Li Shen: Why Communist Party Members Cannot Have Religious Beliefs
Communist Party members should not believe in religion; this is a fundamental principle. Why must we adhere to such a principle? Because God does not exist.
I
Historically, humanity once believed in various kinds of gods, hoping to use divine power to solve problems they wished to resolve but could not handle themselves. However, through thousands—even tens of thousands—of years of practice, humanity finally discovered that such hopes were all in vain. To solve one's own problems, one can only rely on oneself.
The first batch of deities mankind believed in were animals. In Chinese history, the so-called "four numinous creatures—the qilin, phoenix, tortoise, and dragon" [1]—were four types of animal gods. Even now, some ethnicities treat animals like monkeys or cattle as gods. By "treating them as gods," it is meant that they are believed to possess supernatural abilities, or what is called "extraordinary powers"—abilities that exceed their own natural capacities. For example, the belief that a tortoise can possess foreknowledge, and so on.
However, people later discovered that these real-world prototype animals did not possess supernatural powers, so they conceived of even more formidable animals. For instance, the dragon, phoenix, and qilin [2] combined the advantages of several animals to become a type of divine creature. Later, they even combined the organs of animals and humans, such as the Sphinx or the horse-headed human. Thus, deformed animal gods or half-human, half-beast animal gods appeared.
But people subsequently discovered that those who were truly powerful were humans, not animals. Consequently, humans—or more precisely, the heroes of the mortal world—were worshipped as gods. Ancient shamans, kings, and powerful heroes were all once worshipped as gods. In ancient Chinese mythology, Gonggong crashed his head into Mount Buzhou, and Nüwa consequently mended the heavens [3]; both were manifestations of the power of human-gods. The Pharaohs of Egypt, the gods atop Mount Olympus in ancient Greece, the kings of ancient Rome, and the Emperors of China were all such existences: both god and man, both man and god.
After the emergence of human-gods, a fierce struggle took place between them and animal gods or half-human, half-beast gods. The basic content of ancient mythology consists of such struggles. In the battles between human-gods and animal gods, the human-gods were always the victors. From then on, if an animal wanted to become a god, it first had to become human.
However, the deeds of those people who truly existed in history or reality are all matters of record. If people wished to endow them with supernatural powers, they faced immense difficulties. Thus, new deities emerged. These new deities were described as the souls of ancient human-gods, or as newly fashioned, purely spiritual existences. People could neither see nor touch them; they resided in the unseen world, governing the world and humanity. If humanity wished to attain happiness, they had to act according to the will of these deities and pray to them.
Such deities have been the basic form of gods since humanity entered the age of civilization. Therefore, to this day, when people speak of deities, they consider them to be purely spiritual existences. People have acted according to their will and prayed to them with kind hearts and pious attitudes; however, they have not granted humanity happiness. The promised happiness exists only in fantasy—like the moon's reflection in water or a flower in a mirror [4]. Finally, one day, humanity thoroughly understood: no matter what form a deity takes, it does not exist. To create human happiness, one must only rely on oneself.
This current of thoroughgoing atheism emerged in eighteenth-century Europe. From that point on, human society underwent a process of accelerated development. First, the capitalist system characterized by democracy and freedom was established, and subsequently, the socialist system was generated and established. In the process of producing material wealth, industrialization was first achieved, and now electronic informationization has been realized. For contemporary humanity, the production of material wealth seems to be an easy task. The suffering is not from having too little material wealth, but from having too much, and from inequality and uneven distribution. To realize the common happiness of humanity is the task of socialists and communists.
II
Historically, the birth of a new deity was simultaneously the moment when old deities were negated. In ancient Chinese mythology, the defeat and killing of the so-called Fengxi (the giant boar) and the Great Serpent, and in Greek mythology, the Nemean Lion and the Dragon, are representative cases of animal gods being negated. As for those so-called demons of half-human and half-beast form, they were merely demon-gods defeated by human-gods. Calling them demons rather than gods means that humanity no longer recognizes them as gods. Similarly, after entering the age of civilization, human-gods were no longer recognized. Because the Christian "Trinity" includes the real person of Jesus, it has often faced attacks from Islam, which holds that Jesus should not be granted the status of the Godhead.
From the perspective of historical development, those arguments that negate old gods are all atheistic arguments. Those who negated old gods were all atheists. Because Socrates did not believe in the gods of the state at that time, he was called an atheist; because Christianity did not believe in the gods of the Roman Empire, it was also once called an atheist. This reached the point where the famous early apologist Justin Martyr had to write a statement: "We Christians are not atheists; we simply do not believe in your gods; we believe in our own God." This was just like Socrates' defense in court. Socrates said he believed in his own god and, precisely according to an oracle, had made philosophy his lifelong pursuit.
It was not until eighteenth-century Europe that advanced thinkers of the time thoroughly negated the existence of God for the first time. If we say that the historical process of negating old gods and establishing new ones often took hundreds, thousands, or even more years, then the thorough negation of the existence of deities will take an even longer period. However, once this process of negation begins, it must inevitably continue to develop forward. There may be twists and turns during development, but it is beyond doubt that it must develop even through twists and turns. Since Europe entered the modern era, human society has cast off the intervention of deities one by one—first in the political sphere, then in the sphere of education and other social activities. The decline of Christianity in its European homeland is clear evidence of this.
Some say: "Theists cannot prove the existence of deities, and you atheists cannot prove the non-existence of deities." This statement is doubly erroneous. First, the existence of God is a proposition put forward by theists. If theists cannot prove the existence of God, that itself only demonstrates the non-existence of God. This is the only logical conclusion. Second, the history of the development of the concept of deities is a history of proving that deities do not exist. No matter what form deities are said to take, they do not exist. The issue merely lies in the fact that existing religions can negate the deities of others—for example, Christianity believes that all deities other than the God they believe in are mere idol worship and not gods. However, when others want to negate their own God, they find it difficult to tolerate. Nevertheless, this era of negation has arrived, and within Christianity itself, theologians constantly doubt or even negate the existence of their original God.
In the history of Christianity, there have been famous arguments for the existence of God. The first was by Anselm, and the second was by Thomas Aquinas. Why argue for the existence of God? Is it not because someone doubted or even negated God’s existence? To argue just because someone doubts is to tell people plainly that God does not exist. Historically, has any subject ever gone to argue for the existence of a King? Today, no one goes to argue for the existence of a President, because the existence of Kings and Presidents is a matter that requires no argument. The modern Christian theologian Tillich also said that arguing for the existence of God is itself a profanity against God.
God does not exist. If a Communist Party member wants to make revolution and seek happiness for humanity, how can they seek help from a non-existent deity or believe in a religion that uses the existence of God as its ideological foundation?
III
All religious dogmas are described as the will of God. However, God does not exist, so where does this so-called will of God come from?
There is only one answer: all "will of God" is the will of man. It is the will of various theologians or clergy, from the shamans of primitive times to the present. Due to the limitations of conditions, historically, the emergence of new ideas had to be described as the will of God. Therefore, when a new deity—and simultaneously a new religion—emerged, it was the emergence of a new ideology. The thinkers who created new deities and new religions were also representative figures of new, advanced thought. In history, those figures who founded new religions will forever be heroes of human history.
Like all new and advanced ideas, what was advanced at the time is not advanced forever. However, the characteristic of religious concepts is to describe their own concepts as eternal and unchanging absolute truths because they are the will of God. Thus, like anything that exists in history, they must change from being advanced to being non-advanced, or even backward. History is developing, and human consciousness is gradually awakening. When humanity can recognize that no gods exist—that it was not God who created the world and humanity, but man who created God—the era of the rule of religious concepts is called the "Dark Ages." The word "dark" refers both to the awakening of human consciousness and to the effects of religious rule.
Yet today, some people advocate that if one believes in religion, human morality will become noble and the social atmosphere will improve; they even claim that religion is the driving force of scientific development. Their reasoning is: "Wasn't science developed in Europe? And wasn't Europe originally Christian?" and so on. Finally, they advocate that Communist Party members should believe in religion, saying this will allow the Party to expand its "governing foundation." It seems as if they believe that if Communist Party members do not believe in religion, religious believers will not accept the leadership of the Communist Party of China; it seems they think the Communist Party of China can only manage the affairs of this land of China with the help of religion.
Currently, those in our country advocating that Communist Party members should believe in religion are not primarily people from religious circles, but rather some Communist Party members who are keen on "participating in religious activities, establishing close private relationships with religious figures," or even "actually becoming religious believers"! Among these Communist Party members, some even hold the status of scholars or are even high-ranking leading cadres of the Party. This phenomenon deserves the special attention of all relevant parties.
If God truly existed and were omniscient and omnipotent, and if believing in religion were truly effective, human society would not have so many disputes to this day, atheists would not have appeared, and Marxism and the revolutionary movements under its guidance would not have existed. The establishment of the Communist Party and its willingness to strive for human happiness through its own bloodshed and sacrifice was based precisely on the understanding that God does not exist; to strive for human happiness, we can only rely on ourselves. Yet some who hold the status of Communist Party members and scholars want Party members to believe in religion and return once again to that process of praying to God for happiness. Such rhetoric, if not harboring ulterior motives, is the result of muddled thinking. Regardless of which it is, we must resolutely resist and oppose it.