Postmodern Apologetics? Both of these words tend to be loaded and, at times, hotly contested. Both have negative connotations, at least in some circles. And, in fact, they seem diametrically opposed to each other. Is not apologetics a militant defense of traditional Christianity, associated with forced baptisms, mass conversions, and screaming demagogues? And is not postmodernism an equally militant rejection of any such belief, in favor of other beliefs or no par tic u lar beliefs at all,

more »

... r complete and utter relativism that rejects all values and virtues or a meaningless term thought up by some doomsayers who thought the modern age was over when, really, we are still in the middle of it? If "apologetics" stands for blind and dogmatic faith and "postmodern" for the complete rejection and even suppression of faith, how could the two possibly meet? Yet obviously, both descriptions are caricatures. Th e introduction explores the history of apologetics in more detail, so let me defi ne it simply in terms of the subtitle: "Apologetics" is used here to characterize the ways in which contemporary philosophy articulates the coherence and value of religious experience and belief in God. Quite a few contemporary thinkers have begun anew to examine the question of whether it is possible to have an experience of the divine and what such an experience might look like. And my central argument is that they do indeed engage in arguments for the validity, coherence, and meaningfulness of such thinking about religious experience. Th us, they are, at least in some minimalist sense, apologetic projects: projects in defense of God or