Preaching the Gospel in a Postmodern World (2)

By David McClister

In the previous article we introduced the basic tenets of postmodernism, a way of thinking that already has a firm foothold in the educational and social institutions in this country and that promises to be a formidable opponent of the faith in the days ahead of us. What can we do in the face of this great enemy of the truth? How can we preach in a world where more and more people are rejecting the ideas of absolute truth, a spiritual realm, and a transcendent God who is the source of life and morality? These concerns deserve some attention.

Of course, we must not sell out to non-biblical ideas. There will be the temptation on the part of some to postmodernize the gospel and change it to make it more palatable to those who have accepted the postmodern way of thinking. It may be that this is already behind some of the efforts of some of our own brethren to broaden fellowship beyond biblical limits. Could it be that a postmodern de- valuation of the truth and a despising of the idea that God’s truth does not change is playing a part in some attempts to create fellowship with those who are not in fellowship with God? I fear this may be the case. The only way to allow for more latitude in fellowship is to deny that there is only one legitimate faith (Eph. 4:5), and the movement in this direction by some brethren shows all the signs of a typical postmodern shift.

Is it possible to find something useful in postmodernism, something that will help us communicate the gospel to others? Again, we must not change the gospel, and we must not be ashamed to preach it when it is “out of season” to do so (2 Tim. 4:2). If the world is at odds with the gospel message, so be it. We must please God rather than tickle the ears of men. But it seems that there may be a few things about postmodernism that may give us room to present the unaltered gospel. For example, when rationalism was in its heyday, defenders of the Bible rightly emphasized that there are rational grounds for belief and they appealed to the evidence (rational, archaeological, scientific, etc.) sup- porting the biblical claims. They used a rational method to preach to people whose thinking was dominated by rationalism. The same kind of thing may be possible in various ways with postmodernism.

First, postmodernists believe that significance lies only in society. Can we not similarly assert that man’s real happiness and worth and purpose lie not in looking to himself or to this world, but that it is found only when he is a member of God’s society, the church? Like the postmodernists, we agree that isolation and retreat within oneself is no way to find meaning in life. Life has meaning only in relationships. But it is not in a set of purely human relationships that such happiness and purpose is found. Those things are found only in relationship with God and with others who are in relationship with him also. God has created a fellowship, a spiritual society if you will, a spiritual community in which we can find our proper place and be happy. The postmodernists are right to assert that man can find significance in society, but they are looking for it in the wrong society. What man wants and needs exists in God’s society, the church, not in man’s society.

Similarly, postmodernists deny that reason is the means to the truth. They have rejected the claims of modernism that man could somehow, on his own, find such a thing called the truth. Well, we would agree. Man cannot, on his own, know the truth. He needs revelation from God to do that. Human reason is not a tool for discovery of the truth. It is instead a tool for analyzing information that is fed to it. That is, reason needs something to work on, it needs information to be supplied to it. Reason then appropriates that information by comparing it to what is already known. In a similar way, can we not preach that reason alone can- not get a man to God? Man’s knowledge of the truth is the result of revelation from God, not the result of the working of his own reason (see 1 Cor. 2:6-16). We would then agree with the postmodernist that reason does not bring us to the truth. The mistake the postmodernist makes here is that he comes to the erroneous conclusion that there is no truth at all. We assert that there is truth, but that we do not know that truth simply by reasoning our way to it. It comes from God and is received by faith.

A third area of agreement with postmodern thinking is in the way it views information. Modernists were convinced that man could find, through reason and other means, the truth, and that this truth would be the answer to man’s problems. Under modernism man searched and learned more about the world than he ever had. It was under the tutelage of modernism that the information age came into full bloom. Man thought that the answer to his problems lies in knowledge, that the key to a longer and better life was to gather information. Some great things came from this, such as the advance of medical technology. Post- modernism, however, rejects the idea that knowledge or information is our savior. With this we can agree. Secular knowledge (which is often more speculation than anything else) is not the answer. We could even go as far as to say that even information about God is not enough. The gospel is not simply data given to us from God, and receiving the gospel is not like storing information in a computer database to be rearranged and manipulated. The gospel is wisdom from God (1 Cor 1:24) and it produces faith and its fruits in our lives. Preaching and receiving the gospel is not an intellectual exercise. It has to do with creating a new man with a new heart, a new mind, and a new character. The information alone does not save. What saves us is when we make our lives conform to the revealed truth of God.

 

Changing the gospel to fit a changing world is not an option, but we can usually find a way to use the unbeliever’s thoughts to introduce him to the gospel. Paul used this very method in Acts 17 when he preached to the Greeks in ancient Athens. We should try to do the same thing in the present day. If history continues on the course it has been going, postmodernism will someday be replaced by something else, but while it is here we have to find ways to preach to those who are steeped in it.

The Story of Two Contractors

By Donald P. Ames

Two men, good friends, decided to build homes on the ocean front. The first man consulted an engineer, who advised him to build back about a block on a good rock foundation. This required a road to be made to deliver the materials, the clearing of the land, and not quite as pretty a view as he had hoped for. Nevertheless, taking the experience of the engineer into consideration, he followed his instructions. Finally his house was finished, and he moved in.

The second man looked at all the “extras” the first had incurred, and decided he had learned from the first man’s “mistakes.” He built his house much closer to the beach. And since he did not have to hire a special engineer, clear the land, and build a special road, he was able to build an even nicer home than the first man. Indeed he was proud of his fine home and happily moved into it.

As the summer came, the second man enjoyed many advantages. He had a nice beach for his kids to play on right by the house. Friends flocked in, admiring the view, the sunset over the ocean, and the convenience. “Why one could almost fish from the front porch and not have to sit in the hot sun,” they said. And he would point out his friend’s house and openly wonder why anyone would want to build so far from such beauty.

Even his friend began to have second thoughts. If he had not spent so much on the “extras,” he could have had an even bigger, nicer home. And he grew tired of lugging all his fishing gear down to the beach. Friends seemed to flock to his friend’s house, but not nearly as many came to his. He even began to question if perhaps he had made a mistake since his friend was doing so well. Maybe he ought to put his house up for sale, and build one down on the beach like his friend had done. After all, his friend had lived there for several years and was having great fun. His friend’s house was bigger and nicer. It was certainly more convenient. And his friend was a good man, well informed and practical; and in this case, maybe had shown the greater wisdom. “Why had he listened to that engineer in the first place?” he wondered.

Then one year an “E1 Nina” developed. The weather began to change and storms became more frequent. As the storms increased in intensity, so did the size of the waves. Soon the beach began to erode and disappear. Before long, the house of his friend was endangered. They tried to stop the erosion, but to no avail. The sand began vanishing, and the house began to totter. Finally it cracked in half and fell into the ocean. The waves soon moved up and the rest of the house collapsed. His friend was ruined. All that he had was tied up in that home. His furniture was gone. The insurance did not cover this type of storm. It was a total loss!

However, since his own house was further away and on a solid foundation, it was not affected. “How thankful I am,” said his wife, “that we hired that engineer. Our house may not have been as big and convenient as his, but at least we still have a home.”

So is he that hears the word of the Lord and does it. Others may evaluate both houses, and maybe even pro- claiming the one bigger, better, and nicer than the other. They may regard the character of both contractors to be equally as good. You may even begin to question of what value is it to be a Christian — he has all of the advantages! But watch and wait . . . wait . . . wait! When the storms of life do come — and they will come — when the storms of grief, of bereavement, and of temptations, etc. come; the house built solidly on the word of God will be the house standing strong after the sweeping storms are passed. It will be able to weather the storms because it had God as its engineer! It had God as a sure foundation! And it had God in its future!

Now, what kind of a foundation are you building on? Go back and read Matthew 7:24-27 and Psalm 73!

Editorial Left-overs

By Connie W. Adams

Holes in the Floor of Heaven

Steve Warriner, a country singer and guitarist, won a CMA award recently for his recording of “Holes in the Floor of Heaven,” a nostalgic piece about departed loved ones who, on special occasions shed tears which leaked through these holes in the form of rain. I must admit I liked it better than songs about drinking and cheating. But Bill Anderson interviewed Steve later and good-naturedly asked how could tears fall down from Heaven when there are not supposed to be any tears in heaven. Good question. “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things have passed away” (Rev. 21:4). The Preacher said of the dead: “Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in anything that is done under the sun” (Eccl. 9:6). I guess it must be poetic license. At least that is how we explain some of the unscriptural songs we offer in worship to God.

Blue John Preaching

In recent years I have taken to drinking skim milk, something I would never have thought of doing during my younger years. Back then such milk was considered fit only for the pigs. We called it “blue John.” All the good stuff was removed. I believe we have too much blue John preaching. We have extracted anything which might possibly offend or mess up someone’s “self-esteem.” We have deleted doctrinal teaching with any teeth for fear that our denominational friends might get the idea that we think they are wrong and need to change. We have watered sin down to the point where it does not seem so bad after all. We must not be judgmental. Anything but that! Even our nation is divided over whether or not it is as bad to lie under oath about immoral behavior as it would be on other things. There are congregations that have never practiced corrective discipline on the disorderly. Well, maybe we will just leave their name off the next directory. Some discipline! We have had to strip away preaching that identifies error among brethren and goes so far as to name those who have promoted it. I hope you understand that the “we” of this article is used accommodatively and is not meant to indicate that every single preacher has succumbed to “blue john” preaching. Could that be more “poetic license”? By the way, who issues these licenses? “Let your Yea be Yea and your Nay, Nay” (Jas. 5:12).

As Others See Us

A brother in Texas has taken a special liking to me. He regularly consigns me to Hell. He thinks I am some sort of clergyman. Recently I wrote a little piece in this column about preaching in the dark and commented that much of the preaching done these days is in the dark. He wrote me a note that said if I wanted to see a perfect example of one who preaches in the dark, “just look in the mirror.” Critics are good for us. I am blessed.

Refreshing Christians

Paul said of Onesiphorus, “for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain” (2 Tim. 1:16). We get to meet and spend some time with people who truly love the Lord and whose zeal and dedication, often amid great trials in their own lives, indeed refreshes us. For starters, we meet many fine young people who have their heads on straight and are not ashamed of the Lord. Many of these come to our meetings. They have to work after school, late at night, early the next morning, to complete homework assignments. Many of these sit near the front, often in a group, listen attentively, take notes and many of them bring friends. Then we have parents with small children who never miss a time. There are young mothers (and fathers) who cope with restless children whose routine has been interrupted, or are cutting teeth, or who are disturbed for who knows what. Still they come. I have had young mothers say to me: “That sounded good, what little I was able to hear.” Then there are people who have worked late (some starting very early in the day) who come straight to an evening meeting without eating. Others have rushed home just in time to grab something to eat quickly, changed clothes,  rushed through traffic, and still manage to stay awake. Then there are the older members whose gait is slow, some with canes or walkers. But you can set your watch by them. They will be there. They not only listen well, but they often say the most encouraging things. Many of them have quick wits and I love to banter with them. They have not given up or given in to the ravages of time. These folks don’t do all this to impress anyone. They would be surprised that a visiting preacher in a meeting would even notice. But in moments of discouragement (even preachers get the blues) these Christians are there to refresh our spirits and make us want to keep on trying. Thank you folks for the refreshments.

An Interesting Event

Recently, while in a meeting at Mooresville, Indiana, Bill Cavender was also in a meeting the same week at Lafayette Heights in Indianapolis. They asked brother Cavender and me to speak and briefly review our experiences in preaching and impressions of the present state of affairs as we see them. They advertised this as “Over 100 Years of Gospel Preaching.” Brother Cavender has been at it for 52 years and I am now in my 53rd year of trying to declare the unsearchable riches of Christ. Our experiences have often run along parallel lines and our assessment of the present state of affairs is very much alike. After both of us spoke, we fielded questions for about an hour. We had a good turnout with good interest and good questions. A number of preachers and elders and their wives, along with others were present.

 

“Play Responsibly”

By Mike Willis

Advertisements for the lottery appear frequently on TV. They contain about the same message. The Lotto Jackpot is now standing at so many millions of dollars. To win you have to play. You have until a certain time to buy your lotto ticket to be a part of Saturday night’s drawing. Don’t miss out! Go buy your ticket today.

The problem is that the advertising has been more successful than it was intended. Fathers and mothers are taking the money they need to pay the rent and buy food, clothing, and shelter for themselves and their children to play the lotto. Those with the least ability to afford to play the lotto throw their dollars away with the unrealistic hope that they might be the lucky winner. They have a greater chance of being struck by lightning than in winning the Lotto Jackpot!

Another problem is that legalized gambling has increased the number of people addicted to gambling. Gamblers Anonymous groups have been formed in all of the major cities in an effort to cope with the numbers whose lives have been and are being destroyed by gambling.

Admitting the evils that gambling has created in our society, those promoting gambling sear their conscience and give a semblance of social responsibility by adding at the end of their message, “Play Responsibly!” The contradiction between the main thrust of the advertisement and the blurp thrown in at the tail end of the commercial is conspicuous. If they actually thought this was going to do any good, they may reverse the message by making the main thrust of the commercial emphasize the dangers of gambling and add a blurp at the end of the commercial that says, “Buy today’s lotto ticket!”

The truth of the matter is that this is another ploy that Satan uses to placate the conscience of those who are still bothered by sin. This ploy is not only used by gambling proponents, it is also used by other interests.

Safe Sex

The Planned Parenthood clinics and other sex education groups have worked for thirty years in our society to teach our children that sex relationships outside the bonds of marriage are acceptable forms of behavior that are quite natural. Only those with outdated puritan moral standards believe otherwise.

Furthermore they have promoted the belief that homosexuality is an equally acceptable form of sexual expression as is heterosexual relationships. Our children are spoon fed the belief that those who oppose homosexuality are the moral deviants, being afflicted with homophobia.

The consequences of these moral doctrines are coming home to the moral relativists. Unwed mothers have dramatically increased, leading to a drain on this nation’s economic system through Aid for Dependent Children. Children are growing up in homes without their father (some radical feminists are openly stating that fathers are not necessary for the normal development of children). In not a few homes of unwed mothers, the children have several different fathers.

Sexually transmitted diseases have increased. TV advertisements appear to tell viewers that, although there is no cure for some of these diseases, one can control the disease and have a relatively normal life. AIDS created a different problem for there is no cure for AIDS and even those drugs that have been most effective leave one’s life far from normal. Consequently, those with the loose sexual ethics have to educate Americans on what they should think about AIDS. For sure, one should not treat those who contacted AIDS through sinful sexual behavior as moral deviants whose immorality brought on this disease.

The moral relativists who have undermined the sexual morals of a generation of Americans are not about to say, “We were wrong when we promoted sexual relationships outside the bonds of marriage. We repent and encourage you to ‘flee fornication’ and abstain from sex until you are married and then be faithful to this monogamous relationship.” Rather, these people will salve their seared conscience by saying, “Practice safe sex!” That is, use a condom when you commit fornication or homosexuality.

The trouble is that using condoms does not always protect a person from the diseases that are transmitted through promiscuous sex. Furthermore, they do not always prevent pregnancies. For sure, they do not address the emotional conflict that occurs when those engaged in these practices are plagued by a guilty conscience. The “safe sex” philosophy may salve the conscience of the moral relativists who perceive that their loose moral teachings are producing evils in our society, but it is a flawed answer to preventing these problems.

Drink Responsibly and Have A Designated Driver

Another industry that is doing immeasurable harm to our society is the liquor industry. Those who oppose drinking alcoholic beverages are depicted as a bunch of crazy religious fanatics. TV characters are frequently portrayed drinking intoxicating beverages. Liquor commercials are among the best produced commercials on TV. I doubt that Joe Camel has done any more harm to our children than have Budweiser’s frogs!

America has a drinking problem. Alcoholic anonymous groups exist in every major metropolitan area. Drunk driving has killed enough people that insurance rates are driven up. Enough people have been hurt that special campaigns against drunk driving have been promoted by Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD).

The typical response to the evils of drunkenness is to teach people how to drink responsibly and to have a designated driver when a group goes out to get drunk.

Conclusion

What would you think of parents who brought home rattlesnakes and put them in the playpen with their two- year-old and said, “Play safely”? The government agencies to protect children would take away their children and reporters would condemn such parents across the front pages of American newspapers.

However, that is about what happens when we hold out gambling, fornication, and alcohol in front of our teenaged children and say, “Play Responsibly,” “Practice Safe Sex,” “Drink Responsibly” and “Have A Designated Driver.” About all that we are doing with these platitudes is placating our seared consciences.

The Christian answer to these problems is to practice self-control, abstaining from all forms of sinful behavior. Let’s not be deluded by the ethical teachings of moral relativists whose values conflict with the Christian ethic.