I'm taking a class on Postmodernism era apologetics.
I think this following quote offers much wisdom for Christian Apologetics:
The author emphasizes the use of presuppositional apologetics as the fashion to bring someone into the Christian narrative needed to understand the meaning and context of Christianity.
I know that the author's recommendation answers the question I had about the usefulness of a Modernistic reasoned approach which, at the same time, seems to push aside the relevance of faith (i.e. trust) toward God.
What do you all think?
I think this following quote offers much wisdom for Christian Apologetics:
On the other hand, a kind of deep “directional”15pluralism is endemic to our postlapsarian (postfall) condition; that is, there is a level of interpretive difference that concerns fundamental issues such as what it means to be authentically human and how we fit into the cosmos. In this respect, for instance, Christianity and Buddhism have very different interpretations about the nature of reality. However, we need to consider these as deep differences in interpretation rather than glibly supposing that the Christian account is objectively true and then castigating the Buddhist account for being merely an interpretation. In fact, both are interpretations; neither is objectively true. And so, to a certain extent, we must also embrace this postlapsarian or directional pluralism as the given situation in which we find ourselves. To assert that our interpretation is not an interpretation but objectively true often translates into the worst kinds of imperial and colonial agendas, even within a pluralist culture. Acknowledging the interpreted status of the gospel should translate into a certain humility in our public theology. It should not, however, translate into skepticism about the truth of the Christian confession. If the interpretive status of the gospel rattles our confidence in its truth, this indicates that we remain haunted by the modern desire for objective certainty. But our confidence rests not on objectivity but rather on the convictional power of the Holy Spirit (which isn’t exactly objective); the loss of objectivity, then, does not entail a loss of kerygmatic boldness about the truth of the gospel.
From: James Smith, Who's Afraid of Postmodernism, Baker Academic
From: James Smith, Who's Afraid of Postmodernism, Baker Academic
I know that the author's recommendation answers the question I had about the usefulness of a Modernistic reasoned approach which, at the same time, seems to push aside the relevance of faith (i.e. trust) toward God.
What do you all think?
Comment