Ding Dong the Witch is Dead (God)

For those unfamiliar with the ideas brought up herein, read the following links (I understand these are not comprehensive but they are good introductions to one of the main proponents of the idea of "living the death of God"):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._J._Altizer

http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/arts-culture/god-dead-controversy

http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=523&C=527


This post will be my attempt to deal with the options for radical theology/death of God theology as well as some of the main problems (as I see them).

First option:
Death of God theology is nonsense. The basic assertion, as I understand it, is that God is dead (though what that means is itself not super clear). It seems to be simply saying that God [as transcendent] is dead. This death comes because of the incarnation and finds it's embodiment upon the cross. This has led to me to ask: what about the Trinity? Because, as much as a Hegelian reading of the Trinity is beneficial, it really does not explain the complex nature of the Trinity. Nothing does, really, but there is two thousand years of Christian thought on the matter and death of God theology (seems) to disregard this fact. If God is dead via the cross then how is the Trinity to be understood? As a dialectic triad? What about God the Father still existing as transcendent? Is God the Son's death the death of the Father? What about the Ascension? Jesus rises and returns to heaven, thus, returning to transcendence (leaving the Spirit, yes). Thus, this idea of the death of God becomes entirely nonsensical. It's just nitpicking without really taking into account the entirety of Christian tradition.

Second option:
Unclear restatement of Christian tradition. This is a quite simple critique but also vital. Any attempt to deal with Christianity in the current age needs to learn how to contextualize, to speak to this time and age. Currently, this death of God movement is simply speaking to academia. It uses the terms given to them by Hegel, Lacan, and Zizek; terms which, for the most part, are extremely unclear. Though, admittedly, they could find a home withing Christian tradition.

Third option:
It's all accurate and a current developments that needs to be embraced by the Church. But again, clarity and simplicity. Both lacking.

Fourth option:
It's all crazy.