Monday, April 4, 2011

On The Merits of Post-Modernism And The Limits of Christian Apologetics

18For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
 19For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
 20Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
 21For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
 22For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
 23But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
 24But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
 25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

-1 Corinthians 1:18-25


Recently, postmodernism has been drawing a fair amount of flak from Christian circles. It is not uncommon to hear in talks by preachers and apologists alike something along the lines of "In this postmodern day and age..", followed by some way in which the propagation of the gospel is impeded. However does postmodernism in itself really oppose Christianity? This is something that I wish to examine further in this post.

What is Postmodernism?

Postmodernism is often held to be a "mood" that emerged after the modern era (Post + Modern). After the enlightenment which celebrated the use of science and reason to probe the mysteries of the cosmos, it became apparent that reason and science were inadequate to provide a full unified understanding of the universe and the meaning of life. It was from this realisation that postmodernism gradually emerged, advocating skepticism, relativism and the absence of objective truth.  

Postmodernism vs Christian Apologetics?

Christianity's aversion to postmodernism is not altogether unexpected. Many who hold postmodern ideals of skepticism and relativism scoff at Christianity, believing its assertion of God as an objective reference for truth, meaning and morality to be dogmatic and arrogant. Therefore now many Christian apologists and theologians have taken it upon themselves to prove Christianity right and postmodernism wrong.

One of the most popular arguments against postmodernism goes something along the line of this:

If you make a statement "everything is relative", you must ask yourself whether that statement you just made is relative too. If it is relative then that statement is not always true to begin with implying that some things are not relative. If that statement is false, it also means that not everything is relative. The statement kind of self destructs on itself. Thus objective truth must exist because it is impossible to deny it.

The argument is rather compelling, yet to me it has also always seemed to be a bit of a cop out or a cheap shot. However on further analysis, I do not think the argument really damages the postmodernist view. Once you establish that some form of objective truth must exist, there still remains the problem of deciding exactly what that objective truth is. Christianity says "aha!" that objective truth is God and his will for mankind. Yet what merits Christianity to be chosen as that objective truth as compared to other ideologies and religions? In the end it appears that even if somehow objective truth does exist, it cannot be known. Doesn't that sound rather postmodernist?

Christian apologists have come up with various elaborate and elegant arguments for the existence of God. However, in the end all proofs eventually lead to propositions that themselves cannot be proven. The postmodernist does have a point when he asserts that everything is known because we want to know. Now I acknowledge the that writing this post would be pointless if reason and meaning are invalid. Thus it is my view that everything is known not just because we want to know but also because we need to. In the end choosing an ontic, a point of reference, and taking it as axiomatic is something everyone has to do. Apologetics  has only served to present Christianity as a reasonable option out of many.

Validity of Apologetics?

However is the current practice of justifying the Christian faith using reason and logic truly in line with what Christianity teaches? The most common justifications usually comes in the form of 1 Peter 3:15 where we are told to "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope you have". Apologetics has done so by taking on skeptics and intellectuals with their own weapons, debating them with reasoned arguments and logical frameworks. Yet one must question whether this is effective or even necessary.

Turning to the piece of scripture at the start of this post, it is apparent that Paul is questioning the wisdom of man as compared to that of God. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts" says the Lord in Isaiah 55:9. The Jews looked to signs and wonders for proof of God's existence while the Greeks looked for wisdom. Both with their respective criteria for proof were unable to comprehend the Gospel which to them was "foolishness". 


Christianity does not work because it is the most logically consistent or because it can be proven without a doubt. All the most intricate reasoning and well crafted arguments are useless if God himself does not act. Notice that in Acts 16:14 it is the lord that "opened her heart to respond to Paul's message".

Conclusion

When Job went through his period of intense suffering, all the reasons that his friends gave him for his plight did not satisfy him. Even when God himself appeared before Job, God did not give Job a reason for his suffering even though we as readers know about the conversation between God and Satan at the beginning of the book. Instead of providing answers he proceeds to question Job:

1Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
 2Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

-Job 38:3-4

This is followed by a long list of questions which we as humans obviously have no answer. In the end Job is forced to admit that many things are obscured from him, yet he is still satisfied by God's presence.

This is why i do think postmodernism has its merits. The truth is that there are many things we do not, and will never comprehend. "Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men". Whatever logics are reasoning we apply in hope of achieving objective truth fall short. In a way postmodernism does cause people to doubt the objectivity of Christianity. Yet confronted with the realisation of one's limitations and fallibility in this strange universe, it also creates the room for one to turn to God by FAITH. Afterall " faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen".  

1 comment:

  1. Certainly a well thought write up, i like how you end up "Yet confronted with the realisation of one's limitations and fallibility in this strange universe, it also creates the room for one to turn to God by FAITH. Afterall " faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen".

    At the end of the day, there's so much of God we do not know and we try to reason him out with our own knowledge, but its that deep assurance from our Lord of who we are in Him which lead to the Hope we profess that matters the most in the end!

    ReplyDelete