What do you think?
Rate this book
Engaging Deconstructive Theology
Engaging Deconstructive Theology presents an evangelical approach for theological conversation with postmodern thinkers. Themes are considered from Derrida, Foucault, Mark C. Taylor, Rorty, and Cupitt, developing dialogue from an open-minded evangelical perspective. Ron Michener draws upon insights from radical postmodern thought and seeks to advance an apologetic approach to the Christian faith that acknowledges a mosaic of human sources including experience, literature, and the imagination.
280 pages, Hardcover
First published March 1, 2007
11 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 21, 2024
The book “Engaging Deconstructive Theology” chooses a rather unorthodox method. The purpose of the book is to exhibit an open mind to humbly learn from non-evangelical positions while not relativizing Christian core beliefs.[1] This is especially directed towards practicing evangelical apologetics which is in danger of being too absolute and monologistic.[2] The way the book proceeds is therefore following this maxim: After outlining the historical context and how premodernity gave way for modernity that was superseded by postmodernity (chapters 1-2), Ronald T. Michener is engaging with the most influential deconstructionalists from the European mainland, America and Britain (chapters 3-8): Lyotard, Derrida, Foucault, Taylor, Rorty, and Cupitt. After displaying their work, he is taking time to point out what can be appreciated and what is to be criticised from an evangelical-theological point of view. Finally, in the last part Michener presents an apologetical framework for the application that has happened previously (chapters 9-13).[3] Because it is this framework that brings the threads together, this part deserves greater attention.
In apologetics, we can never give answers to all questions there are since we are finite beings.[4] This finitude shows the limits of human capacity. Modernity has denied this finitude and presumed to explain everything objectively. In this regard, Michener is pointing towards Grenz who has come up with four embodiments the gospel requires in postmodernism: to be post-individualistic, post-rationalistic, post-dualistic, and post-noeticentric.[5] From the book of Acts Michener is showing the need of community for interpretation.[6] He is arguing for an evangelical pluralism.[7] Furthermore, Paul’s speech on the Areopag serves as a good example of how apologetics can look like: He was deconstructing the Athenian gods in a loving way by adjusting the gospel to the context and still holding fast to the grand narrative of the gospel message.[8] Michener concludes that it is important to have a learning posture to those we disagree with.[9]
In a next part Michener suggests leaving the path of pure reasoning and join people like Lewis in communicating apologetics not just in dogmatics, but rather in imaginary language. Because fiction speaks to the whole human being and not only to the ratio it is fitting to provide a message of hope. This should be the main aspect there is to mediate because it is hope we are eschatologically heading towards.[10] Concludingly, Michener is advocating neither a strong foundationalist theory nor a Christian “neo-Wittgensteinian fideism”.[11] Rather, he is defining his approach as “soft foundationalism”.[12] It does not deny objectivity but is calling for humility in the communication of knowledge claims of truth.[13] It should be done in community due to the limits finitude brings.[14] Thereby, the epistemology of Michener’s soft foundationalism also points towards ecclesiology.[15]
Michener brings a fresh perspective into play. One can sense how diligently he has dealt with deconstruction. Even though this could not find much room in the summary the last part takes up many concerns of what the deconstructionalists brought forth. In this way the methodology, though uncommon, has worked out. Michener let the postmodern thinkers speak on their own and delivers an assessment only after that. His approach for apologetics goes back to what the gospel is: love and truth. This comes from a deep trust in the goodness of the gospel message. Remarkably, it is legitimate for Michener to argue from the book of Acts, since he is developing an approach for apologetics, not for hermeneutics.
This book has helped me to detach my thinking from modern presets from my upbringing I had confused with being Christian. It has shown me ways to engage critically with postmodernism and what we may learn from the brilliant thinkers of our time.
[1] Ronald Michener. Engaging Deconstructive Theology. (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2007), ix.
[2] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 161.
[3] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 159.
[4] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 165.
[5] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 162-163.
[6] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 170.
[7] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 173.
[8] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 182-185.
[9] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 187.
[10] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 216.
[11] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 225.
[12] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 229.
[13] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 236.
[14] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 233.
[15] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 239.
[16] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 232.
In apologetics, we can never give answers to all questions there are since we are finite beings.[4] This finitude shows the limits of human capacity. Modernity has denied this finitude and presumed to explain everything objectively. In this regard, Michener is pointing towards Grenz who has come up with four embodiments the gospel requires in postmodernism: to be post-individualistic, post-rationalistic, post-dualistic, and post-noeticentric.[5] From the book of Acts Michener is showing the need of community for interpretation.[6] He is arguing for an evangelical pluralism.[7] Furthermore, Paul’s speech on the Areopag serves as a good example of how apologetics can look like: He was deconstructing the Athenian gods in a loving way by adjusting the gospel to the context and still holding fast to the grand narrative of the gospel message.[8] Michener concludes that it is important to have a learning posture to those we disagree with.[9]
In a next part Michener suggests leaving the path of pure reasoning and join people like Lewis in communicating apologetics not just in dogmatics, but rather in imaginary language. Because fiction speaks to the whole human being and not only to the ratio it is fitting to provide a message of hope. This should be the main aspect there is to mediate because it is hope we are eschatologically heading towards.[10] Concludingly, Michener is advocating neither a strong foundationalist theory nor a Christian “neo-Wittgensteinian fideism”.[11] Rather, he is defining his approach as “soft foundationalism”.[12] It does not deny objectivity but is calling for humility in the communication of knowledge claims of truth.[13] It should be done in community due to the limits finitude brings.[14] Thereby, the epistemology of Michener’s soft foundationalism also points towards ecclesiology.[15]
Michener brings a fresh perspective into play. One can sense how diligently he has dealt with deconstruction. Even though this could not find much room in the summary the last part takes up many concerns of what the deconstructionalists brought forth. In this way the methodology, though uncommon, has worked out. Michener let the postmodern thinkers speak on their own and delivers an assessment only after that. His approach for apologetics goes back to what the gospel is: love and truth. This comes from a deep trust in the goodness of the gospel message. Remarkably, it is legitimate for Michener to argue from the book of Acts, since he is developing an approach for apologetics, not for hermeneutics.
This book has helped me to detach my thinking from modern presets from my upbringing I had confused with being Christian. It has shown me ways to engage critically with postmodernism and what we may learn from the brilliant thinkers of our time.
[1] Ronald Michener. Engaging Deconstructive Theology. (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2007), ix.
[2] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 161.
[3] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 159.
[4] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 165.
[5] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 162-163.
[6] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 170.
[7] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 173.
[8] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 182-185.
[9] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 187.
[10] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 216.
[11] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 225.
[12] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 229.
[13] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 236.
[14] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 233.
[15] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 239.
[16] Michener, Engaging Deconstructive Theology, 232.
Displaying 1 of 1 review