In Truth and the New Kind of Christian you begin by describing academic postmodernism, distinguishing it from “street level” postmodernism. What are some of the differences between the two?

I think that on the common, everyday (or “street”) version of postmodernism, people seem to be quite influenced by some attitudes, including the following: (a) suspicion of authorities’ claims, including those of religious and political leaders, as well as of modern science, to be acting just for the betterment of humankind; (b) suspicion of hierarchies; (c) greater awareness of peoples’ biases that impact their claims; (d) a heightened importance of seeing people who live authentically; and (e) the sense that our moral and religious beliefs are “up to us.”

The more academic version, however, draws upon several key philosophical positions.  Most common is the idea, which is expressed in a variety of ways, that we somehow have been so influenced by our language, culture, historical situatedness, and more, that we somehow cannot transcend their shaping influences and know the real world as it actually is, apart from our thoughts, beliefs, cultures, and (most of all) our languages (which, by the way, is what I mean by referring to the “objective” world).  Another way to put this is that we do not have knowledge by direct acquaintance with any thing in the real world.  Alternatively, there is no simple, direct “seeing,” to use the language of philosophy of perception.  Instead, there is only “seeing as,” or “seeing that.”  On that view, inevitably interpretation is part of experiencing the world, so we cannot know the real world as it truly is, apart from our interpretations.

What beliefs or characteristics might define a Christian as “postmodern”?

Let me focus on some of McLaren’s answers.  To use his terms, a “new kind of Christian” has laid aside the expectations of modernity to have everything understood, including God, and instead delights in finding a God who is full of wonder and mystery.  In addition, he (or she) has shed the baggage of foundationalism and its (supposed) requirement to have certainty in our Christian beliefs.  A new kind of Christian wants to embody the story of Jesus, and not settle for abstract, ahistorical truths that have been divorced from their context, the story of Jesus.  New, postmodern kinds of Christians genuinely value community, especially against the rampant individualism of modernity.  I’d also see my chapter three, and the first dialogue between Neo and Dan in McLaren’s A New Kind of Christian.

You explain that several prominent theologians, as well as Emerging Church voices Brian McLaren and Tony Jones, describe us as being “inside” language in such a way as to prevent us from knowing anything about reality. How then, on their view, can we claim to know anything about God?

First, I should mention that various people understand the relationship of language and world (or, put differently, the extent of the shaping influences of language, culture, etc., upon our ability to know the real world) differently.  Like Alasdair MacIntyre, some seem to think that there are real, objective realities that we know as such apart from our language use.  He mentions various minerals, and I think the laws of logic would fall into this kind of category for him.  Others, such as Grenz and Franke, seem to think that there is a real, physical world out there, but we still live in a socially constructed one, one that has been made into what it is by our use of our language. 

Second, I don’t see anyone claiming that we cannot know anything about reality.  Nevertheless, for the Christians I examine, the move seems to be that we know reality from “under the aspect of” the Christian story, or the gospel.  Not only would they think that from that standpoint we see life and the world accurately (which I think is right), they seem to go further and also claim that we cannot seem to know reality as it truly is apart from the use of our particular language.  But if that is the case, then we seem left without a way to know that our claims as Christians are indeed true about the real world (e.g., that Jesus actually arose from the dead).  However, I do see them trying to maintain that despite our limitations to know reality, God participates with us in our Christian communities and language “games,” enabling us to understand His revealed truth.  But, I don’t think that view will withstand scrutiny, for as I argue in the book, we still are limited in our ability to know even that that is the case, due to our particular (in)abilities to know reality as it is apart from our language use.

What are some of the strengths of McLaren’s analysis of modernity?

They are many, I think, especially when we consider how he says modernity has affected not just the culture, but also the church.  And even if he is not exactly right in all his assessments, they are close enough to home to make us pause and consider carefully all his claims.  Here are a few: (a) Christians have acted in ways to try to conquer and control, as evidenced in part even by our choice of terms (e.g., “crusades” for our evangelistic efforts).  (B) We have tended to reduce the Christian life to a set of simple formulas, such that if we are not experiencing the fruit of the Spirit, the cause must be due to our own fault, maybe due to misapplication of the simple truths, or due to our sin.  (C) We must have “bombproof” certainty in our beliefs as Christians, and if we doubt, woe to us.  So, (d) God is rigid and controlling, expecting us to believe without any doubts, and to apply the simple truths of the faith just right.

Tony Jones, National Coordinator of Emergent-U.S., has claimed that we ought to change the presuppositions of how to do ministry in order to effectively communicate with postmodern people. What are some of the key changes he’s advocating?

I think this is a wise question to consider, since it is good missiology to consider how to contextualize the gospel to reach a given people group.  In his Postmodern Youth Ministry book, he mentions in part that we need to realize that youth now are being raised under the influence of postmodernism, which I think is largely right on target.  Jones thinks we need to live as Christian missionaries in a foreign culture, since American culture is post-Christian.  Like missionaries abroad, we have to learn the “language” of the broader culture, so we can communicate with its members.  Youth workers need to understand mysticism and spirituality, pluralism, and deconstructionism, to name a few.  See my chapter 3 for more details.