From Deism to Militant Atheism

In the modern West, with the development of capitalism, the bourgeois revolution broke out in England in 1640. In this process, in order to develop the economy and science and technology, the bourgeoisie had to critique religious theology to liberate thought; in order to seize political power, it had to critique the theory of the divine right of kings; in order to transform the whole of society, it had to critique every aspect of religious belief. The development of atheism in Europe roughly underwent a process from deism and pantheism, which advocated replacing divinity with reason during the Enlightenment, to the thorough materialist militant atheism of France. As atheism further developed in various European countries, on the one hand it propagated bourgeois revolutionary thought, thereby promoting the progress of modern philosophy and natural science; on the other hand, it laid the foundation for Marxist atheism, becoming the source of its critique of religion.

近代西方，随着资本主义的发展，1640年英国爆发了资产阶级革命。在这一过程中，资产阶级为了发展经济和科学技术，必须批判宗教神学以解放思想；为了夺取政权，必须批判“君权神授”说；为了改造全社会，必须批判宗教信仰的方方面面。无神论在欧洲的发展大致经历了从启蒙运动时期主张以理性代替神性的自然神论和泛神论到法国彻底的唯物主义战斗无神论的过程。随着无神论在欧洲各国的进一步发展，一方面它宣传了资产阶级革命思想，进而推动了近代哲学和自然科学的进步；另一方面，为马克思主义无神论奠定了基础，成为其宗教批判思想的源泉。

I. Modern Western atheism first appeared in the form of deism

一、近代西方的无神论首先是以自然神论的形态出现的

Deism initially originated in England, which had carried out a religious reformation from above, and then rapidly spread from England to the Netherlands, France, and other Western European countries, ultimately bearing the fruit of rationalism and bringing the Enlightenment that swept across Europe.

自然神论最初肇端于自上而下地进行了宗教改革的英国，然后由英国迅速地扩展到荷兰、法国和西欧其他国家，最终结出了理性主义的硕果，带来了席卷欧洲的启蒙运动。

First, deism replaced the God of traditional religion with a rational God. The practice of using the Bible as the criterion for determining truth since the Middle Ages began to be widely doubted by scientists and philosophers in the 17th century. Although deism acknowledged the existence of God, this God was by no means the absolutely free, arbitrary God described by traditional religious theology, but rather a "rational God" very close to the laws of nature, one that endowed nature with laws, or a kind of moral goodness. This view of religion sought to establish religion on a rational basis; reason was the authority they sought to establish, and all religious beliefs or revelations should be judged by reason like any other proposition. The philosophical foundation of deism was empiricism and universal skepticism, which were the basic principles of almost all philosophers and scientists in the 17th century, and the empirical method became their common starting point. In England, based on skepticism toward Aristotelian deductive logic, which had been abused by medieval Scholasticism, Francis Bacon established empirical induction, making it an important tool for modern experimental science and empiricist philosophy. Thus the 17th century became an era of flourishing European philosophy and science.

首先，自然神论以理性的上帝取代传统宗教的上帝。中世纪以来以《圣经》作为准则来判定真理的做法，在17世纪开始受到科学家和哲学家们的普遍怀疑。自然神论虽然承认上帝的存在，但这个上帝已绝非传统宗教神学所说的那种绝对自由、为所欲为的上帝，而是很接近自然界的规律，是赋予了自然界以规律的某种“理性的上帝”或者一种道德上的善。这种宗教观是要把宗教建立在理性的基础上，理性才是他们要树立的权威，一切宗教信念或启示都应该向任何别的命题一样由理性来判断。自然神论的哲学基础是经验主义和普遍的怀疑主义，这是17世纪几乎所有哲学家和科学家的基本原则，而经验的方法则成为他们共同的出发点。在英国，基于对被中世纪经院哲学所滥用的亚里士多德演绎逻辑的怀疑，弗朗西斯·培根建立了经验归纳法，使它成为近代实验科学和经验论哲学的重要工具。因此17世纪成为欧洲哲学和科学勃兴的时代。

Second, deism advocated establishing a society based on reason. Enlightenment thinkers believed that the reason society did not progress and the people remained ignorant was mainly due to the domination and restraint of the people's spirit by religious forces. To change this situation, they believed that only by following the model of natural science and establishing the authority of reason and science could one gain a deeper insight into the spirit of law, society, politics, and even religion. On this basis, they proposed a complete set of philosophical theories, political programs, and social reform plans, demanding the establishment of a society based on reason. The empiricist principle pioneered by Bacon was pushed to an extreme in a mechanistic way by the English philosopher Hobbes, thereby reaching an atheistic conclusion in his view of religion. Hobbes applied this empiricism to the explanation of God. In political science, he opposed the church being above the state, and using bourgeois theories of human nature, he centrally critiqued the theory of the divine right of kings. He believed that Christianity did not propose any legislative or political principles, and that these principles should not be sought in Christianity, but rather in nature. Royal power was not divinely ordained, but humanly conferred. He believed that secular power originated from the theory of "sovereignty conferred by the people" (social contract theory). In his magnum opus *Leviathan*, he advocated replacing theology with law and science, arguing that an absolutist state [1]1 The Chinese term 专制主义 (zhuānzhì zhǔyì) is rendered here as "absolutist," referring to the theory of absolute sovereignty in Hobbes's political philosophy, not the modern concept of totalitarianism. (i.e., Leviathan) that maintains reason, peace, property, and social interaction through law was a secularized City of God. In epistemology, he also opposed the superiority of revealed truth over natural knowledge, insisting on experience as the sole basis for judging all knowledge. Starting from mechanical materialism, he regarded extension as the essential attribute of matter, and so-called knowledge was the understanding, through sensory experience, of the motion of extended bodies presented in the form of displacement, and the search for laws within it. Since God has no extension and no motion, He is not among bodies and therefore is not an object of our cognition. In this way, Hobbes completely removed God from epistemology. "He believed that God has absolutely nothing to do with true knowledge, because if what the theologians say is true, and there is no change of motion in God, then it follows that we cannot know God." [2]2 This appears to be a quotation from a secondary source discussing Hobbes's epistemology; the original source is not identified in the text. Like extreme nominalists, Hobbes believed that so-called "God" was merely a name passed down through hearsay, just like "fire" in the mind of a blind person, which is merely the result of hearsay.

其次，自然神论主张建立以理性为基础的社会。启蒙运动思想家们认为，社会之所以不进步，人民之所以愚昧，主要是由于宗教势力对人民精神的统治与束缚。为了改变这种状况，他们认为只有遵循自然科学的模式，树立理性和科学的权威，才能更深刻地洞察法律、社会、政治、甚至宗教的精神。他们在此基础上提出一整套哲学理论、政治纲领和社会改革方案，要求建立一个以理性为基础的社会。培根开创的经验论原则被英国哲学家霍布斯以一种机械的方式推向了极端，从而在宗教观上达到了无神论的结论。霍布斯把这种经验论运用到对上帝的解释上。在政治学上他反对教会凌驾于国家之上，以资产阶级人性论集中批判了“君权神授”说。他认为，基督教没有提出任何立法的和政治的原则，也不应该到基督教中去寻找这些原则，而应该到自然界中去寻找。君权不是神授的，而是人授的。他认为世俗权力来源于“君权民授”理论(社会契约论)。在巨著《利维坦》中，他主张用法律和科学来取代神学，认为一个由法律来维护理性、和平、财产和社会交往的JQ主义国家（即利维坦）就是一座世俗化的上帝之城。在知识论上他也反对启示真理对于自然知识的优越性，坚持把经验作为唯一的根据来判断一切知识。他从机械唯物主义出发，把广延性当作物体的本质属性，而所谓知识就是通过感觉经验来认识有广延的物体以位移方式呈现出来的运动，并从中寻找规律。上帝既然没有广延，没有运动，他就不在物体之列，因而就不是我们认识的对象。这样一来，霍布斯就把上帝从知识论中彻底清除出去了。“他认为，上帝和真正的知识完全无关，因为如果神学家们所说的是真实的，而且上帝里没有运动的变化，那么，随之而来的是，我们无从知道上帝。”霍布斯像极端的唯名论者一样认为，所谓“上帝”不过是人们以讹传讹的一个名称而已，正如盲人心中的“火”一样，只是道听途说的结果而已。

Third, deism advocated a rational natural religion. The famous English deist Tindal believed that true religion must be established according to eternal and unchanging natural laws. He sought to transform Christianity into a rational natural religion, and satirized and critiqued past revealed religion, arguing that it was not true revelation; true revelation lay in nature itself, in humanity's innate reason; and the true God was the God revealed by Newton. In Tindal's view, true morality was a rational life in harmony with natural laws. The philosopher Locke, in a letter to his friend Philipp van Limborch (i.e., *A Letter Concerning Toleration*), emphasized: "No private person has any right in any way to harm another person in the enjoyment of his civil rights because he is of another church or religion. All the rights he enjoys as a man, and as a citizen, are inviolably sacred. These are not religious matters. Whether he is a Christian or a pagan, no violence or injury may be done to him." [3]3 This is a paraphrase of Locke's argument in *A Letter Concerning Toleration* (1689). Locke also believed that true faith must be established on the recognition of the "light of nature," on the basis of natural reason.

再次，自然神论倡导合乎理性的自然宗教。英国著名的自然神论者丁达尔认为，真正的宗教必是按照永恒不变的自然法则建立起来的，他力图要把基督教改造为合乎理性的自然宗教，并对过去的启示宗教进行了嘲讽和批判，认为那不是真正的启示，真正的启示是在自然本身之中，在人类天赋的理性中；而真正的上帝则是牛顿显示的那种上帝。在丁达尔眼里，真正的道德，则是与自然法则和谐一致的理性的生活。哲学家洛克在致友人菲力·范·林堡格的一封信（即《论宗教宽容》）中强调:“任何私人都无权因为他人属于另一教会或另一宗教以任何方式危害其公民权利的享有。他作为一个人而享有的一切权利以及作为一个公民而享有的公民权，都是神圣不可侵犯的。这些并不是宗教事务。无论他是基督徒，还是异教徒，都不得对他使用暴力或予以伤害。”洛克还认为，真正的信仰必须建立在对“自然之光”的认识上，建立在自然理性的基础上。

The essence of religion as religion, its fundamental basis, is belief in a supernatural being. Deism launched an attack on this, placing natural reason above it, and either regarded what traditional religious theology considered "supernatural" as illusory or as a natural existence governed by natural laws. In this way, the foundation of religion was severely shaken. This is precisely the value of deism's critique of religion. Marx and Engels believed that "deism is, for the materialist, at most a convenient and easy way to get rid of religion." [4]4 This is a paraphrase of Marx and Engels's view on deism, likely from *The Holy Family* (1845). In his later years, Engels again mentioned the role of deism in the *Introduction to the English Edition of Socialism: Utopian and Scientific* (1892), stating that its widespread dissemination in France, together with materialism, provided the theoretical banner for the later French Revolution. [5]5 Engels's *Socialism: Utopian and Scientific* (1880) included an 1892 English edition introduction discussing the role of deism and materialism in the French Enlightenment.

宗教之为宗教，即宗教的根本性基础是对超自然存在的信仰，而自然神论则对其发起了进攻，将自然理性置于其上，把传统宗教神学视之为“超自然”的东西，要么视之虚妄，要么视之为被自然法则所支配的自然存在，这样，宗教的基础就被严重动摇了。这正是自然神论对宗教批判的价值所在。马克思、恩格斯认为“自然神论至少对唯物主义者来说不过是一种摆脱宗教的简便易行、凑合使用的方法罢了”。恩格斯晚年在《社会主义从空想到科学的发展·1892年英文版导言》中又再次提及自然神论的作用，认为它和唯物主义一起在法国的广为流传，为后来的法国大革命提供了理论旗帜。

II. The true theoretical analytical critique of religion began with pantheism in the 16th and 17th centuries

二、对宗教的真正理论性分析批判始于16、17世纪的泛神论

First, pantheism holds that God is nature. In deism, although God nominally retains the supreme status of creator and ruler of the world, He has in fact been replaced by reason itself. Deism places God outside nature; it uses nature to erode God and reason to restrict faith. Since the infinity of God has been eroded by the finitude of experience, and the content of revelation has been emptied by reason, we thus see two fates confronting God after deism: either He becomes entirely identical with nature—this is pantheism—or He is simply abolished altogether—this is atheism. Deism regards God as outside nature, while pantheism regards God as within nature; deism describes God as the creator and designer of nature, while pantheism equates God with the universe, holding that God exists coextensively with the world, that God is nature. Pantheism was a roundabout way adopted by Enlightenment thinkers to critique orthodox religion. Although it did not deny the existence of God, it denied God’s transcendence and personality, dissolving the God who stood above the natural world into all things. The supernatural and superhuman sacred attributes that religious theologians had bestowed upon God gradually disappeared in pantheism.

首先，泛神论认为神即自然。在自然神论中，上帝虽然在名义上仍然保持着世界的创造者和主宰者的至高地位，但是他实际上已经被理性本身所取代，自然神论将上帝置于自然之外，它用自然来蚕食上帝，用理性来限制信仰。上帝的无限性既然被经验的有限性所蚕食，启示的内容既然被理性所抽空，于是我们就看到了上帝在自然神论之后所面临的两种命运：它或者完全等同于自然，这就是泛神论；或者干脆被彻底取消，这就是无神论。自然神论把神看作在自然之外，泛神论则把神看作在自然之中；自然神论把神说成是自然的创造者和设计者，泛神论则把神与宇宙等同起来，认为神泛同于世界而存在，神即自然。泛神论是启蒙思想家们采取的一种迂回批判正统宗教的方式，虽然它没有否定神的存在，但却否定了神的超越性和人格性，使高踞于自然界之上的神消融于万物之中，宗教神学家赋予神的超自然、超人间的神圣属性在泛神论中逐渐消失。

Second, “substance” is the core concept of pantheism. The highest theoretical achievement of pantheism is the philosophy of the Dutch thinker Spinoza. At the end of the 16th century, the Netherlands established Europe’s first bourgeois republic. Greater freedom of thought and religious belief ensured the flourishing of science and culture. Yet the establishment of bourgeois rule did not bring feudalism to a final end; the Dutch bourgeois revolution was not yet fully completed, and it faced the continuing task of opposing feudal forces and religious authority. Spinoza’s pantheistic thought was precisely the product called forth by this era. *Ethics* and *A Theologico-Political Treatise* are the representative works of Spinoza’s philosophical system, systematically expounding his philosophical and socio-political thought. “Substance” is the core concept of Spinoza’s pantheism and the foundation of his entire doctrine. He held that substance is something that exists independently and is the root from which all things evolve. The infinite natural world is a harmonious system composed of countless material substances connected together and operating according to its own inherent laws. This harmonious system can also be directly called nature, God, or substance. “God or substance,” “God or nature” are essentially identical, both expressing objective material nature. Although Spinoza’s theory did not abolish the name of God or the divine, it completely changed the divine nature and essence that religious theologians had bestowed upon God or the divine. God no longer possessed sacred power transcending nature, but was merely nature itself; the divinity of God became the natural attributes understood by natural scientists.

其次，“实体”是泛神论的核心概念。泛神论的最高理论成就当推荷兰思想家斯宾诺莎的哲学。16世纪末，荷兰建立了欧洲的第一个资产阶级共和国。思想和宗教信仰上的较大自由保证了科学和文化的繁荣，然而资产阶级统治的建立并没有使封建主义寿终正寝，荷兰资产阶级革命尚未彻底完成，它面临着继续反对封建势力和宗教势力的严峻任务。斯宾诺莎的泛神论思想正是这个时代所呼唤的产物。《伦理学》和《神学政治论》是斯宾诺莎哲学体系的代表作，系统地阐述了他的哲学思想和社会政治思想。“实体”是斯宾诺莎泛神论的核心概念，也是他整个学说的基础。他认为实体是独立存在的东西，是演化万物的根源。无限的自然界就是由无数的物质实体连接而成并遵循自身固有规律而运行的和谐体系。这个和谐体系也可以直接称之为自然、神或实体。“神或实体”，“神或自然”本质上是同一的，表述的都是客观的物质自然。斯宾诺莎的理论虽未取消上帝或神的名称，但却全然改变了宗教神学家所赋予上帝或神的神性和本质，神不再具有超越于自然之上的神圣力量，而仅为自然本身，神的神性变成了自然科学家所了解的自然属性。

Third, pantheism denies the doctrine of divine creation. Spinoza declared: “I hold a view of God and nature very different from that commonly advocated by modern Christians. I hold that God is the immanent cause of all things, not the transitive cause.” [6]6 Spinoza, *Ethics*, Part I, Proposition 18. The translation follows the Chinese text’s rendering of Spinoza’s distinction between immanent and transitive causation. This means that the cause of natural evolution lies within nature itself, not outside it. The position of a mysterious creator is eliminated; creator and created are identical, and God is nature itself. Based on this view, he boldly endowed God with solid materiality. He said: “Extension is an attribute of God, in other words, God is an extended thing.” [7]7 Spinoza, *Ethics*, Part II, Proposition 2. “Extension” here refers to the attribute of matter occupying space. In this way, Spinoza explained the material unity of the world in his own distinctive manner, fundamentally denying the existence of a supernatural spiritual entity (God). Furthermore, on this basis Spinoza criticized the doctrine of “divine right of kings”: “Ancient monarchs, in order to usurp the throne, often proclaimed themselves descendants of immortal gods, thinking that if their subjects and the rest of humanity did not regard them as fellow men but believed them to be gods, they would willingly submit to their rule and obey their commands.” [8]8 Spinoza, *A Theologico-Political Treatise*, Chapter 17. The Chinese text paraphrases Spinoza’s critique of monarchical claims to divine descent. “The main secret of despotic rule is to deceive the people, cloaking the fear used to oppress them in the beautiful garb of religion, so that the people may fight bravely both for their safety and for slavery. For the vain glory of a tyrant they do not hesitate to sacrifice their lives, not only without shame but even counting it as supreme honor.” [9]9 Spinoza, *A Theologico-Political Treatise*, Preface. The Chinese text condenses Spinoza’s argument that despots use religion to manipulate the people. As a progressive thinker of the rising bourgeoisie, Spinoza also put forward the view that knowledge should be separated from religion, and philosophy from theology, each going its own way. The ultimate aim was to demonstrate the rationality of his political ideal, that is, to theoretically justify the rising bourgeoisie’s ascent to the ruling class. This pantheism, centered on the theory of substance, dealt a heavy blow to the religious theology that was still struggling at the time, ignited the blazing torch of atheism across European countries, and laid the foundation for the emergence and development of 18th-century French Enlightenment thought and militant atheism.

再次，泛神论否定上帝创世说。斯宾诺莎宣称:“我对于神和自然持有一种非常不同于那些近代基督教惯常所主张的观点，我认为神是万物的内因，而不是外因。”这就是说自然演化的原因在其内部，而不在它的外部。神秘创造者的位置被取消了，创造者和被创造者是同一的，神就是自然本身。基于此种观点，他果敢地赋予神以坚固的物质性。他说:“广延是神的一个属性，换言之，神是一个有广延的东西。”这样，斯宾诺莎就以自己特有的方式解释了世界的物质统一性，从根本上否定了超自然的精神实体（上帝）的存在。进而斯宾诺莎基于此批判了“君权神授”的学说，“古代的帝王为了争夺王位常宣传说他们是永生的神的后代，以为如果他们的国民与人类其余的人不把他们当作和自己是一样的人，而相信他们是神，就甘心服从他们的统治，听从他们的命令了”。“专制政治的秘诀主要是欺瞒人民，用宗教的美丽的外衣来套在用以压倒民众的畏惧的外面，这样人民既可英勇地为安全而战，也可英勇地为奴隶制而战。为一个BJ的虚容不惜牺牲生命，不但不以为耻，反倒引为无尚光荣。”斯宾诺莎作为资产阶级上升时期的进步思想家，还提出了知识与宗教分离，哲学与神学各行其道的观点，其最终目的在于论证他的政治理想的合理性，即从理论上论证资产阶级上升为统治阶级的合理性。这个以实体说为核心的泛神论沉重地打击了当时还在挣扎的宗教神学，并在欧洲诸国点燃了无神论的熊熊火炬，为18世纪的法国启蒙思想和战斗无神论思想的产生和发展奠定了基础。

III. French Militant Atheism as the Highest Achievement of 18th-Century Bourgeois Enlightenment Thought

三、法国战斗的无神论是18世纪资产阶级启蒙思想的最高成就

Represented by La Mettrie, Helvétius, Diderot, Holbach, and others, the 18th-century French atheists, using militant materialism as their ideological weapon and aiming to oppose feudal autocratic rule, launched a fierce critique of religious theology and the feudal church, establishing a thoroughgoing atheism. By attacking the French system of autocratic rule that united church and state, this atheism expressed the bourgeois political demand for the separation of church and state, thereby making the French bourgeois revolution the most thorough revolution in the history of European bourgeois revolutions.

以拉美特利、爱尔维修、狄德罗、霍尔巴赫等为代表的18世纪法国无神论者，以战斗的唯物主义为思想武器，以反对封建专制统治为目的，对宗教神学和封建教会进行了猛烈的批判，创立了彻底的无神论。这一无神论通过抨击法国政教合一的封建专制制度，表达了资产阶级政教分离的政治要求，从而使法国资产阶级革命成为欧洲资产阶级革命史上最彻底的一场革命。

First, the combination of militant materialism with anti-religious atheism is a distinctive feature of 18th-century French Enlightenment thought. An important characteristic of 18th-century French atheism was its conscious grounding of atheism in a materialist conception of nature, organically integrating materialism with atheism, and using the idea of the material unity of the world to completely deny the existence of God and the doctrine of divine creation. This shook the theoretical foundations of religious theology at a deeper level. La Mettrie openly and consciously adhered to a materialist monist position. He pointed out: “In the whole universe there is only one substance, which varies only in its forms.” [10]10 La Mettrie, *Man a Machine*. The Chinese text cites La Mettrie’s monist materialism. Diderot stated: “In the universe, in man, in animals, there is only one substance.” [11]11 Diderot, *D’Alembert’s Dream*. The Chinese text cites Diderot’s materialist monism. Holbach also held: “The universe, that great assemblage of everything that exists, presents to us everywhere only matter and motion.” [12]12 Holbach, *The System of Nature*, Vol. 1, Chapter 1. The Chinese text cites Holbach’s definition of the universe as matter and motion. Since the universe is the totality of all existents, then “before this circle that encompasses everything, nothing exists, nothing can exist.” [13]13 Holbach, *The System of Nature*, Vol. 1, Chapter 1. The Chinese text cites Holbach’s denial of anything beyond the material universe. Starting from the view that matter is the origin of the world, they thoroughly denied the existence of a spiritual entity, God. They openly declared that there is no God and that God’s creation of the world is a delusion.

首先，战斗的唯物主义与反宗教的无神论相结合，是18世纪法国启蒙思想的显著特点。18世纪法国无神论的重要特征是把无神论自觉地建立在唯物主义自然观的基础上，使唯物论与无神论有机结合，以世界的物质统一性思想，彻底否认上帝存在和上帝创世说，这就在更深层次上动摇了宗教神学的理论基础。拉美特利公开、自觉地坚持唯物主义一元论的立场。他指出:“在整个宇宙里只存在着一个实体，只是它的形式有各种变化”。狄德罗指出:“在宇宙中，在人身上，在动物身上，只有一个实体。”霍尔巴赫也认为:“宇宙，这个一切存在物的总汇，到处提供给我们的只是物质和运动。”既然宇宙是存在物的总汇，那么，在“包容一切的这个圈子之前，什么也不存在，什么也不能有”。从物质是世界的本原这个观点出发，他们彻底否定了精神实体、上帝的存在。他们公开宣布上帝是没有的，上帝创造世界是一种妄想。

The French materialists also held that matter and motion are inseparable, and that motion is an inherent property of matter. Diderot opposed the erroneous view of separating matter from motion, and for this purpose specially wrote the “Philosophical Principles on Matter and Motion” to critique the incompleteness of the materialism of his predecessors. He said: “Everything in the universe is in motion or agitation, or simultaneously in both motion and agitation.” In his “D’Alembert’s Dream,” he expressed this idea even more clearly: “Everything changes… the world is ceaselessly born and dies; at every instant it is born and dies, and there has never been an exception, nor will there ever be.” Holbach held that “motion is self-produced, self-increased, and self-accelerated within matter, without requiring any external cause.” Their view of matter’s self-motion overcame the incompleteness of 17th-century materialists in opposing theology, fundamentally negating the theological view of God as the prime mover. Helvétius, proceeding from a materialist view of nature, pointed out that theology is not science, and that theology and science are opposed. He believed that since the Middle Ages, Catholic theology had held supreme authority over the entire field of cultural and intellectual activity, and science had become the handmaiden of theology. The Church and scholasticism propagated obscurantism, plunging the human spirit into a state of rigidity. Theology and the Church had always been fetters on the pursuit of truth and the development of science, heavy chains binding the human mind. In his view, the Church had historically persecuted progressive thinkers, scientists, and fighters for democracy and freedom with extreme cruelty. On the pretext of defending the purity of religious dogma, they would declare any progressive thought that threatened religion and feudal rule to be heresy, and would persecute and destroy heretics. What the Church persecuted was science; what it strangled was human reason. Helvétius mercilessly mocked the theologians. He said: “Those who are ignorant yet stop at nothing were once the idle rich; today they are the theologians.” His powerful critique of theological obscurantism played a tremendous role in liberating human thought and advancing science and culture in history.

法国唯物主义者还认为物质和运动是不可分的，运动是物质的固有属性。狄德罗反对割裂物质与运动的错误观点，为此专门写了《关于物质和运动的哲学原理》一文来批判先辈们唯物主义的不彻底性。他说:“宇宙中的一切都在移动或激动中，或者同时既在移动中又在激动中。”他在《达朗贝的梦》一文中更清楚地表达了这个思想，他说:“一切都在变……世界生灭不已，每一刹那它都在生都在灭，从来没有过例外，也永远不会有例外。”霍尔巴赫认为:“运动在物质之内是自行产生、自行增长，自行加速，并不需要任何外因的帮助。”他们的这种物质自行运动的观点，克服了17世纪唯物主义者反神学的不彻底性，从根本上否定了上帝是第一推动力的神学观点。爱尔维修还从唯物主义自然观出发，指出神学不是科学，神学和科学是对立的。他认为，从中世纪以来，天主教神学在文化知识活动的全部领域具有至高无上的权威，科学成了神学的婢女。教会和经院哲学宣传蒙昧主义，人类精神陷于僵死状态。神学与教会从来都是追求真理和发展科学的桎梏，是束缚人们精神的沉重枷锁。在他看来，历史上教会曾极端残酷地迫害进步思想家、科学家以及争取民主和自由的战士。它们动辄以捍卫宗教信条的纯洁性为借口，宣布任何有危及宗教和封建统治的进步思想为异端，对异教徒进行迫害和摧残。教会迫害的就是科学，扼杀的就是人的理性。爱尔维修对神学家进行了无情的嘲弄。他说:“不学无术而无所不为的，过去是纨绔子弟，今天是神学家。”他有力地批判了神学蒙昧主义，这在历史上对解放人类思想，发展科学文化事业产生了极大的推动作用。

Secondly, militant atheism combined the critique of religion with the critique of reality, in order to achieve the goal of negating feudal autocracy. In response to the lies of the clergy, who claimed that religion was the foundation of morality and that without religion society would lack morality and order, the French materialists, proceeding from a bourgeois theory of human nature, exposed and criticized the hypocrisy and essence of feudal religious morality. La Mettrie, from a bourgeois standpoint, believed that the asceticism preached by the Church was merely a “sacred poison” used to poison the people’s “natural rights” and “nature.” For this reason, he pointed out that if the “sacred” ideological shackles of religion were not cast off, capitalism could not develop; this was the essence of the anti-religion issue. Helvétius believed that the clergy, in order to maintain power, “slandered true honor and true virtue.” The clergy preached to the people “do not kill,” while they themselves engaged in mass slaughter; they exhorted people “do not steal,” while they themselves cruelly exploited others; they taught people “do not commit adultery,” while they themselves lived a life of debauchery. Religious morality was thus self-contradictory, hypocritical, and deceitful. Therefore, religion “is the hidden enemy of all human virtues.” Religion itself cannot raise the moral level of a nation; “it has never made people better; to resort to superstition, credulity, and fanaticism to encourage them to do good is like pouring oil on a fire to extinguish it.” He reviewed human history, explaining that since Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, monarchs had not become more courageous or wise, nor had the people become more educated or humane; likewise, the number of patriots had not increased anywhere. Therefore, religion was utterly useless for cultivating morality, and “henceforth, only by destroying the majority of religions can a sound morality be established in any empire.” Diderot believed that behind the preaching of the ascetics always lurked greedy ambition. So-called asceticism was merely a yoke demanding that people unconditionally endure the oppression of autocracy. Morality, he argued, should be based on the realistic foundation of behavior beneficial to society, without presupposing the will of a fictitious supernatural entity. Holbach pointed out: “What makes people good is rational education, noble habits, wise systems, just laws, and appropriate rewards and punishments; not all kinds of abstruse and obscure speculation.”

其次，战斗无神论将宗教批判与现实批判结合起来，以达到否定封建专制的目的。针对教会僧侣们把宗教说成是道德的基础，宣扬没有宗教，社会就会没有道德，就会丧失秩序等谎言，法国唯物论者从资产阶级人性论出发，揭露和批判了封建宗教道德的虚伪及其本质。拉美特利从资产阶级立场出发，认为教会宣扬禁欲主义不过是用来毒害人民“自然权利”和“本性”的一付“神圣的毒药”。为此他指出，如果不摆脱宗教这个“神圣”的思想枷锁，资本主义便发展不起来，这就是反宗教问题的实质所在。爱尔维修认为僧侣为了保持权力，“就诋毁真正的荣誉和真正的美德”。僧侣向人们宣传“不要杀人”，而他们自己却大批地进行屠杀；他们劝导人们“不要偷窃”，而他们自己却残酷无情地剥削别人；他们教导人们“不要通奸”，而他们自己却过着荒淫无耻的生活。宗教道德就是如此地自相矛盾和虚伪诡诈。因此宗教“乃是各种人道美德的隐敌”。宗教本身并不能使一个民族的道德水平提高，“它从来不会使人们变好，求助于迷信、轻信和狂热来鼓励他们行善，等于浇油灭火。”他回顾了人类历史，说明自从基督教在罗马帝国成为国教以来，君主并没有因此变得英勇、贤明，人民也没有变得更加有教养，更加合乎人道；同样地，爱国者的人数在任何地方也都没有增加。因此，宗教对培养道德根本没有什么用处，而“今后唯有靠摧毁大多数的宗教，才能在各个帝国给一种健全的道德打下基础”。狄德罗认为，在那些禁欲主义者的说教背后，总是隐藏着贪婪的野心。所谓禁欲主义不过是要求人们无条件地忍受专制压迫的枷锁罢了。而道德应建立在行为有益于社会的现实基础上，而不必以虚构的超自然实体的意志为前提。霍尔巴赫指出:“使人成为善良的，是有理性的教育、高尚的习惯、贤明的体系，公正的法律和赏罚得当；而不是种种艰深晦涩的思辨。”

Thirdly, the 18th-century French atheists also profoundly pointed out that religion was a tool of feudal monarchical autocracy. They declared that the purpose of religion was to perpetuate autocratic rule, and that religious institutions had become an indispensable component of the feudal system. Helvétius believed that when the feudal rulers did things harmful to the people and society, the Church, fearing popular resistance, vigorously preached that “life is but a transition,” and that only by meekly submitting could one go to heaven after death and enjoy true happiness. The clergy’s preaching “cooled the love for relatives, honor, public good, and the fatherland. Thus heroes became scarce; the hearts of monarchs were moved; they hoped to obtain a great celestial power, and sometimes agreed to transfer a portion of their earthly authority to the clergy.” Helvétius further pointed out that religion was the cause of political corruption, poverty, backwardness, and even the decline and fall of many countries. Wherever the Catholic Church played a decisive role in state affairs, social progress was very slow, the development of industry and trade was hindered, and the people fell into a state of ignorance; wherever the Catholic Church ran rampant, the country would sooner or later decline and fall. The immense power held by the clergy had brought Spain, Portugal, and other countries to the brink of poverty and bankruptcy. At the same time, religion everywhere caused sectarian strife and religious wars, bringing great disaster to the people. The history of religion “tells us: religion has everywhere lit the torch of intolerance, leaving fields strewn with corpses, rivers flowing with blood, cities burned, empires ruined, and it has never made people better.” Holbach pointed out: “Christianity spread in the past only because autocracy sheltered it; like all religions, Christianity is the most reliable defender of autocracy.” Diderot believed that religion merely demanded that people unconditionally endure the rule of feudal autocracy; earthly kingship and heavenly divine power were a pair of intimate twin brothers; the God of heaven and the emperor on earth were two ropes tied around people’s necks; if one rope was not untied, the other could not be untied either.

再次，18世纪法国无神论者还深刻地指出宗教是封建君主专制的工具。他们宣称，宗教的目的就是使专制BZ永存，宗教机构已成了封建制度的不可缺少的组成部分。爱尔维修认为，当封建BJ干出危害人民和社会的事情时，教会害怕人民起来反抗，就竭力宣扬“人生不过是一种过渡”，只有逆来顺受，才能死后上天堂，享受真正的幸福。僧侣的宣传“浇凉了对于亲属、荣誉、公益、祖国的热爱。于是英雄稀少了，君主们的心动了，他们希望得到一种天上的巨大势力，有时同意把自己在地上的权威转让一部分给僧侣”。爱尔维修还进一步指出，宗教是造成许多国家政治腐败、贫穷落后，甚至没落衰亡的原因。凡是天主教会对国家事务起着决定作用的地方，社会进步就非常迟缓，工业和贸易的发展就受到阻碍，人民就陷入愚昧无知的状态；凡是天主教会横行霸道的国家，迟早会没落衰亡。僧侣们拥有的巨大权力，曾使西班牙、葡萄牙这些国家濒临贫穷破产的境地。同时，宗教到处都引起教派纷争和宗教战争，给人民带来了巨大的灾难。宗教史“告诉我们:宗教在任何地方都点起了不宽容的火把，搞得尸横遍野，血流成渠，城市焚烧，帝国残破，而它们从来不曾使人变好”。霍尔巴赫指出:“基督教过去之所以得到传播，只是因为专制制度庇护了它，和所有的宗教一样，基督教也是专制制度最可靠的保卫者。”狄德罗认为，宗教不过是要人们无条件地忍受封建专制的统治，地上的王权和天上的神权是一对亲密的孪生兄弟，天国的上帝和人间的皇帝是拴在人们脖子上的两股绳子，如果不解开其中一股，就解不开另一股。

From this, we can clearly see that the revolutionary significance of French militant atheist thought lay in criticizing and exposing religious theology, overthrowing the feudal autocratic system, and establishing bourgeois rule. Engels once said that French materialism provided the French Revolution with its “theoretical banner and furnished the draft for the Declaration of the Rights of Man.” The French Revolution was “the first uprising that completely cast aside the religious cloak and fought on an undisguised political front; it was also the first uprising that truly carried the struggle through to the end, until one of the warring parties, the aristocracy, was completely eliminated and the other, the bourgeoisie, achieved total victory.” Thus, “atheists can be respectable people; what dishonors human dignity is not atheism, but superstition and idolatry.” The 18th-century French materialist atheism defended the rationality of the capitalist system and represented the direction of social and historical development.

由此，我们可以清楚地看到，法国战斗无神论思想的革命意义就在于，批判和揭露宗教神学，推翻封建专制制度，建立资产阶级统治。恩格斯曾说：法国唯物主义给予法国大革命“理论旗帜，并且为《人权宣言》提供了底本”。法国大革命是“完全抛开宗教外衣、在毫不掩饰的政治战线上作战的首次起义；这也是真正把斗争进行到底，直到交战的一方即贵族被彻底消灭而另一方即资产阶级完全胜利的首次起义”。因而，“无神论者能够成为可敬的人，玷辱人的尊严的不是无神论，而是迷信和偶像崇拜”。18世纪法国唯物主义无神论为资本主义制度的合理性辩护，代表了社会历史发展的方向。

IV. The Influence of Modern Western Atheism on Marxist Atheism

四、近代西方无神论对马克思主义无神论的影响

The philosophical foundation of Marxist atheism is the highest stage of development of materialist philosophy, namely dialectical materialism and historical materialism. Clearly, it first inherits the materialist tradition. Lenin explicitly pointed out: “The philosophical foundation of Marxism is dialectical materialism, which fully inherits the historical tradition of materialism of the French eighteenth century and of Feuerbach in the first half of the German nineteenth century, a tradition of absolute atheism and resolute opposition to all religion.” Lenin also wrote, when summarizing the “circular” pattern of philosophical development:

马克思主义无神论的哲学基础是唯物主义哲学发展的最高阶段，即辩证唯物和历史唯物主义。显然，它首先继承了唯物主义传统，列宁明确指出：“马克思主义的哲学基础是辩证唯物主义，它完全继承了法国十八世纪的和德国十九世纪上半期费尔巴哈的唯物主义历史传统，即绝对无神论的、坚决反对一切宗教的唯物主义历史传统。”列宁还在总结哲学发展的“圆圈”式规律时写道：

Modern: Holbach – Hegel (via Berkeley, Hume, Kant)

近代：霍尔巴赫——黑格尔（经过贝克莱、休谟、康德）

Hegel — Feuerbach — Marx.

黑格尔——费尔巴哈——马克思。

Thus it can be seen that eighteenth-century French militant atheism was an important intellectual source of Marxist atheism and, to a certain extent, laid the foundation for the creation of Marxist atheism.

可见，18世纪法国战斗无神论是马克思主义无神论的重要思想来源，在一定程度上为马克思主义无神论的创立奠定了基础。

First, eighteenth-century French atheism for the first time openly raised the banner of materialism and atheism, becoming thoroughgoing atheism. In modern times, many philosophers who in fact already possessed materialist ideas were unwilling to acknowledge themselves as materialists. Bacon and Locke both carried theological incompleteness; Spinoza was cloaked in pantheism; Hobbes also acknowledged the existence of a creator; and even later Feuerbach rejected the label of materialism. Only the eighteenth-century French atheists for the first time openly raised the banner of materialism, thereby drawing clear lines of demarcation in philosophy.

首先，18世纪法国无神论第一次公开地打出了唯物主义和无神论旗帜，成为彻底的无神论。近代以来，许多实际上已具有唯物主义思想的哲学家也不愿承认自己是唯物主义者。培根与洛克都带有神学不彻底性，斯宾诺莎披着泛神论的外衣，霍布斯也承认造物主的存在，甚至连后来的费尔巴哈也拒绝唯物主义这个称号。唯有18世纪法国无神论者第一次公开打出了唯物主义的旗帜，从而划清了哲学的阵线。

Similarly, thoroughgoing atheism had never appeared in the history of Western thought. From the Renaissance to the seventeenth century, progressive bourgeois philosophers all participated, either overtly or covertly, in the theoretical demonstration of narrowing God’s sphere of jurisdiction: among these were pantheism, which naturalized and secularized God; deism, which retained God’s role in creation and the “first push” but denied its continued intervention in worldly affairs; and dualism, which used God to mediate between the two parallel substances of mind and matter. The French atheists not only denied orthodox religion but also overcame the incompleteness of pantheism and deism. They used modern natural science and the materialist worldview to demonstrate atheist ideas and pointed out the blood relationship between theology and idealism, thereby becoming thoroughgoing atheists.

同样，西方思想史上也从未出现过彻底的无神论，从文艺复兴到17世纪，进步的资产阶级哲学家都或明或暗地参与了缩小上帝管辖范围的理论论证：其中有使上帝自然化、世俗化的泛神论，有保留了上帝的创世和“第一次推动”作用，但否认它继续干预尘世事务的自然神论，还有用上帝沟通心灵和物质两个平行实体的二元论。法国无神论者不仅否认正统宗教，而且也克服了泛神论、自然神论的不彻底性。。他们用近代自然科学和唯物主义世界观论证了无神论思想，并指出了神学与唯心主义的血缘关系，从而成为彻底的无神论。

Second, eighteenth-century French atheism achieved a genuine materialist monism in the view of nature. On the fundamental questions of philosophy, from Descartes to Spinoza and even Locke, there was either dualism or a tendency toward dualism. Only the eighteenth-century French materialist atheists for the first time explicitly raised the question of the material unity of the world. They unanimously answered the first aspect of the fundamental question of philosophy as matter determining everything, with sensation and thought being merely an attribute of matter. In the view of matter, the French materialist atheists’ definition of matter had already approached the Marxist definition of matter. Helvétius held that matter is a collection of the properties inherent in corporeal things, an abstraction. He said: “Matter is not a thing; in nature there are only individuals we call bodies; the term matter can only be understood as the collection of properties inherent in all bodies.” [15]15 Claude-Adrien Helvétius, *De l’Esprit* (On the Mind), 1758.

其次，18世纪法国无神论在自然观上达到了真正的唯物主义一元论。在哲学基本问题上，从笛卡尔到斯宾诺莎乃至洛克，不是二元论就是有二元论倾向，唯有18世纪法国唯物主义无神论者第一次明确地提出了世界的物质统一性问题，他们一致回答了哲学基本问题的第一个方面是物质决定一切，感觉和思维只不过是物质的一种属性。在物质观上，法国唯物主义无神论者的物质定义已接近马克思主义的物质定义，爱尔维修认为，物质是对有形体东西的特性的集合，是一种抽象。他说：“物质并不是一件东西，自然中只有一些我们称之为形体的个体，物质这个名词只能了解为一切形体所固有的特性的集合。”。

Third, the philosophy of the eighteenth-century French atheists initially possessed characteristics of dialectics. They affirmed that all things in the universe exist in universal interconnection. Diderot said: “If phenomena were not interconnected, there could be no philosophy at all.” Holbach pointed out: “Everything in the universe is interconnected… In nature it is absolutely impossible for there to be any independent power, any isolated cause, any separate activity, because all things in nature are constantly acting upon one another, and nature itself is nothing but an endless cycle composed of motions that are issued or received according to necessary laws.”

再次，18世纪法国无神论者的哲学初步具有了辩证法的特征。他们肯定宇宙万物都是普遍联系而存在的。狄德罗说：“如果现象不是彼此联系着，那就根本不能有哲学。”霍尔巴赫指出：“宇宙中的一切都是联系着的。… …在自然中根本不可能有任何独立的能力，任何孤立的原因，任何单独的活动，因为自然中的一切事物都在不断地互相起作用，自然本身只不过是由一些按照必然法则发出或接受的运动构成的一个无始无终的循环。”

Diderot also put forward the idea of evolutionary development. He said that from primordial material elements, after long periods of combination and separation, rational human beings could emerge. “The embryos formed by these elements, through countless organizations and developments, successively acquire motion, sensation, ideas, thought, reflection, consciousness, feeling, desire, signs, gestures, sounds, articulated sounds, language, laws, science, and art. Each of these stages of development takes millions of years, perhaps even other stages of development and other stages of expansion unknown to us.” Here, he simply depicted human development, with no trace of God creating humanity and no shadow of mechanism; it is the self-development of matter and the progress of humanity.

狄德罗还提出了进化发展的思想。他说，由原初物质元素经过长时期的结合与分离，会变成有理性的人。“这些元素形成的胚胎经过无数的组织和发展，它相继地具有了运动、感觉、观念、思想、反省、意识、感情、欲望、记号、手势、声音、音节分明的声音、语言、法律、科学和艺术，这些发展阶段每一个都经过几百万年，也许还经过我们所不知道的另一些发展阶段，另一些扩展阶段。”在这里，他简单描绘了人类发展，没有上帝造人的痕迹，也没有机械论的影子，它是物质自身的发展和人类的进步。

Next, the eighteenth-century French atheists put forward the idea of placing equal emphasis on perceptual knowledge and rational knowledge. They held that “experimental philosophy” one-sidedly exaggerates sensory experience, while “rational philosophy” one-sidedly exaggerates the role of rational thought; therefore, the correct path of cognition should be to combine the perceptual and the rational. Diderot emphasized that the three methods of observation, reflection, and experiment on nature are three organically linked links in the entire cognitive process, closely connected to each other. Observation is the collection of factual material; cognition must be based on facts, which “are always the true wealth of the philosopher”; reflection combines the already collected factual material for careful analysis; experiment then verifies the results of reflection, checking whether they correspond to external objects. The entire cognitive process is a process “from sensation back to reflection, and from reflection back to sensation,” which is also the developmental process from the concrete to the abstract and then from the abstract back to the concrete, finally reaching truthful cognition of objective things. Lenin believed that Diderot’s emphasis on the viewpoint of experiment (practice) was “very close to the view of modern materialism.”

从次，18世纪法国无神论者提出了感性认识与理性认识并重的思想。他们认为“实验哲学”片面夸大感觉经验，“理性哲学”片面夸大理性思维作用，因此，认识的正确道路应该是把感性和理性结合起来。狄德罗强调，对自然的观察、思考和实验这三种方法是全部认识过程有机联系的三个环节，彼此紧密相接。观察就是搜集事实材料，认识要以事实为基础，事实“总是哲学家的真正财富”；思考把已经搜集到的事实材料组合起来作缜密地分析；实验则证实思考的结果，看它是否与外界的对象相符合。全部认识就是一个“从感觉回到思考，又从思考回到感觉”的过程，这也就是从具体到抽象、再从抽象到具体的发展过程，最后达到对客观事物的真理性认识。列宁认为狄德罗重视实验（实践）的观点，“非常接近现代唯物主义的看法”。

Finally, the eighteenth-century French atheists also put forward some reasonable ideas in the view of history. Their “materialist doctrines about the innate goodness of human nature and the equality of human intelligence, about the omnipotence of experience, habit, and education, about the influence of the external environment on people, about the great significance of industry, about the rationality of enjoyment, etc., have an inevitable connection with communism and socialism.” [16]16 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Holy Family*, 1845. Helvétius put forward the proposition that “man is the product of his environment.” He held that “all people constructed equally well possess the physical capacity to obtain the highest ideas; the intellectual differences we see among people are due to the different environments they are in, due to the different education they receive.” Philosophically speaking, this proposition contains the germ of historical materialism. Since human emotions, thoughts, ideas, and even moral character are all determined by the social environment, this to a certain extent approaches the basic viewpoint of historical materialism that “it is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness.” [17]17 Karl Marx, *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*, Preface, 1859. Although this approach was unconscious, it nevertheless provided precious intellectual material for the formation of the Marxist materialist conception of history.

最后，18世纪法国无神论者在历史观方面也提出了一些合理思想。他们“关于人性本善和人们智力平等，关于经验、习惯、教育的万能，关于外部环境对人的影响，关于工业的重大意义，关于享乐的合理性等等的唯物主义学说，同共产主义和社会主义之间有着必然的联系。”爱尔维修提出了“人是环境的产物”的命题。他认为，“一切构造得同样完善的人，都拥有获得最高观念的体力；我们在人与人之间所见到的精神上的差异，是由于他们所处的不同环境、由于他们所受的不同教育所致”。从哲学上说，这个命题包含着历史唯物主义的萌芽，既然人的情感、思想、观念乃至品德等都是由社会环境决定的，这就在一定程度上接近了唯物史观关于“不是人们的意识决定人们的存在，相反，是人们的社会存在决定人们的意识”的基本观点。尽管这个接近是不自觉的，但它却为马克思主义唯物史观的形成提供了珍贵的思想材料。

Of course, Marx also pointed out that the French atheists’ analysis of the causes of religion was not yet profound or thorough enough. For example, Holbach attributed the cause of religion to human fear and astonishment at nature, which led to the supposition of the appearance of some superhuman spiritual force; this view could not yet penetrate into the politics and economy of human society. They regarded human “reason” as the driving force of social development, believing that by appealing to reason and through education, people could overcome religious delusion and push history forward. This shows that their view of history was an idealist conception of history based on abstract human nature. Therefore, Marx said: “The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusions about their condition is the demand to give up a condition that needs illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.” [18]18 Karl Marx, *Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right: Introduction*, 1843. That is to say, the French atheists’ criticism of religion was only the “embryo” of the criticism of the real world. It was precisely on the basis of critically inheriting eighteenth-century French militant atheism, and then through the criticism and transformation of German classical philosophy of Hegel and Feuerbach, that Marx and Engels led atheism to the proposition of communism as the ultimate destination of humanity.

当然，马克思也指出了法国无神论者对宗教产生的原因分析还不够深刻和彻底。例如霍尔巴赫把宗教的产生原因归结为人对自然的恐惧和惊异而假想某种超人类的精神力量的出现，这种观点还不能深入到人类社会的政治和经济中去。他们把人的“理性”视为社会发展的动力，以为只要诉诸理性和通过教育就能使人们克服宗教迷误，推动历史前进。这表明他们的历史观是一种抽象人性论的唯心史观。所以，马克思说:“废除作为人民的虚幻幸福的宗教，就是要求人民的现实幸福。要求抛弃关于人民处境的幻觉，就是要求抛弃那需要幻觉的处境。因此，对宗教的批判就是对苦难尘世——宗教是它的神圣光环——的批判的胚芽。”这就是说，法国无神论者对宗教的批判只是对现实世界批判的“胚芽”。马克思、恩格斯正是在批判地继承18世纪法国战斗的无神论的基础上，进而通过对德国黑格尔及费尔巴哈古典哲学的批判与改造，才把无神论引向了共产主义这一人类理想归宿的命题。

The developmental history of modern Western atheism also provides important insights for us today as we uphold and develop Marxist atheism and further improve our religious work. First, the propaganda and education of Marxist atheism must reflect the character of the times. As a major principle, Marxist atheism needs to be embodied in all aspects of the state’s work, organically integrating its development with the great practice of building socialism with Chinese characteristics, constructing an ideological discourse system for the major principle of Marxist atheism, innovating the forms, content, and methods of atheist propaganda, and continuously promoting the adaptation of Marxist atheism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times and its popularization. Second, the propaganda and education of Marxist atheism must draw on the excellent heritage of atheism in Chinese and foreign history, strive to provide the masses with various atheist propaganda materials, and conduct vivid and effective propaganda and education. Third, it is necessary to dialectically view the existence of religion at the present stage from the perspective of historical materialism, proceed from the “two overall situations” of the strategic overall situation of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the changes unseen in a century in the world, actively guide religion to adapt to the New Era of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and “guide religion to strive to serve economic development, social harmony, cultural prosperity, ethnic unity, and the unification of the motherland.” [19]19 This quotation is a standard formulation from the Chinese Communist Party’s religious policy, emphasizing the instrumental role of religion in serving state-defined social and political goals.

近代西方无神论的发展史也为我们今天坚持和发展马克思主义无神论，进一步做好宗教工作提供了重要启示。首先，马克思主义无神论的宣传教育要体现时代性。马克思主义无神论作为大原则，需要在国家方方面面的工作中体现出来，将它的发展同建设中国特色社会主义的伟大实践有机结合在一起，构建起马克思主义无神论大原则的意识形态话语体系，创新无神论宣传的形式、内容和方法，不断地推动马克思主义无神论的中国化、时代化和大众化。其次，马克思主义无神论的宣传教育必须汲取中外历史上无神论的优秀遗产，努力向人民群众提供各种无神论的宣传材料，进行生动有效的宣传教育。再次，必须从唯物史观的角度辩证地看待现阶段的宗教存在，从中华民族伟大复兴战略全局和世界百年未有之大变局的 “两个大局”出发，积极引导宗教与中国特色社会主义新时代相适应，“引导宗教努力为促进经济发展、社会和谐、文化繁荣、民族团结、祖国统一服务”。

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心