Was Jesus a Socialist?

[Goshin]

Let me ask a question... I'd like to know where you're coming from. Sangha, Paschendale, and any others pushing the "Jesus was socialist" theme... are any of you followers of Christ? Do any of you consider yourself Christian? Do you follow what Jesus said was the "greatest commandment": love the Lord God with all your heart/mind/soul, and love your neighbor as yourself? Have you obeyed his commandment to repent and be spiritually reborn?

Or are you simply using this issue to try to give Christendom a nice gouge in the eyeball? :mrgreen:

 

[sangha]

Jesus said this to one rich man. One. If you can show me where he commanded in general "ALL rich people must give ALL they have to the poor, or go to hell" then I am all ears.... but I'm reasonably sure He never said that as a general commandment.

Do you really think that Jesus' teachings only applied to those he was speaking to at the time?

Really?

Like many, you're taking one isolated instance and expanding it beyond what was intended. Jesus told the rich man to sell all that he had, "take up the cross and follow me," because the man was hung up on his wealth... it was an idol to him, something that stood between him and God. In other passages, Jesus taught that none should let anything stand between them and Heaven... that if they could not follow God because of the lust of the eyes, it was better they gouge their eyes out than go to hell for being unable to control their idolotry of lust.

Applying what Jesus said to one person to all people is a standard method of interpreting the Bible. I realize that the Talibornagains prefer a literal reading of the Bible (except when they don't) but most people, including most christians, have rejected that rigid method.

And my post wasn't meant to explain everything Jesus said.

 

[sangha]

Well funny you should say that, considering the OP, since the charity of which Jesus taught was chiefly managed by the clergy.

Do you consider yourself a Christian, Sangha?

No, when Jesus said the rich should sell their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor, he said nothing about having the clergy manage the process.

And why do you want to know if I'm a christian. What does that have to do with the discussion?

 

[sangha]

Hm. I shouldn't trust private charity because they aren't big enough to solve the problem of poverty.

I don't see where Paschendale says you should not trust private charity

 

[sangha]

Socialism/Communalism is the default state of families, just as it was common among small tribes and hunter-gatherer-herder bands. It works at that level because the group is small, tightly-knit, interdependent, and slackers face the ultimate sanction: being kicked out to starve on their own or fall prey to other tribes or animals.

On national scales, it doesn't work so well. There's the "free rider" problem. There's the "tragedy of the commons". There's the example of the USSR, China before it began free-market reforms, and heck there is the USA, currently spending its way into cheerful bankruptcy because our politicians are too chicken to admit that we can't keep spending on social programs at this level and survive. Point to Europe if you like: many European countries are in financial trouble and having to implment "austerity programs", cutting social spending, to avoid bankruptcy.

Don't misunderstand me: I think we should definitely act to keep folks from starving to death. In principle I don't object to state governments being involved in "hand UP" programs to help people down on their luck get back on their feet and be self-supporting. I don't object to society taking care of those who are GENUINELY disabled. But a full-blown Socialist State.... that tends not to end well.

It works very well in some of the developed economies of Europe, whose people enjoy a higher standard of living than we do, although not as much wealth.

And our capitalistic system, with its' recurring bailouts for Big Business interests, has just as much of a "free rider" problem as any socialist nation, and suffer far less from the tragedy of the commons. Also, the USSR was not a socialist economy or system. It was a centrally planned version of state capitalism.

 

[Wake]

I wonder if communists have/will use this argument as well..

 

[BDBoop]

Jesus said this to one rich man. One. If you can show me where he commanded in general "ALL rich people must give ALL they have to the poor, or go to hell" then I am all ears.... but I'm reasonably sure He never said that as a general commandment.

Like many, you're taking one isolated instance and expanding it beyond what was intended. Jesus told the rich man to sell all that he had, "take up the cross and follow me," because the man was hung up on his wealth... it was an idol to him, something that stood between him and God. In other passages, Jesus taught that none should let anything stand between them and Heaven... that if they could not follow God because of the lust of the eyes, it was better they gouge their eyes out than go to hell for being unable to control their idolotry of lust.

You're teaching half a sermon and neglecting the rest.

53, and that's the first time I ever heard it was just directed to that one man. Why did they even include it, then.

 

[Thunder]

I wonder if communists have/will use this argument as well..

TRUE Communists don't give a damn about Jesus, Moses, Muhammed, or the Easter Bunny.






...or Superman.

 

[Goshin]

Do you really think that Jesus' teachings only applied to those he was speaking to at the time?

Really?




Applying what Jesus said to one person to all people is a standard method of interpreting the Bible. I realize that the Talibornagains prefer a literal reading of the Bible (except when they don't) but most people, including most christians, have rejected that rigid method.

And my post wasn't meant to explain everything Jesus said.

I don't know of any Christian denomination that teaches "God requires all rich people to give away ALL their wealth to the poor, or go to hell." There's a reason for that.

Do you think "the rich young ruler" was the ONLY rich man Jesus ever spoke to? He spoke with many people who were of all states, including several who were certain high-status, therefore probably rich. Yet the "rich young ruler" in the passage to which you refer was the only one he told to give away ALL his wealth if he wanted to go to Heaven. Why? Because that particular rich man made an idol of his wealth; it was getting in the way of him following God.

This is how that passage is interpreted by most Christian denominations. I find that more compelling than to assume that some random person on the Internet has suddenly figured out something that eluded millions for millenia.

 

[sangha]

I don't know of any Christian denomination that teaches "God requires all rich people to give away ALL their wealth to the poor, or go to hell." There's a reason for that.

That's because Jesus did not say that "God requires all rich people to give away ALL their wealth to the poor, or go to hell." and neither did I

Do you think "the rich young ruler" was the ONLY rich man Jesus ever spoke to? He spoke with many people who were of all states, including several who were certain high-status, therefore probably rich. Yet the "rich young ruler" in the passage to which you refer was the only one he told to give away ALL his wealth if he wanted to go to Heaven. Why? Because that particular rich man made an idol of his wealth; it was getting in the way of him following God.

Right. And the wealthy today are making an idol of their wealth.

This is how that passage is interpreted by most Christian denominations. I find that more compelling than to assume that some random person on the Internet has suddenly figured out something that eluded millions for millenia.

And millions have interpreted Jesus' teachings to mean that if they're rich, it's because God is rewarding them. But millions of other christians have interpreted to mean exactly what I said it meant. As I've said earlier in this thread, the Bible is like a jewel; its' true beauty can only be appreciated by looking at it from many angles

 

[mac]

Luke 18:22

Jesus is offering advice. It was the man's option to do it or not....how many socialists would give the populace the option of giving up 60% of their income?

 

[sangha]

Jesus is offering advice. It was the man's option to do it or not....how many socialists would give the populace the option of giving up 60% of their income?

Many Socialists would have these decisions made through the democratic process

 

[mac]

One could probably reasonably make the argument that Jesus supported ideas designed to promote the welfare of all or most people, supported generalized notions of equality, sharing, and individual responsibility for the welfare of the community; and he didn't put a whole lot of stock in the selfish acquisition of personal wealth at the expense of others. Was he a socialist? I don't see how he could have been, for the simple reason that that concept didn't exist 2000 years ago. You might say that his ideology was not inconsistent with socialism, and could be read to support certain aspects of socialism.

Obviously you'd never hear a conservative argue that Jesus was a socialist, because their ideology would be at odds with such a thing.

All conservatives are Christians?

 

[Goshin]

No, when Jesus said the rich should sell their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor, he said nothing about having the clergy manage the process.

You've been too selective in your reading. Among most 1st century church fellowships, tithes and offerings were brought in and put under the management of the "shepherd" (pastor) and/or Deacons (Elders) in some cases.

And why do you want to know if I'm a christian. What does that have to do with the discussion?

It would tell me whether you have an honest spiritual concern for whether Christians are truly living up to Jesus' teachings, as a fellow-follower of Christ..... or whether you're simply another non-believer who thinks he's found something with which to poke Christendom in the eye.

If you are not a Christian.... why do YOU care what Jesus said about something? What makes you think you know more about this passage of scripture than hundreds of highly-educated theologians and scholars who have commented on it?

 

[sangha]

All conservatives are Christians?

Aderketh didnt say that all conservatives are christians.

 

[BayToBay]

Who cares?

The only political position one can draw from Christ is his support of a strong separation of church and state.

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.

 

[BayToBay]

Many Socialists would have these decisions made through the democratic process

That does not make it any better or optional.

 

[sangha]

You've been too selective in your reading. Among most 1st century church fellowships, tithes and offerings were brought in and put under the management of the "shepherd" (pastor) and/or Deacons (Elders) in some cases.

So what? It doesn't prove that Jesus approved of that. If you want prove that Jesus wanted the clergy to oversee the process, you should provide a quote from Jesus.

It would tell me whether you have an honest spiritual concern for whether Christians are truly living up to Jesus' teachings, as a fellow-follower of Christ..... or whether you're simply another non-believer who thinks he's found something with which to poke Christendom in the eye.

If you want to attack my motives or intent, I suggest you take it to PM. My understanding is that such a discussion is against the rules. Let's discuss the issue, and not the posters.

If you are not a Christian.... why do YOU care what Jesus said about something? What makes you think you know more about this passage of scripture than hundreds of highly-educated theologians and scholars who have commented on it?

One doesn't have to be a christian in order to care (and respect) Jesus' teachings. And I did not see any requirement that I know more than highly educated theologians, etc in order to discuss this on DP, just as you need not be so educated either. We are both expressing our opinions on what the text means. Your argument by authority is inappropriate and discourages civil discussion IMO.

 

[Goshin]

That's because Jesus did not say that "God requires all rich people to give away ALL their wealth to the poor, or go to hell." and neither did I

For all intents and purposes you did, quibbling aside.

Right. And the wealthy today are making an idol of their wealth.

Ah, so you know the hearts of all men, do you? What's on Bill Gate's mind just now?

And millions have interpreted Jesus' teachings to mean that if they're rich, it's because God is rewarding them. But millions of other christians have interpreted to mean exactly what I said it meant. As I've said earlier in this thread, the Bible is like a jewel; its' true beauty can only be appreciated by looking at it from many angles

Do you believe in the Bible, Sangha? Do you believe in the God of the Bible? Since you're so concerned with this particular passage of scripture, are you equally concerned with "... ye must be born again. Except a man be born of water, and of spirit, he shall not see the Kingdom of Heaven"?

Or is this simply "let's see if we can put on over on the Christians by telling them Jesus is socialist" ?

 

[sangha]

That does not make it any better or optional.

Yes it does, unless you're not too fond of democracy and the ideological justifications for democracy

 

[sangha]

For all intents and purposes you did, quibbling aside.

No, I did not. I said nothing about it being required

Ah, so you know the hearts of all men, do you? What's on Bill Gate's mind just now?

I did not say that I know the hearts of all men. I am not going to defend something I never said

Do you believe in the Bible, Sangha? Do you believe in the God of the Bible? Since you're so concerned with this particular passage of scripture, are you equally concerned with "... ye must be born again. Except a man be born of water, and of spirit, he shall not see the Kingdom of Heaven"?

Or is this simply "let's see if we can put on over on the Christians by telling them Jesus is socialist" ?

I am honestly discussing my opinions on what Jesus said. If you think that is in any way inappropriate, I know that you know what to do

 

[Goshin]

So what? It doesn't prove that Jesus approved of that. If you want prove that Jesus wanted the clergy to oversee the process, you should provide a quote from Jesus.




If you want to attack my motives or intent, I suggest you take it to PM. My understanding is that such a discussion is against the rules. Let's discuss the issue, and not the posters.




One doesn't have to be a christian in order to care (and respect) Jesus' teachings. And I did not see any requirement that I know more than highly educated theologians, etc in order to discuss this on DP, just as you need not be so educated either. We are both expressing our opinions on what the text means. Your argument by authority is inappropriate and discourages civil discussion IMO.

Not at all. I'm being entirely civil... I'm asking because knowing where you're coming from with this argument tells me a lot about your motives and concerns. I've noted a trend, among those who are not Christians, to try to use isolated passages out of context to give Christiandom a poke in the eye.

I'm also saying that on one side of the argument are millenia of educated theologians and bible-scholars and their opinions and interpretations. On the other side is... you, and your opinion about a religious teaching of a religion that, I strongly suspect, you neither believe in nor subscribe to.

 

[sangha]

Not at all. I'm being entirely civil... I'm asking because knowing where you're coming from with this argument tells me a lot about your motives and concerns. I've noted a trend, among those who are not Christians, to try to use isolated passages out of context to give Christiandom a poke in the eye.

My motive for discussing this are several. They include, but are not limited to

1) enjoyment
2) curiosity
3) education

I'm also saying that on one side of the argument are millenia of educated theologians and bible-scholars and their opinions and interpretations. On the other side is... you, and your opinion about a religious teaching of a religion that, I strongly suspect, you neither believe in nor subscribe to.

No, my position has just as much support from biblical scholars are yours does, and your suspicions are not the issue in this thread, so I will not be discussing them

 

[Goshin]

No, I did not. I said nothing about it being required

Well... let's back up a couple of pages...

Jesus advocated for much more than simple charity. He proposed that the rich sell EVERYTHING they owned. It was a warning about accumulating material wealth when others were going without the basic necessities

According to Jesus, if you didn't sell off your excess wealth and give it to the poor, you would be damned to Hell. That sounds pretty coercive to me.

Like I said... quibbling aside....

I did not say that I know the hearts of all men. I am not going to defend something I never said

Well, earlier you said "and the rich today are making idols of their wealth"... you don't know what might be an idol to a man until you know him rather well, unless you read minds... or make broad assumptions based on limited data.

I am honestly discussing my opinions on what Jesus said. If you think that is in any way inappropriate, I know that you know what to do

It was a simple question.... you don't have to answer if you don't want to. Of course, a refusal to answer is an answer of sorts in itself.

 

[Goshin]

My motive for discussing this are several. They include, but are not limited to

1) enjoyment
2) curiosity
3) education

Very well.

No, my position has just as much support from biblical scholars are yours does, and your suspicions are not the issue in this thread, so I will not be discussing them

"Liberation theology", I assume? That isn't exactly mainstream.