How (not) to speak of God – Chapter 1: God rid me of God

Peter Rollins begins his book with setting up a dialectic between Ludwig Wittgenstein’s statement “What we cannot speak of we must pass over in silence.” and evangelical christianity’s approach which suggests “God is the one subject of who we must never stop speaking”. What results from this is an approach which suggests “That which we cannot speak of is the one thing about whom and to whom we must never stop speaking”. This dialogue between mysticism and dogmatism sets the scene for Part 1 of How (not) to Speak of God  and Rollin’s discussion of post-modern continental philosophy and theology. 

.

Chapter 1: God rid me of God

“Chapter 1 explores the nature of revelation and argues that, far from being the opposite of concealment, the word of God has mystery built into its very heart” (p. xiii).

Away-from-here

Rollins describes the emerging conversation not as a set of beliefs that might “one day burst onto the religious scene as a single, unified and distinct denominational perspective”, but rather represents an “understanding that being a Christian always involves becoming a Christian” (pp. 5-6).

A revolution of the ‘how’

“[T]his revolution is not one which merely adds to or subtracts from the world of our understanding, but rather one which provides the necessary tools for us to be able to look at that world in a completely different manner” (p. 7).

Speaking (of) God

“Christianity is generally accepted to rest upon the belief that God has communicated with humanity via revelation” (p. 7). Revelation is seen to be the opposite of concealment. Theology = Word (of) God.

Revelation against concealment

The enlightenment saw the employment of pure reason, at the expense of custom, authority and instinct. However this approach, rather than being seen as opposing the theologian, was implemented so that “one could decipher the singular meaning of… supernatural revelation” (p. 8).

The end of ideology

The ‘genealogical critique’ or ‘critique of ideology’, as espoused by Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Marx and Freud, challenged the “belief that our ideas derive from pure reason devoid of prejudice” (p. 140). “In doing so they each helped to point out that when we make absolute claims concerning what we believe about the world or God, acting as if our opinions were the result of some painstaking, objective and rational reflection, we end up deceiving ourselves, for our understanding is always an interpretation of the information before us” (p. 9). These thinkers have been (mis)used in justifying nihilism.

Beyond meaning and meaninglessness

This deconstruction of reason does not necessarily result in meaninglessness. Nietzsche, Marx and Freud did not eliminate the possibility of objective truth, rather they simply noted that subjective humans could not articulate it objectively.

The idolatry of ideology

This ‘critique of ideology’ mirrors the biblical rejection of idolatry. Like the golden calf being a visual rendering of God, ideology is a (conceptual) attempt to make God accessible. “[I]t is the way one engages with an object or idea that makes an idol an idol rather than some kind of property within it.” (p. 12).

The bible and conceptual idolatry

Unlike contemporary churches, the bible does not offer a simple, linear description of God. There is a “vast array of competing stories concerning the character of God that are closely connected to the concrete circumstances of those who inhabit the narrative.” (p. 12). Western theology has reduced this diversity and vibrancy. This unnamable nature of God prevents us from colonizing an idolatrous image, where we “claim to understand God as God really is.” (p. 13). The biblical witness represents many ideological images held together in creative tension. In this way fractures and tensions are embraced rather than ironed out. This ungraspable nature is seen in the unpronounceable (vowelless) form of God’s name, thus preserving the mystery of God.

Revelation as concealment

The ‘critique of ideology’ and condemnation of idolatry undermine fundamentalist attempts to offer a correct interpretation of God. This demonstrates that “revelation, far from being the opposite of concealment, has concealment built into its very heart.” (p. 16). “Hence revelation ought not be thought of either as that which makes God known or as that which leaves God unknown, but rather as the overpowering light that renders God as unknown.” (p. 17). “While all of the Church has maintained that there is a revealed and hidden side of God, this difference here is that we are rediscovering the Barthian insight that even the revealed side of God is mysterious.” (p. 18).

Beyond ‘God’

“Hence Meister Eckhart famously prays, ‘God rid me of God’, a prayer that acknowledges how the God we are in relationship with is bigger, better and different than our understanding of that God.” (p. 19).

.