Four Ingrained Chinese Objections

By Zhou Xiao-an

Popular objections

From the 20^th century onwards there have been a range of objections to Christianity by Chinese people. Here are the four most common ones:

The first objection declares that Christianity is in direct contradiction to science. It is unscientific and is anti-scientific. During the May 4^th Movement, there were three ideological debates relating to Christianity among Chinese intellectuals, expressed in The New Youth, in Young China Organization and in the two anti-Christian movements of 1922 and 1926.

A common focus of these debates was that all religion, including Christianity, was unscientific and non-rational. Religion had come into being because our ancestors lacked scientific knowledge and so gave mistaken explanations of incomprehensible and awesome natural phenomena. Christianity was no exception. As science developed, people would come to know more about the world and therefore religious superstition would gradually exit the stage of history.

The second objection was that Christianity was an imperialistic tool for the invasion of China. This idea was especially popular during the anti-Christian movement of 1922 and during the subsequent communist revolution. In 1922 and in 1924 there were two anti-Christianity movements initiated mainly by young students. These movements, with their challenges to Christianity, caused considerable social impact. Historians consider that these movements were the fourth and most damaging assault on Christianity since its arrival in China.

The notion that Christianity was an imperialist tool for the invasion of China was very common among Chinese people at that time, especially among intellectuals who were heavily influenced by nationalism. After 1949 this idea became increasingly popular as a result of heavy government propaganda.

The third objection was that Christianity is a kind of spiritual opium. This idea originated with Marx and as a result of propaganda it has become widespread. Up until 1978 this was the most popular Chinese view of Christianity. This notion claims that the ruling classes have used Christianity as a spiritual opium to weaken the fighting spirit of the lower-classes. A variation of this idea is that religion, including Christianity, is simply a crutch for weak losers.

The fourth objection was that Christianity is an idealistic philosophical system, but it is based on a wrong worldview. It is superstition. All religions are forms of idealism, but materialism is the only correct worldview.

These four criticisms levelled against Christianity come from scientism, nationalism, socialism and materialism respectively. And they are still the four most popular objections among Chinese people. Anyone holding any of these ingrained assumptions would find it hard to accept the Christian faith. Nevertheless, there is a common problem in all four of these viewpoints and that is that they fail to realize that Christianity is a religion with a genuine history and that its origin and development are a part of human history. It would be irrational to reject Christianity without doing some study of history. Such an irrational attitude is inappropriate for people who are serious about seeking the truth.

Three principles of knowledge

From a philosophical standpoint, the four objections described above can be classified into two groups: materialistic/naturalistic, and empirical. Consequently, there are two main reasons why people reject Christianity: (1) it violates a materialistic or naturalistic world outlook, and (2) it transcends our daily experience. For Chinese people, Jesus' resurrection is nonsensical and they promptly refuse to believe it. But can we deny the existence of something, simply on the basis of our own lack of experience of it?

The Indian fable of The Prince and the Snow can help us answer this question. Once upon a time, there was an Indian prince who did not believe in the existence of snow, because he had never seen snow. Obviously, this Indian prince had a wrong knowledge principle in that he considered that his own experience was the ultimate yardstick of truth.

From this fable we deduce that we cannot deny the existence of something simply because we have never personally experienced it.

This is such an important knowledge principle that we may, for now, call it the first knowledge principle.

Based on this first knowledge principle, we can move on to another line of reasoning. And because this line of reasoning is also very imprtant, let us call it the second knowledge principle: it is much harder to prove the non-existence of something than to prove its existence.

The reason is simple. When someone wants to prove the non-existence of something, for instance the Indian prince trying to deny the existence of snow, he must first possess complete knowledge of everything related to the subject. But if someone wants to prove the existence of something, all he needs is a partial knowledge of the subject. It is like someone living in the northern hemisphere trying to prove the existence of snow. All he needs is his own experience of snow and the assurance of his senses.

Deriving from the second knowledge principle, we can come up with the next important line of reasoning. To emphasize its importance, let us call it the third knowledge principle.

Suppose a group of people do not believe in the existence of something because they have never experienced it. Suppose also a different group of people do believe in the existence of something because they have experienced it. Then those who are trying to figure out objectively whether the entity exists or not, should focus more on the testimony of the second group of people.

If a historical event cannot be proved by science, we must focus on the witnesses who experienced the event.

All these three knowledge principles are in fact scientific. Although Christianity transcends science, these are the right principles to use in studying the truth of historic events. Materialism, naturalism and empiricism are unable to get us there.

The author is from Hunan. He has a Ph.D. in physics and is now a pastor in a church in Vancouver, Canada.