I read the article titled, "The Gospel in Postmodernity: Finding a Center", by William Stacy Johnson. I found his article to be very interesting. He states that Postmodernity (PM) is not some passing fad, but rather a shift in our culture. Which in turn means that we as the church must learn to face these shifts and learn how to deal with them and overcome them in order to be able to effectively present the gospel. He tells us that unfortunately to over come the PM mindset is not an easy task due to the fact that PM's don't accept only one answer, but rather look for multiple answers, which in turn creates a sense of no real boundaries or basis to be able to make any argument. He states in PM, there is no foundation. This will truly create a struggle for those of us in the church that are from earlier generations, because we are so used to dealing with a foundation and now have to be able to relate to those who don't have one.
He goes on to say that a foundation is not always the answer. He states that by having a foundation and a desire to search for the truth, it has in turn caused us to become more uncertain about the truth than when we first began. He feels that PM creates a sense of open mindedness in the person and therefore allows for them to be able to discern the truth more clearly. The fear in the church is then, that PM's will merely drift away from the church and God for that matter since there can not be only one way to heaven. This is a reality, however, due to the fact that society is shifting from modernism to postmodernism creates an opportunity for the gospel to be heard anew. Johnson cites that in the past momentous cultural changes have provided pivotal occasions.
He goes on to suggest that in this day and age traditional churches will not be able to reach out to the PM, but rather a church that is willing to enter into their world and embodies the grace of the living God. A church that does not try to corral God but rather allows God to be God and call us to him any way possible.
I strongly agree with much of what Johnson said in his article.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting post Jason, last evening I blogged with Jason Clark in England to research his model of missiology. Some of the exciting developments in PM is first of all getting unstuck that provided openness to new paradigms/worldview that included things diminished or removed by M such as spirituality and genuineness that is expressed in being an intentional, missional, social-justice, holistic, green ecological, biblical, kingdom community in the ECM. The manifest destiny of power & pragmatism is an issue that PM has raised. I like the call to deconversion in PM that allows for a holistic conversion. The position of authority in the individual in PM is a concern, if it is not a Christ-centered prophetic vision. This is a centered set perspective not a new foundationalism or presupositionalism. If PM is truly pluralistic then the ECM should have a higher degree of tolerance and less demonational schisms than we have seen in M; if I am correct and my differeniated group is also correct, then we should get along right?
In theory or an ideal situation we should all be able to get along, however, since we are all humans and all have free will there will always be disagreements and therefore conflict. Not that all conflict is bad, however, if you look at it from an external view you don't have a chance to see the details that will often reveal the true reason why there is conflict.
On another note you are becoming quite the "hip" professor, blogging with folks from other countries. Now if you can only get Brother Gary to learn to use the computer. :)
Post a Comment