Three "ism's": You DO need air to survive!

I ran across some thoughts in a commentary that really made me start to think deeply about three “isms” that we run across almost daily and are at odds with one another in almost every way. The three “isms” are theism, modernism, and postmodernism. Theism is the belief that there is a god or gods out there somewhere. We typically run into theism in a form that believes that a god of some kind created the universe. Theism has many flavors, but it can basically be boiled down into polytheism and monotheism. The opposite of theism would be modernism. I don’t want to oversimplify modernism as it has far reaching cultural implications, but as it relates to religion it pretty much rejects the supernatural in order to give way to science. So we have theism at odds with modernism right out of the gate. One says, “Some god exists”. The other says, “No god exists”. Both of these worldviews are very dogmatic, meaning that they both think that they are the truth. If that’s the case, then they are mutually exclusive of one another meaning that no person can hold these two truths simultaneously and not be looked at as a total moron. I can’t think up is both down and up at the same time. It’s either one or the other. To believe otherwise relegates me to the aforementioned realm of the moronic. Now let’s take a look at postmodernism. Again, I don’t want to oversimplify postmodernism, but for the purpose of a short writing here, let’s just say that postmodernism believes that everything is relative. While theism would say, “Some god exists”, and modernism says, “no god exists”, postmodernism would suggest that “your god exists and my god exists”. On top of that, the postmodern view of religion would further suggest that everyone’s god, whether they exist or not, can all coexist peacefully. Now, we know that this is just crazy. There are way too many religions out there that would argue this point literally to the death. No devout Muslim would agree with this. No serious Christian agrees with this. So what is it that postmodernism is trying to do here? Well, I am of the opinion that this postmodern outlook on religion is simply trying to help people relate to one another peacefully. So a Christian who takes on a postmodern way of thinking, believing that nothing is concrete and that all is relative, would suggest that Jesus is that Way, the Truth, and the Life, but this isn’t necessarily the truth for everyone. Those who don’t believe in Jesus, well, they’re okay. It’s fine for them to believe that Jesus isn’t God since that is what is true for that person. I would like for you to imagine someone trying to spike a postmodern volleyball over a net. Now, I would like for you to imagine a solid Christian jumping up, blocking that spike so hard that the person spiking the ball falls to the ground crying in pain, horror, and humiliation while the blocker screams, “Get that weak garbage out of here!” Christian postmodernists need to grow a spine. Why in the world anyone thinks that it is appropriate to stand halfway between theism and modernism is beyond me. Is it okay for a Christian to think this way? I would submit to you that it is not and I will explain further (if it’s not self-explanatory already) why I believe that. The postmodern Christian is caught between two worlds: the dogmatic and the pragmatic. Dogmatic people stand on what is true. Pragmatic people stand on what works. Does it “work” for Christians to just try to get along with others? Well, I suppose that isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but is it okay when truth gets watered down? If Jesus is the way, truth, and life and no one comes to the Father except through Jesus, then is it okay to say that this truth is okay only for those who want to believe it to be true? Is it less true if someone chooses not to believe it? Here’s the problem Mr. Postmodern Christian: if a person chooses to not believe it as a dogmatic truth, Jesus is still the Way, the Truth, and the Life and nothing changes the fact (not even unbelief) that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus. I can believe all day long that oxygen isn’t necessary for survival, but I can’t make that true. If the “rule of three’s” is true, after about three minutes without oxygen, I will become very, very dead. So, if some guy claims that he can live without oxygen and puts a plastic bag over his head, am I okay to just let him suffocate since we all know that he will die? Wouldn’t I try to stop him from doing something that will result in his own asphyxiation? At least poke a hole in the bag, right? If I allow him to have his own postmodern way, he will die. His truth is going to kill him. The dogma that is the human body’s need for oxygen will win over his hard headed and hard hearted belief that he doesn’t need air to survive! Let’s say that I allow him to hold this view and act on it and he dies. What now? Am I now responsible for his death since I didn’t do anything to prevent it when I could have? I guess the courts will decide that one, but the obvious parallel here is that in the life of a Christian, some things are just true and they are DEADLY true! Those who don’t believe that Jesus is God and that trust in Him is essential for salvation are putting a plastic bag over their heads. If I just say, “Well, that’s what is true for him, so I shouldn’t step on his rights”, then I am basically saying, “I don’t believe my own truth enough to do something about it”. When does it end? When do we take a stand and just live out lives like we REALLY believe this “Jesus stuff”?