Editor’s note: This article is part of a two-part series titled “How to Evangelize Postmodernists.” Part two is available here.
A part of every effective evangelistic strategy is rightly understanding the beliefs of those you are seeking to evangelize. Knowing what your interlocuters believe and what makes them tick, so to speak, will help you be more effective at relaying the good news of Jesus Christ. This is why missionaries seeking to reach Muslims will research Islam and the Quran, and those seeking to reach Hindus will study Hinduism and the Vedas, etc. While it is clear in Scripture that God is sovereign over salvation, we should strive to do our best to be winsome and knowledgeable about those we are seeking to reach.
Though it is not a religion per se, this is no less true for those who embrace postmodernism. Though very few people would likely choose the label “postmodernist”[1] to describe themselves, the modern West is heavily influenced by postmodern thought. The average person on the street may not know anything about Michel Foucault and Jean-François Lyotard, but that does not mean that their ideas are not mainstream in our culture. Thus, for Christians who are trying to be faithful to reach the lost in the American context, it would be wise to learn about postmodernism so that we can more effectively engage postmodernists.
But before jumping into this topic, I want to say that there are very few original thoughts in what follows. I was greatly helped in my research by D. A. Carson[2], Douglas Groothuis[3], James Sire[4], and Sam Chan.[5] If one desires more information on postmodernism at large, all of these resources would be helpful. With that noted, let’s jump in!
What Is Postmodernism?
To rightly evangelize postmoderns, we must understand what postmodernism is. However, to understand postmodernism correctly, we must first understand what modernism is. Modernism was largely built upon the ideas of foundationalism. Foundationalism argues that knowledge is the result of understanding foundational truths that are either self-evident (those facts that are so obviously true they don’t need to be argued for or proven, i.e., the law of non-contradiction) or those that can be tested and confirmed through our senses. In other words, being rational and using logic to prove something is fundamental to foundationalism. We can make objective decisions to determine truth by using logic and reason. You may have heard the terms “rationalism” and “empiricism” before, and that is what these two “isms” are largely getting at. So, in answering the question of “How do we know something?” moderns would say, “Because our use of reason or testing/verification tells us so.”
With this in mind, let’s consider how to define postmodernism. People have differing definitions of postmodernism, and a consensus definition has not emerged. Getting a descriptive definition that is not obscure is hard to find as well. One of the easier-to-understand definitions actually comes from PBS! They define postmodernism this way: “A general and wide-ranging term which is applied to literature, art, philosophy, architecture, fiction, and cultural and literary criticism, among others. Postmodernism is largely a reaction to the assumed certainty of scientific, or objective, efforts to explain reality.”[6]
Don Carson would argue that postmodernity is largely a reaction to the epistemological certainty of modernism.[7] Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that examines how we know what we know. So, Carson argues that postmodernism takes great issue with how moderns are so certain that they know what they know. If you read about postmodernism more broadly, you’ll notice that most definitions argue that postmodernism is largely a critique of modernism.
What Are the Core Beliefs or Big Ideas in Postmodernism?
One of the core beliefs of postmodernism is the rejection of objective truth. Friedrich Nietzsche famously said that “God is dead.”[8] By this, Nietzsche meant that with the rise of modernism, reason, and skepticism, the traditional conception of God could not possibly be true or viable. And when God is removed from the equation, so is objective truth.
Nietzsche also pondered the essence of truth. He said, “What, then, is truth? A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms–in short, a sum of human relations, which have been enhanced, transposed, and embellished poetically and rhetorically…”[9] In other words, truth is not objectively there. It is described in the language in which we tell our metanarratives (more on this below), but there is nothing more truly there. If we continue to insist that we have the one true story, we are delusional. As James Sire noted commenting on Nietzsche’s thought here, “Those who hang on to their metanarrative as if it really were the master story, encompassing or explaining all other stories, are under an illusion. We can have meaning, for all these stories are more or less meaningful, but we cannot have truth.”[10] From a slightly different angle, listen to the way Douglas Groothuis describes it:
For these postmodernist thinkers, the very idea of truth has decayed and disintegrated. It is no longer something knowable by anyone who engages in the proper forms of investigation and study. Truth is not over and above us, something that can be conveyed across cultures and over time. It is inseparable from our cultural conditioning, our psychology, our race and our gender. At the end of the day, truth is simply what we, as individuals and as communities, make it to be and nothing more. Truth dissolves into a host of disconnected “truths,” all equal to each other but unrelated to one another; there is no overall, rational scheme of things.[11]
And this thought introduces another major point within postmodernism, and that is its focus on language. According to postmodernism, all language is a social or human construct. We create language systems, but language does not describe anything true necessarily. Rather, language is used for practical purposes, i.e., to get things done, and to construct “truth” for that community. Therefore, since there is no objective truth behind language, but rather pragmatism (“pragmatism” is a philosophical view that affirms theories or beliefs in terms of their practical application or their ability to get things accomplished), truth is determined by the community. If language is a communal activity and you can convince enough people to agree with you and what you say, then that is “truth” for that community.
Another focal aspect of postmodernity that is attributed to the work of Jean-Francois Lyotard, who is considered one of the founders of the movement, is an “incredulity toward metanarratives.”[12] A metanarrative is the big-picture story that defines one’s worldview. So, for Christians, we have our story which is derived from the Scriptures. Our story goes that there is a Creator God who created and sustains the world (Gen.1-2; Heb. 1:3) The disobedience of the first couple brought sin and death to His creation (Gen. 3), but He made a way for reconciliation through the life, death, and resurrection of His Son (John 3:16). And on and on. But that is our metanarrative that frames how we view all of reality.
And other people have their own metanarratives, whether they be naturalists who do not believe in the supernatural, Marxists who view all things from the lens of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, the Muslim who believes the story of the Quran, etc. Postmodernists believe that no metanarrative is any better than any other. All these stories are equally valid for those people who believe them. If they work for these people, then they are validated and true (at least they are true for those who believe them).
But notice how this quickly leads to relativism. If your community believes that Jesus is God, well, He might be God for you and your community, but not for someone else or some other community who holds to Allah being God. No one’s story, in other words, is any more “true” than anyone else’s. We are all just playing language games, and if your story helps you live a more meaningful life, then good. But you have no business or authority in telling others that you have the one true story. Listen to how Sam Chan describes the implications of this:
In this way, postmodernity recognizes that knowledge is power. The one who gets to tell the story and impose it as a metanarrative upon others is playing a power game. In postmodernity, there is deep mistrust of organized religion, government, and other forms of established authority because that is exactly what authority figures do: they impose their metanarrative upon all peoples and use truth as a weapon to force people to conform to their metanarrative. That’s also why, in postmodernity, we employ a hermeneutic of suspicion upon a narrative or truth claim. We deconstruct the narrative or truth claim by asking, “What power game is this person playing?”[13]
As you have probably already discerned, this view is at the root of a lot of the social ideologies in our current culture like Critical Race Theory (CRT), Queer Theory, Fat Theory, etc.
Additionally, because language is viewed from this perspective, objective interpretation is also impossible. If truth is subject to the fancy of a community, then is there really a right and wrong way of interpretation? This is where the word “deconstruction” comes into the picture. As James Sire notes:
There is as well a problem with the stories themselves. How is the language in which they are expressed to be interpreted? Within the deconstructionist segment of postmodernism, the stories we tell ourselves and others do not have a determinate meaning. They are subject to normal misreading through lack of intelligence or basic background, or difference between the writer’s or speaker’s background or context and that of the reader or listener. There is an inherent indeterminacy to language itself. Stories all contain the seeds of self-contradiction. Texts and statements mean only what readers take them to mean.[14]
Therefore, when it comes to interpretation, authorial intent is often jettisoned. In other words, what the author meant when he wrote something is largely irrelevant. In fact, it’s impossible to recover what the author intended according to this view. This is because postmodernists, under the influence of one of the leaders named Jacques Derrida, adopt a form of a view called referentialism. Referentialism argues that there is no perfect correspondence between words and the meaning that they confer. Therefore, as Norman Geisler argues, “meaning…is ultimately untransferable between writer and reader.”[15] Now, as I will argue in part two, this view is ultimately self-defeating. Nonetheless, it is important to try to understand where they are coming from.
Without going into much more detail, a couple of other aspects of postmodernism that are worth mentioning are complexity and contradiction; postmoderns value that things are not always what they seem. They value complexity, and one of their adamant rejections is that things are never as clear or as simple as moderns often made it. Additionally, postmoderns value concrete experiences. They are not fond of abstract principles but prefer real-life experiences. They desire to define their own reality based on how they feel, what works, and what they think improves their (and others’) way of life.
By way of summary, postmodernism can be roughly defined by the following characteristics (other characteristics could be added, and these appear in no particular order):
- A critical nature towards rationalism and empiricism (logic and verification to discern truth).
- A rejection of absolute truth.
- “Truth” is determined by one’s community.
- Language is a social construct that is used for pragmatic purposes.
- A skepticism of metanarratives (no metanarrative is any better than any other).
- Knowledge is power (hence skepticism of those in power and controlling metanarratives).
- Objective interpretation is impossible.
- A valuing of the complex and a rejection of the simple.
- A valuing of the concrete and a rejection of the abstract.
__________
[1] Throughout this article, “postmodernist” and “postmoderns” will be used synonymously.
[2] D. A. Carson, The Gagging of God.
[3] Douglas Groothuis, Truth Decay.
[4] James Sire, The Universe Next Door.
[5] Sam Chan, Evangelism in a Skeptical World.
[6] https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/postm-body.html#:~:text=A%20general%20and%20wide%2Dranging,objective%2C%20efforts%20to%20explain%20reality.
[7] Carson, The Gagging of God, 57-64.
[8] Frederick Nietzsche’s writings, on multiple occasions, used the term “God is dead.” The first occurrence is found in The Gay Science (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2012), 156.
[9] Nietzsche, “On Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense,” 47.
[10] Sire, The Universe Next Door, 211.
[11] Groothuis, Truth Decay, 20.
[12] Jean-Francois Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 24.
[13] Chan, Evangelism in a Skeptical World, 111.
[14] Sire, The Universe Next Door, 213.
[15] Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, 192.
“The immortal Charles Spurgeon was many things—powerful preacher, fervent evangelist, fearless apologist, prolific author, and dynamic leader all rolled into one. But at the center of his ministerial heart was, perhaps, one virtuous gifting above all else— a devoted pastor. Indeed, so many of Spurgeon’s ministry pursuits and so much of his ministry influence flowed from his primary work of shepherding the flock of God entrusted to him. Spurgeon’s heart for the local church, and the ecclesiological convictions that undergirded it, are an enduring distinctive of the great man’s ministry. That’s why the 21st century pastor will benefit from studying Spurgeon’s ecclesiological convictions and well-documented pastoral ministry. And that’s also why I’m grateful for Geoff Chang’s The Army of God: Spurgeon’s Vision for the Church, in which he sets forth, in easy-to-read format, Spurgeon’s local-church convictions and practice. I heartily commend this book to all who serve God’s people. .”
“Though conservative evangelicals have long affirmed the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture, how to interpret Scripture remains an ongoing source of discussion and even debate. Kevin Vanhoozer’s Mere Christian Hermeneutics is a welcome contribution to this ongoing dialogue. Vanhoozer is a respected theologian and accomplished author who brings his considerable gifts to bear in this treatise on biblical interpretation. Whether you agree or disagree with Vanhoozer’s argument on reading the Bible theologically, all who seek to seriously engage the topic of biblical hermeneutics will benefit from his work.”
Ethan Jones clarifies, “This is not a book about digital media.” Indeed, it serves as a welcomed distraction from the devices that distract. This is a beautiful book about how the Psalms, as poetry, can teach, guide, shape the soul as well as shape churches. Jones, associate professor at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, has written articles on this idea for a few years following service as a Visting Scholar at the University of Cambridge, and I am thrilled to see it come together in book form.
“While in seminary, a professor encouraged my preaching class to take up poetry to improve our preaching. Both tasks – poetry and preaching – give a sense of the significant with an eye towards style. Both tasks stir the heart and move the will. Thus, as a growing preacher myself, I was delighted to discover Tim Challies’ new book, Pilgrim Prayers. This book is filled with poem-prayers from prior generations. Each poem is accompanied with added commentary, devotional content, and Scripture reading. Whether you are a pastor hoping to improve your preaching or simply a Christ-follower looking for a new devotional, these poem-prayers will help you savor the Savior and declare his deeds. I hope you enjoy these wordy gifts as much as I have. (For a personal favorite from Challies’ selection, see “A Prayer of Confident Submission to God” authored by Christopher Newman Hall).”
“These 1978 lectures published this year for the first time stand as yet another example of the treasure the late J.I. Packer was to evangelicalism. The subjects covered—Christ’s humanity and divinity, the biblical foundations of penal substitutionary atonement, the historicity and power of Christ’s resurrection—should not be the least bit controversial in the Christian tradition, but Packer’s careful responses to the challenges to these truths (and more besides) delivered more than 40 years ago are just as relevant and vital to gospel ministry today. Few write about such depth with such clarity and humility. This book, the best I’ve read in 2024, is a beautiful refresher on gospel doctrine that will serve us all well in an age of continuing drift and distraction.”
“One of the greatest needs in our day of information overload is the Christian who can communicate truth in both personal and artful ways, adorning the beauty of the gospel with beautiful prose. As she reflects on her own careful cultivation of her garden in upstate New York, teacher and author (and occasional For The Church contributor) Andrea Burke’s tender and devotionally rich writing in A Bit of Earth will cultivate vital growth in your own heart. This is, quite simply, a beautiful book.”
“Not only is Kevin DeYoung’s recent book Daily Doctrine a bulwark of truth for pastors and ministry leaders, it was a balm for my soul as well. Time would fail to mention just how broad a landscape DeYoung covers in this guide, and for fear of leaving off such important doctrines I wouldn’t dare begin to summarize. For me, the theological precision of his work on the doctrine of Christology, his biblical and historical sourcing for the doctrine of the Trinity, and his section on salvation was worth the price of the book by themselves. Many people may ask: ‘What’s the point of theology?’ Kevin DeYoung’s book responds by modeling what Andrew Bonar knew to be true: ‘Doctrine is practical, for it is that that stirs up the heart.’ Pick up this book and you’ll find yourself returning to its contents years down the road, for your own life and the life of your people.
“Hans Boersma writes in his endorsement of Parkison’s book, ‘This is easily the best primer on the beatific vision today.” In other words, this is easily the best primer today on one of the most important doctrines for the Church. The beatific vision is the Christian’s hope of seeing God face to face—a doctrine which has been forgotten for far too long. Parkison’s book gives a comprehensive treatment of the beatific vision, from its biblical basis and historical foundation to retrieval in evangelicalism and application in the Christian life, in order to raise the Christian’s eyes to a hope far above the woes and wiles of our everyday experience. Read this book and be reminded and renewed in your hope of being with your God fully as we were always meant to be.
“When we behold Christ, we are transformed. In Delighting in the Old Testament, Jason DeRouchie shows us Christ throughout the pages of the Old Testament, transforming our understanding of the Old Testament to see its unified storyline that points to salvation in Jesus. DeRouchie presents a thorough, biblical case, carefully showing how the Old and New Testaments work together to proclaim Christ and are rightly understood in light of Him. DeRouchie also applies this foundation to interpret Old Testament laws and promises for believers today. Though his work is an excellent resource for students, his writing is accessible to a wide audience, with clear Scripture references and helpful graphics. Delighting in the Old Testament helps Christians read their Bible and see their Savior who loved them before the foundation of the world. In this way, the book is truly for the Church.”
“In no period of history has Christ abandoned His bride. Reclaiming the Dark Ages offers a testimony to that fact. Peering into the period of our history between the early church and the Protestant Reformation, a millennium often characterized as spiritually and intellectually lost, authors Iain Wright and Yannick Imbert give us a glimpse of the light of true faith enduring over the generations. Each chapter presents a biographical sketch of 10 key figures, including Boethius, Anselm of Canterbury, and John Wycliffe, and an account of each one’s contributions to theological orthodoxy. Though some readers may benefit from additional reading to fully appreciate the theological context and controversies in each figure’s story, the book is an accessible entry point to this period of Church history and an encouraging reminder of God’s faithfulness to build His Church.”