John Piper The Challenge Of Relativism Analysis

Introduction

The notion of postmodernism has rapidly made its way to the front and center of our social discussion topics. The question that must be asked concerning this erroneous view from the premise is, ‘How does anyone think this logically and pragmatically could be an idea which they could hold firm to?’ The idea of postmodernism guarantees that there are no guarantees. In other terms, postmodernism boldly states that there is a solid truth that the earth is incapable of boldly producing statements of solidified truths. Straight from the premise of this fallacious idea we see a landslide of incoherence and an overwhelming sense of vacillation at the very foundation.
Also found in the ideas of postmodernism is the idea of relativism. While postmodernism claims that there are no proven absolutes, relativism claims that the reason for no absolutes is that individuals create their own rules. In essence, the idea of relativism says that that which one person believes is only applicable to the life of the next person if he or she wishes for it to be relative to them. John Piper alludes to the topic of relativism in

his article The Challenge of Relativism, saying, “This is the essence of relativism: No one standard of true and false, right or wrong, good or bad, beautiful and ugly, can preempt any other standard.

No standard is valid for everyone.” What Pastor John Piper is essentially saying here in his article is that relativism boldly proclaims that no one standard can

truly be set for all living organisms. In saying this, John Piper vividly captures the focal points of relativism, bringing to life the reality that particular groups of people are entirely disconnected from the living God, so much so to the point of denying any truths to be pertainable to any large amount of people. Piper brings to life the folly of such ideas in his work, as do the contributors to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, who state that, “There is no clear distinction, then, between the natural and the artificial in experience.” This is to say that, because of the theory of postmodernism, life can no longer be divided into the superficial and the realistic. It can only be determined by each individual. This is the matter with which we are to deal with on a daily basis and discern whether or not it is plausible for mankind to place his trust in its dogma.

Summary
Perhaps the most imperative part of dealing with any religious theory is deciding whether or not it is coherent. In order to discern whether a theory which brazenly states that no theories can be accepted as true, one must determine how it answers many preliminary questions concerning the nature of mankind, the reality of a higher entity, and issues regarding the universe and the supernatural world. Though difficult to handle when discussing a topic which denies any truths, postmodernism does in fact hold its ground when it comes to important questions concerning the preceding issues.
When answering the question of what God is like, postmodernism has very explicitly stated that God is nonexistent. To the postmodernist, to hold to the idea of an unwavering God characterized by such attributes as omnipotence and holiness and benevolence would be to completely deface the notion of postmodernism and uproot it from its foundations, for believing in any sort of unwavering higher entity would be to believe that something is true and must be true for all of humanity. Scripture explicitly says that God is the ultimate source of truth, but to the postmodernist there is no ultimate truth; there is only what you believe to be true for you as an individual. Wayne Grudem suggests in his book Systematic Theology that because of the fact that Scripture is inerrant in all that it says, the God that the Bible speaks of must also be true and pure. Grudem says in his chapter concerning the inerrancy of Scripture that, “The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to the fact,” which simply goes to say that Scripture will never contradict itself, so whenever it suggests that there is a God, it must be true and it will never say otherwise. Even despite the Bible’s explicit claims to be correct in its statements of the existence of a God, postmodernists deny all claims in order to hold firm to the belief that no truth can be eternal and true for all cultures.
Secondly, the postmodernist has no real answers regarding what the universe is. “Any possibility of exposing error or falsehood must be abandoned as untenable, since analyses of propaganda would contain no greater ‘truth’ value than the propaganda they purport to analyze,” said David N. Gibbs in his article Is There Room for the Real World in the Postmodernist Universe?, where he debunks the ideas of the postmodernist, calling their ideas ludacris and contradictory of themselves.
The postmodernist simply denies that the universe has any real rhyme or reason to it. The universe to him is as essentially structureless and void of any form. Genesis accounts for the world as being void prior to creation, but explicitly claims that God spoke words which brought into existence all of life, including the structure of life forms. However, the postmodernist remains in disbelief regarding the fact that God has given life a particular form of structure. Included in the postmodernist view of the universe is their erroneous view of human life, which says that humans have no real structure and, therefore, have no real reason for existence apart from furthering their knowledge of scientific studies. Humans to the postmodernist are gods of their own lives.