Postmodernism/IgnorancePosted by Rick on January 3rd, 2005
I haven’t been in front of the computer much with NT Wright in town and all, but I noticed someone else was also frustrated with Doug Wilson’s post on postmodernism. I haven’t read this response by Sandlin yet, but if you shared my frustration, it’s worth a look.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Permalink
January 4th, 2005 at 5:26 am
Too many big words…
January 4th, 2005 at 10:08 am
Hey Rick. If you do get a chance to post, and if it’s not cumbersome, would you give us a sense of the conference? Do they plan on having a panel with Wright and Gaffin and taking questions from the audience? Does it seem like there’s a wide range of people there – not just the RTS crew (Duncan, Kelly) or the Morecraft crew, but also other pastors from the PCA? I’d heard this was going to be a popular conference drawing from all over the ideological map from the denomination, and am hoping it’ll stir up some good dialogue.
January 5th, 2005 at 4:13 pm
What in Wilson’s post was it that frustrated you?
January 5th, 2005 at 4:18 pm
Mike: He doesn’t seem to know what the heck he’s talking about.
Scott: If someone doesn’t beat me to it, I’ll give a report in a couple of days.
January 5th, 2005 at 11:18 pm
I think there is more here than meets the eye. If I’m correct, then in a way it is too bad that the Wilson-Sandlin exchange is taking place in public, because there are things that require one to have “inside” information in order to be able to read between the lines. I suggest not losing sleep over it.
January 6th, 2005 at 11:10 am
Good Mr. Sandlin isn’t exactly a philosophy buff himself. His second essay seemed to read pomoism as, simply, not being overly confident about one’s theology. Seemed a bit trite and all. Imho, at least.
January 6th, 2005 at 12:23 pm
Like I said, I haven’t read Sandlin’s argument, so I don’t know that he can really beat Wilson’s argument. All I’m saying is Wilson hasn’t really understood pomo-ism.
January 6th, 2005 at 1:12 pm
Scott,
they just lectured and asked each other questions and took questions from the audience in the Q and A. I thought the Q and A was the best part of the conference. Their asking each other questions seemed to clarify a lot.
Also, there were people of all types. Liberal and conservative baptists, Anglicans, Lutherans, and all sorts of Reformed.