[...] As well, while soft postmoderns seem to evidence humility with regards to their ability to come to know truth, this humility can often be misleading. While this could evidence a respect for the fall and its resulting effects upon the mind (noetic effects of sin), it could also be because of the postmodern tendency to seek acceptance even when the cost is compromise. Let’s face it, the less you stand for, the more people will like you. The stronger your convictions, the more chance you have to be rejected. -Understanding the postmodern mind and the emerging church [...]

This really helped me with an assignment about postmodernism, thankyou!
(I’ve referenced this properly in my bibliography, don’t worry.)

-Claire

I appreciate the succinct explanation of the “emerging church” vis-a-vis post-modernism; but I take issue with the comparison with Eastern Orthodox apophaticism. A theologian well versed in Orthodox teaching, I do not see any similarity. Apophatic theology has never been an attempt to avoid theological clarity, but rather an attempt to place perimeters around human thought to prevent heretical ideas and miscreant praxis. While it is true that apophatic definitions are stated in the negative to preserve the infinite mystery of our infinite God, the precision of these statements simultaneously provide cataphatic affirmation. The many dogmas defined at the great Ecumenical Councils were phrased in exactly this way.

Wow – thanks for that. I’m fairly certain that I haven’t heard a better explanation than what you’ve presented here. I’m not 100% sure I agree with your conclusions, but it certainly has me thinking

A good evaluation. Thank you.

To continue the train of though, what I observe with dismay is the increasing combination of soft post modernism with seeker sensitive strategies. The focus on seeker friendliness (usually to stimulate growth, irrespective of other vocalized reasons) usually subtly pushes the postmodern view towards the hard side. At the same time, it can corrode foundational beliefs.

The two (subtle post modernism and seeker sensitivity), acting together, can refocus church leadership on business considerations (growth) and away from foundational, Christ centered ones. Sadly, the shift is also often couched in Good News rhetoric. The reality can be a church that looks to creeping postmodern philosophy as a necessary requirement to become seeker friendly, all in the name of attracting converts.

This effectively preaches that the overarching power of the Holy Spirit and the Sovereignty of God are at least partially moot, not working in modern times without the help of man.

Is this soft apostasy? I don’t know…

[...] The following is a response to C. Michael Patton’s post, “Understanding the Postmodern and the Emerging church” [...]

[...] Parchment and Pen | Understanding the postmodern mind and the emerging church “When asked by the group which side that I agree with, I told them with all sincerity, “When I am around postmoderns, I am a modernist; when I am around moderns, I am a postmodernist.”” (tags: article blog theology postmodernism) [...]

Jay, there is a spectrum of belief among soft postmoderns. I did not intend that there be a definite line, but the presentation of the options.

If you are a hard postmodern, this, by my definition above means that you don’t believe in a transcendent truth that exists outside of your subjective cognition. If this is the case, then this is antithetical to Christianity as Christianity presupposes trancendence. Obviously for Christianity to be true, God would have to exist in reality, not just your mind.

Therefore, if you describe your self as a hard postmodernist, then you cannot also be Christian unless you redefine what it means to be Christian.

Hope that clarifies.

Great post. Well thought out. I disagree with some of the ways that you framed “hard” and “soft” postmodernism and how you presume there is a clear divide between the two. Is there? Is the divide that clear and unmistakable? Or is the divide an analytical distinction that makes understanding the wide variety of folks identifying with the emerging belief?

The clear divide that you posited leads you to make claims like this: “It is not possible to be a hard postmodernist and be a Christian.”

The claim that it is “not possible” isn’t empirically supportable. Or let me put it this way: I am and know other “hard” postmoderns that unequivocally identify as followers of Jesus. Are we Christians? I’m not sure what that means. But I try to live in the way of Jesus, either way.

That brings us to a quintessential postmodern condition. You assert that it is impossible. And I’m saying only from your angle, for it is quite possible from mine and those with whom I gather.

Excellent. Well said. I’ve been doing similar thinking on this. If you’re interested:

http://pastorkes.blogspot.com/2007/08/humility-mystery-and-i-dont-know.html

http://pastorkes.blogspot.com/2007/01/god-is-bigger.html

Enjoy!

-Kester