LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1998, Page 75

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

CONVENTION ESSAYS AND BIBLE STUDIES

Deconstructing Words
Of all of the notions that arise out of postmodernism, the
most debilitating to the Christian enterprise is the deconstruction of words. For the postmodernist, words do not
convey objective meaning. They emerge out of the subjective mindset of the author and enter into the subjective
mindset of the reader. Written tests mean different things
to different people, and no singular interpretation of any
text is better than any other interpretation. Words are socially constructed and merely tell the story of the writer.
They are signifiers, and what they signify is different for
different people in different cultures at different times.
Because words do not convey objective meaning, the
practice of formulating propositional truth claims from
words is soundly rejected. Words merely tell a story—a narrative. I have my story, and you have your story. There is a
Lutheran story and a Roman Catholic story. There is a
Christian story and a Muslim story. No single story is better than any other story. There are no meta-narratives—
pervasive stories to which all must bow. At the recent
Reimagining Conference in the Twin Cities, in which feminists gathered to retell the Christian story, keynote speaker
Mary Farrell Bednarowski said, “To ask about someone’s
story is theology ... Only when we hear and receive all the
stories will we arrive at the truth.”9
Christianity is and always has been a religion of the
Book. We begin with the understanding that the authors of
Scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit, were seeking to communicate objective reality in the words they employed. On
the basis of the meaning of the words, we formulate doctrinal propositions. Objective reality translates into objective
truth. It is the task of the theologian to discover that truth,
formulate and systematize that truth, and teach that truth
to others.
Postmodernists soundly reject that methodology. In
their way of thinking, the author is unable to convey objective, absolute truth. The author is merely telling his story
based upon his own social construction.10 Since the words
of the text do not convey objective meaning, presenting
truth as propositional statements drawn from the text is
impossible. All you can do is tell the author’s story and
allow the reader of that story to provide his or her own interpretation—which becomes his or her story.
This gives rise to the new method for conducting a postmodern baby-boomer Bible class. It is no longer the task of
the exegetically trained pastor to teach the meaning of the
text in the form of objective, propositional truth statements.
Rather, each individual discovers his or her personal meaning of the text. No one meaning is better than any other
meaning. The pastor merely facilitates this pooling of ignorance.11

The Postmodern Religious World
Many suggest that the postmodern philosophy is merely
a baby-boomer thing and that this way of thinking, together with leisure suits, flowered shirts, and “Laugh-In,”
will pass. Those staging sit-ins on campus 25 years ago are
now in the classrooms teaching an irrational philosophy.
But be that as it may, even though postmodernism may be
a temporary glitch in the societal psyche, it is the prevail-

75

ing mindset of the culture. Attempting to appeal to the
postmodern culture will profoundly change the manner in
which we confront people with the Christian message.
In the modern age, world religions and Christian denominations were in competition. The doctrinal truth
claims of one group were set against the truth claims of
competing groups. Religions or denominations had, so to
speak, their own store in the great religious shopping mall.
Not only did each proclaim, promote, and describe their
particular product to the shoppers, but they also criticized
the products offered in the other stores. They honestly believed that their product was better. The goal was to convert the shopper. We in The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod spoke of having the pure Gospel as opposed to the
impure understanding of the Gospel offered by other denominations. We shared that pure Gospel and refuted the
errors of other groups, not to exert power over them, but
because we were concerned about their eternal destiny. For
us, truth was a matter of life and death.
Modern advertising was of the same competitive nature.
Chevy was better than Ford. Camels were smoother than
Luckies. Pepsi tasted better than Coke. If you don’t believe
it, try the Pepsi taste test. But when Coke decided to “teach
the world to sing” rather than compete with Pepsi, a whole
new day in advertising dawned. Postmodern advertising
does not place one product over the other. That is meanspirited. You buy Bud because of frogs and lizards, not because it tastes better than Coors.
This same kinder and gentler commercialism also permeates the postmodern religious shopping mall. All religious doctrinal products are now of equal value. Truth is
no longer a matter of life and death. Seeking to impose your
superior beliefs upon others is as politically incorrect to the
postmodern thinker as seeking to change sexual orientation or impose what you believe are better cultural standards. If people buy your product, it is not because your
product is better. Rather, it is because you have the best
displays, the cleverest advertising, and the friendliest and
happiest sales people. You offer free coffee and have balloons for the kiddies. When people come into your store,
they have a good experience.12
The Mormons have led the way in demonstrating the
postmodern advertisement of religion. Their media blitz
promotes the quality of their community of faith rather
than the content of their teaching.13 They have appealed
very successfully to the feelings and emotions of postmodern people.

Should We Accommodate the Culture?
The question before us this morning is a very simple
question. Should we seek to appeal to and accommodate this
postmodern culture? If this is the path we choose to take,
we have some major adjustments to make. We must work
very hard at changing our image. In the eyes of many
today, we are a hard-nosed, power-hungry, conservative assembly of politically incorrect truth-mongers. Of course, if
we choose, we can change our image. We can reshape ourselves into a politically correct and culturally relevant organization. The Mormons did it. Why can’t we? We merely
have to understand what the culture is seeking and accom-