As in the previous post, the whole idea of a Munzerian Church is an abstraction that could as well never come about. It could as well start beautifully with committed persons who wished to defy capitalism and religious reaction. If that happened ‘historical materialists’ should be ready to see comrades there. It is a challenge to understand the early modern which contained a very balanced set of foundations. Then after the onset of the modern period everything jumps into a one track mind, scientism. Marxism got caught up in this and was crippled from the start. The Orthodox reactionaries relished their restoration after the legacy of immense sacrifice from the bolsheviks was all thrown away.
The best solution to the god question is to remain silent. But we can point to limited issues there. The rise of science, quite obviously, arrives to throw light on the background and provides a perfectly sensible dialectical complement to theism, but most of all a dismissal of the archaic trappings of Old Testament religion.
It is hard to see the outcome here. A culture reduced to the new atheism will suffocate. The legacy of the Axial Age is increasingly derelict. My approach could work, but it is not likely to be realized.
Attempts to replace Xtianity almost always fail because its critics cannot understand it. That’s after the entirely appropriate debriefing a la humanist perspectives of its mythological aspects.
The Tillich idea, btw, of ‘being’ is a classic commentary, but the core of the ancient idea spoke not just of the ‘being’ of god, but of the ‘will’ of god. That latter was a stumbling block for many post-religious thinkers, but all at once we can see the real meaning lost concerning this usage. As noted the ‘will of god’ theology was apparently grafted onto a form of Samkhya with the results taken from the classic progression of gunas: null, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, 96 (in a seven term system). The Trinity appears as a garbled version of the ‘three gunas’ as the first manifest entity from and veiling the unmanifest ‘null’ or ‘god by definition’ as eternally unknown before the cascade of greater laws or triads. The doctrine of the Trinity is all we have left of this conception, and I can imagine the look on the face of the Jain yogi observing the fate of his attempt at clarification.
But this kind of thinking clarifies theology to a considerable extent. I think that it would be impossible to adopt this kind of correction, but the history deserves greater study. The idea of the Trinity in this sense stands out at once as comprehensible, if still obscure, in terms of the (atheist) system of samkhya arriving no doubt into the Roman empire via Jain yogis.
As we have pointed out the ‘will’ as in Schopenhauer suddenly becomes a means to understand what was meant by the ‘will of god’ manifesting in lower realities. It is amazing how little the original meanings were able to forestall theological extravagance and the progression of thought into sterile crudities.