The Postmodern Piper?

Sometimes I just read things and laugh.  Laugh hard.  I don’t really know how to explain the lunacy of this quote, so I’ll just reproduce it:

Another symptom of postmodernism’s influence on evangelical hermeneutics is what could be called “middle-ground mania.” The interpretive atmosphere of today appears to impose an insatiable appetite for theologians to have the best of two worlds-to locate themselves between established positions-thereby mixing literal and non-literal hermeneutical principles in various combinations.

John Piper provides an example of this by classifying himself in three theological camps, dispensationalism, covenant theology, and new covenant theology. (Robert Thomas, “Postmodern Hermeneutics and Biblical Prophecy“)

Piper as an example of postmodernism?  Bizarre. Far-fetched.  Unreal.  Those are the words that first come to mind.  This use of postmodernism as a bat to bash people with has gone way too far.  How can the definition of postmodernism be stretched to to include finding middle ground with people?  Does postmodernism just mean compromise now?  That’s kind of silly.

Piper, as well as any other large personality, can be open to lots of criticism and misinterpretation.  But there are two things I am certain about when it concerns John Piper: he’s currently on sabbatical and he is not a postmodernist.  He has always argued against the postmodern view.  While I don’t agree with Piper on a lot, he certainly gets his definitions of postmodernism semi-right, he uses the pop culture definition of postmodernism (plurality, poor doctrine and mysticism) and not the actual theological or philosophical definitions.  Yet, he still sticks with the pop definition, which is within the range of possibilities (postmodernism gone wrong equals Piper’s definition of postmodernism).  The equation of Piper with postmodernism is way out in left field.  Like outside of the ball park, way out in outer space, far beyond the Milky Way.  It just plain doesn’t make any real sense.