Was Jesus A Socialist?

1. 67

   Charles Jamesposted 13 years ago

   I am writing a series of Hubs under the linked theme of "Socialism 101".
   
   It seems to me that Jesus was not a socialist, because His aim was to straighten out backsliding within the Jewish community.
   He carefully sidestepped attempts to inveigle him into confronting the Roman occupation. It seems to me that His concern was that too many Jews were becoming concerned with the form and procedure of religious practice, and forgetting that the main purpose of religious activity was to get closer to God.
   
   I am particularly looking for contributions opposing my view, and saying that Jesus was a Socialist.
   
   Can I mention here that for this discussion I really am not interested in anyone's views on Obama, the Tea Party, the Democrats and the Republicans, etcetera.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Darrke Thoughtsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I think that he was (and also most religions trend toward socialism).
      
      He recommended the rich man sell everything he owned to follow him.
      
      In Acts, a couple were zapped for not giving all they had to the Church (and lying about it)
      
      He gave out lots of free health care.
      
      The beatitudes suggest humble living, sharing, taking only what you need, rather than any kind of capitalism or seeking wealth. (Blessed are the meek, blessed are those who are persecuted... I don't recall blessed are the business owners or politicians?)
      
      I think you are right that he had a concern with the faked religious piety in his day.  And more interested in how individuals lived than in government systems.  But the lifestlye he proposed seems much more like socialism or communism than any other government system.

      replyreport
   2. 59

      Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There were no political parties back in those days. You were what ever nationality you were, but you fell under the dictatorship of whom ever happened to rule at the time. In Jesus time, He was a Jew under Roman rule, who taught that all were equal.

      replyreport
   3. 49

      paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      You are right there; and that make Jesus not a Socialist.

      replyreport
   4. 59

      Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I am writing a series of Hubs under the linked theme of "Socialism 101".
      
      It seems to me that Jesus was not a socialist, because His aim was to straighten out backsliding within the Jewish community.
      
      =  -  =  -  =  -  =
      
        I don't think that he was a socialist even though a couple of his disciples did put together  a commune  Wayyyy outside of Jerusalem in approx 62 Ad.  So I would Guess that Jesus steered them in that direction according to scripture.
      
        But in reality Jesus was more in line with of a Patriarchal society.   And a     more than fair    one!

      replyreport
2. 78

   Seafarer Mamaposted 13 years ago

   I would agree that Jesus leaned toward Socialism over other types of social system for providing for citizens.  He definitely advocated that those with more take care of those with less, and praised those who took care of their "neighbors" by sparing an extra cloak or loaf of bread.

   replyreport
3. 67

   Charles Jamesposted 13 years ago

   Many thanks believers for your help here. All help gratefully received.

   replyreport
4. 0

   Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years ago

   If you read the acts of the Apostles and the early church, you will see that if a man had two fields, he had to give his extra field to a man that didn't have a field.
   
   Also, the early church shared everything.
   
   There are many, many verses in the New Testament that indicate that Christianity is very, very much a socialistic religion.
   
   Of course, that is not a particularly popular or politically correct concept today, so it is side stepped.
   
   Here are many verses indicating that Christianity is the practice of socialism.
   
   http://www.openbible.info/topics/socialism
   
   http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays … ialism.htm
   
   Yes, there are verses where many rich men serve God. That is not the issue. The issue is whether the rich men are prepared to share their wealth with those that aren't. Most give pennies.
   
   As Jesus said that one penny from a man that only had one penny to give gave all he had, but a rich man who gave a penny and didn't even miss it, gave nothing...
   
   Socialism is the norm in the early church.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      You couldn't be more wrong! The idea that Jesus was a socialist is a perversion of the teachings of the Gospel and is purposely done by those with a proclivity towards Marxist ideology, or by those on the left. Here is a good article to explain it further.
      
      http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/ … at_is.html

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Oh, please lady love. I've studied the bible from Genesis chapter 1 to Revelations Chapter 22 and, at one point, because I have excellent long term memory, could virtually place any verse accurately by someone just mentioning it.
         
         I also spent a decade studying it.
         
         I'm not interested in opinions. I used links that actually quoted verses. Those verses very clearly demonstrate the socialistic nature of the early church.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Well would you be interested in the Pope's opinion? Perhaps you know better than he after having studied so hard and all. Memorization isn't understanding.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I think we have a different perspective over here. You believe that is someone holds a particular office, then they must be an authority. I believe that is someone holds a particular authority, then they are a figurehead for what that authority represents.
               
               In other words, I respect the opinions of people who think deductively and evaluate the evidence. I have no respect for those who perpetuate points of view that they inherited from their predecessors.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  You seem to know so much! You even know what I believe! Obviously you are very special since you have an original point of view that isn't taken from any other source and is a conclusion of your own invention! You must be truly an amazing individual! I am so impressed by this that I should align my opinion with yours!
                  
                  Personally, I don't think you even know what socialism is. Perhaps that is where you lack understanding.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Lady Love, that is an emotional response. It was also a personal attack. Mine wasn't. The kind of response you just made is generally made by those who cannot think of an answer to what has been said.
                     
                     Education is about teaching people to think for themselves and to question the status quo. In other words, people who are educated do not accept something is factual just because someone else says it is. They go out and discover for themselves whether it is factual. Education is supposed to teach one to be an independent thinker.
                     
                     If you refer me to the pope as an example of someone who thinks something, then yes, obviously you believe that. Otherwise, why refer me? There's no point.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Well if my response was emotional it might have been for the arrogant tone of your response. You imply that you read the Bible, studied it and you have come to the conclusion that Jesus was a socialist. You support that opinion with a couple of passages and claim it to be fact when it is not! It is but your opinion! You imply your expertise because you studied the Bible and memorized it, yet you don't even bother to read what the Pope has to say! You discount his opinion, excuse me, his analysis of the teachings of Christ as relevant, you imply you better then he, the leader of the Church a man that has devoted his life to the study of such things! Do you not see the arrogance of your position? You're entitled to your view, you conclusion, but please don't pretend that your view is a cold hard fact when it clearly is not!

                        replyreport
      2. 61

         John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Hm yes an article starting with "While I truly tremble at the mere mention of the name "Jesus" in the same sentence with the word, "socialism," " is bound to be open and balanced, no agenda there then.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Agenda? Did you even get past the first line? Or do you just dismiss arguments out of hand because of the source? Did you bother to read the quotes from the Pope explaining Christ's teachings and why they are NOT socialist?
            
            Of course you didn't! Is it because YOU have an agenda or is it because your are a left wing ideologue?

            replyreport
            1. 61

               John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               What do you mean did I get past the first line?
               
               When somebody expresses their extreme bias in the first line there is very little point in passing it.
               
               I really don't expect somebody who states their belief so strongly and so early in the argument to suddenly turn round and suggest that there may be aspects that could be regarded as socialist.
               
               In fact, I did read most of the article and the hoops the writer was jumping through to avoid any hint of socialism were laughable

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  lady_love158posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  With so many discrepancies in your post I'd have to say it is you jumping through the hoops. No matter, you like the other poster I was debating have made up your minds and consider your opinions indisputable fact.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     No, I don't consider either my opinion or available evidence as indisputable fact.
                     
                     However, I don't consider your quoted source as anything other than the desperate attempt to detach Jesus from any accusation of socialism.
                     
                     BTW Discrepancies?

                     replyreport
5. 60

   Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years ago

   Absolutely.  He also loves Muslims and was not born in the U.S.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      He is a disestablishmentarianist. All things will pass away.

      replyreport
6. 82

   2besureposted 13 years ago

   I could have been.  Don't forget the passage where he was preaching to the masses and took the young lads lunch of 2 fish and 5 loaves and blessed it and multiplied he was able to feed the masses . Mat 14:17-20
   
   Now this isn't Jesus but His disciples really did something that sounded like socialism.  It does not seem like a bad thing either!
   
   
   Act 4:34  Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
   Act 4:35  And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

   replyreport
7. 75

   frogdroppingposted 13 years ago

   How did we get from 'was Jesus a socialist?' to 'oh whatever. Leftie'??
   
   It's so bad it's almost funny.
   
   Edit - @ Charles - I don't know. He seemed to like sharing and educating folks regarding distributing the workload and I'd say he had a thing about equality.

   replyreport
8. 64

   Greek Oneposted 13 years ago

   "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s"
   
   Jesus was not a political economist.. either capitalist or socialist.
   
   Indeed, His message was to give up all material possessions willingly.. but not due to any grand economic theory

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Darrke Thoughtsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Sounds to me like he promoted paying taxes... and praying maybe?

      replyreport
9. 67

   Charles Jamesposted 13 years ago

   Thank you all for your contributions.
   
   If it were an easy question there would be no need to ask it.
   
   One line of argument is that Jesus was essentially a religious figure, some of whose actions through pink spectacles look like Socialism. The other is that Jesus was a socialist. As I tend myself to the first line, I really want to hear argument for the second line - or any other intelligent view.

   replyreport