God is Dead Theology

Some of you may read the title of this school of thought, and ask, "How can there be a theology about God being dead? Isn't that a contradiction in and of itself?  If God is dead or doesn't exist, why even bother with theology?"  I am reminded of a song that was sung frequently in a church that I attended in New York City.  The name of the song was "God's Not Dead, He is Still Alive."  The validity of God's existence, as expressed in that song was "I feel Him in my heart, I feel Him in my hands, I feel Him in my feet, I feel Him in my head, I feel Him all over me."  The main proof that was used to demonstrate God's existence was "feelings."  In other words, there was an emotional basis for demonstrating the reality of God's existence.  In essence, it was a religion of emotions.

I would be the last person to deny that emotions play a role in the Christian experience.  If we evaluate human beings holistically, there are emotional, intellectual, physical, and spiritual components in our makeup.  Everyone of those components plays a role in our relationship with God. We can never sever or extricate any one of those elements in our spiritual journey.  Jesus affirms the teaching of the Torah by instructing His disciples to "love the Lord with all their mind (intellect), all their heart (emotions), all their might (physical strength), and all their soul (totality of their being).

In his book, "A Layman's Guide to Protestant Theology," William Hordern  covers the emergence of the "God is Dead" theology.   He informs us that the term "God is dead" was originally coined by the philosopher Frederich Nietzche.  It has been used frequently by theologians to describe the fact that for many in our age, God seems to be unreal and thus is dead.  Gabriel Vahanian brought the term to prominence in his book, God is Dead, which appeared in 1957. Vahanian argues that today atheism is not simply a theory which few thinkers reach; it is a way life lived by the masses.  When Vahanian wrote his book, he was aware that there was a revival of religion.  But this confirmed his thesis.  What was being revived was a religiosity which identified God with humankind's peace of mind and economic welfare.  Nothing could better prove the death of God than the way in which this religiosity lightly used God's name.  Vahanian does not believe, however, that God is in fact dead. The living God of biblical faith can be ignored but not killed. And so Vahanian calls Christians to smash the idols worshiped in our time so that the living God might be heard again.  The God is dead theologians begin from the same view of our culture, but draw a different conclusion than Vahanian did.  In some real sense they want to say that God is dead. (Hordern, p.238).

Leading African American theologian, James Cone, author of "God of the Oppressed," and "Black Theology and Black Power," argues that the God who is identified with the oppressing class is an evil and demonic god and needs to be put to death.  For Cone, any god who supports maintaining people in a state of subjugation needs to be done away with.  In Cone's theology, the only God that should be allowed to exist and served is the God who identifies with oppressed people and their struggles and their sufferings.

One key exponent of the God is dead group is Thomas Altizer.  Altizer believes that Christians must accept their own age and think in its terms.  He believes that God died in Christ, died in the nineteenth century, died in the twentieth century, and that God dies again every time Christians love their neighbors, and goes on to say that we must will the death of God. When Altizer reads Phillipans 2:6-8, his understanding is that God died in Christ in order to enter fully into human history.  For Altizer, the person who hopes to find in him a truly atheistic theologian will be disappointed. Altizer believes that God's death does not mean that God is no more, but rather that God is becoming fully immanent within the world and history.  That is why Altizer could easily say "God is dead, thank God" (Hordern, p.240).

Another leading figure in this group is William Hamilton.  Hamilton believes that theology must become humble and fragmentary.  In Jesus, says Hamilton, we find God lowly in the world, serving others.  According to Hamilton, in Jesus, God is suffering.  Today's Christian must be a rebel against God because only when we have rebelled against the "father image" of God can we serve the limited and suffering God (Hordern, p.243).

In closing, I invite you (the reader) to evaluate the God is Dead theology.  What strengths and weaknesses do you see in this school of thought?  Are there any elements of God is Dead theology that you believe we as Christians can embrace?  Or do you believe that the God is Dead theology is a human attempt to deny the existence of God and make it irrelevant for today?  Your input and response to these questions will make for a very lively discussion.

Grace and peace,

Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona