prayeramedic.com » Postmodernism

The Shack: Love it or Hate it?

Dan — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 21:55:38 +0000

I recently read The Shack by William Paul Young, a Christian fiction bestseller that everyone has been talking about for a few years now. A discussion about the book began in the comments on one of my posts, and I wanted to continue the discussion here. What do you think?

Have you read The Shack?
What did you think about it?
Do you think the book is theologically dangerous or is it just fiction?
Do you recommend the book to others?

Let’s chat….

Your religion is nothing more than man’s failed attempt to turn faith into a science

Dan — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 08:30:53 +0000

“Your religion is nothing more than man’s failed attempt to turn faith into a science.” I actually said these words to a theology professor in 2003 shortly before my complete disillusionment with Christianity. I was tired of being fed dead, theological answers to life’s living, breathing problems and experiences. Don’t get me wrong, theology is immensely valuable to us when it comes to defending against heresy and combating error. When properly understood, it can also be helpful in grappling with the problem of evil. But when theology simply becomes a dead system of concepts and loses touch with people’s hearts and souls, we’re in the danger zone. I’ll call this academic theology for the purposes of the blog post, but keep in mind that I am NOT saying all academic theology is bad. I will simply use this term to refer to theology devoid of any practical application to people’s lives.

I recently came across a great article entitled “The Bible is About God’s Character, Not Concepts.” The article got me thinking about some of my own experiences and thought journeys. Here’s some highlights from the article:

“[The Bible is] not about ideas, it’s about people,” … “Ideas were not made in God’s image, people were.” Christians should not imagine that faith is merely about theological description….

People are tempted to pursue a conceptual understanding even of God because it gives them a sense of control amid a world full of uncertainty. But assurance for Christians does not come by way of their ability to describe unchanging truth…. They are secure in the knowledge of God’s character.

Christian confidence lies in a God who came to mankind in Jesus Christ, who loved, died and resurrected for them….

Making a science out of an attempt to understand God may give people a sense of power. Yet, like science, which it resembles, theology as it is done today cannot give insight into human meaning and ethics….

Philosophy cannot address the deepest needs of humankind. That is because human beings are not just thinkers. In contrast, writers of the Bible had a better understanding of what it means to be human. Human life revolves around the story and history….

[For example,] “How do you get to know somebody?

It is not by asking them about their weight or DNA composition. “You ask questions about their history….” That will offer a glimpse into the underlying person.

… People get to know others by observing them in different situations. Knowing people is about knowing their character, which is revealed through their behavior.

In the same way, “we get to know Jesus because we see Him in a whole range of different situations….”

The Gospels, stories about Jesus relating what He said and did, record His encounters with an adulterous woman and chief tax collector, among others. The “bias” of His disciples who wrote the accounts of His life and ministry is not an issue, contrary to contention in some academic circles. That is because every history is an interpretation….

This is so very true. I don’t believe in Jesus as a theological statement, I believe in Jesus because He was a real man who walked the earth, died for my sins, and rose from the dead, demonstrating His power over sin, death and Satan. I love Him because I have had the opportunity to get to know Him as the Word, where I also learn about Him (John 1:1, 14).

Do you think academic theology at times simply masks our desire to control our destiny? Do you think academic theology can obscure human meaning more than aid in its understanding? What are the positive benchmarks of academic theology? What has academic theology got right, and what can we learn from it?

The Church is failing…

Dan — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 00:40:56 +0000

I’m getting sick of always hearing about what the Church is doing wrong from people who offer no solutions other than to give up on it. The bottom line is, the Body of Christ isn’t going away – it is Christ’s Bride whom He loves and for whom He died. Whether She meets in houses, buildings, cathedrals, college campuses, coffee shops, or bars, She is Christ’s Beloved.

I’m really not one to talk since I used to join in the banter, although long ago I recognized the problem with how it’s Chic to Critique and that when we do so, we’re Critiquing His Bride. It’s not fair to critique without offering suggestions for improvement and becoming part of the solution. It’s easy to make pot shots from the sidelines, it’s a lot harder to work for effective, lasting change from the inside.

A lot of the complaints about the church stem from a misunderstanding of the distinction between the Church’s calling and the individual believers’ calling. Without this distinction, the church gets overwhelmed and overburdened with good ideas. I’ve heard people suggest that the Church should do all of these things:

Feed the homeless and build shelters
Help people find jobs
Offer parenting classes
Help people struggling with addiction
Support overseas missions and send missionaries
Begin mentoring programs
Offer free community healthcare clinics
Visit shut-ins and hospitalized
Build nursing homes or find families for elderly
Run a daycare
Offer bible studies and classes that accommodate everyone’s schedule
Reach out to people using Web 2.0 / social networking
Offer relevant, cutting edge worship music with talented musicians
Offer a strong youth program
Provide a community food pantry
Buy Christmas gifts for underprivileged children in the community
Offer specific life phase ministries (age, marital situation, parenting, hobbies, etc.)

Do you know what all of these have in common? They all require significant financial and/or human resources to develop and sustain! The funny thing is, many of the people who recommend that the Church do these things also don’t think the Church should have any hierarchy of leadership or organizational structure – nor a building from which to operate. Others want to see these things from their own local church, but they are not willing to contribute their time, talents, or money to support them. And that’s really not fair.

Nothing is wrong with any of these ideas, in fact I like many of them. But these are not the Church’s primary responsibilities. If we judge the Church by the above standards, She is failing miserably and She always will be. The Church cannot meet everyone’s needs.

Critics like to use the existence of a need as justification for the Church being a failure. For instance, if we have homeless people in the community, the Church is failing to care for them. But I would be willing to bet that a lot of things in most communities are actually better because the Church is offering some programs to help and is witnessing in that community. Do we assume that police officers are worthless because we still have crime or that parents are useless because kids do stupid things? NO! Why then do we assume that the existence of an unmet need is proof of the Church’s failure?

The other thing we forget is that individual believers do meet a lot of a communities’ needs simply by fulfilling the duties of their vocations. The Church is filled with healthcare providers who help the sick, social workers who help the underprivileged, emergency service providers who respond to community crises, teachers who educate children, and many more people who help communities and make godly changes in the world. But the Christian faith, more specifically the Church, is never credited with the daily actions of individual believers as they fulfill their vocations.

Most of the above-listed needs overlap with other social institutions. None of these are unique to the Church, that is, others can fulfill them. The Church does have one thing that is unique, however. This is something that NO ONE else can offer. The Church must meet people’s most vital need for the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Church primarily exists to preach the Gospel and to equip others to do the same. No one else has this message and no one else can equip others to share it.

So the next time you think of a great ministry that your local church should provide, offer to lead it and to develop the resources for it. Do a little research before making a suggestion, there may be reasons why it isn’t feasible to do something at that time. At the same time, you may find that there are many people interested in donating their time, talents and financial resources to meet a need in your community. As you develop the ministry, be sure that it also meets people’s greatest need for the gospel of Jesus Christ. Otherwise you’re just like any other social institution, and you’ll be failing at the very thing the Church is called to do.

Most Christians Cannot Explain Their Faith, says Christian Post

Dan — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:30:45 +0000

I’ve been pointing this out for awhile. This Christian Post article shows how few Christians have any intellectual basis for their faith and most cannot explain it in an intelligible way:

The faith of most Christians, even that of many pastors, will not stand up to intellectual scrutiny, according to renowned apologist Josh McDowell.

This is a concern because pastors’ inability to present biblical truth comprehensibly and relevantly has led to children from Christian families leaving the church, research has shown.

In the United States, the age at which nearly all such children leave church has decreased to 18 years.

Not even the children of many successful ministers are spared….

During the past six years, he asked hundreds of Christians and leaders why they see themselves as Christians. Again no one gave him an “intelligent” answer.

In the past 17 years, he has asked over 4,000 pastors, leaders and parents why they believe the Bible is true.

A mere six “came close to giving an intelligent answer,” McDowell noted.

“If anything is based upon truth, it’s the Christian faith,” he said. “Christians who do not know why they have faith or believe have a very difficult time expressing themselves to others.

“The saddest thing is people come to me and say, ‘What’s the answer?’”

“I say, ‘There’s no answer… There are hundreds of answers.’”

Most Christians, even some pastors, don’t even know one. On the other hand, the apologist said he could give 50 reasons for his belief that the Bible is true.

Ninety-five percent of Christians gave disappointing responses when asked why they believe Jesus is the Son of God.

Asked why the Bible is true and historically reliable, Christians replied that it was what they had been taught by their church or parents.

A common response that most Christians gave to both questions was that it is “what I believe.”

McDowell responded: “That’s voodoo thinking. Where did we ever get that crazy idea that something is true just because we believe it?

“If that is true, then there will never be heresy. Everybody would be right.”

On one occasion, 13 youth pastors at a large convention were unable to reasonably answer the apologist’s question.

Finally one young person stood up, walked toward him and told him he knew the answer.

The young man promptly held up his Bible and said, “Because I believe it.”

And to McDowell’s dismay, all the youth pastors applauded him.

McDowell said, “Young man, do you know the difference between you, me and the majority of Christians in the world?

“To you, it is true because you believe it. For me, I believe it because it is true.”

Another response the apologist received was: Because I have faith.

He commented, “Where did we ever get the crazy idea that faith makes something true? That’s idiotic. That’s so unbiblical you can call it heresy.

“God doesn’t use faith to create truth. He uses truth through the Holy Spirit to create faith.”

Christians, the apologist stressed, are called to explain their faith when asked. They are set free by the faith in the truth, he expressed, referring to John 8:32.

Yet others say Christianity is true because Jesus changed their lives.

Even this will not stand up to intellectual scrutiny, McDowell argued.

“Lies change lives; cults change lives,” he said.

To make such an appeal is “not the essence of Christianity,” the author emphasized.

McDowell said: “We owe it to ourselves, we owe it to our children, we owe it to our neighbors, we owe it to the lost, to tell them not just what we believe but why do we believe it.”

H/T Defending. Contending.

Reaching iGens

Dan — Mon, 03 May 2010 08:30:27 +0000

iGens are emerging adults, the 20-somethings that everyone seems to be talking about. I happen to be one of them. My good friend Dick Rockenbach sent me a great article entitled Storming the Castle by Scot McKnight. McKnight says that “Reaching ‘iGens’ means breaking through inflated self-esteems.” I couldn’t agree more. He points out,

… Most iGens reside behind a carapace of protection nothing short of a castle wall. Older models of evangelism aimed for people to receive God’s grace in Christ by making them aware of their profound and utter sinfulness—indeed, that they were themselves sinners by nature. But a different model might be in order to “reach” iGens. This generation may need to be wooed to the castle door, the way Paul wooed the Athenians on the Areopagus, before they will hear the gospel.

If we begin with an assault on a human’s worth, Mr. Rogers’ gospel of self-acceptance will come to their rescue. If we begin by claiming that all humans are depraved, Sesame Street’s gospel of universal acceptance will make its defense. If we question the self’s disposition, we will find that the gospel of self-esteem has created a bunker deep enough and a wall thick enough that deflection and absorption are instinctive responses. It might work to reach some iGens, but not most….

While McKnight to some extent advocates bypassing the Law and cutting straight to the Gospel, he does acknowledge that sin must be addressed. He points out some of the reasons why it is difficult to show iGens their sinfulness. He considers iGens “pre-moral” and questions whether or not they feel guilt. He states,

… Morality requires a potent sense of what is right and wrong, and it needs a powerful sense of what is true and false. Contemporary culture does not provide the average iGen with a profound grasp of what is right and wrong apart from the conviction that assaulting the self is clearly wrong.

Yet deciding to stake one’s life on Jesus and the cross requires a sense that we are wrong, that we need Jesus, and that his saving death and resurrection can become effective…. [iGens] do not feel guilt as much as they feel shame for not achieving what they are designed to accomplish.”

McKnight goes on to propose a strategy to reach iGens by beginning with Jesus and using the very issues that iGens fight against as evidence of of human sinfulness, such as war, poverty, and racism. While I don’t entirely agree with his solution, I fully agree with his diagnosis and I found this to be a very insightful read. Sin is always the problem, and Jesus is always the answer. I highly encourage you to read the full article….

Reaching For God

Speak with Conviction and Authority

Dan — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:00:31 +0000

This is a great poem by Taylor Mali that has been turned into a short video. I saw this at Extreme Theology and thought I’d share it:

Typography from Ronnie Bruce on Vimeo.

Perhaps some of the reasons that Christian music sucks stem from postmodern nonsense?

Christophobia

Dan — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:30:59 +0000

It seems that Christophobia is rampant these days. Nothing causes such a stir as two simple words: “Jesus Christ.” Have you ever noticed that if a chaplain closes a prayer “in Jesus’ name,” it makes headlines, but if a religious leader prays to Allah, Benevolent Spirit, Jehovah, etc. no one bats an eye? Why is it that when people hit their thumb with a hammer they yell “JESUS CHRIST!” They don’t yell “BUDDHA” or “ALLAH!” It just doesn’t happen very often. It makes one wonder….

The folks who seem to fear the most when the politically incorrect name of Jesus is invoked are Christians. That’s the ironic part. I know lots of Christians who almost cringe at the mention of Jesus’ name in so-called “secular” realms.

And we seem to excuse this behavior. We seem to empathize when people hide their affiliation with Christ for job security, or to maintain a “normal” social image. Aside from DC Talk, no one wants to be labeled a “Jesus freak.”

[Jesus said,] “If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels” (Luke 9:26).

I sometimes wonder if those who fear the name of Jesus really understand the profoundness of the Gospel. I wonder if they really know the depths of His love.

Sometimes they are unable to know the depths of His love because they do not know the depths of their sin. If your sin is small, then your Savior will also be small. But when we recognize how depraved we really are, we can only exclaim with St. Paul,

“I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16).

“Everyone” includes you and me. Everyone includes your coworkers, the media, your students, your teachers, your boss, your family, your friends, and your neighbors. How can we pray for the Gospel to be spread when we are ashamed of it? Political correctness is part of our (fallen) culture. We are called to remain “aliens and strangers in the world” (1 Peter 2:11), to be in the world but not of it (John 17:13-18). At times this will involve breaking cultural taboos. Even if it costs us our jobs or our very lives.

“For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:35).

But take heart, we have a great and loving God. Be thankful.

“For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline. So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.

What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.” (1 Timothy 1:7-14).

Social Gospel

Dan — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 05:45:15 +0000

I was actually writing a post about the social gospel, and then I ran across Daniel and Heather’s blog post on the subject. I couldn’t have said it better….

I also recently discussed this on my post about preaching the gospel without words. Be sure to read the comments for the discussion and feel free to chime in!

It is cool to search for God, but not so cool to find Him

Dan — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:39:40 +0000

This quote pretty well sums up the new “chic” nonreligious Christian spirituality that has come to define much of postmodern Christendom. In a church that has become 5 miles wide and 1 inch deep, the journey has become far more important than the destination.

Kevin DeYoung makes a great point about this in the book he co-authored with Ted Kluck, Why We’re Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be:

Because the journey is an experience more than a destination, the Christian life requires less doctrinal reflection and more personal introspection. The postmodern infatuation with journey feeds on and into a preoccupation with our own stories. If my grandparents’ generation could be a little stoic and not terribly reflective, my generation is introspective at a level somewhere between self-absorption and narcissism. We are so in-tuned with our dysfunctions, hurts, and idiosyncrasies that it often prevents us from growing up, because maturity is tantamount to hypocrisy in a world that prizes brokenness more than health.

I’m not advocating stuffing all our feelings, but we must learn that self-expression and being true to ourselves are not the surest guides to Christlikeness. Sincerity is a Christian virtue, as is honesty about our struggles. But my generation needs to realize that Christianity is more than chic fragility, endless self-revelation, and the coolness that comes with authenticity.

Thinking less of ourselves doesn’t help us focus on Christ, but rather thinking of ourselves less. In other words, even though we may admit that we are sinners, the solution is not to continue professing our brokenness but to begin professing Christ’s sufficiency. Instead of dwelling on ourselves, we need to dwell on Christ. Instead of being more honest about our shortcomings, we need to be more cognizant of Christ’s perfect righteousness (that is credited to us by faith!).

The focus of our spiritual journey is a person: Christ. The journey is certainly important, but not if you never get to know the one with whom you sojourn. The beauty is that we couldn’t even make the first step along the path, yet Christ decided to carry us through the journey because of His great love for us. Jesus Christ is the path itself as well – the way, truth and life.

As long as we’re still searching, we can still go on believing that we’re not accountable to any Higher Power. But once we admit that God has revealed Himself through His Word and that He became a man, Jesus Christ, we must live differently as a result. Being accountable isn’t so cool, but it’s much better than living in an ignorance that has eternal consequences.

Humility in the wrong place

Kingdom Extremes

Dan — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 02:42:15 +0000

While going through the assigned reading for my missions class, I came across some profound thoughts by one of the authors that I wanted to share.

The following is an excerpt from Cities and Salt: Counter-Cultures for the Common Good by Tim Keller, which can be found in Perspectives on the World Christian Movement by Ralph D. Winter and Steven C. Hawthorne.

The Kingdom Both Rich and Sharp. Keller describes a polarity of ideas about the kingdom:

On the one hand, the gospel can be reduced to an individualistic message that helps people get to heaven – a “get out of jail free” card with no transformation.
Against this, another idea of the kingdom has become very popular, in which Jesus’ death doesn’t so much assuage God’s wrath for sin as it absorbs the world’s evil and violence. Jesus’ life is exemplary, showing the way of non-violence and service. Jesus now, according to this version of the kingdom, calls us to work for peace and justice in the world. Basically, the gospel is reduced to a call to “repent of living for yourself and join Jesus’ kingdom program.” This may be, as one author put it, “all call and no grace.” Keller says that this can amount to just one more legalism.

According to Keller, both of these are extremes to avoid. We need to see that the gospel is sharp; that is, dealing with atonement for sin and justification by grace. But the gospel is also rich; that is, it equips us to pursue justice and cultural renewal.

This may be a faulty observation, but it seems that many of the mainline traditional denominations (who happen to be very modernist) have very elaborate doctrinal statements and often fall into the first category, while many of the more liberal and newer church movements (who happen to be very postmodern) fall into the second. Coincidence? I think not. What do you think?