Christian Apologetics in the Postmodern World

Rating:
Summary: Uneven Quality, but some good essays
Review: Christian Apologetics in the Postmodern World is a compilation of essays addressing the question, How should Christians do apologetics in light of the new and unfamiliar challenges of postmodern culture and philosophy? The essays are radically uneven in quality, from Philip D. Kenneson's excellent and groundbreaking "There's No Such Thing as Objective Truth, and It's a Good Thing, Too" to the mediocre and laughably ethnocentric "Christian Apologetics in the African-American Grain" by Ronald Potter. Of the 11 articles, only three merit the reader's attention. First, "Politically Incorrect Salvation" by William Lane Craig is a well-done defense of evidentialist apologetics in the face of the overwhelmingly presuppositional bent of postmodernism. The central idea of his essay is that the church must maintain its claim of particularism, in opposition to the gospel of tolerance propounded by the postmoderns with their distaste for metanarratives. Second, James Sire's "On Being a Fool for Christ and an Idiot for Nobody: Logocentricity and Postmodernity" is likewise a frontal attack on the anti-metanarrative mindset of postmodernism. Sire argues that Christians must stress their logocentricity in contrast to the pomos but must also provide subjective apologetical testimony to back up their arguments for logocentricity. His essay seeks a rapprochement between modernism and postmodernism. Third, the aforementioned essay by Philip Kenneson, the best in the book, in my opinion, directly applies the insights of postmodernism to Christian faith. Kenneson uses Sire as a foil for his argument and has quite a penchant for strawman construction; he woefully misrepresents Sire's plea for ontological realism as an argument for epistemological realism. Likewise, Kenneson underestimates the extent to which postmoderns like Rorty are actually adherents to ontological relativism, which Sire correctly denounces as self-defeating. But, overall, Kenneson's essay is very good.

Rating:
Summary: A Decent Introduction to a Difficult Topic
Review: Necessarily the idea that "objective truth" does not exist is going to strike a bitter chord with most Christians. I believe this book does a fine job of introducing the thinking Christian to what postmodernism truly is (not the denial of "truth" per se, but the denial that claims to truth can be made from an objective standpoint) and why the Christian should be concerned about it.

Of the essays in the book, James Sire's and Philip Kenneson's do the best work in representing either side of the view. Sire argues that postmodernism is nothing but relativism in a new package and should be treated accordingly. Kenneson argues that claims to "truth" are not necessarily wrong, but that we need to examine the method by which we arrive at those claims.

In the end, I'm sure, it is Sire's opinion that will be adopted by the vast majority of readers if only because it is a familiar one that most (if not all) Christians have been reared on. It's a shame that Kenneson will probably be dismissed as being "merely a relativist" simply because he is honest regarding the human condition--specifically its inability to interpret experiences apart from the experiences themselves. The model of thought he provides frees the church of the burden of "proving the truth" and instead allows it to return to its original mission of "living the truth."

Rating:
Summary: A Decent Introduction to a Difficult Topic
Review: Necessarily the idea that "objective truth" does not exist is going to strike a bitter chord with most Christians. I believe this book does a fine job of introducing the thinking Christian to what postmodernism truly is (not the denial of "truth" per se, but the denial that claims to truth can be made from an objective standpoint) and why the Christian should be concerned about it.

Of the essays in the book, James Sire's and Philip Kenneson's do the best work in representing either side of the view. Sire argues that postmodernism is nothing but relativism in a new package and should be treated accordingly. Kenneson argues that claims to "truth" are not necessarily wrong, but that we need to examine the method by which we arrive at those claims.

In the end, I'm sure, it is Sire's opinion that will be adopted by the vast majority of readers if only because it is a familiar one that most (if not all) Christians have been reared on. It's a shame that Kenneson will probably be dismissed as being "merely a relativist" simply because he is honest regarding the human condition--specifically its inability to interpret experiences apart from the experiences themselves. The model of thought he provides frees the church of the burden of "proving the truth" and instead allows it to return to its original mission of "living the truth."

Rating:
Summary: Great Collection of Essays on an Important Topic
Review: This is an excellent book that belongs in the library of everyone interested in Christian apologetics. The book consists of eleven essays on Christian apologetics, particularly focusing on how Christian apologectics ought to be done in the postmodern context.

The first threes essays are mostly definitional and descriptive, focusing on what postmodernity/s is/are and setting the stage for possible Christians responses.

The next two essays come from a modernistic perspective. Nicola Creegan takes the unpopular position of arguing for Schlieermacher as a model for Christian apologetics that accepts most of the fundamental tenent of modernism. William Lane Craig then goes on to defend Christian particularism from the standpoint of evidentialist apologetics.

Then comes anessay by James Sire that attempts to adopt a mediating postion between modernity and postmodernity. While there are some insights here, I think Sire's essay is far more modern than postmodern. Another point of complaint is that his understanding of logocentrism is simply misinformed on crucial points.

The two most interesting articles in the volume come from J. Richard Middleton and Brian Walsh who present a great response to deconstruction and Phillip Kenneson who questions the popular evangelical conception of objective truth. These articles, I think, are the best in the volume, making fascianting connections between postmodernity and Christianity and provoking lots of thoughts.

The final three essays focus on issues particular to the church in the postmodern context. The article by Dennis Hollinger on the church as an apologetic (and in particular as the plausibility structure of the Christian worldview) was excellent.

In sum, this is an excellent collection of essays on postmodernity and apologetics. The essays represent a diverse number of perspectives and offer a lot of constructive material for thought and reflection. Highly reccommended.