Postmodernism 101 – lesson 10

Defending and Proclaiming the Truth in a Postmodern Culture

Lesson 10 – The Deconstruction of the Mind

1) We are in conceptual transition…

– The breakdown of belief –

     – There is no universal consensus about what is true, or that truth even exists

     – We live in a marketplace of belief systems offered for public consumption 

     – All paths to God (or not to God) are considered equally valid

     – We are witnessing the birth of a global culture –

     – All belief systems have become aware of all other belief systems

     – It is difficult to accept any one system as absolutely true

     – The culture is inclusive of all belief systems

     – So, absolute truth is impossible!

– Polarization –

     – We have conflicts over the nature of social “truth” – ie, what is true and “inclusive” for everyone in a social grouping.

     – We engage in culture wars over education, morality, inclusion, freedom, tolerance… and their definitions!

2) Why?

– Objectivists believe that truth is transcendent and knowable

– Constructivists believe that people construct their own reality – there is no such thing as transcendental truth (ie, truth that comes from beyond humanity).

– Constructivists believe that…

         – We live in a symbolic world – ie, image and experiences

         – Societies create their own symbols, their own social reality

         – This construct becomes the “real world”

3) The One “Real World”…

– It is not a single symbolic world, but rather, a vast universe of multiple realities

– Different groups of people construct different stories to fit their needs

– Each language embodies different ways of experiencing life

– And so…

    – All truth claims are considered to be constructions of language

    – As a result, all texts are suspicious – they are not reliable since they wield power

4) Postmodernists believe…

– They must deconstruct the “texts” of traditional belief systems

– This is seen as liberation

– Liberation is rebellion against power structures, including oppressive notions of knowledge and truth

– Postmodernism is anti-foundational – it seeks to destroy all objective foundations and replace them with nothing

– The grand metanarratives of history have broken down – they are seen as fictions claiming to embody truth

5) Metanarratives
– A definition:
FromWikipedia

A metanarrative refers in critical theory, and particularly in postmodernism, to a supposedly comprehensive explanation, a narrative about narratives of historical meaning, experience or knowledge, which offers a society legitimation through the anticipated completion of a (as yet unrealized) master idea. The term was brought into prominence by Jean-François Lyotard in 1979, with his claim that the postmodern was characterized precisely by a mistrust of the grand narratives (such as: Progress, Enlightenment emancipation, Marxism) which had formed an essential part of modernity….

Postmodernists attempt to replace metanarratives by focusing on specific local contexts as well as the diversity of human experience. They argue for the existence of a “multiplicity of theoretical standpoints” rather than grand, all-encompassing theories….

Narratology and communication

According to John Stephens, a metanarrative “is a global or totalizing cultural narrative schema which orders and explains knowledge and experience” – a story about a story, encompassing and explaining other “little stories” within conceptual models that make the stories into a whole. Postmodern narratives will often deliberately disturb the formulaic expectations such cultural codes provide, pointing thereby to a possible revision of the social code.

In communication and strategic communication, a master narrative (or metanarrative) is a “transhistorical narrative that is deeply embedded in a particular culture.” A master narrative is therefore a particular type of narrative, which is defined as a “coherent system of interrelated and sequentially organized stories that share a common rhetorical desire to resolve a conflict by establishing audience expectations according to the known trajectories of its literary and rhetorical form.” 

– Metanarratives are seen as “secretly terroristic texts” whose function is to ground and legitimate the illusion of a universal human history

– This is seen as a conspiracy

– These metanarratives must be “deconstructed” – broken down and explained for what they really are – texts of oppression and suppression.

6) What About History?

– Postmodernists seek to dissolve history by rewriting it according to the needs of a particular group – this is known as revisionism

     – Examples – feminist or gay agendas

– Postmodernists suppress their opposition by enforcing a new “correctness” in academia, in society or in politics.

– They have a point, but there are limits, especially when they become guilty of the very “incorrectness” they seek to oppose.

7) The Goal of Postmodernists

– To deconstruct the stories so there are no frameworks for knowledge

– But this is a framework!

– Postmodernism is full of contradictions…

8) The Deconstruction of Language

– Postmodernists hold a particular view of language which developed out of literary criticism.

– Language cannot render truths about the world in an objective way

– Language shapes what we think

– Language is a cultural creation; therefore it is a social construct

9) Signifiant / Signifié

– These terms were established within the study of linguistics to differentiate between a word and the object/idea to which it refers

– The connection between a word and its meaning is considered to be arbitrary

         – For Example…

         – This is not a pipe.

         – It is a painting by Magritte!

– Words are arbitrary symbols in a closed system – ie, they work together within a given system governed by rules of that system

– The meaning of the words is part of the system – their definitions are given by means of other words in the system

– The words of one language do not covey the same meaning as equivalent words in another language

         – Therefore, language is subjective

         – Therefore, meaning is subjective

         – Therefore, truth is not able to be known…

         – But is that a logical conclusion?

         – Or does logic matter?

10) For the Postmodernist…

– There is no transcendental λόγος – no objective meaning, no realm of absolute truth that exists beyond the bounds of human language

– We are incarcerated in a prison house of language

– The deconstructionist seeks to break out of the prison of language by disrupting the power and authority of language.

– The great works of literature, the canon of civilization, are seen as propaganda to justify racism, sexism, homophobia, imperialism, economic oppression…

         – Example – the US Declaration of Independence

         – Declares all men are created equal – but the document signers had slaves, and women were excluded from voting

         – The “subtext” of the Declaration is seen as contradictory to the surface text, therefore, the document is seen by revisionists as enshrining the rights of wealthy white males granting themselves privileged status in the name of God.

         – Yet another power play!

         – And yet, the moral absolutes of the Declaration are objectively valid, even though society was in need of reformation to become more aligned with the standards it espouses.

11) For the Deconstructionist…

– The author’s intent is not important.

– It is the relationship between the reader and the text at a given moment in time that matters.

– Therefore… The meaning of a text becomes what I say it means based on how it impacts me now psychologically, emotionally, experientially, spiritually, and may mean something else at another moment in time.

12) Deconstructionism is…

– Intellectually sophisticated

– Theoretically grounded

– Methodologically rigorous

– And full of contradictions…

13) Examples of Contradictions

– “There is no truth” is put forth as being true

– There is a consensus that consensus is not possible

– There are authoritative statements against authority

– Comprehensive narratives are written against comprehensive narratives

– Postmodernists decry the espousal of viewpoints while holding a viewpoint against viewpoints

14) The result…

– If nothing is true, everything is possible

– When the objective realm is swallowed up by subjectivity, moral principles evaporate…

         – Societies are in moral chaos

         – Everything is evaluated as to whether it contributes to an individual’s personal pleasure.

         – People are consumed with self

         – Anything goes

         – People are left passive and without hope

15) How does one live without metanarratives?

– One can accept the meaninglessness of existence

– One can deny the complexity of life as an illusion

– One can settle for limited action – the existentialist choice

– One can construct one’s own metanarrative by constructing a story to command  – but is this not another power play?

16) Can we deconstruct deconstructionism?

– Postmodernists appeal to concepts of justice, fairness and tolerance – but these are moral absolutes!

– The intellectual culture of our day is admitting that it has no foundation for truth – an opportunity for Christians

– Deconstructionists are guilty of idolatry. They seek to replace God with philosophies, ideologies, rationalizations… all the while constructing their own meanings rather than acknowledging God

17) What do the Scriptures say?

Romans 1:25 – For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Isaiah 44:9-19 – vs 9 Those who fashion a graven image are all of them futile, and their precious things are of no profit; even their own witnesses fail to see or know, so that they will be put to shame.

vs. 18 – They do not know, nor do they understand, for He has smeared over their eyes so that they cannot see and their hearts so that they cannot comprehend.

18) The Limitations of Human Reason

– Reason is valid in its sphere

– We can reason that there is a God, but not what He is like nor what He has done for our salvation

– We cannot reason the Trinity, the Incarnation – for this, we rely on revelation.

19) Communicating Hope

– Postmodernism may represent the deconstruction of human attempts to do without God.

– BUT! Truth DOES exist – His name is Jesus!

20) The Church is the interpretive community – ie, we must explain the story!

Romans 11:33-6 – Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor?  Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

1 Peter 1:24-25 – For, “All flesh is like grass, And all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls off, but the word of the Lord abides forever.” And this is the word which was preached to you…

Another interesting blog piece by Jim Wallace of Sojourner’s Magazine. Wallace has been a strong voice in America about the notion of the “common good,” which is a fundamental teaching in the Scriptures. Government exists to restrain evil, violence, wrongdoing and lawless deeds. It also exists to promote the common good. The challenge is often to decipher what constitutes the common good! I certainly is NOT found in the current logjam we see in the polarized debates between the President, Congress and in cases before the Supreme Court. My hope and prayer is that justice will prevail, consistent with God’s call for us to love Him above all, to truly love our neighbor as self, putting the interests of others above our own, serving one another. A tall order!

Sojourner’s has a YouTube channel promoting discourse about the common good. Here is an example video – it is in Spanish, with subtitles, so wear your specks!

The Common Good Video Series: Rebirth in the Dominican Republic

The blog piece, which follows, may be somewhat provocative for some, but I think it offers a perspective worth discussing. As always, please feel free to leave comments below.

NB- I am neither promoting nor defending the position of Jim Wallace – I think he has many interesting points for discussion, however, so please take this into consideration as you think with me!

Blessings,
Don

link to blog or read it here:
__________________________________________________________

A revealing thing happens when you remove yourself from the daily drum of politics and become a mere observer. I did just that last year, during some of the most divisive moments of the presidential election. Sitting back and watching the deluge of insults and accusations that feeds our political system, I witnessed the worst of us as a nation. And I came to the conclusion that it’s time to reframe our priorities.

When did we trade the idea of public servants for the false idols of power and privilege? When did we trade governing for campaigning? And when did we trade valuing those with the best ideas for rewarding those with the most money?

We’ve lost something as a nation when we can no longer look at one another as people, as Americans, and — for people of faith  — as brothers and sisters.  Differing opinions have become worst enemies and political parties have devolved into nothing more than petty games of blame.

During a three-month sabbatical, observing this mess we’ve gotten ourselves into, I prayed, meditated, read — and then I put pen to paper. The resulting book gets to the root of what I believe is the answer to our current state of unrest. It is not about Right and Left — or merely about partisan politics — but rather about the quality of our life together. It’s about moving beyond the political ideologies that have both polarized and paralyzed us, by regaining a moral compass for both our public and personal lives — and reclaiming an ancient yet, urgent and timely idea: the common good.

I called the book On God’s Side: What Religion Forgets and Politics Hasn’t Learned About Serving the Common Good, pulling from a famous Abraham Lincoln quote: “My concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side.”

That was probably the most important thing about religion ever said by an American president. Presidents and policymakers usually want to claim that God is on their side, their country’s side, and even their political party’s side. But what does it mean to be on God’s side?

I believe it starts with focusing on the common good — not just in politics, but in all the decisions we make in our personal, family, vocational, financial, communal, and, public lives. That old but always new ethic simply says we must care for more than just ourselves or our own group. We must care for our neighbor as well, and for the health of the life we share with one another. It echoes a very basic tenet of Christianity and other faiths — love your neighbor as yourself — still the most transformational ethic in history.

As a Christian believer, I hold that call close to my heart and see that the biblical call to the common good means caring for the poor, welcoming the stranger, and valuing others as ourselves. These ideals inform my steps as a follower of Jesus, but they are also key to moving our country forward regardless of our religious faith, spiritual identity, or none of the above. The common good is a moral call for us all as men and women, husbands and wives, daughters and sons, employees and colleagues, friends and acquaintances, religious and secular. It’s what we owe each to each other.

How can we inspire the common good in every aspect of our lives? What does the common good in practice look like?

Well, we are seeing it today, even in some corners of Washington, D.C. It is playing out in the immigration debate as bipartisan groups come together to find common ground for the 11 million individuals whose lives are torn apart by our broken immigration system. Policy makers on both sides of the aisle have come to understand the moral imperative of ensuring the well being of those within our country — of keeping families together and welcoming those who already share their lives, their work, and their church pews with us. If we can uphold the common good on immigration, I believe it is possible elsewhere.

It’s time to ask what it would look like if we could practice the common good in the massive debates that are now dividing our country: economic fairness and social trust; the purpose rather than the size of government; the moral path to fiscal sustainability, ethics for globalization; coming together to holistically prevent gun violence; conflict resolution over endless wars; and countless others.

And if we are truly committed to discovering what it means to be on God’s side, it is time to go much deeper in seeking a redemptive path forward. It’s time to move beyond our shallow and superficial, often hateful politics and media. It’s time to do the spiritual reflection that could provide the moral compass that our politics and economics have lost and that even our religions can forget.

As I wrote, my purpose became ever more clear: to help spark a national conversation about the meaning and application of the common good. Although the call to the common good goes back centuries, the need for a new dialogue about what it means and what its practice would require of us has never seemed more critical.

On Monday, I begin a nationwide tour — 40 events in 16 cities so far. During these “Common Good Forums,” I hope to help lead the conversation on how we can move forward in our communities, cities, neighborhoods, and ultimately as a country, joining together in the common good.

And you can join me: on Facebook and Twitter, I will be posting my thoughts, sharing photos from the road, and offering exclusive access to the conversations that will help shape this national dialogue. And I want to hear back from you, too!

I think it is fitting that this whole process begins right after we walk through Holy Week. I’ve felt the weight of this season on my soul as I look at where we are as a nation. It’s a weight that reflects the very real brokenness of this world, evident in not only our politics, but in our daily walk as we ‘do life’ together and too often fail to see the face of God in each other.

But there is a hope and a true joy in the redemption that we get to share this Sunday.

I pray that this book’s message will carry with it that hope during this time when many still feel quite hopeless. For a whole new generation, the common good is becoming an ethic and a vision worth committing one’s life to. The opening sentence carries a hope that many people are hungry for:

“Our life together can be better.”

Please follow along as we begin this national dialogue. Follow Jim on Facebook and Twitter to receive first access to a special offer to purchase On God’s Side.

Jim Wallis is CEO of Sojourners. His forthcoming book, On God’s Side: What Religion Forgets and Politics Hasn’t Learned about Serving the Common Good, releases April 1. Follow Jim on Twitter @JimWallis.

___________________________________________________________

The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective (Book highlights)

.reeder-article a { color: #111; border-bottom: 1px dashed #111; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; }

I found this article on the Resurgence, and pass it along for your own thinking – post comments below!

The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective (Book highlights)

The Resurgence

Justin Holcomb reviews Pinchas Lapide’s examination of Jesus’ resurrection.

The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective

by Pinchas Lapide, translated by Wilhelm C. Linss
Augsburg Publishing, 1983

---

The resurrection of Jesus is central to the Christian faith. Without the resurrection, there would be no Christianity, as the Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian Christians: “If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain” (1 Cor. 15:14).

Historically, Jesus’ resurrection (along with his claims to be the Son of God and the Son of Man) has always been the point of contention that separates Christians and Jews. However, the Orthodox Jewish theologian Pinchas Lapide (1922–1997), in his book The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective, turns that expectation on its head. Though he does not believe Jesus is the Messiah, Lapide does believe that the resurrection of Jesus was a historical event. Recognizing that Jesus and his disciples were faithful Jews, he seeks to understand it from a Jewish perspective.

Foundational faith

According to Lapide, belief in resurrection was common in Judaism of Jesus’ day. He points out that not only does the Old Testament record several resurrections (or resuscitations; 1 Kings 17:17–24; 2 Kings 4:18–37; 13:20–21), it alludes to the future resurrection for all people in a number of places (Job 19:25–27; Hosea 6:1–2; Ezek. 37:11–14; Dan. 12:2). Individual resurrections provided the basis for the final, general resurrection. Lapide claims, “This certainty of a future resurrection of all and of a possible earlier resurrection of some people especially graced by God was the precondition of the Easter faith of the disciples” (p. 64). Thus, the Jewish faith of the apostles was the foundation of their faith in the risen Christ.

Lapide does see the cross “as a definite pledge of God.”

Though he believes the New Testament embellished some of the facts, Lapide argues that the oldest accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are simple and unexaggerated, which contributes to their reliability: “Instead of exciting Easter jubilation we hear repeatedly of doubts, disbelief, hesitation, and such simple things as the linen cloths and the napkins in the empty tomb” (p. 100). Furthermore, “The best proof for the solid faith in the resurrection is probably the realistic way in which the two oldest Gospels describe the painful death and Jesus’ cry of despair on the cross: ‘And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last’ (Mark 15:37)” (p. 110).

Only 3 explanations

In Lapide’s mind, Jesus’ resurrection and appearances have only three possible explanations. They were either:

1. A religious myth,
2. A series of individual personal experiences, or
3. Historical events.

Though formerly a skeptic of Jesus’ resurrection, re-examining the evidence led Lapide to accept the resurrection as historical fact: “If the defeated and depressed group of disciples overnight could change into a victorious movement of faith, based only on autosuggestion or self-deception—without a fundamental faith experience—then this would be a much greater miracle than the resurrection itself” (p. 126).

Resurrection, Lapide argues, is a hope Christians and Jews share.

Modern explanations of the resurrection that de-historicize the event appear to Lapide “as all too abstract and scholarly to explain the fact that the solid hillbillies from Galilee who, for the very real reason of the crucifixion of their master, were saddened to death, were changed within a short period of time into a jubilant community of believers” (p. 129). If God truly was active in the miraculous events of the Old Testament, then Jesus’ resurrection is not inconceivable.

While Lapide does not see Christ’s work on the cross as accomplishing redemption, he does see it “as a definite pledge of God, as a down payment of further hope for the longed-for complete redemption which we all are still expecting” (p. 136). Moreover, though he thinks Christianity has misinterpreted it, Lapide believes Jesus’ resurrection has “helped advance the divine plan of salvation” because it has “carried the faith in the God of Israel into the whole Western world” (p. 142). The resurrection of Jesus can still provide hope of God’s faithfulness to Jews who are waiting their messiah, Lapide asserts.

A common hope

Jesus’ resurrection does not have to be miraculous, according to Lapide. The works of God “do not arbitrarily skip the natural chain of cause and effect like the works of the sorcerer in a fairytale” (p. 150). Resurrection is no more miraculous than is the creation of life through natural birth: “Why should the resurrection of a personal ego after passing through death be more miraculous than the gradual awakening of a human being out of the lifeless matter of a fertilized ovum?” (p. 151). Rather than a supernatural event, the resurrection is a natural event that gives meaning to all of life, and “the hope of resurrection is a reasonable faith which should be sufficient for a meaningful, fulfilling life on earth” (p. 151). Resurrection, Lapide argues, is a hope that Christians and Jews share.

Lapide does not believe the resurrection proves Jesus is the Messiah.

It is unique for a Jewish scholar to accept the resurrection of Jesus as a historical event. Yet as Carl Braaten writes in the introduction, “It is the contradictory interpretation placed on the final 48 hours from Good Friday to Easter Sunday, the decisive events—cross and resurrection—on which the whole of Christianity is based” (pp. 13–14). Christians (and the New Testament) see in these events the revelation of the messianic identity of Jesus, while Jews still look for the Messiah who will establish God’s kingdom. Lapide accepts the resurrection as thoroughly historical, yet he is not a Christian because he does not believe it proves that Jesus is the Messiah.

For Lapide, Jesus is just a member of the great line of patriarchs and prophets who pave the way for the full salvation to be brought about through God’s kingdom. For Christians, the resurrection is God’s miraculous testimony that Jesus is “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:26), “the Holy and Righteous One . . . the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead” (Acts 3:14–15). We as Christians believe that God “commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:30–31).

Article: Signs of the Times

I just read an article on Monerism.com that I think applies to our discussions on how to think about the times in which we are living. The article is in the share file for this class, but can also be downloaded by clicking here or here.

If you have comments, be sure to post them below!

Cheers,
Don

Postmodernism 101 – lesson 9

Defending and Proclaiming the Truth to a Postmodern Culture

Lesson 9 – There are no absolutes, but there is hope!

1) We live in a new era…

– It is clear that the modern era is now over…

– We are living in a postmodern world.

2) What does this mean?

– As Christians, it means that we must be in a continual process of “understanding the present age.” Romans 13:11

– The church has always had to confront the culture around her, and exist in tension with the world.

– If we ignore the culture, we risk becoming irrelevant.

– However, to accept the culture, is to risk syncretism, and unfaithfulness to our calling to be “in the world, but not of it.” (see John 17:14-16)

3) How should we understand the present age?

– We are witnessing a massive shift in worldviews.

– A rightful understanding of postmodernism, necessitates an understanding of what preceded.

4) What is Pre-modernism?

– The predominant worldview in Europe  and Western societies from the Middle Ages up to the 18th Century

– Life in this world was seen as owing its origin and its meaning to a spiritual realm beyond the senses – “a first cause” or God.

5) In this worldview…

– miracles can and do occur

– Biblical revelation and/or mythical legends and tales explain the reasons for the existence of life and for natural phenomena

– objective moral values stem from the supernatural / God

– truth is objective and does not depend on our individual interpretation – truth is a person – Jesus Christ

6) Still, not everyone living at that time was a believer…

-Pre-modern stories

         – King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table

         – The Quest for the Grail

         – The Cult of the Virgin Stories

         – Beowulf

         – Ivanhoe, by Sir Walter Scott

7) What is Modernism?

–  Modernism stems from the Enlightenment, and is exemplified in the French Revolution

– The rights of Man

– Civic religion and the secular state

– Rationalism and Human Reason

8) In this worldview…

– man is autonomous and not dependent on God to explain the meaning of life

– the supernatural is rejected as unnecessary to explain natural phenomena or the origin of species and the universe

– God, if He exists, is seen as  creator of the universe. He is considered to have set the universe in motion, like a machine. He then walked away from it, leaving it to man. This is the view of the Deists.

– Civic religion was set up – our gods became life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness the common good, economic practicality, these are the basis for making moral choices – also known as “pragmatism” or “utilitarianism”

9) Values of Modernism…

– man determines his fate

– there is purpose and design in nature – man follows the model he finds there – ie, hierarchy and order

– language expresses meaning

10) Modern stories

– The novels of Jules Verne

– Master and Commander

– A Story Like the Wind, and A Far off Place, by Sir Lawrence Van der Post

11) However…

– the modern era is now over

– the postmodern era has begun

– what has changed?

12) Values of Postmodernism…

– indeterminacy, random chance

– anarchy

– the embracing of silence

– the rejection of objective meaning – meaning is subjective

– meaning is created for language

13) What is postmodernism?

– there is not one simple definition – postmodernism rejects definitions!

– rather, we must understand postmodernism in terms of its characteristics

14) Characteristics of Postmodernism

– the breakdown of belief

– the birth of a global culture

– a new polarization

15) The Breakdown of Belief

– today, there is no universal consensus about what is true

– all belief systems are considered equal in value, and to be accepted in the name of tolerance

16) The Birth of a Global Culture

– all belief systems become aware of all other belief systems

– as a result, it is difficult to accept any of one of them as absolutely true

– therefore, there are no absolutes

17) A New Polarization

– conflicts over the nature of truth cause schism

– we have culture wars over educational issues, moral instruction, which values are to be taught…

18) In Postmodernism…

– humans construct their own realities – as individuals, and as social groups

– life is an illusion – we create our own meaning and identity

– experience is valued over truth or reality, since these later don’t really exist

19) What is the result?

– people are left without a sense of meaning in life

– people feel disconnected

– people don’t know who they are

– our societies are moving forward with an arbitrary purpose in view, or not…

– people vacillate in their values depending on the moment and the circumstances

– people do not know what they believe

– authority is seen as arbitrary

– destiny is arbitrarily created

– we live in a mad world…

20) Postmodern stories

– The Stranger, by Albert Camus

– The Matrix

– Seinfeld

– Music Videos

21) The Deconstruction of Meaning

– today, all truths, all stories are questioned

– so what IS the meaning of life?

– how does my story fit into the big picture?

– IS there a big picture?????

– For hundreds of years, our culture has been losing its story. The Enlightenment dismissed the idea that we could still have a larger story, life could still make sense, and everything was headed in a good direction.

– Western culture rejected the mystery and transcendence of the Middle Ages and placed its confidence in pragmatism and progress, the pillars of the Modern Era, the Age of Reason. But once we had rid ourselves of the Author, it didn’t take long to lose the larger story.

– In the Postmodern Era, all we have left is our small stories. Our role models are movie stars, and the biggest taste of transcendence is the opening of the ski season. Our best expressions are on the level of “Have a nice day.”

– The only reminder we have of a story beyond our own is the evening news, an arbitrary collection of scenes and images without any bigger picture into which they fit. The central belief of our times is that there is no story, nothing hangs together, all we have are bits and pieces, the random days of our lives. Tragedy still brings us to tears and heroism still lifts our hearts, but there is no context for any of it. Life is just a sequence of images and events without any rhyme or reason. So, what are we left to do? Create our own story line to bring some meaning to our experiences. Our heart is made to live in a larger story; having lost that, we do the best we can by developing our own smaller dramas.

         from: The Sacred Romance, by Curtis and Eldredge, 1997

22) The Metanarrative

– Since people do not know the metanarrative, they do not understand how their own individual stories fit in to the grand purpose and design of God. They do not know what God has said and done in space and in time!

23) How do we respond?

– In our mad and hopeless world, it is our job to tell The Story ( ie, the metanarrative)!

– As Christians, we, of all people have an understanding of God’s message of hope!

– Romans 5:1-11 – Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.  And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us. For while we were still helpless (and hopeless!), at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

– Ephesians 2:12 …remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

– 1 Peter 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead…

– It is our job to tell the story, to give an account for the hope that is in us as Christians (1 Peter 3:15).

This mad world is in desperate need of the Gospel message!

Postmodernism – Lesson 8

Defending and Proclaiming the Truth in a Postmodern Culture

Lesson 8 – The Uniqueness of Jesus Christ – Myth or Reality?

Critiques often refer to Jesus as a great religious leader.

1) What are some of the common labels assigned to Jesus by critics?

– Charismatic personality

– Social reformer

– God-conscious

– Great teacher

– Moral example

2) What sets Jesus apart from other religious leaders?

– His personal claims – authority to forgive sins and to judge.

– The evidence supporting His claims.

3) What is the problem with the claim that beliefs about Jesus are just like beliefs about other religious leaders?

– Other religious leaders did not make the same claims as Christ, and the evidence supports His claims. There is a difference!

– Some refute the resurrection of Jesus citing other supposed resurrections, but…

– Historicity is unimportant to most religions, but not to Christianity.

– Other “resurrections” cannot be substantiated like that of Jesus.

4) What evidence supports the resurrection of Jesus?

– The empty tomb

– The boldness of the once timid disciples

– The emergence of the early church

– Both friends and enemies believed the tomb was empty.

– Since the tomb was empty, something had to have happened to the body.

– Women were recorded as the first eyewitnesses of the empty tomb – if the resurrection had been a hoax, why didn’t they say men were the first eyewitnesses?

– Hundreds of people, believers and skeptics, saw Jesus after the resurrection.

– Jesus was seen eating, and was physically touched by those around Him.

– The disciples were so marked by the resurrection that they were willing to suffer and die for Christ.

– In the midst of great opposition (political, cultural, economic, religious…), the church was firmly established across a vast territory in a short time.

5) What arguments are given against the resurrection?

– The disciples stole the body.

– Jesus’ enemies stole the body.

– The women went to the wrong tomb.

– Jesus didn’t really die on the cross – he just swooned then recovered in the tomb.

– The disciples were hallucinating.

– Jesus rose from the dead even though His body remained in the tomb – His spirit rose, not His body.

– Jesus’ death and resurrection were just like that of any other ancient gods who died and rose again.

6) So what do we say?

– Does the historical evidence point to a real resurrection or not?

– If so, is this an example of a natural or a supernatural event?

– What does this tell us about the nature of Jesus Christ?

– While Jesus didn’t walk around saying “I am God,” He spoke and acted as God.

– He referred to God as “my Father,” not “our Father.”

– He spoke by His own authority, and with authority, reading men’s hearts, and responded accordingly.

7) Other important considerations

– Jesus claimed to be God and sovereign judge (John 5:18ff; 10:27ff)

– He had authority to forgive sins. (Luke 5:17ff)

– He is Abraham and David’s Lord. (Mt 22:36ff; Mk 12:35ff; John 8:39ff, esp vs. 58)

– He is a king and has a kingdom. (John 18:33ff)

– If Jesus were simply a wise teacher who espoused morality and peace, why was the religious community and the Roman establishment so threatened by Him?

– Why did the early church so firmly buy into Jesus’ claim to be fully God and fully man if He were not genuine?

– What can we learn from their example of faith in reaching out to our post-modern world?