Arnett, William M.

English

Asbury Theological Seminary

Tillich's Doctrine o f GodWilliam M. ArnettThree European-born theologians in our time are presentingthe Christian faith in a comprehensive manner from differentperspectives. Emil Brunner is attempting a re-formulationand re-statement of the classical tradition of Reformed theology in modern terms and with a Neo-orthodox emphasis.The most voluminous and monumental undertaking is that ofKarl Barth who seeks to present a church or dogmatic theologyfrom the theistic point of view. Paul Tillich, now professorat Harvard University, is endeavoring to write a systematictheology with an apologetic emphasis, being concernedprimarily with its relevance to life as a whole, in terms ofthe modern situation. In addition to these efforts in the realmof systematic theology, it may be noted here that RudolfBultmann seeks also to restate what he terms the mythologicalelements in the message of the New Testament in a new wayin order that the New Testament kerygma might be moreeffectively transmitted to men in a scientific age. LikeTillich, he attempts to make his reinterpretation existentially .For Tillich, apologetic theology is "answering theology , "-'^for it seeks to answer questions which arise out of life'ssituations, pertaining primarily to man's existence, his salvation, and his destiny. The result of Tillich's efforts thusfar is a imique systematic theology with an ontological andexistential foundation and framework. Two volumes have beenpublished, with Volume I appearing in 1951, which presentedthe first two parts, "Reason and Revelation" and "Being andGod." Volume II, published in 1957, contains the third partof his system, "Existence and the Christ," and represents thefirst series of Tillich's Gifford Lectures given at theUniversity of Aberdeen. Parts four and five, "Life and theSpirit" and "History and the Kingdom of God" are still tofollow.Systematic Theology , I, p. 31.Tillich's Doctrine of God 11The "Method of Correlation"While accepting criticism such as Earth's of a generalphilosophy of religion on the basis of systematic theology,Tillich nevertheless tries to do justice to the theologicalfactors and motives behind natural theology and philosophy ofreligion. Evidence of this is apparent in the philosophicalelement in the structure of his system. He calls his theological method "the method of correlation. Correlation forTillich is multiple in character and implication. In thismethod radical disjunctions are avoided, and instead thevarious polar elements which are present in every significant religious situation are conjoined, such as the human andthe divine, the finite and the infinite, the knowing subject andthe object known, freedom and destiny. Such contradictoryviews as atheism and theism are resolved, since neitheratheists nor theists are outside God, according to Tillich.It should be further noted that the existential character oftheology must pervade the system throughout. It requires thatevery part of the system should include one section in whichthe question is developed by an analysis of human existenceand existence generally, and one section in which the theological answer is given on the basis of the sources, the medium,and the norm of systematic theology. ^Does God Exist?For Tillich, the basic theological question is the questionof God. 4 His answer to the query, "Does God exist?" is acategorical "No." According to his view, God does not existbecause existence is a category of dependence. He thereforerepudiates the "so-called proofs" for the "so-called existence"of God. Since God is beyond essence and existence "it is asatheistic to affirm the existence of God as to deny it."5 Thevery phrase, "the existence of God," is "in itself an impossible combination of words. God does not exist , saysTillich, but is rather the ground of all existence.2 Ibid. , p. 66.3 Ibid.^Ibid. , p. 163.^ Ibid. , p. 237.^ Dynamics of Faith, p. 47.12 Ashury StmmarianGod as Being-itselfBasic to his whole system of thought is that God is being-itself.'^ The question of God is not the question of a beingbesides others, but it is the existential question of being itself.The assertion that God is being-itself is a completely true andnon-symbolic statement. All other descriptions of God, otherthan being-itself, are symbolic^ and not literal. Every concrete assertion about God must be symbolic, for a symbol isa segment of finite experience. God as person. Father andLord come imder this category. In fact the symbol of God asLord and as Father does not appear for full discussion imtilpage 286 of Volume I, which gives some indication of howthe "God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" is imprisonedin his philosophical theism. Some of the symbolic terms ofGod are:(1) He is "the living God." Since life is literally "theprocess in which potential being becomes actual being" andsince God transcends all distinctions between potential andactual He is not living in the non-symbolic sense, but ratherHe is the ground of life . ^(2) He is personal .10 God is a personal God but this doesnot mean that He is a person, nor is He less than personal. Itsimply means, in non-symbolic language, that He is the groundof everything personal.(3) He is spirit .H This is the most inclusive symbol forGod, since it is the function in which all the elements of thestructure participate. It is also the basis for any trinitarianstatement.(4) He is creative .12 God is creative because He is God.He eternally "creates himself, " a paradoxical phrase whichstates God's freedom.(5) He is holy . 13 Holiness expresses the unapproachablecharacter of God. It is "that quality which qualifies all otherqualities as divine. His power is holy power; his love is holySystematic Theology , I, p. 235^This much-used word in Tillich's writings is thoroughly discussed in Dynamics of Faith , pp. 41f .^ Systematic Theology , I, pp. 241f.'^^ Ibid. , p. 245. ^^Ibid. , pp. 252ff.^^Ibid. , pp. 249f. ^^Ibid. , pp. 271f.Tillich's Doctri7ie of God 13love. "(6) He is almighty , or omnipotent .^^ Omnipotence, withrespect to time, is eternity; with respect to space, it is omnipresence; and with respect to the subject-object structure ofbeing, it is omniscience.(7) He is love .^^ His love is a mystery for finite imder-standing because it is beyond the distinctionbetween potentiality and actuality . "The wrath of God ... is the emotional symbolfor thework of love which rejects and leaves to self-destructionwhat resists it. "16(8) He is Lord and Father A'^ These are the two mainsymbols of a person-to-person relationship with God. The twoare inseparable. God as Lord expresses the holy power ofGod and distance, while the concept "Father" expresses unitywith God who is holy love.Grod as the UnconditionalThe fact that man asks questions about God indicates that heis already aware of God. His awareness of God is not the result of argumentation, but rather a presupposition of Hisexistence. Every argument for God's existence points to thepresence of something unconditional within the self and theworld. Without this, questions about God would not be asked.Li Tillich's usage, the term "the imconditional" is a philosophical symbol for the ultimate concern of man. In hisessay on "Tillich's Concept of the Protestant Era," JamesLuther Adams points out that the term, as suggested by itsGerman connotations, conveys the idea of the majestic and theawful, the ultimate and the intimate, the sovereign, thecommanding, that which cannot be tampered with, that whichmakes demands that cannot be ignoredwith impunity. 18 For aman to be religious is not a matter of certain beliefs andpractices , but rather the point of being ultimately concerned ,and he is ultimately concerned when he ejqjeriences the unconditional. The experience of the unconditional is theexperience of thatwhich has absolute authority for one, of thatbefore which he bows in humility and awe.-'-^ Man's ultimateconcern takes precedence over all other concerns in his life.14/^;^. , pp. 272ff. Ibid. , pp. 286f.^^Ibid. , pp. 279f. ^^The Protestant Era , p. 300.^^Ibid. , p. 284. The New Being, pp. 152f.14 Ashury SeminarianOn this basis, even the "irreligious" can be religious or giveevidence of religion. Tillich avers that the atheist usually hasan ultimate concern for truth. In fact, he insists that even theatheist may be saved, since his ultimate concern for truthand his loyalty to truth is itself a relationship to God, eventhough the atheist does not recognize it. 20God as TranscendentA prominent characteristic of Tillich's doctrine of God ishis hostility to supranaturalism.^l In his view, transcendentis not to be identified with supernatural , in the sense that Godis understood to be a transcendent object inhabiting a realmabove this world. God is beyond naturalism and supra-naturalism. 22 Transcendence is not to be thought of inspatial terms. 23 For Tillich, transcendence is a quality ofreality which is realized in faith. However, his use ofdepth asthe dimensional symbol for transcendence leaves us with theproblem of how to differentiate transcendence fromimmanence. The relevance of prayer in Tillich's understanding ofGod is brought into question, at least in its acceptedviews and practice. Prayer appears to be of little significance,as Tillich actually implies in a recent article. 24The Trinitarian Problem"Trinitarian monotheism is not a matter of numberthree. "25 The trinitarian problem, for Tillich, is the problemof the imity between ultimacy and concreteness in the livingGod. 26 He says the number three has no specific significancein itself, although it comes nearest to an adequate descriptionof life-process. In contrast, the concern of the ChurchFathers was "not to divide the substance (or essence) and notThe Protestant Era, pp. xiv-xv.Systematic Theology , I, pp. 65-66; 116-117.Systematic Theology , II, p. 5. Cf. Systematic Theology , I,p. 263.'^'^ Systematic Theology , I, p. 263.^4 "How We Communicate The Christian Message," The NewChristian Advocate, HI, 5, p. 16 (May, 1959).Systematic Theology , I, p. 228.Dynamics of Faith, p. 46.Tillich's Doctrine of God 15to confuse the persons" in the Godhead. Tillich leaves us witha hazy notion, at least gives no unequivocal statement concerning an ontological Trinity, and the question arises whetherthis does not indicate a gnostic trend.God and CreationGod is creative because He is God, and since the divine lifeis essentially creative, in Tillich's view, all three modes oftime must be used in symbolizing it. "God has created theworld, he is creative in the present moment, and he tvillcreatively fulfil his telos . "27 A pantheistic and Hegeliannotion is expressed in Volume H: "...God is eternallycreative, and through himself he creates the world and throughthe world himself. "28 On such a basis the world is requiredto make God no less than God to make the world. Accordingto Tillich's ontological view, creation itself fell with man,since the doctrine of creation and the doctrine of the Fall joinor coincide. He admits that this is the most difficult and themost dialectical point in the doctrine of creation. Whilecreation, including man and the material, is good as potentialessential being, it is fallen and evil as actualized existentialbeing. In the relation of creation and the Fall, Tillich statesforthrightly that "actualized creation and estranged existenceare identical. "29 Thus, in man's transition from potentialityto actuality , sin is an unavoidable necessity .God and Man's SalvationMan's estrangement from God necessarily serves as thebackground for God's activity in overcoming it. These factorsare given more thorough consideration in another article inthis issue, but our concern here is God's relation to man'ssalvation . Tillich is critical of traditional views of Christology ,and rejects as pagan and superstitious any notion that Godbecame man, for that would mean that God ceased to be whatHe was and was changed into something else. ^0 Tillich willallow the idea of "incarnation" in the Johannine statement thatthe "Logos became flesh" if "Logos" is understood as the universal principle of self-manifestation, in God as well as in^'^ Systematic Theology, I, p. 253.Systematic Theology , H, p. 147.^^Ihid. , p. 44. ^^Ibid. , p. 94.16 Ashury Seminariannature and in history. 31 He therefore rejects the virgin birthas an historical fact (as well as Christ's physical resur-rection)32in the life of Jesus. 33 As for atonement, "theatoning processes are created by God and God alone. "34Though God "is eternally reconciled"35 the atoning process"implies that God, in the removal of the guilt and punishmentwhich stand between him and man, is not dependent on theChrist but that the Christ, as the bearer of the New Being,mediates the reconciling act of Grod to man. "36 The urgencyand xmiqueness of Christ's atoning work is further weakenedby Tillich in his insisting that, though Christ is "the ultimatecriterion of every healing and saving process, " it cannot beinsisted that "there is no saving power apart from him. "37The idea of participation in the New Being in Jesus as theChrist sums up his concept of salvation. Tillich rejects thenotion of "eternal condemnation, " and says that God continuesto work creatively in those who are in a state of separation.Though we must suspend judgment imtil Volume HI appears ,one wonders if this is a germinal idea for universalism.An EvaluationThis in brief is Tillich's doctrine of God. He admits thathis ontological system "demands the ability of radical abstraction. "38 At the same time he repudiates tjie insinuationthat he has surrendered the substance of the Christian messagemerely because he uses unbiblical and imtraditional terminology. 39 But the question persists after wading throughTillich's gymnastics of abstractions as to whether he is notforcing something alien into Christian wineskins. His ontological conception of God as being itself, the ground of everything that exists, leaves us with something abstract andimpersonal, while biblical religion is intensely personal,reaching its climax in the doctrine of the incarnation wherethe personal is the chosen medium of divine self-manifestation.His evaporation of historical facts by the overuse ofsymbolism, his persistent denial of the miraculous and^^Ibid. , p. 95. ^.l^bid. , pp. 173-174.lllhid. , pp. 1551 Jj^^^- ' PP- 167-168.�^^Ihid. , p. 160. "^^Ibid. , p. 11.^^Ibid. , p. 173. ^^Ibid , p. viii.Ibid. , p. 169.Tillich's Doctrine of God 17supernatural, his attenuated Christology and soteriology�yes,all this and more is but to hand the sop to skepticism. Hissystem is neither calculated to make the angels sing, nor tobring the Christian "joy and peace in believing through thepower of the Holy Spirit." No ontological system can comprehend the full measure of God's grace which is the throbbingheart of biblical Christianity. Tillich's construction leavesus with the increasing conviction of man's impotence to presshis way into the presence of God by abstractions, any morethan by the power of speculative reason. In the words ofH. R. Mackintosh, "If we are to approach. He must stretchforth His hand and draw us near. If we are to know Him, withthe knowledge which is life eternal. He must speak His freeand gracious Word, and we must hear in faith. "40Types of Modern Theology , p. 117.

Tillich\u27s Doctrine of God

https://place.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2105&amp;context=asburyjournal

Tillich\u27s Doctrine of God

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Asbury Theological Seminary