L killers of Church

In a previous blog, I wrote concerning 10 reasons why the church is broken.  I'm sure many reasons exist that hinder God's people, but believe that three main reasons are wreaking havoc upon the Church of the West.

Liberalism

Liberalism can be viewed in many ways.  In fact, Christians are to be liberal in the giving of their time and means.  So, taking this definition of liberalism is a good thing, but how are we to see liberalism as a Church killer?  The liberalism that seems to be killing the Church today deals with individuals who don't hold God's word as inspired truth.  The postmodern push has crept into the Church today and many are questioning the truthfulness of God's word.  Renewed attacks are coming from within the Church upon orthodox beliefs.  Many, in fact, are claiming that God's word can not be seen as universal truth or an all-encompassing narrative.  What this means is that individuals or communities are deciding what is true for them and what is not.  The problem with this approach is the individuals or communities are the ones responsible for making universal ground rules, therefore contradicting that truth is not universal.

Liberalism is being twisted in the Western culture for the promotion of values that don't ring true with the message of the Bible.  One of the most glaring examples of this deals with many churches of the West acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle.  This is an extremely sensitive subject, because as soon as one points out the contradictions of the homosexual lifestyle compared to God's Word they are almost immediately branded as intolerant.  The question that needs to be asked, that no one really does is, "Who is intolerant when the subject comes up?"  Many times the Church is guilty of being intolerant, but when the homosexual community demands that acceptance takes place over God's Word then it is the homosexual community that is intolerant.  Other cultural liberal issues that have been accepted by many in the Western Church includes: sex before marriage, acceptance of abortion, and many other issues that cut across biblical teachings.

Legalism

Legalism has existed before the time Jesus appearance on earth.  Plain and simple, legalism is a man-made set of rules that one uses to justify themselves from.  It is law-keeping that misses the heart of God's message.  Many in the church fall prey to the web of legalism.  Jesus was constantly dealing with the Pharisees legalism (see Matthew 23) and little has changed today.  Too many legalist are driving people off, because in their mind they have it all figured out.  In other words, you must go to the legalist for answers, and not God's Word. One of the major reasons why young people are leaving churches or not even considering meeting with the church deals with the heavy load that legalists put on the backs of individuals.  The sad consequence of legalism is that the love of Jesus is suppressed for individual hoop jumping laws.  Legalists are interested in works as opposed to the heart of Christ's message.  For the legalist, Christ's sacrifice is disparaged simply for the sake of personal control.

Laziness

Too many Christians are too comfortable on their spiritual lazy-boy chair.  For the lazy Christian, Christianity means nothing more than filling a pew on Sunday morning, if that.  Lazy Christians feel entitled, as if God owes them something simply because they mouthed the words, "I believe."  It's no wonder that the Church is exploding in non-Western countries while the Western Church relies too much on the comforts they have been blessed with.  If the Western Church would realize that location makes no difference in God's movement, it could recapture the culture that now sadly influences the Church more that the Church influences culture.  The Western Church seems content to mouth certain "special" words and show up at a building for a 2 hour stint and call itself Christian.  Maybe, the Western Church should read what Jesus has to say (Matt. 7:21-13, Rev. 3:16) before trying to justify their fat and lazy lifestyle.

The purpose of the blog is not to be negative toward the Church, but to point out real problems that hinder the Church in the West.  On many occasions I feel like Paul who said, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst (1 Tim. 1:15)."  No one has lived a perfect life, except Jesus, but the three L's defiantly are killers of the Church.

A Review of John Caputo by Wes Widner

After listening to John D Caputo’s interview by Luke Mulenhauser on commonsenseatheism.com (mp3) I decided to get John’s book, What Would Jesus Deconstruct, and see what sort of case he could build for postmodern Christianity that would compel emergent pastors like Brian McLaren to endorse it.

I first encountered JackCaputo’s writings in the introduction to God, the gift, and Postmodernism, which he edited with Michael Scanlon (Indiana University Press, 1999). Since I’m not a professional philosopher, a number of the book’s chapters (sur)passed the reading comprehension capacities of my bald layman’s head, but not the introduction. There Caputo and Scanlon spoke in down-to-earth terms of our need to become “enlightened about the Enlightenment” (meaning, for my fellow less-philosophical laypeople, the eighteenth-century movement that eventually reduced reality to phenomena that could be measured and dissected by “objective” human reason).
-Brain McLaren, pg 9

McLaren goes on to provide a very brief outline of the book which I find rather helpful,

First you’ll notice that Jack flies you into a “zone of intertextuality,” meaning that he is going to suspend you between several texts, notably Sheldon’s In His Steps (the unlikely inspiration of the WWJD craze), the writings of Jacques Derrida, and the New Testament. This may strike you as an unlikely combination, but it will make perfect sense by the time you’re halfway to the last page.

John does rely heavily on Sheldon’s book to, ironically, provide some structure for his book which deals mostly with deconstructionalism. In fact, if you haven’t read Sheldon’s book you might find it worthwhile to put John’s book down and read Sheldon’s work before returning.

• To finish the review click here.
• Check out Reason to Stand - click http://reasontostand.org/

Post modern poison - part 3

A group that is often looked to as buying into the post modern poison is the Emergent Church. Not all within the movement would buy into the reletivizing of truth. Many young people have gravitated toward the movement simply because so many in the Church have presented a judgmental and legalistic code. Nevertheless, aspects of the Emergent movement seem to espouse that the grand metanarritive of the Christianity can't exist.

By far the most prominent leader of this group is Brian McLaren. Philosopher John Caputo has this to say about the Emergent movement and Brian McLaren, " I try to be a philosophical consultant for them whenever they ask my advice. Brian McLaren is a good friend of mine, and a lot of people I’m quite close to and really help as much as I can."[1] McLaren is at the forefront of what seems to be an acceptance of postmodern philosophy. McLaren states, "I think that most Christians grossly misunderstand the philosophical baggage associated with terms like absolutism or objective....Similarly, arguments that pit absolutism verses relativism, and objectivism verses subjectivism, prove meaningless or absurd to post modern people."[2] What's interesting is that the statement by McLaren is one that is objective in nature. McLaren consistently dodges clear statements in the Bible, concerning truth claims of the gospel writers. What appears to be McLarens road, is to present watered down truth, so as not to offend others.

Staying away from offending others seems to be the thrust of the Emergent post modern philosophy. John Caputo nicely sums up the philosophy by saying, "There’s a group of young evangelicals who are restless with the elders. They think the elders are racist and sexist and homophobic and xenophobic, and they’re sick of it. And they don’t think that the point of the New Testament is to ban gay marriages, it must have some broader point than that. It must mean something more than that. And they’ve gotten much more interested in peace and justice issues and in the spirit of the Kingdom of God, and they look to progressives like Brian McLaren to show them some alternative, what Brian calls “more generous orthodoxies”.So the orthodoxy is bad news. The orthodoxy means beating people over the head, blackmailing them with the fear of eternal damnation, making them get in line. There’s a group of mostly young people, younger evangelicals who are sick of that, and they want to hear something else. So there’s an opportunity."[3]

While it is true that Christians should not beat individuals up, it is also true that God's Word is offensive to those who are perishing (2 Cor. 2:15-16). If the post modern philosophy is embraced by McLaren or others, the poison KoolAid of post modern philosophy is taken by denying God's grand metarrative of truth.

[1] John Caputo interview
[2] Christianity Today (November 2004), p. 42-43
[3] John Caputo interview
* Interesting Brian McLaren interview

Post modern poison - part 2

The main problem with post modern philosophy is the purposeful erosion of objective truth. This purposeful erosion is done by way of deconstruction. Deconstruction, an idea from Jacques Derrida, is a way to reconstruct text. It is looking for new meaning and new interpretation of texts. For example, the bible can be looked at in a different manner and deconstructed as well. Professor of philosophy John Caputo has this to say about deconstructionism, "Deconstruction is a way to reinvent things. Which means you need something to invent to begin with. You need some kind of tradition, inherited belief, structures, et cetera, which is where you start."[1]

The problem with deconstructionism is that it leads to relative truth. Christian scholar Norm Geisler states, "Deconstructionism embraces conventionalism. All meaning is relative to a culture and situation."[2] According to deconstructionism, truth is lost, because reinterpretation is always necessary. There is no objective truth on a post modern deconstructive interpretation. Again according to Caputo, "You’ll never get to the original intent. Second of all, if you could, that doesn’t settle anything. That was just the first interpretation; it’s not the last."[3] If everything is always reinterpreted, then no objective truth exists, and this is the problem of post-modernism.

Post modernism makes way for relative truth to wiggle its way into the the grand metanarritive, this is exactly why the interviewer (Luke Muehauser) asks professor Caputo, "Many analytic thinkers will say that post-modernism is bound at the hip with relativism about truth and morality."[4] Caputo states, "I don’t think it’s relativistic."[5] Caputo does nothing to dispel the notion of relative truth, for how can you? Anytime relative truth is explained away it is done so by way of objective statements. Relativism is self defeating and post-modernism destroys objective truth. This is the problem and poison of post-modernism.

[1] interview with John Caputo
[2] Geisler, Norm, Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, p. 192
[3] Caputo interview
[4] Ibid
[5] Ibid

Postmodern poison part 1

The postmodern poison revolves around the subject of truth. In an interview with philosopher John Caputo of Syracuse University, the poison of postmodernism is taken.[1]

One of the common views of postmodernism is that no grand metanarritives exist. A grand metanarritive would be an all encompassing story that would represent truth, such as the message of atonement through the death of Jesus or simply the message of the bible. As Caputo states, "So everything that modernity tried to dispel, post-modernists also want to dispel, but they want to do it in another way. They want to do it without the overarching, very strong epistemological and metaphysical claims that modernist philosophers embraced." The keyword is overarching, in that, the grand metanarritive is denied.

The way that postmoderns break with the grand metanarritive is though deconstruction. Caputo explains, "The negative tone of the word “deconstruction, ” that it’s grammatically a negation, throws you off. If somebody deconstructs you they’re doing you a favor. But they’re breaking the rigidity of beliefs that are being held too tightly and to fiercely. They want to open you up into the ways in which things can be reinvented." Deconstruction is not concerned with truth, but as Caputo explains a reinvention of beliefs. Truth is irrelevant on a purely postmodern view. Truth cannot be reinvented, no matter how much Caputo would like it to be so. When truth is deconstructed, the poison of postmodernism has been taken.

[1] For the full interview click here

Top Ten Reasons Why The Church Is Broken

note:  I'm amending the blog based on point ten.  No where in the New Testament is tithing required.  There are examples of the Chuch giving of its means, but not a strict tithe.  I feel that giving to missions, the local church, and to anyone that God lays on your heart to give to is the right thing to do in following the Holy Spirit's leading.  Too many in the Church hoard their money, not realizing that it does not really belong to them.


The Church seems to be exploding in third world countries today. Part of the explosion is due to persecution. According to Tertullian, “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.” I agree with Tertullian, but see another reason why the church is exploding in third world countries. Charles Spurgeon said, " The Word of God is like a lion. You don’t have to defend a lion. All you have to do is let the lion loose, and the lion will defend itself." Coupled together, the Church has found great success throughout history. But, what seems to be hindering the Church in the West, and more specifically in the United States? I would like to offer ten reasons for why the Church is broken in the West.

10. A lack of giving - The Church need to give of its financial means that God has blessed it with. Your giving is dealing first and foremost with your income. The primary passage used is Malachi 3:8-10. The sad fact of giving is that so many individuals simply do not trust God. Malachi 3:10 asks believers to trust God in order to see what he will do. There are other ways to give, such as your time, but many times giving has been understood from the standpoint of giving of one's means. Ephesians 4:28 seems to imply the reason we work is to share with those who are in need.  Ultimately, all belongs to God, so individuals should give with a grateful heart as God moves them to give.

9. Denominational fighting and legalism - This may not be a huge factor, but some groups (even those who claim to be non-denominational) seem to fight only for the denomination or local church. Legalism as defined by dictionary.com is, "adherence, or the principle of adherence, to law or prescription." The religious leaders of Jesus day-the Pharisees- were notorious for a legalistic form of worship (see Matthew 23). Legalism hinders an individuals relationship with Christ and others by causing the individual to focus solely on laws, as opposed to one's personal relationship with Jesus.

8. Church hypocrisy - Hypocrisy is "when you profess something that you do not really believe."[1] The main problem with the American church is, in many ways, the Christian's life doesn't match his/her beliefs or profession of beliefs. There is very little difference between the lifestyle of the Christian and the non-Christian. In the book, Unchristian, data was given to show that 85% of non-Christians could see no difference between their non-Christian values and their friends Christian values.[2] In the same book, a staggering percentage of Christians saw nothing wrong with activities such as: cohabitation, sex outside of marriage, using profanity, getting drunk, and viewing pornography.

7. A lack of knowledge - Hosea 4:6 states, "my people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. " One of the major problems in the West today is the Church's inability to articulate and defend the Christian worldview. Christian apologetics is desperately needed in the Western Church. The essential Christian doctrines are being left by the wayside and the typical American Christian is not only spiritually illiterate, but unwilling to do his/her own study concerning God's word.

6. A diminished view of sin - Sin literally means, "to miss the mark." A sin is a transgression of God's law. Cornelius Plantinga defines sin as, "the smearing of a relationship, the grieving of one's divine parent and benefactor, a betrayal of the partner to whom one is joined by a holy bond."[3] It seems in the Church today sin is minimized. Too many are willing to justify sin, as Christians in America conform more and more to a worldly viewpoint. When sin is pointed out, there is actually a resistance by some in the American church that you are being judgemental without a realization that you might possibly be offending a holy God. Sociologist James Hunter points out the minimizing of sin by saying, sin "now finds its home mostly on desert menus. 'Peanut Butter Binge' and 'Chocolate Challenge' are sinful; lying is not. The new measure for sin is caloric."[4]

5. A lack of prayer - Simply put, when God's people don't pray, God will not act. 2 Chronicles 7:14 states, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." Prayer is integral to the foundation of the Church. As stated in second Chronicles, God's people must be willing to cry out to him. It seems the only time some pray is when they need something from God or they are at the end of their rope. Prayer is a critical component to a healthy church.

4. Judgmental - One of the common themes expressed toward the Church today is that it is too judgmental. The compassion of Christ seems to be lacking in many ways as the Church is too quick to condemn others. A survey of non-Christians finds that 87% of them believe the Church is too judgmental.[5] Jeff expresses a common sentiment by saying, "Christians talk about hating sin and loving sinners, but the way they go about things, they might as well call it what it is. They hate the sin and the sinner."[6] Suggestions for creating dialogue include: 1. Listen to the other side before speaking, in other words, be willing to dialogue., 2. Don't label individuals., 3. Don't be a know it all., 4. Be empathetic., 5. Be genuine., and 6. Be friendly without preconceived motives.[7]

3. Too accepting of post-modern philosophy - By far the most dangerous philosophy of post-modernism is the "rejection of objective truth."[8] If truth is not objective then it is up to community or individuals to construct their own truth. So, what may be true for me, may not be true for you. This view is know as relativism. The bible presents itself as a grand meta-narrative. A grand meta-narrative would be an all encompassing view that the whole of the bible is objectively true and speaks of necessary truth for all humans. Unfortunately, this view that truth is relative is being accepted by some in the Church today, more specifically with a movement called the "Emergent Church." Not all who belong to this movement would espouse the view of post-modern relativism, but a segment exists, none the less, that seems to adhere to post-modern philosophy. If truth is relative to individuals or cultures, then ultimately the bible as God's word can't be trusted.

2. Idol worship - As the saying goes, "The more things change, the more they stay the same." Today's Western culture is saturated with idols, they may not be the personal idols of old, but idol worship continues even within God's church. Herber Schlossberg wrote an excellent book describing the problem of idol worship within the American Church called, Idols for Destruction.[9] In his book, he lists five categories of idol worship: 1. Idols of humanity, 2. Idols of Mammon, 3. Idols of nature, 4. Idols of power, and 5. Idols of religion. The over arching problem with idol worship is that it promotes humans as gods. God no longer receives the the place that he rightfully deserves. Schlossberg says, "Humanitarianism was the term originally applied to the followers of a group of eighteenth-century theologians who affirmed the humanity but denied the deity of Christ. It was later used when speaking of the Religion of Humanity, and it carries the subsidiary meaning of the worship of the human race."[10] Today's idols are wreaking havoc on the American Church, from pornography, to an increased appetite for money and power. Schlossberg adds that, "the anarchy of humanism (ultimately) brings enslavement"[11] ; enslavement not just to the individual, but enslavement of the church to the world.

1. Spectators - From my viewpoint as a pastor, the American Church is far too apathetic and willing to participate only as spectators. Not all American Christians are like this, but many are far too willing to sit on the sidelines as opposed to following the great commission. Part of the problem is that pastors are simply not disciplining and training the church in a proper way, but again, there seems to be a spirit of apathy within the Church. Other problems that exist could be strongholds of Satan that the local church needs to be in prayer about, or possibly the Church in America is just too comfortable in its lifestyle to get involved in the Lord's work. From my perspective, much of the problem lies on an individual mindset within the Church that sees the Church as a ticket booth. Some see the Church as their way of punching a heavenly ticket and nothing more. Jesus said "Go and make disciples," not, "Come to church." The principle problem with the broken Western Church is that we have forgotten our mission here on earth. Christianity, rightly defined, is an action word, and not as many would have it being, just operating as a club for members to act as spectators only.

Not all is bad with the Church in the West or America. The United States has always been at the forefront of helping others around the world. The United States has also provided the world with an abundance of missionaries worldwide, and as a result, the Church is growing at its fastest rate ever[12], due in part to the efforts of Christians in America with God's help. The Church in the West, with all of its problems has done and continues to do much good.

The ten problems listed are by no means exhaustive. Many would not rank them in order as I presented. This is not meant to be a bashing of God's Church, but a realization that if we don't address these problems, the Church of the West will be further weakened. God's Church will survive and thrive until His return as promised by Jesus, " I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. (Matt. 16:18)" Finally, as Christians we all need to remember the advise of the Hebrew writer, "Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith (Heb. 12:2);" for when we do so the Church will truly see with clarity the task of the bridegroom (John 3:29).

[1] Kinnaman, David and Gabe Lyons, Unchristian, p. 41
[2] Ibid, p. 48
[3] Plantinga, Cornelius, Not The Way It's Supposed To Be, p. 12
[4] Hunter, James as quoted in Not The Way It's Supposed To Be, preface-p. x
[5] Kinnaman, David and Gabe Lyons, Unchristian, p. 182
[6] Ibid, p. 181
[7] Ibid, p. 194-95
[8] Moreland, J.P., Kingdom Triangle, p. 67
[9] Schlossberg, Herbert, Idols for Destruction
[10] Ibid, p. 51
[11] Ibid, p. 87
[12] Ibid, Moreland, p. 166-68

The empethatic emergent

One of the common themes that surrounds the emergent movement is that of empathy. Empathy is a good thing. All Christians should be compelled as Jesus was to relate to others. The problem, as I see it, is that truth is sometimes compromised at the expense of not wanting to offend others.

Brian McLaren has made this statement concerning the question of homosexuality, "Frankly, many of us don't know what we should think about homosexuality." He goes on to say, "Perhaps we need a five-year moratorium on making pronouncements."[1] In one way I can see what I believe McLaren is trying to do. There have been many slanderous statements and fronts put on the homosexual community by those that call themselves Christian; this it seems is what McLaren wants to dodge so as not to come across as offensive. I applaud his concern for his fellow man, though I have a problem with one aspect of this approach. It appears that in his empathy, the truth of scripture is compromised. When Jesus was presented the woman caught in adultery, he offered both grace and truth (John 8:1-11). The truth came in the fact that he asked her to sin no more.

I'm sure Brian and others within the Emergent Movement don't want to compromise the truth of God, but that is exactly what they do when empathy (grace) is leaned on at the expense of truth. We can all agree that following God is not a simple task. One has to constantly deny himself/herself daily, and even at that we trip and fall. We have no business in pointing to specks in others' eyes when we are blinded by the lumberyard in our own eye, but again, we need to be willing to state the truth to others in a loving way.

C.S. Lewis once remarked on the individual who said that Jesus was only a good man by saying, "But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."[2] Similar to this thought is the idea that the message of Jesus is to only show empathy; he didn't leave that option to us as either. Jesus had some harsh things to say to those who were willing to listen. Sure, the Church should be vigilant in reaching out to individuals who have not submitted their lives to Jesus, but never at the expense of truth. Christians need to lovingly present the good news to all in a manner that is not condemning, but at the same time, truth should be defended. Peter states: "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect (1 Peter 3:15)." We all need to be prepared to give an answer concerning truth, but in a gentle and respectful manner.

[1] http://www.outofur.com/archives/2006/01/brian_mclaren_o.html
[2] Lewis, C.S., Mere Christianity, P. 40-41

Reaching Postmoderns

Probably the biggest reason for the success of the Emergent movement is its reaching out to the younger generation. In general the North American church has been doing a poor job in some instances in sharing the love of Christ. Many of the 20 to 30 year olds have a bad taste in their mouth for what they perceive as a stagnant and judgemental Church. The two topics that commonly surface deal with homosexuality and churches that are too fundamentalist.

It is true that a large portion of young postmoderns are completely turned off with the present status of many North American churches. It is also true that the Emergent movement has been doing a good job of reaching out to those who feel disengaged from the message of Christ. The problem, however, comes in the form of a question: At what expense are we to reach out to others and just how much of the post modern message should the Church adopt? If the Church is reaching out at the expense of truth, then the end result of conversion is a moot point, for how can one really know who or what they are following? Truth is absolute and it absolutely cannot be compromised. What I find disturbing within the Emergent movement is this aspect of backing away from truth so as not to offend others.

Reaching the postmodern generation with the good news is a difficult task these days. More and more of the younger generation are becoming skeptical because of how the previous generation has failed to empathise with the young. The problem, as I see it, is one of relations as opposed to watering down the truth of Christianity. Many times Jesus made statements that were very divisive to the people of his day. He did this, because truth is important. Truth has life and death implications. So, truth should never be thrown under the bus at the expense of trying to find common ground. I will say that many in the Church are extremely judgmental and this has not only left a bad mark on the Church, but has driven away scores of individuals.

The Emergent movement will always have an appeal because of the approach, but it will fail in bringing individuals to Christ if the true message of Christ is minimized. John 1:14 states that Jesus came full of "grace and truth." All individuals who wear the name of Christ need to bear this in mind.

Emerging truth

By far the biggest charge leveled at the "Emergent Movement" revolves around the subject of truth. Is truth relative or objective? According to orthodox Christianity, truth must be objective. If truth is relative, then the grand metanarritive of Scripture cannot be trusted. David Roach summarizes the post modern problem by saying, "The worldview of postmodernism -- complete with an epistemology that denies the possibility of or need for propositional truth -- affords the movement an opportunity to hop, skip and jump throughout the Bible and the history Christian thought in order to take whatever pieces they want from one theology and attach them, like doctrinal post-it notes, to whatever picture they would want to draw." [1]

Other differences prevail within the post modern "Emergent Movement." Some of the issues revolve around the culture of the "Emergent Movement" as compared to the culture of many traditional churches in North America. Some within the "Emergent Movement" see the North American church as being stale and institutionalized, as if the Church has lost its way in what it means to be a community of believers. Community takes on a large role within the "Emergent Movement." Typically, emergent churches tend to be made up of 20 to 30 year old individuals, with very few that are elderly. Emergent churches are found in large urban areas and tend to have a more liberal view than non-emergent churches. For example, some of the points of contention that differ include: different approaches to sharing the gospel, moral views are emphasized in a different manner, especially the subjects of abortion and homosexuality,and political differences that seem to favor the left as opposed to the majority of North American churches.

One of the biggest leaders in the "Emergent Movement" is Brian McLaren.[2] Although his views do not represent the entire movement he is usually mentioned first as the most influential leader within the movement. In the coming blogs the differences of the "Emergent Movement" will be examined. Much of what the movement offers has been a wake up call to many stagnant aspects of churches, not only in North America, but the entire West.



1. For the entire article see: http://bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=20420
2. Brian McLaren's websight: http://www.brianmclaren.net/
* Interesting dialogue between Brian McLaren and Chuck Colson on the post modern push within the emergent church movement: first is Mclaren's response to a Colson article in Christianity today - http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/000269.html Second is a response to McLaren by Colson - http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/000160.html

The post-modern push

The post-modern era has brought a radical shift within some of the churches in the west today. We do live in a time that is after the modern age. Modernism in many ways sprang from the enlightenment period where much emphasis was put on reason and empirical science. Perhaps the biggest shift dealt with the field of epistemology (how we obtain knowledge). From the modern point of view knowledge could be grounded in absolute or objective truth. In a modern framework, truth could be known. However, those who hold to a post-modern view see truth as being subjective in many ways.

Deconstructionism has played a major role in post-modern thinking. Jacques Derrida, is commonly refereed to as the author of deconstructive thought. Deconstructionism [1] could be simplified as follows, "There is no grand metanarrative." To boil this down further, truth is not objective or absolute. A grand metanarrtive, would therefore, be objective or absolute, which the post-modern's would deny. It is this aspect of post-modernism that scares many Christians today. For when the grand metanarrative (objective truth) is called into question, the whole nature of Scripture and reality becomes incredibly fuzzy.

The post-modern push within the Church today has been explored and will continue to be explored in how it relates to orthodoxy. There are several points to be addressed in the coming blogs. What are the effects of post-modernism in the church today, specifically the "Emergent Church" movement? What views are espoused by the "Emergent Church" movement? Finally, How should the Christian community handle itself in a post-modern society?

1 Jacques Derrida and his views of Deconstructionism