Postmodernism & Parables: Communicating Parables to Postmoderns in a Western Context – Using Storytelling, Drama and Experiential Learning Methods

INTRODUCTION

What is postmodernism and how does it influence Western society? How should evangelical Christians respond to it? Do stories and parables provide an effective approach for bringing the gospel to postmoderns? Can drama, storytelling and experiential learning methods play a role in helping postmodern people connect with Jesus and deepen their understanding of the parables? In this article I grapple with these questions and seek to argue that drama, storytelling and experiential learning methods may be helpful and appropriate for communicating parables in a Western postmodern context.

 

I will follow the three main headings shown below:

  1. Postmodernism
  2. Responding to postmodernism – stories and parables
  3. How to communicate parables to postmoderns (discussing drama, storytelling and experiential learning approaches)

 

1. POSTMODERNISM

Postmodernism now infuses much of Western society. The shift from modernism to postmodernism is not a clear division, but rather is like a merging and confluence of currents.[1] Today we do not exist in a completely postmodern environment, but are in a situation of a mix of modern and postmodern tendencies.[2] So what are these tendencies? How do we navigate these waters? I will describe these currents at work in my life, interspersed with wider observations.[3]

 

I was born in 1975. Unlike the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, who was expelled from university for his pamphlet on “The Necessity of Atheism” in 1810,[4] atheism and agnosticism were commonly held presuppositions that permeated my upbringing. Reason defined belief. My father would not believe in God, unless it was proved to him, beyond reasonable doubt. Christianity didn’t make logical sense, therefore it was discarded. This was the fallout of belief from a modernist era, in which reason had been found triumphant, surpassing faith as its guiding principle. We would now think, in order to understand, rather than believe, so as to understand.[5]

 

This modernist worldview discarded Anselm’s premodern assumption: “I believe in order to understand”, to endorse and build on Descartes’ statement in 1641: “I think, therefore I am”. Descartes’ statement asserts that “one can rely on reason to achieve universal, objective knowledge”.[6] Effectively it places humans at the centre of the universe, instead of God.[7] The Enlightenment period thrived on reason and science, pervading the thinking of Western society.[8] Modernist thinking is characterised by an emphasis on:

  • Reason, as opposed to belief
  • Objective truth, as opposed to viewing truth to be subjective to one’s cultural standpoint[9]
  • Natural (meaning that nature is self-evident), as opposed to acknowledging how our culture shapes and conditions our responses to nature.[10]

 

Postmodernism arose in the latter twentieth century, largely as a reaction against modernism.[11] People became disillusioned with the modernist confidence in reason, science, progress and individualism. Western society had resulted in wars, the oppression of indigenous and marginalised people, the threat of nuclear war and environmental crisis.[12] Postmodern thinkers in the 1960’s, such as Derrida and Foucault,[13] began to challenge the modernist assumptions listed above, by showing how:

  1. Trust in reason is a kind of belief
  2. A subject’s language shapes their sense of objective truth
  3. Culture molds our sense and perception of the naturaln14″>[14]

This shift of thinking has had repercussions, as Johnston describes:

“Where modernity was cocky, postmodernity is anxious. Where modernity had all the answers, postmodernity is full of questions; where modernity clung to certainty and truth, postmodernity views the world as relative and subjective. Postmodern people have not only abandoned ideology and truth but are likewise suspicious of those who claim to say “I know””.[15]

 

Further tendencies of postmodern people is that they will rely more on emotions and intuition, looking “beyond reason to nonrational ways of knowing.”[16] Without a strong external framework to guide people’s limitless choices in today’s materialistic, media saturated Western society, people are left to consider and grapple with their own inner response.[17] In the absence of an overarching belief and purpose, relationships also become very important. Postmodern people are seeking community, a sense of belonging, spirituality and a holistic understanding of their inner selves and identity.[18] The importance of relationships has led to a greater valuing of the treatment of people in the process of how tasks are achieved.[19] A shift in education and communication styles also becomes apparent, moving away from a one-way dissemination of ideas to a two-way interactive process where listeners are actively involved and participating.[20]

 

Perhaps some of the different emphases of modern and postmodern worldviews could be depicted at this point as follows:[21]

   Modernity                         Postmodernity

   reason                                belief (“what’s true for me?”)

   objective, certain                subjective, relative

   natural                               cultural[22]

   cocky                                 anxious

   answers                             questions

 

   hierarchy                           anarchy

    mechanistic                      relational[23]

   individual components       holistic[24]

   intellect                             emotions/intuition[25]

   unity                                 diversity[26]

 

   conquest                          cooperation[27]

   purpose                            play

   design                              chance

   a completed work             process

   analysis from a distance   analysis through participation

In the vacuum of belief that I grew up in, I looked towards music, drama, peace and environmental causes, as well as seeking that the voices of indigenous and marginalised people be heard. In my efforts to overcome a profound sense of meaninglessness, homelessness, and feeling overwhelmed in the face of so many choices,[28] I turned away from reason to look for belief. I turned from seeking a basis in objective truth, to considering what would fit with my subjective, cultural experience. I began by tasting and “trying on” different religious worldviews and practices, at the smorgasbord table of postmodernism – where a number of different belief systems are able to be presented and tolerated at once.[29] Would any of these beliefs be a right “fit” for me and my subjective experience? Could I pick out the best of what I saw, and put them together? Nothing worked for very long, and eventually I called out to Jesus, and had a conversion experience of seeing light and hearing him answer.

 

With a presupposition that Christianity defied reason, it was with great surprise that I found, after I came to faith, that Christianity could be considered to be intellectually defensible. Indeed, reason and belief need not be opposed. A “both/and” paradigm can be used, rather than an “either/or” paradigm. As Kevin Vanhoozer describes: “I believe in reason. Reason is a God-designed cognitive process of inference and criticism, a discipline that forms virtuous habits of the mind. I reason in belief. Reasoning – giving warrants, making inferences, analysing critically – does not take place in a vacuum but in … a framework of belief.”[30]

 

Such “either/or” thinking may also not be helpful when it comes to considering modernism and postmodernism with respect to Christianity. Instead, both modernism and postmodernism can be seen to highlight some tenets of Christianity and to oppose others, and the truth of Christianity will live longer than both modernism and postmodernism.[31] It has been suggested that modernity has some parallels with the Biblical story of the tower of Babel, where human autonomy, unity and progress became an affront to God.[32] Postmodernity then, perhaps resembles the diverse cultures and languages who struggle to understand each other. However, the situation of postmodernism might also be depicted as having lots of small and large towers of Babel standing alongside and tolerating each other. Downing explains how “postmodernists teach that we are all embedded in towers of discourse – that it is impossible to conceptualise reality without them”.[33] The challenge for Christians then, is to become aware of any towers in which we are embedded that do not serve God, and to seek to enable others to catch a glimpse of the God who revealed Himself personally in the Biblical story.

 

2. RESPONDING TO POSTMODERNISM – STORIES AND PARABLES

So how can this glimpse be caught? What do we do as evangelical Christians in response to this situation? For us as evangelicals to continue to largely base our approach in reason and scientific thinking, would be to remain a “child of early modernity”,[34] and as Grenz comments: “We are called to minister not to the past but to the contemporary context, and our contemporary context is influenced by postmodern ideas.”[35]

 

One approach that responds to this situation is narrative theology. Dissatisfaction with modernity contributed to the emergence of narrative theology, which seeks to reclaim the centrality of narrative in the Christian story.[36] It began to be understood that modernism refused to recognise that it too had its own myth of scientific progress, and “that we live in a world constructed by myth.”[37] Tilley points out how: “The myth of modernity is the story that kills stories… [or the] story that tells us we have outgrown stories. It tells us that narratives are irrelevant to truth and truth is irrelevant tonarratives.”[38] When it comes to the Christian story, such an approach might be depicted as reading the Bible and squeezing out truths from it, then discarding the narrative shape of the text.[39] In light of such an approach “it is imperative that the church unequivocally reclaim the Bible as narrative (whatever the consequences for our encounter with postmodernity),” as Middleton and Walsh assert.[40] The Bible is not written as an ethical textbook or as a book of rules. Rather, it is to be primarily considered as a revelation of God himself,[41] and God chose to reveal himself through stories. Jesus, God incarnate, told many stories.[42] The Bible gives us an epic story of revelation – from creation, fall, redemption in Jesus, through to full consummation.

 

Implications of narrative theology is that we find ourselves at a particular point within the grand story of God’s activity. We are between two stages – the redemption in Jesus and the coming full consummation.[43] There isn’t a clear path linking these two stages, and this space in the story might be like a discovery of an “unfinished dramatic script”,[44] since “the concrete shape of our lives in the world is quite literally unscripted”.[45] This requires us to immerse ourselves in scripture and improvise our roles in light of its intent and help from its Author.[46] Barton suggests that biblical interpretation “is something practical, personal, communal and political. It is about changing and being changed according to the image of the triune God whose story the Bible tells.”[47] Such an approach is relational, holistic and process oriented, requiring active participation and engagement. Furthermore the stories of the Bible emphasise the personal, loving and situational nature of God, who can be seen to meet and work with people where they are at,[48] while drawing them towards mutual love relationships with him and with other humans. We are particularly implored to be in a loving, obedient, personal relationship with Jesus Christ as our Lord. Such a response “can be provoked, evoked, or prompted, but not persuaded or coerced, for to do so would invalidate the response”, and would likely not appeal to postmoderns.[49] Human freedom is respected and questioning is affirmed.[50] We are to perform and embody scripture in the context of community.[51] As Lash describes “It is no more possible for an isolated individual to perform these texts than it is for him to perform a Beethoven quartet or a Shakespeare tragedy.”[52] This call is demanding and risky, requiring creativity, flexibility, discipline and rigor:[53] “As an open-ended canonical drama inviting us on a journey of improvisation, the Bible is a dangerous book”.[54]

 

This journey sounds different – improvisational and unstructured, relational, participatory, holistic, process oriented, questioning, situational – elements that connect and appeal to a postmodern mindset, as was discussed earlier. Within this “dangerous book” appear some particularly “dangerous stories” – parables. As Tilley explains:

“Parables are stories that upset the mythic world in which they are told. How people respond varies. Some people “get” them. Others don’t. Some have their worlds transformed. Others have their worlds destroyed. Parables work to reveal the unexpected, subvert the normal, cast out certainty to make room for hope, and thus provoke various responses. They are dangerous stories.”[55]

 

Parables are likely to fit with the postmodern “mood” of seeking to subvert myths or structures that are considered not to serve us. The words and language of Jesus’ parables are used to reshape people’s thinking, challenging them to reconsider, often by shocking them – enabling them to step outside of ‘towers’ they are embedded in.[56] The parables also imaginatively and playfully accentuate the performance of what God desires, as seen in the good Samaritan story, rather than using a propositional approach to teach.[57] As Larsen comments: “Parabolic communication is more right-brained and for the heart, and it will occasionally exasperate the more analytic-type individuals. The parable is art.”[58] This appeal to creativity, emotions and intuition is also a connecting point with postmoderns.[59]

 

Parables also act somewhat like puzzles. They are packed tight with meaning. As Walter Wink describes: “Parables are tiny lumps of coal squeezed into diamonds, condensed metaphors that catch the rays of something ultimate and glint it at our lives.”[60] Seeking their meaning raises many questions – another connecting point with postmoderns. While many parables have an elusive quality, parables are also accessible to people, through their use of simple and direct language, and familiar, earthy situations that don’t tend to require prior learning.[61] Jesus’ original hearers would have had a common experience of the kinds of situations he was talking about.[62] Even in our vastly different cultural context today, many situations are still easily able to be related to, such as in the parables of the lost sheep and lost coins. As Lewis and Lewis point out: “Jesus goes beyond mere concepts and ideas. His philosophy is clothed in flesh, blood and daily life.”[63] Such accessibility enables postmoderns to participate and interact with truth in a way that is not abstracted and removed from daily existence.

 

Jesus also allowed his hearers to come to their own conclusions about the parables.[64] The stories tease and provoke people to actively grapple with them, think about them and discover what they mean.[65] It may be that by using parables Jesus even made sure that some people wouldn’t understand what he was saying, in line with the difficult passage of Mark 4:11-12. This passage says: ‘He told them, “The secret of the kingdom has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’ ” ’ (NIV translation). Thiselton contemplates this and helpfully considers that: “Jesus used parables in order to prevent premature understanding unaccompanied by inner change… A parable may even allow progressive levels of understanding as the pieces gradually fall into place and the hearer’s perceptions are duly revised and transformed.”[66] Fathoming a parable then, could be a process in which the hearer takes an active journey of transformation, both cognitively and in their emotions and inner being. This links with the postmodern emphasis on process, active participation and holism.

 

To summarise, parables are likely to connect with postmoderns on a number of levels: they seek to subvert structures that do not serve; they challenge and shock people into thinking in different ways; they appeal to the right-brain, the heart, emotions and intuition; they raise questions; they are accessible, familiar and grounded in daily life; and they seek to actively engage people in a process of wrestling, thinking and discovery. Given these connections, parables may provide an effective bridge and inroad for the Gospel to postmoderns – who are in desperate need of God’s story.[67]

 

3. HOW TO COMMUNICATE PARABLES TO POSTMODERNS

So how would we best communicate parables to postmoderns? Ideally in a way that is relational, participatory, holistic, process oriented, questioning, right-brained, accessible, earthy, perhaps even somewhat subversive. Drama and storytelling techniques and experiential learning methods may be helpful here.

 

Dramatic and storytelling approaches breathe life into us and speak to us in different ways – uniting us in a common experience, and awakening our sense of curiosity, wonder and play.[68] Drama and storytelling methods engage our right-brain, our imagination, emotions and intuition – evoking a holistic response in us.[69] There is likely to be great value in trying to freshen up Christian stories and parables since, as Bausch comments, they “have become familiar with age and repetition, they have lost their force and their ability to jar us”.[70] Dramatic and storytelling approaches offer possibilities for presenting and refreshing the parables in a way that seeks to “catch the Christian imagination too long dulled by repetition and familiarity”.[71]

 

Storytelling offers a simple, direct and effective approach  – where the hearers are drawn into entering the world of the story, and participate by imagining and identifying with its characters.[72] As Steffen comments: “Stories uniquely interweave reason, mystery and reactions, causing listeners to reflect on personal / group beliefs and actions”.[73] Possibilities that could be explored are for the storyteller to take the role of a certain character in a parable, and present the parable from this fresh and unusual angle. Another use of storytelling is narrative preaching, which many people have been exploring in recent times.[74] Narrative preaching involves “exegeting both Scripture and personal and communal experience today as story. The storytelling preacher thereby is presented with the challenge of ferrying back and forth between The Story and our stories.”[75] Lowry gives an example of narrative preaching of Matthew 20:1-16 which is ‘The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard’. Lowry delivers the story of the parable, embellishes it with cultural details, and intersperses it with anecdotes and similar modern day story parallels, while seeking to draw out the suspense and shock of parable.[76] Narrative preaching such as this has the strength of being able to imaginatively bring alive the original cultural context of the parable, while relating it to the contemporary hearers’ common experiences and feelings. Postmodern people are likely to be more open to storytelling methods, which integrate reason and actions, than a more abstracted, propositional style of approach.

 

Dramatic approaches have a certain elasticity which allows them to be stretched and recast into participatory, community building explorations. A pioneer in this field was Augusto Boal,[77] who steered away from a “one way” performance, towards the concept of drama being a “two way” interactive dialogue and a relational event. He experimented with theatre forms that sought to actively involve all people by provoking responses in fun ways. For example, Forum Theatre would set up a scene of oppression that people could relate to. The audience (or ‘spect-actors’) would be challenged to consider what they would do in the protagonist’s situation. ‘Spect-actors’ would be invited to take the place of the protagonist and try out different solutions. This expressive kind of role-play imitates life and community, and the drama becomes an arena of practice for real life.[78] Other dramatic forms involve similar methods with therapeutic goals, such as psychodrama,[79] where participants in community re-enact difficult stories from their lives with the goal of re-living and re-learning new and more effective ways of dealing with these events. It is acknowledged that “real life is complex and unpredictable. Knowing what to do is very different from being able to do it.”[80] These approaches recognise that people are relational beings who are embedded in community and culture. Therefore, for people to make holistic change, theory and action need to be integrated. Active participation in community, dialogue and discovery is considered valuable to the process of seeking such integration. It can be seen then that participatory dramatic methods have many characteristics that will appeal to the tendencies and preferences of postmodern people.

 

Experiential learning methods also offer insights and possibilities for communicating parables to postmodern people. This approach involves a group entering into a common experience of some kind, then reflecting on what happened in that experience. This leads into using critical thinking skills to make wider observations and generalisations, followed by a consideration of how the wisdom gleaned might be transferred and applied to other situations.[81] Team oriented problem-solving experiences are often utilised, and people are encouraged to reflect on how they felt during the activity and to make “paradigm shifts” of discovering how to relate and work together better. Experiential learning theory has strong research and evidence for its effectiveness.[82] A key part of its success is the way it caters to different learning styles.[83] Perhaps a common experience could be orchestrated that helps a group of people enter into the life of a parable, then the group could seek to reflect on and problem-solve its meaning. The situation of communicating a parable however, needs to interact with the text – becoming like a three way conversation between the original intent and meaning of the parable, the immediate common experience facilitated for the group, and the wider possibilities of applying and transferring learning into daily life. This experiential style of learning through discovery has benefits in that it emulates the kind of process Jesus utilised – trusting his hearers to engage and learn from the parables themselves.[84] However, such an emphasis on people’s responses must be held within certain limits – such as by interpreting the parable in light of its grammatical features, and wider literary and historical context which point to its objective meaning.[85]

 

Creating a common experience will be beneficial for communicating parables, since it assists in seeking to replicate the situation of the original hearers of Jesus – who would have heard him speaking directly into their common and shared experience.[86] In order to bridge this cultural gap we could either (1) help today’s hearers to enter into the original cultural context of the parable through a shared experience, or (2) seek to reproduce the parable within a common or relevant experience for today’s hearers, and then relate this situation back to the parable. Either way, it is important to preserve or emulate the “shock factor” of the parables. When retelling a parable into today’s context, it is important to recognise that it can never be exact, but rather can only “illumine an attitude that such Scriptures promote; we should not press them more than that”, as Bausch points out.[87]

 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I have argued that drama, storytelling and experiential learning methods may be helpful and appropriate for communicating parables in a postmodern context – particularly because they are engaging for people, assist in creating a common experience, feelings and participation, and help to integrate theory and action. These methods are likely to strike chords with people influenced by postmodernism. The renewed emphasis on story, with the emergence of narrative theology, opens up exciting possibilities in this wide arena. These opportunities are worthy of further exploration. Parables in particular may provide an effective inroad for the Gospel to postmodern people.

 

As Middleton and Walsh comment:

“The postmodern world… is characterised by a loss of trust in stories. Not only can no story or tradition be regarded as absolute, but postmodern people have come to experience themselves more and more as storyless… The postmodern metanarrative, while calling into question the universal claims of all other stories and traditions, does not itself have the resources to enable us to live with integrity and hope in a postmodern world.”[88]

 

I can testify to the truth of this statement from my own experience. Postmodern people are in desperate need of God’s story. As Christians, we need to be desperate to find ways to bring God’s story home to them.

 

NOTE

For those interested further, I can provide an example parable summary exegesis of Matthew 20:1-16 ‘The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard’ and sample applications including: small and large group experiential drama approaches; storytelling from the point of view of the last person and first person employed; and a debate about the parable, in a Western context.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Australian and New Zealand Psychodrama Association Inc. ‘Psychodrama is Deep and Complex’ In Australian and New Zealand Psychodrama Association Website. http://anzpa.org/psychodrama (2009).

Barton, Stephen C. ‘What a Performance!’ In Handling Difference. http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/products/279/49/handling_difference_summer_1998_what_a_performance/ (1998).

Bausch, W. J. Storytelling: Imagination and Faith (Connecticut: Twenty-third Publications, 1984).

Blomberg, Craig. Interpreting the Parables (Leicester: IVP, 1990).

Cassady, M. Storytelling Step by Step (San Jose: Resource Publications, 1990).

Clapp, R. Border Crossings: Christian Trespasses on Popular Culture and Public Affairs (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2000).

Downing, Crystal L. How Postmodernism Serves (My) Faith: Questioning Truth in Language, Philosophy and Art (Downers Grove: IVP, 2006).

Eslinger, R L. Narrative and Imagination: Preaching the Worlds that Shape Us (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995).

Forbes, Greg W. The God of Old: The Role of the Lukan Parables in the Purpose of Luke’s Gospel (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000).

Grenz, Stanley J. A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996).

Grenz, Stanley J. The Moral Quest: Foundations of Christian Ethics (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997).

Henton, M. Adventure in the Classroom: Using Adventure to Strengthen Learning and Build a Community of Life-long Learners (Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt, 1996).

Hill, Michael. The How and Why of Love: An Introduction to Evangelical Ethics (Kingsford: Matthias Media, 2002).

Johnston, Graham. Preaching to a Postmodern World: A Guide to Reaching Twenty-First Century Listeners (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001).

Larsen, D. L. Telling the Old Old Story: The Art of Narrative Preaching (Illinois: Crossway, 1995).

Lash, Nicholas. ‘Performing the Scriptures’ in Theology on the Way to Emmaus (London: SCM, 1986), 37-46. 

Lewis, R. L. and Lewis, G. Learning to Preach Like Jesus (Illinios: Crossway, 1989).

Lose, D. J. Confessing Jesus Christ: Preaching in a Postmodern World  (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003).

Lowry, E. L. How to Preach a Parable: Designs for Narrative Sermons (Nashville: Abingdon, 1989).

Mellon, N. Storytelling and the Art of Imagination (Rockport: Element, 1992).

Middleton, J. R. and Walsh, B. J. Truth is Stranger than it Used to Be (Illinois: IVP, 1995).

Montrose, Lynne. ‘International Study and Experiential Learning: The Academic Context’ In Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad. http://www.frontiersjournal.com/issues/vol8/vol8-08_montrose.htm (2008).

Paterson, Doug. ‘Background’ and ‘The Workshops’ In Theatre of the Oppressed Website. http://www.theatreoftheoppressed.com/ (2005).

Reese, Andy C. ‘Implications Of Results From Cognitive Science Research For Medical Education’ In Med Educ Online. http://www.med-ed-online.org/f0000010.htm (1998).

Sider, J. W. Intererpreting the Parables: A Hermeneutical Guide to their Meaning (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995).

Steffen, T.A. Reconnecting God’s Story to Ministry (La Habra: Center for Organizational and Ministry Development, 1996).

Stiller, B. C. Preaching Parables to Postmoderns (Philadelphia: Fortress, 2005).

Thiselton, A. C. ‘Reader Response Hermeneutics, Action Models, and the Parables of Jesus,’ in The Responsibility of Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 79-113.

Tilley, T. W. Story Theology (Collegeville: Liturgical, 1985).

Webb, William J. Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001).

 

[1] Stanley J. Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 2.

[2] J. R. Middleton and B. J. Walsh, Truth is Stranger than it Used to Be (Illinois: IVP, 1995), 109-110.

[3] This approach will give you some insight into my cultural experience and subjectivity. Crystal L. Downing, How Postmodernism Serves (My) Faith: Questioning Truth in Language, Philosophy and Art (Downers Grove: IVP, 2006), 135.

[4] Downing, How Postmodernism, 63.

[5] Downing, How Postmodernism, 60.

[6] Latter quote from Downing, How Postmodernism, 60.

[7] Stiller, B. C. Preaching Parables to Postmoderns (Philadelphia: Fortress, 2005), 3-4. Grenz, A Primer, 7.

[8] Graham Johnston, Preaching to a Postmodern World: A Guide to Reaching Twenty-First Century Listeners (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 25.

[9] As Downing explains: “For the postmodernist, all seeing comes from a certain standpoint, and depending on where and when you are standing – York in the seventeenth century or New York in the twenty-first century – you will see things differently.” Downing, How Postmodernism, 139.

[10] These three points have been adapted from Downing, How Postmodernism, 135.

[11] Grenz, A Primer, 2, 7.

[12] Johnston, Preaching, 27. Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 11. Grenz, A Primer, 7.

[13] To be precise, Derrida and Foucault would be described as poststructuralist thinkers here. However, as Downing comments: “Though both disliked application of the term postmodernist to their work, they both nevertheless reinforced a basic assumption of postmodernism: the interdependence of knowledge and language”. Downing, How Postmodernism, 125.

[14] Adapted from Downing, How Postmodernism, 135.

[15] Johnston, Preaching, 26.

[16] Grenz, A Primer, 14.

[17] Johnston, Preaching, 43-44.

[18] Johnston, Preaching, 54.

[19] Johnston, Preaching, 55.

[20] Johnston, Preaching, 55-56.

[21] I have utilised and adapted tables and information largely from Johnston here, except where otherwise noted. Johnston, Preaching, 27-28.

[22] As is explained above.

[23] Grenz, A Primer, 7.

[24] Grenz, A Primer, 7.

[25] Grenz, A Primer, 7, 14.

[26] Grenz, A Primer, 19.

[27] Grenz, A Primer, 7.

[28] A common experience of postmoderns. Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 110, 145.

[29] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 76-77.

[30] Quote taken from Downing, How Postmodernism, 139. Downing footnotes: Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “Pilgrim’s Digress: Christian Thinking on and About the Post/Modern Way”, in Christianity and the Postmodern Turn: Six Views, ed. Myron B. Penner (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2005), p. 87.

[31] Downing, How Postmodernism, 229-230.

[32] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 15-20. Downing, How Postmodernism, 161-162.

[33] Downing, How Postmodernism, 178.

[34] Grenz, A Primer, 10. Grenz is discussing George Marsden’s views and footnotes: Marsden, “Evangelicals, History, and Modernity,” in Evangelicalism and Modern America, ed. George M. Marsden (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1984), p.98.

[35] Grenz, A Primer, 10.

[36] T. W. Tilley, Story Theology (Collegeville: Liturgical, 1985), 36.

[37] Tilley, Story, 45.

[38] Tilley, Story, 35.

[39] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 69. Using material from N. T. Wright and Thomas Long.

[40] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 69.

[41] Stanley J. Grenz, The Moral Quest: Foundations of Christian Ethics (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997), 244-245.

[42] As is written in scripture, and as can be gathered from Matthew 13:34-35 and Mark 4:34. Lewis and Lewis report that Jesus’ parables make up one third of all his words. R. L. Lewis, and G. Lewis, Learning to Preach Like Jesus (Illinios: Crossway, 1989), 86.

[43] Michael Hill, The How and Why of Love: An Introduction to Evangelical Ethics (Kingsford: Matthias Media, 2002), 44-45.

[44] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 182. As N. T. Wright discusses.

[45] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 183.

[46] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 183.

[47] Stephen C. Barton, ‘What a Performance!’ In Handling Difference. http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/products/279/49/handling_difference_summer_1998_what_a_performance/ (1998).

[48] For example God chooses to continue to work with the nation of Israel, as seen in the Old Testament, even though they often frustrate and fail him. He does not miraculously transform him into people that embody an “ultimate ethic” (as Webb might describe it), but begins where they are at and works towards transforming their culture towards an ultimate ethic. William J. Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001), 30-33.

[49] D. J. Lose, Confessing Jesus Christ: Preaching in a Postmodern World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 231. Influencing this situation is the move away from authority – which could be the greatest change sociologically over the twentieth century, as Lewis reports. Lewis and Lewis, Learning, 24.

[50] More specifically questioning “in the context of a faithful, covenantal relationship with God” is affirmed. Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 186.

[51] “The performance of scripture is the life of the church.” Nicholas Lash, ‘Performing the Scriptures’ in Theology on the Way to Emmaus (London: SCM, 1986), 43.

[52] Lash, ‘Performing’, 43.

[53] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 183.

[54] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 194.

[55] Tilley, Story, 50.

[56] Downing, How Postmodernism, 177. Forbes, Greg W. The God of Old: The Role of the Lukan Parables in the Purpose of Luke’s Gospel (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 46-47.

[57] Downing, How Postmodernism, 177.

[58] D. L. Larsen, Telling the Old Old Story: The Art of Narrative Preaching (Illinois: Crossway, 1995), 152.

[59] This is not to imply that Jesus’ parables do not include reason and principles of theology, rather Jesus’ parables are “packed with theology… [and cause] reason, imagination, and emotions to collide; demanding a change of allegiance”, demonstrating that “stories  can communicate theology effectively”. Steffen, T.A. Reconnecting God’s Story to Ministry (La Habra: Center for Organizational and Ministry Development, 1996), 126.

[60] Larsen, Telling, 143, quoting Walter Wink. In a similar fashion, Jeremy Taylor describes: “He taught them by parables, under which were hid mysterious senses, which shined through their veil, like a bright sun through an eye closed with a thin eyelid.” Jeremy Taylor quote from Larsen, Telling, 148.

[61] Stiller, Preaching, 16.

[62] Stiller, Preaching, 16. Lewis and Lewis, Learning, 29.

[63] Lewis and Lewis, Learning, 82.

[64] Lewis and Lewis, Learning, 26.

[65] A. C. Thiselton, ‘Reader Response Hermeneutics, Action Models, and the Parables of Jesus,’ in The Responsibility of Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 97-99.

[66] Thiselton, ‘Reader’, 112.

[67] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 77-78.

[68] Bausch, W. J. Storytelling: Imagination and Faith (Connecticut: Twenty-third Publications, 1984), 30, 34, 58.

[69] Bausch, Storytelling, 47.

[70] Bausch, Storytelling, 140-141.

[71] Bausch, Storytelling, 140-141.

[72] As Steffen comments: “Stories draw listeners into the lives of the characters (people, animals, or objects, real or fictitious. Listeners (participants) not only hear what happened to such characters; through the imagination they vicariously enter the experience.” Steffen, Reconnecting, 122.

[73] Steffen, Reconnecting, 122.

[74] Eslinger, R L. Narrative and Imagination: Preaching the Worlds that Shape Us (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 152-153.

[75] Eslinger, Narrative, 8.

[76] E. L. Lowry, How to Preach a Parable: Designs for Narrative Sermons (Nashville: Abingdon, 1989), 115-141.

[77] A Brazilian director who developed Theatre of the Oppressed in the 1950-60’s. Doug Paterson, ‘Background’ and ‘The Workshops’ In Theatre of the Oppressed Website. http://www.theatreoftheoppressed.com/ (2005).

[78] Paterson, Theatre, Website.

[79] Psychodrama is based on the philosophy and methods developed by psychiatrist Dr Jacob Moreno (1889-1974).

[80] Australian and New Zealand Psychodrama Association Inc, ‘Psychodrama is deep and complex’ In Australian and New Zealand Psychodrama Association Website, http://anzpa.org/psychodrama (2009).

[81] M. Henton, Adventure in the Classroom: Using Adventure to Strengthen Learning and Build a Community of Life-long Learners (Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt, 1996), 46.

[82] “Experiential learning is a pedagogy with a long tradition of theory, research, and practice.” Lynne Montrose, ‘International Study and Experiential Learning: The Academic Context’ In Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad. http://www.frontiersjournal.com/issues/vol8/vol8-08_montrose.htm (2008).

[83] As Reese comments: “Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory has the best experimental support for improved learning outcomes when a student’s learning style is matched by the appropriate teaching methods.” He footnotes: Kolb DA. Experimental learning. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984; and Willcoxson L and Prosser M. Kolb’s learning style inventory (1985): Review and further study of validity and reliability. British J. Educational Psychology, 1996; 66:251-261. Andy C. Reese, ‘Implications Of Results From Cognitive Science Research For Medical Education’ In Med Educ Online. http://www.med-ed-online.org/f0000010.htm (1998).

[84] Also, as Lewis and Lewis point out, Jesus catered to different learning styles, and respected human experience and observations. Lewis and Lewis, Learning, 47-48, 68, 81.

[85] Forbes, The God, 47-48.

[86] Lewis and Lewis, Learning, 30.

[87] Bausch, Storytelling, 143.

[88] Middleton and Walsh, Truth, 77-78.