The virtue of slogan is brevity. Its vice is triteness.
It seems that a lot of slogans flying around in today's conversation are not helpful.. and vague at best (sorry, I'm nuts for clarity to avoid unnecessary runarounds)
For example, a pastor once likened postmodernism with relativism and sexual immorality... all the godless fruits of derrida and foucalt must be evil.
At the other side of the continuum, some pomo writers who wud consider any fruit of Enlightenment as outdated, old-fashioned or obsolete etc. Surely the most helpful way to move ahead is to evaluate any view by its own virtue, not its pedigree.
It's common and wearisome at times, to see the conversation to be one-sided (like lighting candles?) ... ie having moral absolutes OR being sensitive to culture? Metaphysical theology OR Hands-on praxis? Transformation by argument OR love?
Much ink or keyboard strokes would have been spared :) if we just bring out the 10000 watt spotlight and say...
Why not moral absolutes and love (being one of the absolutes)? Why not theology and praxis? Transformation by winsome argument and demonstration of the gospel?
Hot from the stove...
Modern Reformation has published an An Interview With Stan Grenz, shortly before he passed away.
Care for a Faith a la Carte? by DA Carson (applause?), the tone has improved very much!
Mike Horton met Brian McLaren face-to-face, offered a very stimulating chat on postmodernism, now published in 5 views on Emerging Church.
Tall Skinny Kiwi offered a quick response" to "Faith a la Carte...
It seems that a lot of slogans flying around in today's conversation are not helpful.. and vague at best (sorry, I'm nuts for clarity to avoid unnecessary runarounds)
For example, a pastor once likened postmodernism with relativism and sexual immorality... all the godless fruits of derrida and foucalt must be evil.
At the other side of the continuum, some pomo writers who wud consider any fruit of Enlightenment as outdated, old-fashioned or obsolete etc. Surely the most helpful way to move ahead is to evaluate any view by its own virtue, not its pedigree.
It's common and wearisome at times, to see the conversation to be one-sided (like lighting candles?) ... ie having moral absolutes OR being sensitive to culture? Metaphysical theology OR Hands-on praxis? Transformation by argument OR love?
Much ink or keyboard strokes would have been spared :) if we just bring out the 10000 watt spotlight and say...
Why not moral absolutes and love (being one of the absolutes)? Why not theology and praxis? Transformation by winsome argument and demonstration of the gospel?
Hot from the stove...
Modern Reformation has published an An Interview With Stan Grenz, shortly before he passed away.
Care for a Faith a la Carte? by DA Carson (applause?), the tone has improved very much!
Mike Horton met Brian McLaren face-to-face, offered a very stimulating chat on postmodernism, now published in 5 views on Emerging Church.
Tall Skinny Kiwi offered a quick response" to "Faith a la Carte...
Comments
Andrew Jones is always worth listening to.
I still think many people can't appreciate that "post" is not necessarily "anti". It's a tough one.
I see myself as a "post-charismatic" when it comes to Benny Hinn kind of spirituality. But, I am not "anti" in the sense that I don't see even the possibility of God working miracles, healing etc. In all honesty, being "post" gives me space to re-examine my "charismatic" past and how it has shaped me and yet while some discontinuity is necessary (cold turkey treatment), I also see some continuity in how God's Spirit is REALLY working now (give me a warm Ramli burger - life in the Kingdom is tasty!)
My personal reading of the more "reflective" writers/thinkers in their critique of Englightenment or modernity is in this light (*grin*)
of course, to go further .. we can now begin to look at our we relate to our pre-Christian past ... that's another story worth pursuing
Perhaps, Discordant Dude has a point that perhaps we can explore how we can be 'post-postmodern' in the same reflective mode in which we are post-Enlightenment?
Since we wanna do mission in a postmodern context, it seems wise to be mindful of both 'opportunities' and 'threats'.
The concern of many evangelicals is a needed check and balance in the euphoria for rethinking 'old' paradigms.
Especially if that rethinking is done in the mould of Derrida, Foucault etc.
Our generation wud never want to be relativists or deny the Christological creeds (I hope!)
But by importing such ideas, we may be shooting ourselves in the foot.
Of course history shows that God is sovereign and in control, so we can 'chill'... and relax.
But history also shows how pioneers of new ideas open the floodgates for later generations to go far beyond what they have the guts to do...
So while all for 'post-charismatic, post-enlightenment, post-postmodern' rethinking, there is also human responsibility to be cautious before God as well :D
So whats the next Emergent gonna be?
as dor Discordant Dude ... to use his lingo "post-postmodern" is actually where all this is already pointing to as far as the USA-UK context is concerned based on my interaction with my Emergent friends there. I've never really settled on even calling our context "postmodern" (I think you'd probably guess why .. cf. my Kairos book review on McLaren's book)- For me, it's tentatively the 21st Century Malaysian context (and we will need to unpack that in due time). A number of us don't find this "category" (i.e. postmodern) non-negotiable (it may be useful to somde degree but not irreplacable) ... in fact we're happy to drop it (Brian Mclaren told us in a personal response, he's the first to do so -Wah!!)We can work on a more useful category ... will talk more if we manage to meet in August. Or via email lah ...
So to these ears, 'rethinking' the Church's mission along postmodern thots is like asking McLaren to renovate the worship around Enlightenment assumptions (which is not extremely helpful)
Wud be meeting i-ching in bali soon
:) Look forward to the Pomo workshop