More postmodernity

“…postmodernity finds appeals to rational argument problematic. But it is deeply attracted to stories and images. Furthermore, postmodernity is more interested in a truth that proves capable of being lived out than being demonstrated by rational argument. This helps us understand why “incarnational apologetics,” which emphasizes the apologetic importance of faithful living, has become so influential in recent years.” – Alistair E McGrath. Mere Apologetics. pg 34/35


What is Postmodernism?

Besides the comment of the last speaker being rubbish (postmodernists can’t know God), this vid is pretty good.

And here’s one of my favorite definitions:

“…what exactly is postmodernism, except modernism without the anxiety?”
― Jonathan Lethem

Bishop NT Wright on postmodernity

Bishop Tom Wright reflects on the postmodern movement, setting it in an historical context. Citing both its insights and limitations, the Bishop ends his comments with this thought:

“Post-modernity is about announcing the Doctrine of the Fall to arrogant modernity. But the Fall is never the last word. The task of the church today could be summed up as ‘How do we now announce the Doctrine of Redemption?'”

Part of an interview by Dr. Tod Bolsinger at the Pastors Retreat of the Los Ranchos Presbytery held at the Serra Retreat Center in Malibu, CA. Bishop N.T. Wright is the Bishop of Durham in the Church of England.

Liberal Christianity – Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Liberal Christianity  

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search
For the religious among us who choose to believe lies, the so-called experts at Wikipedia have an article about Liberal Christianity.

The faith that worships some of Christianity’s better ideas, but without getting so much into the whole figurehead thing or the “saved by the great blood-spurting wounds of Jesus” fetish promoted by your standard Mel Gibson torture epic. It is tolerant of everyone except for people it deems “intolerant,” and has a particular emphasis on the rejection of most (though not quite all) of those orthodox Christian ideas that seem a bit too far-fetched for all but the most religiously rabid. Its doctrines and precepts can be vague to the point of near non-existance (rather like their god), though LC’s aren’t particularly bothered by this, since they are comfortable enough not to need a black and white and well-defined dogmatic world view. LC’s are sometimes mocked by orthodox Christians because the latter get a raging hardon over the fanciful idea of divine justice, whereas Liberal Christians, recognizing the lack of divine justice here in the real world, seldom bother even to muster up a semi over the concept, especially since they are far too busy organizing the next Springtime Pet Service. Liberal Christianity sometimes uses The Bible, but also uses whatever other books they deem useful, including Aesop’s Fables and Dr. Seuss, in order to teach themselves to get along with others instead of getting all excited and perky over the possibility that their god is about to go smiting some group or another.

The Afterlife

Liberal Christians, if they believe in a heaven, believe that at death everyone gets to go there. When liberal Christians get to heaven, they get very quiet while passing the rooms of conservative Christians, so as not to wreck the conservatives’ fantasy that they’re the only ones who got in, and the extra bonus fantasy that liberal Christians (and everyone else) are off writhing in the pain of hell’s eternal torture. By staying quiet the liberal Christians ensure the conservative Christians can keep their divine punishment hardons raging for all eternity.

Read more awesomeness at: Liberal Christianity – Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.

Comfy Chairs and Acts of Violence

Motivational Posters for the Emerging Free-for All


Nihilism 2 – Decline of Cosmological Values

12 (Nov. 1887-March 1888)

Decline of Cosmological Values

( A )

Nihilism as a psychological state will have to be reached, first, when we have sought a “meaning” in all events that is not there: so the seeker eventually becomes discouraged. Nihilism, then, is the recognition of the long waste of strength, the agony of the “in vain,” insecurity, the lack of any opportunity to recover and to regain composure–being ashamed in front of oneself, as if one had deceived oneself all too long.–This meaning could have been: the “fulfillment” of some highest ethical canon in all events, the moral world order; or the growth of love and harmony in the intercourse of beings; or the gradual approximation of a state of universal happiness; or even the development toward a state of universal annihilation–any goal at least constitutes some meaning. What all these notions have in common is that something is to be achieved through the process–and now one realizes that becoming aims at nothing and achieves nothing.– Thus, disappointment regarding an alleged aim of becoming as a cause of nihilism: whether regarding a specific aim or, universalized, the realization that all previous hypotheses about aims that concern the whole “evolution” are inadequate (man no longer the collaborator, let alone the center, of becoming).

Nihilism as a psychological state is reached, secondly, when one has posited a totality, a systematization, indeed any organization in all events, and underneath all events, and a soul that longs to admire and revere has wallowed in the idea of some supreme form of domination and administration (–if the soul be that of a logician, complete consistency and real dialectic are quite sufficient to reconcile it to everything). Some sort of unity, some form of “monism”: this faith suffices to give man a deep feeling of standing in the context of, and being dependent on, some whole that is infinitely superior to him, and he sees himself as a mode of the deity.–“The well-being of the universal demands the devotion of the individual”–but behold, there is no such universal! At bottom, man has lost the faith in his own value when no infinitely valuable whole works through him; i. e., he conceived such a whole in order to be able to believe in his own value.


What has happened, at bottom? The feeling of valuelessness was reached with the realization that the overall character of existence may not be interpreted by means of the concept of “aim,” the concept of “unity,” or the concept of “truth.” Existence has no goal or end; any comprehensive unity in the plurality of events is lacking: the character of existence is not “true,” is false. One simply lacks any reason for convincing oneself that there is a true world. Briefly: the categories “aim,” “unity,” “being” which we used to project some value into the world–we pull out again; so the world looks valueless.


Conclusion: The faith in the categories of reason is the cause of nihilism. We have measured the value of the world according to categories that refer to a purely fictitious world.

Final conclusion: All the values by means of which we have tried so far to render the world estimable for ourselves and which then proved inapplicable and therefore devaluated the world–all these values are, psychologically considered, the results of certain perspectives of utility, designed to maintain and increase human constructs of domination–and they have been falsely projected into the essence of things. What we find here is still the hyperbolic naivete of man: positing himself as the meaning and measure of the value of things.

[Exerpt from Nietzshe’s Will to Power ]