Hi CHRISTOPHER,
***
CR> Thanks for your comments on Dr. Veith's article.  However, I don't 
CR> good in postmodernism at all.  Postmodernism emphasizes relativism 
CR> the Bible emphasizes absolute truth in morals and theology.  Either
CR> is God's Son or He isn't--Jesus is not a figment of the imagination
CC>What is post modernism anyway?
Most scholars mark the beginning of postmodernism around 1985 or so at the 
fall of the Berlin wall.  Modernism assumed a one storied universe in which 
empirical science could provide all the answers to ultimate questions.  The 
theory of evolution is but one example of this.  However, more recent 
philosophical investigation of empirical science itself has shown that it 
operates out of authoritative paradigms or models of our understanding of 
reality and nature.  However, these models of the universe or reality often 
turned out to be wrong to some degree.  That's why we had the Copernican 
revolution and then the Newtonian revolution.  Even Einstein's theories of 
general relativity has been improved upon and corrected to one degree or 
another.  However, the greatest danger of modernism and Enlightenment views 
of the universe was its outright dismissal of supernatural events.  The a 
priori assumption of naturalistic science is that there are no such things 
as supernatural events, that all events have a rational and natural 
explanation.
Postmodernism, on the other hand, emphasizes the subjective nature of doing 
science.  While empirical science is based on the scientific method, the 
very selection of evidence and certain models designed to provide an 
experimental verification and reproduction of an hypothesis often begs the 
question.  Are we asking and answering our own questions based on a biased 
worldview and an incorrect authoritative scientific paradigm or model?  
Postmodernism has therefore concluded that uniformitarianism (the fact that 
the universe is uniform in the past, present, and future allows scientific 
investigation of the natural universe) is possibly wrong.  Relativism in 
empirical science must mean that there is therefore no absolute truth.  
Humans are limited and therefore only create a facade of ultimate reality. 
It follows from this that reality itself is a creation of the mind and 
therefore does not even exist in and of itself.
If different cultures have different worldviews, they in some sense are all 
correct but just different ways of viewing reality.  Therefore, western 
civilization is no better explanation of reality than say a third world 
country's premodern explanation of reality.  Some Pentecostals/charismatics 
have gone so far as to suggest that the reason pre-modern third world 
countries experience greater numbers of miracles is that they believe in 
miracles and the supernatural while western civilizations do not believe 
and because of their unbelief are experiencing fewer miracles (See Charles 
Kraft).  One might just as well suggest that pre-modern cultures are 
superstitious and "think" they are experiencing more miracles but in 
reality are only misinterpreting the events or their experiences as 
"miraculous".  Magicians are experts in sleight of hand and so 
Pentecostals/charismatics are experts in manipulating our interpretation of 
perceived events.  What "appears" to be supernatural is in fact many times 
smoke and mirrors or creative manipulation of people's interpretation of 
the events.  I call it "manipulation".  However, true miracles would be 
immediately obvious to all, including skeptical modernist observers from a 
western culture.  Clever magic tricks and emotional and mental manipulation 
do not constitute "real" supernatural events.
Postmodernism, therefore, is rampant with relativism and embraces as 
equally true and valid even the New Age anti-intellectualism and claims of 
ineffable (beyond words) supernatural experiences which are really closer 
to superstition and pagan worldviews of the past than to Christianity.  
Christianity is rooted solidly in this world and in an objective revelation 
in history--the history of salvation as it has unfolded in Judaism and 
Christianity.  Christianity led to an objective view of nature and 
creation and ultimately led to science.  Few atheists and agnostics will 
acknowledge this but the modern university system and science itself 
evolved out of the Catholic monasteries.  They were centers of intellectual 
investigation of God's revelation in nature and in Scripture.  Libraries of 
manuscripts developed.  These libraries contained not only theological 
works and copies of Holy Scripture but they also collected Arabic works 
with translations of Aristotle and Plato and other classics but also 
mathematics, astronomy, geography, etc.
 
Postmodernism is, in short, a return to a pre-modern worldview in many 
ways.  It denies absolute truth on the basis of our past errors.  However, 
to deny absolute truth, even in theory, is to embrace superstition, 
relativism, and ultimately paganism.
CR> sake 
CR> of drawing in unwary pagans, what we wind up with is nominal Christ
CR> who 
CR> know nothing about sound doctrine, spiritual disciplines, or 
CR> self-sacrifice.
CC>I know of self-sacrafice but I'll admit, I'm just now learning of spiri
CC>discipline and whatever sound doctrine is.
Yes, Chris, life is one long process of discovery and refinement and 
learning.  Part of our spiritual discipline is to pray and develope a 
devotional life.  However, another aspect of spiritual discipline is to 
develop a rational Christian worldview, a Christian apologetic.  To do any 
less than this is to admit to the world that ultimately Christianity is 
irrational, fideistic, and irrelevant.
CR> I left the Pentecostal movement about a year ago after being within
CR> fellowship for over ten years.  Postmodernism and existentialism is
CR> rampant 
CR> in their paradigm and truth seems to have taken a far, far backseat
CR> pragmatism and Pelagianism.
CC>Was in a pentacostal spinoff for awhile.   Lot's of candy, little meat,
CC>everybody understands me here.  In other words, lot's of hype little 
CC>substance.
Yes, Christopher.  I think you get my drift also.  When there is no 
rational support for one's message what you wind up with is an empty 
experience.  Such experiences may or may not be valid but we are 
continually wondering if they are even true because there is no rational or 
logical support for them.  What distinguishes a Pentecostal's emotional and 
spiritual experiences from the ecstatic experiences of a New Ager or a 
Buddhist?  If there is no logical argument and no sound biblical 
hermeneutic supporting a particular theological view, then what ultimate 
meaning does it have?  If the truth is based on our experiences who can say 
that homosexuality is wrong (or any other sexual deviation for that 
matter)? However, if ultimate spiritual and theological truth is 
propositional and revealed in an objective Holy Book, then all of our 
spiritual experiences must be tested and weighed by that revelation, not by 
our experiences alone.  If I proclaim that someone has been raised from the 
dead in the middle of an ecstatic prophecy to the gathered church, I must 
actually raise a corpse from the casket for my claim to be truthful and 
valid.  To spiritualize the claim as a way of retro-fitting or 
rationalizing away the fact that the dead person was not actually raised is 
to, in effect, lie.  Either the dead person is raised or they are still 
dead.  Otherwise, we are playing fast and loose with the truth and buying 
into a false relativism and a postmodern worldview more closely affiliated 
with pre-modern superstition than to a supernatural Christian worldview.
Sincerely in Christ,
Charlie Ray, 
Chaplain
1 Timothy 4:16
Watch your life and doctrine closely.
Persevere in them, because if you do,
you will save both yourself and your hearers.  (NIV).
chaplain@isgroup.net
---
 * WR  # 461 * Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus.
---------------