9/29/2012 Christian Atheism and Radical Theology

by Benny Mattis

In 1882, with the publication of his book The Gay Science, Friedrich Nietzsche declared the death of God through the words of a character called "The madman."  The death in question was not the literal death of a being who was once alive, but rather the shrinking ability of foundational belief systems to help people make sense of the world they live in.  The Enlightenment showed us the various discoveries to be found by asking, "Why?"  However, when unmitigated skepticism undermines foundational belief systems without providing acceptable alternatives, a nihilistic sense of meaninglessness may take hold.

It may seem that when everything is questionable, nothing is sacred.  However, it is the case that, especially following the Enlightenment, everything is indeed questionable, regardless of whether one personally resolves to question everything or anything.  But don't humans need the sacred?  Isn't nihilism a problem that ought to be solved?  Those who answer "yes" to this question have come up with various responses, which include merely negating meaninglessness ("meaninglessness itself is meaningless, therefore it doesn't matter that life is meaningless!"), positing a "hidden meaning" ("things may look terrible and chaotic at first glance, but from a God's-eye view everything is just fine"), and attempting to return to a pre-skeptical state (taking foundational beliefs back, and keeping them "on faith").  But there is a group of theologians who are trying to find religious symbolism in meaninglessness itself--these include the proponents of what is called "Death of God theology," which will be the topic of discussion this week.

***

On 9/29/2012, the discussion of Christian Atheism went as planned.  We discussed an excerpt from Slavoj Zizek's Only a Suffering God Can Save Us.  Discussion questions included:

-Is it possible to be both a Christian and an Atheist?

This question garnered varied responses from people of different backgrounds--some said that the word "Christian" implies a specific set of beliefs about the supernatural, whereas others suggested that, as it sufficiently resembled traditional Christian culture, Christian Atheism could well be considered as such.

-Is any system of beliefs capable of justifying itself?

This question was not discussed as much as the others, but Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem was brought up as evidence against this possibility.

-Does Zizek succeed in finding meaning in meaninglessness?

Because of Zizek's dependence on religious imagery, some of us concluded that the inspirational power of his ideas are somewhat confined to ex-Christians.  A more critical view suggested that Zizek is actually worsening the nihilism that results from a death of God--if God is suffering, as opposed to just us humans, then things may seem to be even more truly hopeless than before.  A more analytic perspective offered the notion that this question--as well as the question of the "meaning of life"--is essentially meaningless itself, i.e. nonsensical.

-What is it that belief and value systems derive motivational power from?

Responses to this question included an evolutionary-biological explanation (beliefs hold people together, which helps them survive) as well as the idea that motivational power is produced primarily by vigorous and charismatic religious leaders.

Despite the rain, a decent turnout showed up to the meeting this week.  We concluded with an announcement that ideas for future discussions should be brought to Quimby.  The meeting was followed by dinner at Worcester Dining Commons and several rounds of "Cards Against Humanity" afterwards.