Theology and atheology are systematic ways of thinking and talking about god-concepts, religious symbols, religious beliefs, religious traditions, and how they relate to human society. Whereas theology begins by taking basic religious beliefs for granted, atheology begins by questioning them and challenging their validity. Theologians believe that the basic truths of religion can be known; atheologians believe that the claims of religion are questionable at best and may be proven false.
Liberation atheology shares something in common with apologetics as well. Apologetics is the branch of theology that is focused specifically upon defending the truth of a particular theology and religion against outside challenges. Liberation atheology aims to be the primary challenge to theologies and religion by defending the validity of critical skepticism as part of a larger effort to undermine the power and influence of religion in society.
Liberation theology can be more or less systematic, more or less formal depending on who is doing it. What it cannot be, however, is casual. Clifford Green offers seven points characterizing liberation theologies, especially in Latin-American and African-American contexts, which can be adapted to describe liberation atheology:
1. Liberation atheology is concerned with changing societies so that they will be more just and humane to people who are oppressed by poverty and racial discrimination. It is not concerned with modernizing traditional religious ideas to make them more meaningful to educated, middle-class people, nor is it concerned with updating religion so that it can appear less oppressive.
Instead, religion is to be set aside entirely in favor of more modern systems of understanding our universe, organizing society, and moving forward with what we can learn. This is not to say that there's absolutely nothing of value in any religion, just that religions on the whole carry too much negative baggage to be worth reforming.
2. Liberation atheology is partisan, not academic. Liberation atheology aims to change society, not merely understand how its problems have developed. No theology is ever merely academic, so why should liberation atheology refrain from partisan engagements? One basic premise of liberation atheology is that all theologies reflect the interests of given social groups, often the most powerful and entrenched, and must thus be engaged as partisan political ideologies rather than neutral, academic studies of gods.
3. A second premise is that atheology must identify as much as possible with the poor, the marginalized, and the victims of society — especially those who have been victimized by social groups which use religion and theology to promote their interests at the expense of others. If theology is going to be critiqued, it must be done for the sake of improving the lives of those who have been harmed by the ways in which religion, theism, theology have been used as instruments of or at least justifications for oppression.
4. Religious scriptures must not be accepted as the sources of authoritative doctrine as expounded by the institutional guardians of orthodoxy. Liberation atheology need to help people understand that reading is an interpretive process and "orthodoxy" is typically whatever interpretation is preferred by the powerful social interests behind religious institutions. In Christian cultures, the Bible is the primary target of atheological criticism; in other cultures, other scriptures are the primary target. This is because liberation atheology must be tailored to the culture in which it exists.
5. The locus of atheological reflection and scriptural criticism is in the midst of action for social justice, not in the seminar room. There is a place and time for academic discussions and debates, but much more important is to work towards social justice for all the people who have suffered oppression in the context of theology and religion. Without activism towards social justice, there can be no social changes and without social changes, liberation theology fails. Consequently, atheological reflection requires critical social analysis of culture, politics, and society generally, not just religion.
6. Because of the degree to which traditional religion has been used to justify oppressive economic practices to the detriment of minorities and those who are already powerless, a critique of capitalism, corporations, and other powerful economic interests is common in liberation atheology. Liberation atheology isn't inherently anti-capitalist or pro-socialist, but its critical stance towards religion entails a critical or skeptical stance towards any system or institution which has relied on religion for justification, defense, or support.
Although liberation atheology can be pursued more or less systematically and more or less formally, it is always a committing to social action, social change, and social improvement. Liberation atheology thus cannot be casual or superficial without betraying the core commitment of critiquing religion for the purpose of opposing the harm done with religion. Liberation theology is activist, not academic.