Marx and the Bible: A Critique of the Philosophy of Oppression

by José Porfirio Miranda, Jose Maria Diez-Alegria (Foreword), John Eagleson (Translator)

José Porfirio Miranda

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Theology, Theory, Social Justice, Nonfiction, Politics

338 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1971

About the author

Catholic clergyman and Jesuit, philosopher, theologian and economist, author and professor at the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana of the Metropolitan Region of Mexico City, and at the Jesuit College in Guadalajara. Miranda wrote basic works of liberation theological exegesis and theory formation.

Reviews

[Stephen Morrison · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. The title is somewhat misleading, though. Very little to do with Marx (except towards the end). But I think this was one of the best books I’ve read for a biblical defense of liberation theology.

[Mark Derderian · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book that demonstrates how Marxism emerged from and contributed to the prophetic Christian tradition. Some surprising juxtapositions of Marxism and Christianity, that reveal depths in each tradition.

[Eric T · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is my first book by Jose Miranda. In retrospect, I should have started with “Communism in the Bible,” since this book is dense, and familiarity with his approach would have helped. Regardless, this is an excellent book. Parts two, three, and four focus heavily on biblical exegesis. Miranda sometimes analyzes the same passage for several pages, critiquing various interpretations of just two or three biblical lines. This can be taxing, especially if philosophy and theology are not your favorite subjects. I enjoy both, yet still found the material dense at times, which slowed my reading since absorbing his key points takes time.

As others have noted, the title is somewhat misleading since Karl Marx appears mainly in the last part. Here, Miranda shines as a writer. His exploration of the shared dialectical patterns in Christianity and Marxism is interesting, especially their opposition to what Miranda calls “Greek epistemology,” the basis of Western thinking. He sees reliance on the status quo as central to the West’s systemization of injustice. He explains that both Marxism and Christianity respond to this by raising up hope, which serves as a catalyst for justice and the creation of a “new world.” For Miranda, this vision is deeply shaped by Paul’s letters, which inform and inspire the transformative role of hope. In this chapter, Miranda draws significant inspiration from Ernst Bloch, a compelling thinker whose work has influenced many Christian theologians, especially within liberation theology. Miranda's most provocative insight comes at the end. Marx's dialectics, he argues, were ultimately too narrow, stopping short of the resurrection of the dead that a complete transformation of history demands. Miranda also states that the negation of the resurrection of the dead is an ideology defensive of the status quo and that it silences the sense of justice that history naturally stirs up through its processes. It serves to kill the real hope of changing the world. The truly dialectical Marxist and Christian arrive at the same conclusion: both must affirm the resurrection of the dead as an indispensable element of the total transformation that a new world requires, a transformation inseparable from the justice Miranda traces through Paul and the Old Testament.

There are probably more accessible books that pertain to Liberation Theology than this, but it is quite informative and thought-provoking. This will be a book I will definitely revisit in the future. I feel I still need to fully grasp some of Miranda’s ideas in the first half of the book, and the biblical analysis he offers is definitely something that requires more than one reading. If you’re interested in a combined philosophical and theological approach to the Bible, and how that relates to an authentic understanding of the Christian message, definitely give this a look.

4.5/5

[Left_coast_reads · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is an example of liberation theology, a tradition focused on the emancipatory potential of Christianity by emphasizing God's actions on behalf of the oppressed. One hallmark of liberation theology is its embrace of orthopraxy rather than orthodoxy--salvation is achieved by right action rather than right belief.

Using the Bible and Marx, Miranda claims that private ownership of the means of production can only be achieved through violence. From here, he argues that Christians should oppose capitalism. He argues that recent papal encyclicals on economic matters should be interpreted along these lines. He engages in some motivated reasoning here, sort of giving the Popes a pass for not explicitly condemning capitalism.

The following three chapters explore a range of topics concerning interpretation of scripture, including God's intervention in human history. Miranda hits the reader with an astonishing number of bible quotes to support his claims. One of the most notable is that to know God is to do justice to the poor. It is not possible to know God simply through contemplation or prayer. God only reveals Himself when we interact with others in pursuit of justice.

Throughout the book, Miranda argues that Christianity has inherited philosophical baggage from the Greek tradition and as a result has lost its way, focusing on an individualistic, abstract interpretation of faith. It has also been shaped to be more compatible with capitalism, losing its radical message.

The last chapter is confusing. Miranda attempts to show parallels between the Marxist view of history and early Christian theology. Maybe I need to brush up on my understanding of dialectics, but it seems to me that Miranda goes off the rails a bit here. He claims that Marx, too, would have predicted resurrecting the dead but his thinking wasn't sufficiently dialectical. This last section is full of non sequiturs and unsubstantiated claims.

I think the title of the book is a bit of a misnomer, but it was good to read something which challenges my own beliefs using some material familiar to me.

[Terry · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you can read Das Kapital and survive, you'll handle this easily.
Not for someone who's looking for excitement.
Somewhere between Carlisle's History of the French Revolution (marvelous) and reading the works of Thomas Acquinas. (ugh!)

[Carol · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had a hard time getting into this book and kept wondering if the book would be more appealing in the original language. It had a lot of interesting and thought provoking ideas.