Karl Marx was not a Marxist, but rather a Christian. This is the surprising thesis of the latest work of José Miranda, Mexican economist, philosopher, theologian and biblical exegete. He contends that Marx’s teachings, correctly understood (not as most Marxists understand them), and the message of biblical Christianity, properly interpreted (not as most Christians interpret it), are identical. This proposition is of vital importance for Liberation Theology, which seeks to provide a biblical basis for communist revolutionary movements.

In his previous books, Marx and the Bible and Being and the Messiah, Miranda has expounded and defended his understanding of the message of the Bible. Here he simply summarizes it: ‘the God of the Bible is revealed solely and exclusively as a moral imperative of [interpersonal] justice’ (p. 191). Yahweh cannot be worshipped directly, but only through acts of love (= justice) toward the oppressed.

This book explicates the other side of Miranda’s equation: the teachings of Marx. It does so by liberally quoting and carefully exegeting the writings of both Marx and Engels.

Marxists, maintains Miranda, have attributed to the founder of their movement a number of non-Christian teachings that he never held. Among these are: (1) that the communist revolution will be motivated by hunger or some other ‘grossly materialistic’ desire (Chapter 1); (2) that men are mere pawns on the chessboard of history, whose every move is absolutely determined by economic factors (Chapters 2, 3, and 4); (3) that such values as honesty, monogamy, human dignity, faithfulness, justice, fairness, duty, and morality in general are ideological principles of bourgeois idealism, and as such must be rejected by the amoral communist, whose only concern is the success of the revolution (Chapters 5, 6 and 7); and (4) that knowable reality is limited to that which can be empirically demonstrated, or, conversely, that all scientific views are dependent on the social class of the one holding them (Chapter 11).

In contrast to these views, Miranda argues convincingly that Marx believed (1) that the revolution would be inspired by a sense of moral outrage, (2) that men are free subjects who greatly influence the course of history, (3) that the only predictable event is the eventual appearance of the worldwide communist society, (4) that man is an end in himself, (5) that traditional moral values are at the heart of communism, and (6) that there is always an element of morality or immorality in cognition.

At this point, Miranda believes that he has demonstrated his thesis. Marx’s radical obedience to the moral imperative of interpersonal justice makes him a Christian, whether he considered himself to be one or not. Nevertheless, Miranda goes on to argue that Marx founded his economic analysis on Jesus’ denunciation of the god money (Chapter 8), and that both Marx and Engels believed that their communism was an authentic fulfilment of early Christianity (Chapter 9). Chapter 10 admits that Marx claimed to be an atheist, but argues that his firm belief in the eschaton and his occasional references to an intelligent principle that guides history should have led him to the logical conclusion that God does exist.

Miranda has succeeded admirably in presenting Marx as a different man than the thorough-going materialist that many have proclaimed him to be. But has he also succeeded in his effort to make the Communist theoretician a Christian prophet?

Let us assume for a moment that Miranda’s concept of Christianity as reducible to horizontal justice is correct. That Marx desired such justice and dedicated his life to achieving it would not seem to be debatable. However, Marx would be the first to agree that if ‘scientific socialism’ actually increased rather than eliminated human misery, it would be evil. Now, Marx’s analytical criticisms of capitalism have spurred both capitalists and non-communist socialists to remove some of the gross inequities that prevailed in nineteenth century Europe (and to that end those criticisms still need to be heard in every country of the world). Nevertheless, those governments which have attempted most comprehensively to put into practice the teachings of Marx have produced the Gulag Archipelago, the Cultural Revolution, and the devastation of Cambodia, to cite three of the most infamous examples. Surely some individuals have experienced improved economic conditions under Communism, but on balance it must be admitted that to date Marxist doctrine has produced far more suffering than justice, and there is little hope that the future will be different. By Miranda’s definition, then, Marx can hardly be considered Christian.

But, of course, Miranda’s definition of Christianity is also highly suspect. In his earlier works he insists dogmatically (anyone who disagrees with his interpretation of passages such as Amos 5:21–25 is guilty of ‘pure tergiversation’) that God does not want cultus, but only interpersonal justice. In order to defend this belief he has to ignore many passages of Scripture. He summarily dismisses the cultic portions of the Law as late attempts to distort Yahweh’s message. The social justice passages in the Psalms are worth citing, but not the exhortations to praise God. If prayer is unimportant, how does one explain the profound impression that Jesus’ ‘Abba, Father’ made on the early Christian community? Were the apostles in gross error when they gave prayer priority over serving tables? If Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed only because they oppressed the poor, why was Lot, a wealthy ‘oppressor’ who worshipped Yahweh, the only just man to be found there?

The worship of the jealous God of Scripture is the chief difference between authentic Christianity and Marx, but it is not the only one. The latter failed to perceive the radical sinfulness of man, and as a result his ‘soteriology’ and ‘eschatology’ were also far from Christian. On a more specific level, the call for violent revolution is flatly contradicted both by the Epistolary exhortations to submission and Christ’s commandment to love rather than resist our enemies.

Marx against the Marxists, yes. The humanism of Marx, definitely. But the Christianity of Marx, never.

---