Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
HOW DO WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT GOD?
All Christian traditions believe in one God and hold the belief that no-one can be saved except by believing that this God, who has revealed himself through the Old and New Testament, is the God who saved humanity from sin and death. Theology is thus a discourse about God or a reflection on God (cf Barth 1947:1-10; McGrath 1996:117; see Berkhof 1990:32-39; [1982] 1991:12-15; Peters 1992:28, 68-78; Kaufman 1996:1-8). Atheism is the rejection of belief in God (see Berkhof 1990:8-10). But the question is what does the word God signify (cf Large 2000:335, 339-345; see Ruprecht 1997:577)? If we do not explicitly say what we mean by the word God, we will not be able to answer
any question about the existence or the being of God (Pannenberg 1979:361). It is therefore important that we, before embarking on any theological enterprise, inquire about the understandings of religions and theological traditions regarding the word God (see Levinas 1998:56-57). We must look at the history of the theological enterprises of the past regarding their understanding of the word God.
During the early centuries after Christ, the early church had to deal with its understanding of God. However, the early church was divided in its understanding of God. The controversy started in Alexandria, probably in the year 318 (cf Kannengiesser 1991:2-3, 473-475; Brakke 1995:6; Williams 2002:48; see Rousseau 2002:224). Arius, a prominent presbyter in the Alexandrian church stated that God the Father is the only one in the Trinity without a beginning (Williams 2002:97). Jesus Christ, the Logos, has a beginning, which precludes him from being God (Stead 1998:671, 674-684). God the Father made the Logos. In Arius’ view therefore, the Logos was subordinate to God.
The Logos must be either God or creature, and since there cannot be two Gods, it follows that the Logos (Jesus) is a creature (Walker et al [1918] 1985:133; cf Stead 2000:25; see Macleod 1996:122-123; Williams 2002:101, 109). Alexander, the pope of Alexandria, decided that Arius was in the wrong (Kannengiesser 1991:393, 398-401). To him the deity of the Logos and his exact likeness to God was important (Williams 2002:156). But it seemed as if these two assumptions contradict each other. How could there be two coequal Gods and how would it be possible for the Father and the Son to be the same? The other bishops of the church were so confused they rejected both arguments. In order to solve the controversy between the two opinions Constantine, the Roman emperor at that time, summoned all the bishops of the Roman Empire to the city of Nicaea in Asia Minor for the first universal council of the church (Rousseau 2002:225). The council assembled in May 325. The majority of the bishops came from the East. Only six were Westerners.
Arius stated his opinion that the Logos was in being like God, but not wholly God (cf Stead 1998:674-682). Athanasius demonstrated that God the Father and the Son is of one and the same being (cf Kannengiesser 1991:105, 112-113). The council ruled in favour of Athanasius’s view and this general opinion of the council is reflected in the text of th Nicene Creed: “We believe in one God….We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God…of one Being with the Father” (World Council of Churches [1991] 1996 = WCC [1991] 1996:11; cf Stead 2000:48; Young 2002:78-79; see Walker et al [1918] 1985:131-134).
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.2 METHODOLOGY
1.3 OUTLINE OF THE DISSERTATION
Chapter 2 THE CHALLENGE OF MODERN ATHEISM
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 HOW DO WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT GOD?
2.3 HOW DO WE SPEAK OF GOD?
2.4 A DEFINITION OF THEISM AND MODERN ATHEISM
2.4.1 Introduction
2.4.2 The autonomy of nature
2.4.3 The autonomy of the subject
2.5 THE CHALLENGE OF MODERN ATHEISM
2.5.1 Introduction
2.5.2 Preserving the status quo
2.5.3 Dialogue between theology and the challenges of modern atheism
2.5.4 A dialectical relationship between theology and modern atheism
2.6 HOW CAN GOD BE KNOWN AND EXPERIENCED?
2.6.1 Natural theology, a possibility?
2.6.2 How do we experience God?
Chapter 3 FRIEDRICH WILHELM NIETZSCHE AND HIS STATEMENT: “GOTT IST TODT [sic]!”
3.1 NIETZSCHE AS THE PROPHET OF NIHILISM
3.2 WHO WAS NIETZSCHE?
3.3 AGAINST WHOM WAS NIETZSCHE REACTING?
3.3.1 Introduction
3.3.2 Nietzsche as reacting against the idea of the subject that knows himself or herself, God and the world
3.3.3 Nietzsche as reacting against the ideas of progress in the philosophy of Hegel and the science of Darwin
3.3.3 Nietzsche’s contact with Strauss and his break with Christianity
3.4 IMPLICATIONS OF NIETZSCHE’S PHILOSOPHY
3.5 SUMMARY
Chapter 4 MODERN ATHEISM AND THEISM CHALLENGED?
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 KARL BARTH’S CHALLENGE TO ATHEISM AND THEISM
4.2.1 Introduction
4.2.2 Atheism and theism challenged
4.2.3 Reflecting on the challenges that Barth offered to modern atheism and theism
4.2.4 Summary
4.3 JÜRGEN MOLTMANN’S CHALLENGE TO ATHEISM AND THEISM
4.3.1 Introduction
4.3.2 Atheism and theism challenged
4.3.3 Reflecting on the challenges that Moltmann offered t modern atheism and theism
4.3.4 Summary 1
4.4 WOLFHART PANNENBERG’S CHALLENGE TO ATHEISM AND THEISM
4.4.1 Introduction
4.4.2 Atheism and theism challenged
4.4.3 Reflecting on the challenges that Pannenberg offered to modern atheism and theism
4.5 TED PETERS’ CHALLENGE TO ATHEISM AND THEISM
Chapter 5 BEYOND MODERN ATHEISM AND THEISM
