Kierkegaard(1813-1855) made scandal in the newspapers of its time at the time of the death of a known bishop. Whereas these newspapers speak in praise of disappeared, Kierkegaard clamp high and strong that to have been a good theologist and a good bishop, this one never was for as much an authentic Christian.
Why?
Because, underlines Kierkegaard, Christian being, it is to be an existential man having made a jump in the faith, which consists in being given up as a God, and not a man of system controlling all the wheels of theology like administration. This blow of glare is interesting, as well by criticism as it deploys than by the questions than it raises.

An original criticism

The debate philosophie/religion and thus raison/foi did not cease, from time immemorial, feeding from the polemic. For atheistic rationalism, God is only one invention of the man intended to fill a need for safety. It is also a social symptom. Religion and superstition always tend to flower when reign political archaisms or crises. Also there is reality only in one alive man without God by his reason. For believing on the contrary, God is the creator of the universe and one can prove it, like saint Thomas d' Aquin (1228-1274), by showing that there is no reality without cause nor of values without bases. So all reality is in God, who exceeds the human condition, and to which it is necessary to be subjected. Vis-a-vis at this opposition, the originality of Kierkegaardlies in the fact of circumventing the debate by underlining two things:

- believing does not have as much reason that it thinks it. If it is true that God is with the base of all, this one does not have a system but an existence. It is tested more than it is not proven. Also this is an error to want to rationalize it. When it is made it, one leads so that Nietzsche (1844-1900) will call "the death of God". God ceases being divine to become the part of a morals and a system;

- the atheist, contrary, is not as wrong as it is believed. If God cannot be an invention of the man, it is right to note that this last is a distressed animal: it awaits an answer has its life vis-a-vis with the questions which raise May and death, owing to the fact that it has the intuition of another possible living condition, a kind of eternity, which N 1 is neither the evil nor death.

To oppose the existence to the systematic mind and thus the religion lived to theology, it is to risk, as atNietzsche which wanted God of exaltation, to pass from fixed God of the reason to dionysiaque God of intoxication with, for consequence, to reduce God to pure lived individual.

Vis-a-vis to that,Hegel (1770-1831) recalls two
things: initially, that the religion is with the base of philosophy, insofar as to think, it is to think what the monk contains, namely the fact of being able to live of a purely spiritual reality and of created a human bond grace has that; then, that if the religion is with the base of philosophy, philosophy is to become to it religion, since the true religion makes wise and nondrunk.