When the Apostle Paul arrived in Athens his spirit was provoked within him as he saw that the city was wholly given over to idols. He could see the outward manifestation of the inward reality he wrote about in his letter to the Romans: apart from God, the hearts of men are foolish and darkened. His response was to reason with Jews and the Gentile worshipers in the synagogue concerning Christ and the things of God. He reasoned in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there. He received no small amount of criticism for his stance but he did gain a hearing and was ushered to the Areopagus by certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers that they might hear more of what he had to say. As he reasoned with them and moved to proclaim Christ, some mocked him, some said they would like to speak with him further, and some believed.

The culture in which we find ourselves as Christians is not unlike Paul’s. The names and players may be different, but the nature of that which exalts itself against God is not. Most are aware of the prevailing mindset termed postmodernism, an eclectic worldview that has flowed quite naturally from a progression of thought from rationalism, to empiricism, to naturalism, to existentialism, to its present position upon the throne of exaltation against God.

As this philosophy gobbles up culture like a ravenous wolf and because its underpinnings threaten to undo rationality itself, postmodernism is a dynamic that must be confronted by the claims and church of Jesus Christ. Christians must be equipped to reason with their neighbors and co-workers even as Paul was in his own context. And, as we do so, we can expect the same kind of results.

While much could be said about this pernicious and pervasive mindset, Ravi Zacharias, speaking live from the 2007 Ligonier Conference and aired on our most recent broadcast of “Calling for Truth,” highlighted three major tenets of this system. An understanding of these issues that form the rubric of this irrational outlook will enable believers to point out the major inconsistencies of this system not only in terms of the worldview itself but in terms that demonstrate that those who embrace postmodern thinking do not live in light of said thinking. A segue into the gospel may be provided at that point.

First, the postmodernist does not believe there is an objective reference for words. In their minds, there is a limitless instability in language as words have no ultimate point of reference. Words actually reflect our own preferences and we can therefore never speak in terms of objectivity.

In my mind, one of the prime examples of such a belief was played out before our eyes when President Clinton told a grand jury why he wasn't lying when he said to his top aides concerning Monica Lewinsky, "there's nothing going on between us." According to footnote 1,128 in Starr's report, he said, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the--if he--if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement…Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”