"So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there. A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with them. Some of them asked, "What is this babbler trying to say?" Others remarked, "He seems to be advocating foreign gods."They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection." (Acts 17:17-18)
And please note how Paul addresses your alleged cultural reference here:
"In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof by raising him from the dead." (Acts 17:30-31)
If this is the culturally relevant preaching that Purpose-Driven pastors preach, then I wouldn't have a problem!
But Paul's preaching on Mar's Hill is nowhere near the model that they use.
Given this fact, I find it ironic when proponents of the Purpose-Driven model reference Act 17 as their justification for felt needs/culturally relevant preaching...not only is it not demonstrated in the passage; the passage is an example of just the opposite - the kind of "Hell-fire and brimstone" preaching that they cite as ineffective, offensive and irrelevant.
Oops, I didn't see your response when I also responded to the same post with the same though! I agree with you. I also wonder how many time words like repent, sin, righteousness, blood, crucify, and the like are found in PDL compared to how many times it talks about how man is made to feel good by what he does or say. I think it would be very telling about what the real point of the PDL story is.