralism and tolerance have eliminated the idea of hell or eternal punishment from the Postmodern context. To assign someone to eternal punishment simply for holding a different view of truth than yours is the ultimate transgression in a Postmodern context – intolerance is the only thing that Postmodernism won’t tolerate. The highest form of intolerance is the idea of hell. The god Postmodernism seeks to embrace is a god of tolerance. The God of the Bible, in assigning those who reject His exclusive claim to salvation to hell, is demonstrating the ultimate intolerance. In a society defined by tolerance, this kind of deity simply won’t be tolerated.

Postmodernism has profoundly impacted the nature of truth. Truth in a Postmodern world is more accurately viewed as truths. The rejection of meta-narratives and Foundationalism undermines the very essence of the Christian faith. Rather than truth being constructed, the Christian must defend the objective reality of truth independent of the knower. If truth does not really exist but is constructed by the experience or context of the knower, or is the product of linguistics, or is determined by the community – there are severe implications for the existence of God. God’s self-revelation about His character is that He is truth. Not a truth among many but the ultimate source and content of truth. To view truth as the product of contextual, linguistic, or community construction is to eliminate the God of the Bible who states that He is truth. If in any way or by any means Man constructs truth, then it follows that God is a creation of that construct. It is on this point that Postmodernism stands or falls. In fact, it is on this point that Christianity stands or falls. If truth is not as the Bible presents it to be, then there can be no biblical Christianity. While Christians must engage Postmodernism and live within its cultural context, it must not and can not accept its view of truth. The Church must maintain a strong and unashamed commitment to the Biblical view of truth. Evangelical theologian Douglas Groothuis gives this sobering warning to those who would flirt with Postmodernism’s poisoned view of truth.

Without a thorough and deeply rooted understanding of the biblical view of truth as revealed, objective, absolute, universal, eternally relevant, antithetical and exclusive, unified and systematic, and as an end in itself, the Christian response to postmodernism will be muted by the surrounding culture or will make illicit compromises with the truth-impoverished spirit of the age. The good news is that truth is still truth, that it provides a backbone for witness and ministry in postmodern times, and that God’s truth will never fail.¹¹

Postmodernism has impacted the expression of practical Christianity:

This new worldview will radically affect the way the Church fleshes out her faith before a watching world. Three key areas affected will be evangelism/missions; contemporary worship, and hermeneutics/homiletics. First, Postmodernism will affect the way we carry out the Great Commission. Postmodernism’s commitment to pluralism will relegate the Great Commission as something to be rejected or else redefined. Evangelism will be replaced by social good as the primary mission of the Church. We will see a return to some form of a social gospel as constructed by a Postmodern mind-set. Since the heathen really are not lost according to pluralism, they really do not need to hear about the Jesus of the Bible. Furthermore, given the Postmodern view of truth and power, missionary activity will increasingly be viewed as Western Imperialism. Missions in the Postmodern world will be about getting communities to interact and to come together around common shared experiences rather than around doctrinal affinity or agreement. We will see Christian-Muslims, Christian-Buddhist, etc. Accommodation and syncretism will be increasingly greater dangers for evangelical missions.

Second, Postmodernism has radically affected the way we worship. Postmodern culture has produced an environment where experience is the chief goal of worship. Worship in this context focuses on the worshiper and his needs rather than on the One being worshiped. In a postmodern world, worship will be focused on the worshiper and will be primarily evaluated not by how it honors and exalts God or by how it conforms to His character, but by the feeling and experience produced in the heart of the worshiper. Much of contemporary music caters to emotional experiential worship often at the expense of doctrine and truth. The Church will have to engage a Postmodern culture from an uncompromisingly biblical standpoint. The cultural context in which we live favors those forms of spirituality that cater to culture rather than to biblical revelation. What so many of these forms of spirituality have in common is that they are offering benefits for self and asking little or no spiritual accountability or sacrifice in return. Postmodern worship has exchanged doctrinal substance for form and sensory appeal. Evangelicalism has gone through a doctrinal dumbing down that will only grow worse as Postmodernism continues to rise.

Third, Postmodern thinking has affected how we interpret (hermeneutics) and preach (homiletics) the Bible. Postmodernism’s view of language and text will lead to a hermeneutic of suspicion. More and more the biblical text will be deconstructed to reveal the “power play” being foisted upon an unsuspecting person or community. Postmodernism’s view of truth will lead to a departure from propositional revelation. No longer will the Bible be viewed as an authoritative source for determining the faith and practice of the Church; instead, it will be seen as an example of how Christians lived and modeled their Christianity within their social and contextual construct.

Postmodernism’s rejection of meta-narrative will rob the Bible of its unifying theme. The Postmodern hermeneutic will not look for unifying concepts but for individualized and localized, independent narrative-based meaning. This will reduce the Bible to nothing more than a book of loosely connected stories. Postmodernism’s view of constructed truth will lead to a reader-response hermeneutic rather than an authorial based hermeneutic. Postmodern hermeneutics will look for multiple meanings instead of the idea of the single intent or meaning of Scripture. This is very different from the hermeneutic of single intent but multiple application. For the postmodern interpreter, there is no real difference between meaning and application. The application in this context becomes the meaning. Postmodernism’s love for narratives and stories will have serious effects on the preaching of God’s Word. In Postmodern churches, the main goal in preaching will be to create an experience rather than to present the demands of objective truth. The goal will be experiential rather than transformational. The preacher will cease to be an authority on God’s world and will become a facilitator or a guide helping parishioners fashion their own meaning as they journey through the stories of God’s word. The preaching act will increasingly be more about stories than about propositions. It will grow increasingly more image-based and visually oriented. The traditional lecture/proclamation approach will be replaced with presentations designed to convince the heart through the eye and emotion rather than through the head and by reason. The preacher will become the storyteller and the preserver and shaper of tradition rather than the guardian of truth and the shepherd of souls. Instead of feeding the sheep, he will be expected to entertain the sheep. Instead of guiding and leading the sheep, he will be expected to empower the sheep and suggest to them ways by which they might construct their own green pastures and still waters by which to lie down.

Dangers for the Church in a Postmodern World

As the contemporary evangelical church attempts to fulfill her mission in a postmodern world, she must ever be vigilant against three dangers that have always confronted the church of God in every age. First, the Church must guard against the danger of assimilation – when the church becomes like the world. Our message is to be delivered by a pure church using a biblical methodology. We must guard against the idea that things are neutral. Neither technology nor methodology are neutral. As we see effective and creative ways to present the ageless message, we must do so carefully lest the messenger be contaminated by the culture. Contrary to the popular idea that the message must not be compromised but the container in which it is delivered is “up for grabs,” the apostle Paul stressed that he did not handle the message deceitfully or manipulatively in order to gain a hearing.

Second, we must also guard against the danger of isolation – when the church abandons the world. The second danger to which the church is susceptible is that of abandoning the world we are called to reach. While there are non-negotiables even in methodology, there are things that can be changed in order to maximize our effectiveness in delivering and communicating the message. Understanding technology is not neutral does not mean the church should avoid all uses of technology. Rather, careful biblical evaluation should be employed to determine what aspects of technology can be and should be employed in ministry.
Finally, we must be alert to the danger of distraction and imitation – when the church departs from its primary focus. In the Postmodern world where image has replaced word, the church will face increasing pressure to move away from preaching as its primary focus. Pastors will cease to become preachers, and shepherds and will become guides and therapists.
Modernism distracted God’s leaders by tempting them to imitate the corporate model. Instead of pastors, we had executives and administrators. In the Postmodern world, with its emphasis on self-need and self-empowerment, we are going to see the role of pastor become that of a therapist/counselor or a spiritual guide or partner. The biblical model God set before the leaders of His people as they represented Him in a pluralistic, hostile, and pagan society was that of a pastor/shepherd. They were charged with feeding and protecting the sheep. They were told that in the midst of a heathen and wicked society, they were to preach the Word which was able to take a lost man and make him wise unto salvation and then equip him unto all good works (II Tim. 3 - 4:2).

How Shall We Then Live?

When the very foundation of our faith is being destroyed, what shall the righteous man do? The answer to this question set in the cultural shift of postmodernity has spawned a plethora of books, articles, and periodical literature. Every scholar has his/her solution for the church to survive and thrive in a postmodern world. However, the contemporary church must understand that neither the problem nor the question are new to this age. The people of God have always had to survive and interact within a hostile cultural context diametrically opposed to its teachings and dedicated to the purpose of subverting, minimizing, and destroying its righteous impact on the world. God has had His enemies in every age but He has also preserved His people in every age who have successfully confessed their faith and carried out His purpose in their day. So it must be for us. We can’t ignore or retreat from the cultural onslaught or we will risk becoming irrelevant. Neither can we accommodate and accept our culture or we risk syncretism and perversion of the Gospel. We must engage our culture as Jesus and the early church engaged theirs.

What shall the righteous do when the foundations are being destroyed? This ancient question was asked and answered in Psalm 11:3 where we are reminded that “The Lord is in His holy temple, the Lord’s throne is in heaven” (11:4). What can the righteous do in a pluralistic, relativistic, postmodern society that has destroyed the very concept of truth? Three simple responses are appropriate. First, rely on God. The Psalmist reminds us that while there is nothing that we can do to stop the foundations from being destroyed, this has absolutely no affect or impact on God. He is still in His holy temple and His throne is still in Heaven. No matter what the postmodern world concludes about God and truth – reality is that God is still God and He still is trying to reconcile men to himself.

Second, represent God boldly and accurately. Because God is still God and His throne is in heaven, we must never allow ourselves to remain silent on this point. No matter how dark the hour or how hopeless the situation may seem – we must be a voice crying out of the darkness testifying to the reality and location of truth and light.

Third, reconcile men to God. God is in his holy temple – He still desires that men worship Him in spirit and in truth. Our job is to go out into a world that does not believe that God exists and to reconcile them to God so that them might render Him worthy worship. Postmodernism is no different (at is core) than all of its predecessors. At the end of the day it desires to see Heaven in terms of what is on earth. It desires to expand and hallow the name of Man in the universe. We desire to see earth through the lens of Heaven. We desire to see reflected on earth the reality in Heaven that was revealed by the Lord when He taught His disciples how to pray – “Hallowed be thy name on earth as it is in Heaven.”

As we have seen, this is not our fathers’ world. However, it is still our Father’s – our Heavenly Father’s – world. Postmodern culture offers some serious challenges to a Church committed to live redemptively in the midst of a wicked and perverse generation. The good news is we know it can be done because we have an authoritative account of how the early Church was able not just to survive but to thrive in a similar context. They endured persecution, ridicule, oppression, and all other manner of affliction heaped on them by a hostile world – and yet they thrived. So can we – so must we! This means that we will have to maintain our passion and commitment to God. We must remain committed to a Biblical worldview and perspective rather than a culturally constructed view of life and ministry. Furthermore, we will have to maintain our moral and spiritual integrity so that our good works may be seen of men that they may glorify our Father which is in heaven. Finally we must maintain the loving community by which all men will know that we are his disciples.

¹ The question of what relationship and approach the Church should have with culture has been heavily debated over the years. The discussion/debate has generated several responses or approaches that the Church can take when considering how to interact with culture. H. Richard Niebuhr, a professor at Yale University, proposed four options open to the church as it related to culture. Those options were “The Christ of culture,” “Christ above culture,” “Christ and culture in paradox,” and “Christ the transformer of culture.” Niebuhr’s treatment of these options is detailed in his work, Christ and Culture (New York: Harper, 1951). In a more recent treatment of this issue, James Montgomery Boice renames Niebuhr’s options as “Christ over culture,” “Christ apart from culture,” “Christ the servant of culture,” and “Christ and the two cities.” The first option, Christ over culture, entails the view that all of society, culture, and government should be submitted to the authority of Christ now. The Medieval expression of this option can be seen in the temporal and political power wielded by the Church as embodied in the papacy. Boice sees a resurgence of this view in the evangelical desire to “take back America for God,” or to bring about national righteousness by means of legislation and politics. The second alternative, Christ apart from culture, involves the church withdrawing from its cultural context and leaving society to perish in its wickedness. This view can be seen in the monasticism of the Medieval world as well as in some of the radical separation practices of groups like the Amish. Boice contends that this view errs on two accounts. It errs by overestimating the godliness of the godly, and it errs by underestimating the value of this world’s culture and government. Boice’s third option, Christ the servant of culture, describes a church that has given itself over to its culture. It basically sees Man as fundamentally good and therefore attempts to adapt itself to the culture that Man has produced. Rather than changing the world for Christ, the Church in this view, is changed by the world. Instead of conformity to Christ, there is conformity to the culture of the world. While Evangelicalism as a whole rejects the foundational tenets of this option, its practical results have made significant inroads in contemporary Evangelicalism. Some claiming the name Evangelical have succumbed to the lure of the wisdom of the world. This adopting of the world’s wisdom has resulted in an embracing of the morality and values of the world. The evangelical community in large measure is no different in moral and ethical practice than the surrounding world. Furthermore, the agenda and mission of the Church is no longer based on the authority and will of God but on the desire and will of the majority of its membership. In addition to adopting the wisdom of the world, contemporary Evangelicalism has embraced certain aspects of the world’s theology. The loss of the sinfulness of sin, the emphasis on the basic inherent goodness of man, the demise of eternal punishment, and the option of salvation apart from Christ are all positions that can be found within contemporary Evangelicalism. These teachings were not derived from the Scripture but rather from the prevailing cultural view. A third area where the Church as been secularized by the world can be seen in its embrace of the world’s agenda. Now that the world is concerned about ecology, racism, Bio-ethics, etc., the Church is following with similar concerns. In many cases more attention is given and more resources are allocated to address these concerns than are given to address the primary concerns of God as reflected in the Great Commission. A final area where the Church has been secularized can be seen its adoption of the methodology of the world in carrying out God’s mission. The fourth option for interacting with culture presented by Boice is that of Christ and two cities. This is the option he believes the Church should adopt. In this view, the Church is in the culture but not of it. In essence, believers are citizens of two worlds (cities), and as such they must function as citizens of this world and God’s world. Although their responsibilities as citizens of heaven must come before their responsibilities as citizens of this world, they still must acknowledge and comply with their this-world-responsibilities provided they don’t conflict with their responsibilities to God and His Word. Boice suggests that Christians should participate in their culture when possible so Christ may be represented through their action and participation. Christians should also exercise a persuasive function in society within the bounds of the just laws of society and the guidelines set forth in Scripture. Finally, Christians should engage their culture by regular, specific, intentional prayer. A fuller discussion of this topic can be found in Chapters 2-7 of Boice’s book, Foundations of God’s City: Christians in a Crumbling Society (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1996).

² “The Death of Modernity” in The Challenge of Postmodernism: An Evangelical Engagement (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1995), p. 11.

³ For example, Allister McGrath defines Postmodernism as “something of a cultural sensibility without absolutes, fixed certainties or foundations, which takes delight in pluralism and divergence, and which aims to think through the radical ‘situatedness’ of all human thought. In each of these matters, it may be regarded as a conscious and deliberate reaction against the totalization of the Enlightenment. It is a deliberate and systematic abandonment of centralizing narratives.” A Passion for Truth (Downers Grove, Ill: Intervarsity Press, 1996), pp. 184-185. Os Guinness observes, “In sum, postmodernism is a total repudiation of modernism and an extreme form of relativism. Paradoxically, it is almost an absolute relativism which eliminates any aspiration for truth, objectivity, universality, and reality . . . . It is a totally permissive philosophy – anything goes – and it’s extraordinary how far it has gone.” Fit Bodies Fat Minds: Why Evangelicals don’t Think and What to do about It (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994), pp. 104-105.

⁴ A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), pp. 12-13.

⁵ The prevailing elements of a Postmodern worldview detailed in the following paragraphs can be found in Dennis McCallum, The Death of Truth (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), pp. 12-13.

⁶ The idea that Postmodernists reject absolute truth has been challenged recently by leading Evangelical pastor and writer, Brian McClaren. “The dismissal of absolute truth is an easy misconception to have because this is what postmoderns will say and what the most radical may believe. But I do not think this is what the rank-and-file postmoderns mean. When they answer no to the question, Do you believe in absolute truth? This is what I think they really mean: ‘Well, of course there is absolute truth out there. I don’t doubt that. I just doubt your ability, or my own for that matter, to apprehend that truth . . . . In other words, what postmodern people tend to reject is not absolute truth but absolute knowledge. . . . Having a universe full of absolute truth but a world full of people grasping and conveying it with absolute accuracy is almost – but not exactly – the same as having no absolute truth at all. Failing to see this distinction, many Christians in the current transition zone keep beating the drum of absolute truth, and the harder they beat it, the more primitive and hopelessly modern they seem. Frankly, I think the term absolute truth has outlived its usefulness.” The Church on the Other Side (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), pp. 166-167. While McClaren’s distinction may sound attractive, it flies in the face of virtually all of the conclusions drawn from Postmodern thinkers themselves. At the core of Postmodern ideology is the foundational premise that truth is created by a particular tribe or community and is used for the purpose of gaining power or position for the ideas and agendas of that particular group. Most Christian theologians would readily concede the fact that none of us fully understands absolute truth. The point in the Postmodern discussion is not related to the comprehensibility of truth but to the very nature of truth itself. While all of us would concede our inability to totally and completely know and understand all of absolute truth, the postmodern and the traditional theologian part ways when it comes to the question of the existence of absolute truth; the former denying and the latter affirming its existence.

⁷ Derrida, Rorty, and Foucalt are examples of Postmodern philosophers and Pinnock, Grenz, Walsh, and Middleton are examples of Postmodern theologians.

⁸ Sweet further develops and applies this image/comparison in two books that make up a trilogy of works designed to help the church transition from modernity to postmodernity. The particular paragraph above is found in the opening section of Soul Tsunami: Sink or Swim in New Millennium Culture (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1999). The remaining two books in the trilogy are Aqua Church: Essential Leadership Arts for Piloting Your Church in Today’s Fluid Culture (Loveland, CO: Group, 1999); and Post-Modern Pilgrims (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000).

⁹ All of the material in this section on culture can be found in Ravi Zacharias’ “An Ancient Message, Through Modern Means, to a Postmodern Mind” in Telling the Truth, edited by D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), pp. 19-24.

¹⁰ The material in this section can be found in fuller form in chapters 2-4 in Gene Veith’s primer on Postmodernism. Postmodern Times: A Christian Guide to Contemporary Thought and Culture (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 1994), pp. 15-24.

¹¹ Truth Decay (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2000), pp. 81-82. Groothius makes the following observations in defense of absolute truth. Truth is revealed by God. It is the product of Divine revelation rather than social or communal construct. Various beliefs may be the result of human invention and consensus, but truth itself comes from the self-disclosure of a personal and moral God who has chosen to make himself known. With this understanding in view, the following observations must be made regarding truth: 1.) Objective truth exists and is knowable. 2.) Christian truth is absolute in nature. This simply means that God’s truth is true without exception or exemption. 3.) Christian truth is universal – it is true for everyone, everywhere. 4.) God’s truth is eternally relevant not trendy or superficial. It is grounded in His eternal being. 5.) God’s truth is exclusive, specific, and antithetical. This simply means that when God states an exclusive truth, it is antithetical to all other claims. 6.) God’s truth is unified. All “truth-claims” must be measured by whether they are unified with God’s truth. 7.) God’s truth is an end, not a means to an end. Truth Decay, pp. 60 - 82.

Sign Up For: