In rounding off my selection of excerpts from the first chapter, I would like to first state that this section below is a good summary of why I am working on this project and where it is going.  If you want to know what Beginning Conversations is all about, read this post.

The Postmodern Opportunity

Many in the Christian fold view the postmodern turn
in culture as more of a threat than a help. As this work is being composed, a
number of evangelical theologians have spoken against postmodern theologies in
scathing and, on occasion, uninformed terms.
With the presence of such critique within the ranks, it is essential for our
conversation that we clearly lay out the benefits of a discussion of
postmodernism in the church.

At the center of our discussion is the contextual
nature of Christianity. Just as the early church explained the Gospel in very
different ways to the Jews in Acts 2 and the Greeks in Acts 17, so too must the
church always seek to understand and express our faith within our own cultural
context. Whether Greek, Jewish, Polish, Native American, American, culture is
the water in which we live. Christ as the “word of God” was an apt way of
explaining Christ to Greeks around AD 100, while some Native Americans have
found the metaphor “white raven” to truly capture the essence of Christ.

One metaphor is no better than the other; it is only
out of an understanding of context and culture that these expressions find
their meaning. Since every culture has it’s own assumptions and customs, it is
the role of every disciple and messenger of Christ to understand culture. Our
culture reveals how we analyze information, communicate, view the world, etc.
In some ways our cultural setting will greatly benefit our relationship with
Christ, but in other ways it may act more like a fence, keeping us from seeing
some side of Christ that we are unable to view from our particular place in the
world. Interaction with our American, postmodern culture will provide
tremendous insight into our particular expression of Christianity, enabling us
to take steps closer to God that may have never been envisioned, creating an
awareness of potential pitfalls we were previously oblivious to, and moving us
into position to share the Gospel in a relevant manner.

With these benefits in mind, this exploration will
focus on the significance of the shift in American culture from modern to
postmodern. Since Christianity does not exist outside of a particular cultural
expression, the turn toward postmodernity provides a glimpse into the possible
ways that our modern context has affected our conception of the Christian
faith. The modern emphasis on individualism took the Bible out of the sole
control of the medieval church and into the hands of the people during the
Reformation. The postmodern shift now offers a critique of the radical
individualism that has marked modernism and the church. Biblical study and
spiritual growth may flourish when we combine small groups/discipleship
relationships and personal study surrounded by exegetical tools and commentaries.

The goal of Christians who interact with and
assimilate postmodernism is a critique that brings balance to our perspective.
Such reforming is a process that is never done. Humbly realizing that our
American Christianity will always have some bugs in it, whether modern or
postmodern, we constantly seek perspectives that will enable us to follow
Christ and make him known with integrity and authenticity. It is my perspective
that a shift into the postmodern provides us with a chance to introduce new categories
and views that will enable the church to accomplish both callings most
effectively in our changing world.

While modernism has advanced the cause of Christ in
monumental ways, it has also skewed our vision of Christianity and set
boundaries that we cannot overcome unless we interact with postmodernism. How
far one delves into the postmodern world must be determined through dialogue
with the Christian community and sensitivity to the Spirit of God. I will
provide a look at the modern and postmodern worlds that may cause some to cheer
and some to hiss. Whichever camp you fit in with, I would encourage each
traveler on this journey to keep three perspectives in mind.

There are some in the church who are against
postmodernism. I respect this position since I trust that it is held out of a
compulsion to listen to the Spirit of God. Such a stance only becomes
destructive to the church when those who hold it opt to argue and attack
instead of dialoguing in a spirit of love. I can agree to disagree with those who
reject postmodernism because we are united in Christ, not in our views of
modernism and postmodernism. My one plea is the same message as Gamaliel to the
Sanherdrin. “‘In the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them
go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if
it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find
yourselves fighting against God’” (Acts 5:38-39NIV).

Others may not be interested in the postmodern turn,
but do not want to isolate themselves from the cultural shifts around them. In
this case, it is perhaps most helpful for such people to encourage, disciple,
and pray for those who are in the middle of this postmodern plunge. It is
difficult to take the Christian faith into uncharted territory and there are
temptations such as pride, anger, and the adoption of questionable doctrines.
Younger generations will need mentors to keep them on track during these
culturally turbulent times.

Lastly, for those who truly resonate with this
exploration of postmodernism, I would advise caution and humility. The
postmodern shift is infinitely complex and it has yet to truly take form as a
cohesive movement, though it may never do so. There certainly are aspects of
postmodernism that cannot be accepted by the Christian faith, which makes
dialogue with other believers and prayerful meditation all the more crucial for
this journey. In addition, many within the church oppose anyone treading on the
postmodern turf, so there will be times in which attacks and insults will flow
from within the body of Christ. When zeal for protecting a particular form of
American Christianity overrides the love of Christ, Christians wrestling with
postmodernism must be on their knees, allowing God’s Spirit to work for the
unity of the body.

Once again, this book is not about describing the
destination. This is the supply station where you prepare for a journey. This
is a point of embarkation into our world: where we have come from, where we
stand, and where we are going. I hope you will learn to view this book as a
dry, ugly log. It is unattractive when you have it sitting by the fireplace,
but it can start a roaring fire that illuminates your room. This is a call to
the church to actively engage with the culture, stepping deeper into
relationship with Christ and increasing our commitment to incarnate Christ into
a world that desperately needs him.

While many Christians  never sit down and hammer out a specific construct for interacting with theology in a particular culture, the truth is that we all have a model of choice. Typically we find ourselves bobbing and weaving from one model to another based on the situation.

The  Bible can be so clear at times, and on other issues  relegated to incoherence.  We all know what the Gospels say about the poor, but it can be so hard in a materialistic society such as America to obey them. Nevertheless, many Christians have no problem with piecing together a theology for the Pro-Life camp.

I’m not trying to take sides on these issues here, I’m simply commenting on the dubios manner in which we handle scripture contextually. I believe that it is inherently helpful to critically examine some of the possible methods available for interacting with culture and then reevaluating our practices in that light.

    In Christ and Culture, Niebuhr lays out five possible
methods of interaction between Christianity and culture, some of which are the
same as those found in Bevan’s Models of Contextual Theology. The focus of
Niebuhr is not only on method, but also on the end result. By taking a quick
look at his categories we will gain a clearer picture of the possible ways a
church may interact with culture:

1. Christ against culture: rejection of culture
2. Christ of culture: cultural accommodation
3. Christ above culture: synthesis of Christ and culture
4. Christ and culture in paradox: dualistic
5. Christ the transformer of culture[1]

    Neibuhr settles on the fifth option
as the proper position for Christians, stressing the redemptive action of the
church that should result since it is intricately enmeshed in culture. Though
Neibuhr’s position is excellent, some Christian theologians have offered a
synthesis of the above presentation, including Bevan. It is my view that a
helpful place to start in many situations is a dialogue with culture that aims
to ultimately transform it.

    Nevertheless, we must take into account the reality
that Christians will find themselves in a variety of positions in relation to
culture. In the case of Deitrich Bonhoeffer, the reality of the gallows loomed
in his mind as he boldly told the Gestapo that the Christian church is the
sworn enemy of the Nazi cause. Bonhoeffer was hung because he was implicated in
a plot against Hitler, and did next to nothing to stave off his execution only
weeks before the Second World War ended. In fact, he gave them a great deal
more evidence by proclaiming his stance against the culture of his day. Though
he certainly was concerned with transforming it, he was essentially required to
reject the culture.

    On the other side of the English Channel,
William Wilberforce was one of many who fought tirelessly for the abolition of
slavery in England
only a few years before the Civil War ravaged America.
As an ambassador for Christ in the political world of England,
Wilberforce was a redemptive presence that transformed English law.

    Niebuhr
provides a helpful reminder that we are embedded in a culture, and we must
choose how we are going to interact with it. The church must step up to the
plate, fulfilling its role as a redemptive, alternative, and subversive
community. While the church offers salvation to individuals, there are also
times when it is appropriate and necessary for the church to act for the
corporate good of society. Tony Campolo offers a helpful example of this large
scale, redemptive action in Adventures in Missing the Point. Desiring to
help the impoverished people of the Dominican Republic, a group of Christian students bought stock in a
major corporation that controlled a large portion of the country. At the annual
meeting, the students challenged the stockholders to address problems that the
company was propagating within the economy, agriculture, education, and health
care. Instead of being laughed out of the meeting, their challenge led to
sweeping changes.

    While we must never deny the immanent importance of sharing
the Gospel with individuals,[2]
our relationship with Christ calls us to bring the freedom and new life of the Gospel
message within the systems of our world. Leslie Newbigin states, “His [Jesus’]
ministry entailed the calling of individual men and women to personal and
costly discipleship, but at the same time it challenged the principalities and
powers, the ruler of this world, and the cross was the price paid for that
challenge.”[3]

Excerpts from my section: "Why Christians Should Care About Culture"

History teaches us that our context has a lot
to do with how we think. Christianity does not exist apart from culture. Just
as Jesus was a Jew who thought like a Jew and the New Testament was written in
Greek by people who thought in Greek categories, Americans are bound to read
the Bible and practice their faith as Americans.

Before examining modernity and
postmodernity, it is crucial to note that neither of these are intrinsically friend
or foe to the Gospel. They are merely our context, which can help or hinder our
search. Understanding our cultural context will essentially help us think about
how we think.

As an American, my culture is simultaneously my greatest
asset and greatest liability. A large portion of the American church is a
western expression of Christianity influenced by European thinking, adopting
the methods of thinking advocated during the Enlightenment. This is not an
evil, but it does cause us to ask the question, “How should the church respond
to the culture that it is embedded in?”

As part of my Beginning Conversations project (see previous posts on this blog for the scoop on the scope of this book), I hope to make the book collaborative. I already have sent drafts of the manuscript out to Christians in various ministry positions and geographical locations in order to gather their comments. My desire has been to integrate their comments into text boxes that will be placed next to  the segments they refer to.

Perhaps an easier way to accomplish this goal of mass collaboration is to post sections of the book on this blog. Below is a section of the first chapter that deals with the importance of culture in theological discussion.

The First Step: Why should
Christians care about culture?

Lake
Nicaragua in Guatemala distinguishes itself from every other fresh water lake in the world because it
is the only one to boast the presence of sharks. I usually enjoy lakes because
they don’t have sharks in them, but this illustrates an important
feature of salt and fresh water. Sharks who live in the salty ocean water
cannot stick it out in fresh water. The saltwater environment has become so
normative they cannot depart from it. They are situated in the ocean, unable to
proceed downstream to a river’s freshwater tributaries. The same is true for a
trout that is transferred from a stream to the ocean. Trout who have lived in
freshwater are in the same peril as the fish out of water if tossed into the
crashing waves of the sea. Salt and fresh water are environments, each having
their own benefits and drawbacks. Ocean fish may be safe from the toxic
pollution of cities that some freshwater fish have to contend with, but
predators and commercial fishing nets also lurk in the ocean depths. Certain fish
are acclimated for each environment, preferring one to the other. How they
function from day to day, eating, spawning, protecting themselves, is
determined by the nature of their habitat.

Though
all analogies break down eventually, culture in many ways resembles these
aquatic environments. Culture is the environment that surrounds us every day.
John Franke and Stanley Grenz define culture as the following: “Culture
includes the symbols—the language, material objects, images, and rituals—that
provide the shared meanings by means of which we understand ourselves, pinpoint
our deepest aspirations and longings, and construct the worlds we inhabit.”[1]
Many would not assert that any particular culture is overtly good or evil. For
example, in American culture, freedom of speech is one of the most exemplary
values. On the other hand, our entertainment and news industries (which are
sometimes one in the same!) fill our minds with gratuitously violent images
that are part of our increasingly violent culture (though some violent images
can be advocating against violence in culture). We are free to say, create,
televise, and view whatever we want, and I am incredibly glad that this is so.
Yet our culture is also saturated with violence. We can look at images on
television of real police chases that show cars crashing into innocent
by-standers, series on network TV with murder victims in pools of blood, and
movies that glorify the protagonist who achieves violent revenge on his enemies
(that brings a ludicrous closure to what is really a never-ending cycle of
violence in the real world). America clearly has things to love and things to toss in the trash.

In going to Israel I was introduced to the Palestinian culture, which is very different from my
own. In taking a hike to Bethlehem
(literally walking south from Jerusalem,
hoping that we would just kind of “bump” into it) we were told by those
familiar with the culture that the women must wear dresses or at least pants,
and in fact, the guys should not show off their legs either. We were told that
some men viewed women in shorts as loose. As luck would have it, one of the
women in our group was decked out in shorts and lacked a contingency plan.
Because it was so hot that I could have melted cheese on the visor of my hat, I
had on shorts, but had tucked some pants into my backpack. Seeing our damsel in
distress, I handed over the pants, setting myself up to feel eerily odd when I
pranced into Bethlehem, legs
showing in all of their glory. Everyone had on pants! To make things a
bit more awkward, I like to sit with one leg crossed over the other, showing
off the sole of my shoe to all who pass. This was another bad idea, as this is
the equivalent of giving the middle finger in America.
The entire time I sat in a café I had to keep reminding myself that both feet
belonged flat on the floor. In spite of my bare legs and paranoia of “flipping
off” someone with the sole of my shoe, we had a great visit in Bethlehem and
only had positive experiences with the people there, enjoying the town with its
café serving fresh orange juice and beautiful stone streets only days before
the intafada in the Fall of 2000 that would essentially close it off from the
world for a number of years.

This illustration
points to the nature of all people in the world. We are situated in a culture,
and in large part, our contexts determine how we interpret actions such as
wearing shorts or crossing a leg. These actions are neutral in American society
but are disrespectful gestures in another. In light of this, we would do well
to remember that the Gospel exists in various cultures and Christians are
called to articulate it to every nation. As Christians we should not favor one
cultural context over another. What really matters is the message of the Gospel
and how we communicate it within our cultural context. Though there are
essentials of Christianity from culture to culture, our faith will necessarily
be expressed in a variety of ways within each people group.

One of the most important topics for me in BTC is the relation of Christianity and culture. As I revise the first chapter covering the complexities of this topic I have found it hard to piece together a number of examples. One of the best is an article by John Franke that is entitled, "Origen: Friend or Foe" (a title that I don’t think John was crazy about). It’s hard to see the effects of culture on the present church in such a clear manner.