It must be understood and readily admitted that it is impossible to set forth all the “anti-Christian implications of Russian Communism. I say, this is impossible because Russian Communism is a “world and life view.” Therefore, it must of necessity express itself regarding all spheres. In other words, in every relationship of life experienced by man, Russian Communism has something to say. 

And what we consider to be the Truth, as revealed in God’s Word and set forth in what we term Christianity (in its narrow and limited sense, as over against the Moderns and Liberals), also does the very same thing—expresses itself with regard to every experience and relationship of man. This expression may be direct or indirect, as in the matter of only setting forth a principle of interpretation. 

In stating this fact, you can see everything is included such as the spheres of Religion, Science, Medicine, Economics, Social Life, etc. Furthermore, included under these specific spheres, there are any number of departments, or what might better be called “minor fields” which certainly must also be considered and an opinion expressed regarding them. 

Therefore, to do justice to the title of this Article, one would have to consider these particular spheres with their sub-divisions and demonstrate how Russian Communism, with its world and life view,” radically differs and opposes the “world and life view” of Christianity. However, this would be impossible since it would greatly exceed the length of this Article. Yet, because we firmly believe that all things in all spheres have absolutely no meaning apart from God, who brought them into being and who sustains them we can, in this article, endeavor to set forth that which Russian Communism considers to be of prime importance. In other words, for Christianity, the essential principle—the pivotal point—the place around which and in whom all things have any meaning, is the absolute, sovereign and holy God. Now, then, this being true with regard to Christianity, we can consider what Russian Communism, in its “world and life view,” understands and holds to be comparable to that of the Absolute and Sovereign God, in Christianity. In this way, then, opposing the very fundamental and basic principle of Russian Communism to Christianity, we can arrive at some idea, at least, of the “Antichristian implications of Russian Communism.” Implications, I say, because when the very basic principle of any system of thought is presented, one naturally sets forth that which effects and thereby colors the whole “world and life view” of that system of thought. 

This leads me to say that the title of this Article was not chosen arbitrarily, I am sure. It is assumed, and it is true that Russian Communism does have“Antichristian implications.” What some, however, consider to be Christian, is another question. Yet, the title of this Article is true and hence, was not chosen arbitrarily and without thought and purpose of setting forth the truth of an existing situation. 

On the other hand, this topic was not simply selectedthat we, as Protestant Reformed people, might also “jump on the band-wagon” as so many have done and are doing, and voice our objections to Communism. This is true of all of the so-called free world. It seems that all are raising their voices and condemning Communism. But why, may we ask? What is the reason? If you should ask the reason of a cross-section of the so-called free world, the answer would undoubtedly be: “Russian Communism is deserving not only of severe criticism, but denouncement and condemnation because it makes it impossible for the people to realize and enjoy the “Four Freedoms.” And what are these “Four Freedoms?” Freedom of Speech, Worship, Want, and Fear

In a report prepared by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and entitled: “Tensions Within the Soviet Union,” we read the following: “Public enemy No. 5 of the Kremlin is, however—and has been since the establishment of the Soviet regime in Russia—the nature of man himself, with all his inborn instincts and desires for well-being, personal property, moral freedom, and spiritual independence.” 

In these words, you can see, one of the reasons (one with many ramifications) why our own country, the United States, condemns Russian Communism. It’s true, Russia is worthy of being openly and vehemently denounced, but this reason is a very shallow and superficial one, yea, a very hollow one. For don’t you see, while in substance Russia is condemned for her materialism, in that very condemnation, the “mature of man” is upheld and defended. This means that the very materialism which is condemned on the one hand, is defended and exalted on the other hand. For, what is the nature of man? What are the “inborn instincts and desires for well-being, etc.?” Do not all these things manifest and reveal the sin and the corruption of man’s heart? Do they not show what man is, by nature? Did not God see that “the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually?(Gen. 6:5) Did He not declare: “there is no man that sinneth not?” (I Kings 8:46). Is not man, by nature, “shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin?” (Psalm 51:5) And what does God behold when He looks upon man? “Everyone of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” (Ps. 53:3) Does not the Lord declare, through His servant, Isaiah that all men “are as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.” (Is. 64:4) And, under the impulse of the Holy Spirit, does not Paul cry out: “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? (Rom. 7:24) Then, too, what is the purpose of God declaring: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his man servant, nor his maid servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbors?” (Ex. 20:17

Does not this language of the Holy God clearly reveal the depths of sill in the heart of man? Furthermore, does not this language show us how this sin in the heart of man is manifested? He “longs for” and “pines away” for the earthly—for the “material” that the sinful desire and lust of his wicked heart may be satisfied. How then can we hold “the nature of man with all his inborn instincts and desires for well-being?” What “good” can possibly come forth from man, as he is, by nature? Common grace may have the answer, but the Word of God knows nothing of such “good.

Very few there are who truly understand the “Antichristian implications of Russian Communism.” Therefore, to arrive at what Communism considers to be the very fundamental principle in its “world and life view” and to oppose this to Christianity, it is only proper that something be said of that which gave rise to this principle. Hence, we must briefly note that behind the “world and life view” of Russian Communism stand certain aspects of the philosophies of Hegel, Feuerbach, and also the contribution of the French sociologist, Proudhon.

Communism has given a very important place to Hegel’s “Dialectics.” From all that we read, Hegel fostered what is called a “Dialectical Idealism“. He is referred to as an “idealist” because his concern was with the nature of ideas—thoughts and concepts. The manner in which these ideas and thoughts and concepts developed—the approach Hegel used to determine the nature of them has been called “dialectical.”

This simply means that ideas which are completely opposite and contradictory are created. This is very evident, he held, because everywhere about us and even in our minds, there is an unfolding process, and this process is that of contradiction or dialectics. He said, further, that everything is in a state of flux; everything is always moving and changing. A thing changes into its very opposite and its very opposite then changes into something else. There is never any immutable (unchangeable) truth or principle for Hegel. All you have is ideas and thoughts. And there are the result of this dialectical process—process of contradiction. But this process, you see, you only end in despair because it is a vicious circle. As long as there is not any stable and unchanging truth which can serve as a standard and criterion for all times, then there can be no certainty, either. Yet, this is Hegel with his thesis—antithesis and synthesis.

For instance, if I am in a gathering an there is a question as to how we shall spend the evening, I might suggest that we go for a walk. Someone else might suggest that we remain at home. Disagreement and conflict arises, and out of this conflict comes forth thesynthesis. We do not go for a walk, nor do we remain at home, but we go for an automobile ride. Now, strange as this example may sound, it nevertheless serves to illustrate Hegel’s dialectical process; thesis—antithesis, and synthesis. In the first place, an idea is affirmed. Secondly, it is nullified or negated by another idea; then from this conflict, there comes forth the synthesis which is nothing other than the reconciliation or union of the opposites.

From all this, Hegel concluded that there was nothing stable—stationary, or fixed; everything could be changed. Because once the synthesis takes place, the whole process begins afresh—the synthesis becomes another thesis. All reality, then, is nothing but a process of changes—a going from that which isn’t too clear, to that which is a little clearer. And to this thinking process, all the earth is subject because it is a part of it. In other words, the earth is subject because it is a part of it. In other words, the earth develops in the way in which we think. This process continues until such time as an ultimate idea or concept makes its appearance, and in which all opposites or contradictions are resolved.

But now, this Feuerbach was one who believed only in matter. Being thoroughly materialistically minded, he held that only matter was the fundamental reality.Nothing else was real but matter. Therefore, he added:a man is what he eats.

All this was quite appealing to Karl Marx who, at this time was formulating the philosophy of Russian Communism. He saw attractive elements in both Hegel and applied it not to thought, ideas and concepts, but to matter and history, as well. In this way, he combined the thinking of these two men and called it dialectical materialism. This meant, of course, what was true regarding the idea and thought with Hegel in his thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, would be true with Marx and Russian Communism regarding matteror the earthly. Therefore, Russian Communism says, you don’t need God because everything moves and changes and develops and is becoming. Why? Because of this thesis, antithesis and synthesis in all the universe. This whole process, it says, will continue until such time as the “classless society” comes forth, and in which all opposites are resolved. For Russian Communism this meant the two great classes would disappear; the Bourgeoisie, the class known as Capitalists, who hire the wage-labor; and the class known as proletariat, those who must sell their labor-power to live.

But this isn’t all. Marx also saw the value of Proudhon’s contribution in which he emphasized the necessity of giving “economics” its rightful place. After all, said Proudhon, “economics” was very important therefor, the dialectical materialism should be applied to “economics“. This, Marx did and the result was that “economics” became basic and fundamental to all matter—to all reality. Furthermore, in the system of Communism, it is the “hub” of all history—seeing that it is nothing but reality in “historical form.”

Therefore, Russian Communism speaks not only of Dialectical Materialism, but also of an “Economic Determinism” and “Historical Materialism.”

As one writer put it: “History is bread” for Russian Communism. Economics is now seen to be the basic principle. Why? Because “economics” is concerned with man, and man is concerned with the “material.”Therefore, according to Communism, “man is economics”—he’s nothing but a mechanical being in a huge economic machine.

Well, this can mean only one thing. If you’ve got “Economic Determinism” and “Historical Materialism,” the result of applied “Dialectical Materialism,” then one thing is sure: the spiritual must certainly go. You can’t possibly have any place for God, and Russian Communism hasn’t either. It refuses to recognize any God above it: materialistic and atheistic it is in its ideals. Hence, setting itself up as the “preserver” and“savior” of man, it demands all of man’s loyalty.

The purely “material and earthly is that which receives the emphasis, as is evident from the place given to“economics” in Communism. As Karl Marx wrote in his “Poverty and Philosophy”—“The social history of men is never anything but the history of their individual development, whether they are conscious of it or not. Their material relations are the basis of all their relations. These material relations are only the necessary form in which their material and individual activity is realized.”

Thus, it becomes imperative to do away with the differences or inequalities among men and bring forth a “classless society” according to Marx. This will be the ultimate synthesis and “economics,” being the very fundamental and basic principle of Russian Communism’s “world and life view” is considered to be the principle that will bring this synthesis. Why? Because “economics” concerns the abundance of things and all this is necessary to remove the lines of inequality, according to Communism.

But, now, we ask: “Is not God, God?” And therefore, must not Russian Communism be condemned because, as we have seen, in its very essence, it is rebellion against God and in direct conflict to His truth ? Isn’t this so? Of course it is! But, where do we read of Communism being condemned because of this? Rebellion against God. Not the god of the Modernist nor even of the Arminian-Fundamentalist, who sows the seed of Modernism. But where do you read or hear such a condemnation of Communism because it is a rising-up of the creature against the creator—the sovereign creator who is no respecter of persons and therefore has declared: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”

The sovereign creator who made all things and in the midst of all things placed man and called him to serve and glorify His God as a faithful steward, in the way, of consecrating all things to Him.

Where do you read of Communism being condemned because God, in His sovereign and righteous justice gave man gifts—not only creating the spiritually rich and the spiritually destitute, according to His sovereign election and reprobation, bringing forth the “Jacobs”and the “Esaus”—but where is there such condemnation of Communism because it is also this same sovereign God who makes the earthly rich, and the earthly poor—who even declares: “For ye have the poor always with you.”

When we speak of the “Antichristian implications of Russian Communism, we do so from the viewpoint that Communism, in its sinful and darkened mind, willfully rejects the truth that it is the sovereign God who“putteth down one, and setteth up another.” It is the Lord who “doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel.” 

Therefore, all men are not equal before God’s face. The difference is there and Russian Communism maynot and cannot attempt to erase and remove that difference with her sinful and wicked philosophy ofatheistic materialism. She can never do it! Because the very essence of her philosophy which is exemplified in the “material”—in the things with which she sinfully strives to realize her ends—the earth and the earthly goods—these, do not belong to her. For all things are the Lord’s and hence, she may not act like the thief that she is. 

But now, in all sincerity, I ask again: “Where do we read of any such denouncement and condemnation of Communism?” And I answer: “Only from the lips of those who have been given to taste the mercy and the grace of the sovereign God of their salvation, and whom they desire to exalt in all their life and walk.” 

E. Emanuel