Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm a college student and In college we often get into strange conversations and discussions. One particular student brought up a ridiculous idea in which she compared jesus's teachings to communism. At first I thought that the comparison was absurd but being open minded as I am I pondered what she said and found that in a way jesus was a communist/Socialist. However, lets us mind that communist/Socialist's are aeithist in dogma. That aside her logic is somewhat sound. What do you guys think?
The teaching of Jesus are more of a subjective nature than people think (the command to give away possessions were for the personal benefit of the particular individuals {an ancient philosophical stance}-if these have a universal aspect then the poor must also give it all away; to the poor, give when asked of them, etc)-the modern with its embarrassment of the ego has tried to alter this. The acts passage that is used to justify common ownership of property also has the statement (when the liars about the disposition of their property were killed) that the property was owned and the owners were free to dispense with it as they saw fit. This is usually forgotten. Jesus did not advocate a political position except that the kingdom of the world was passing away-I would assume that means its political thought which would also include capitalism, monarchism, technocratic, communism, etc. One was to try to get along in what ever situation one found oneself in.
I think the usage of buzzwords such as "Socialism" and "Communism" have been grossly mis-characterized and overused since the last election. If one only watched Fox News their entire life, you'd be apt to thinking that "socialism" is doing something for someone other than yourself. Most people don't understand socialism, they don't understand the roots of it, the theory of it, or the true nature of it. It's a fancy buzzword people like to throw around in this day and age because pseudo-intellectual right wingers have adopted the words to mean something entirely different than what they really are.
But, to answer your question, I think you are having an essence of what I call "The Horoscope Theory." You take a very broad definition of a very broad category and you try to assign some meaning within that breadth and depth. One could find so called "Socialist" characteristics to almost anyone whose ever lived - especially if you're using some of the more modern day Fox News version of the definition.
Was Jesus really and truly a "Socialist?" No. Not in the classical sense and not in the more modern, pseudo-defined sense. Did he have "socialist" characteristics? Not really. He had characteristics that people now are trying to define as socialist but I hardly feel as though he felt the class struggles of the proletariat necessitating an entirely equal pool from which to draw all technological, economic, and educational resources.
I'm a college student and In college we often get into strange conversations and discussions. One particular student brought up a ridiculous idea in which she compared jesus's teachings to communism. At first I thought that the comparison was absurd but being open minded as I am I pondered what she said and found that in a way jesus was a communist/Socialist. However, lets us mind that communist/Socialist's are aeithist in dogma. That aside her logic is somewhat sound. What do you guys think?
No, communists and socialists are not inherently atheistic. And your friend is quite correct that Jesus' teachings were indeed socialist/communist oriented, and in fact the early Christian church reflected those ideals:
All that believed were together, and had all things in common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
(Acts 2:44-45)
And the multitude of believers had but one heart and one soul. Neither did any one say that aught of the things which he possessed was his own: but all things were common unto them.
(Acts 4:32)
There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. There was a Levite, a native of Cyprus, Joseph, to whom the apostles gave the name Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”). He sold a field that belonged to him, then brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.
(Acts 4:34-37)
The god of the Old Testament also commanded a sociast/communist arrangement:
This is what the Lord has commanded: Gather of it, every man of you, as much as he can eat; you shall take an omer apiece, according to the number of persons who each of you has in his tent. And the people of Israel did so; they gathered some more, some less. But when they measured it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; each gathered according to what he could eat
(Ex. 16:16-18)
Atheistic dogma? Is that even possible? Isn't dogma by its very definition a belief that is not to be disputed or questioned, and thus completely outside of the free thinking and criticism encouraged by atheism?
This is so confusing!!
I think MrBlueSky is misinterpreting the bible.
Like GCS Troop said quote "He had characteristics that people now are trying to define as socialist but I hardly feel as though he felt the class struggles of the proletariat necessitating an entirely equal pool from which to draw all technological, economic, and educational resources."
(This just from a kid's perspective. Was reading the book Loud Silence and got me thinking.)
Socialism means taking by force the excess from some people and distributing it to other people. Jesus taught that one should voluntarily give up your excess to help someone in need. There are subtle, but important, differences; the most important being the voluntary nature of altruism.
Socialism means taking by force the excess from some people and distributing it to other people. Jesus taught that one should voluntarily give up your excess to help someone in need. There are subtle, but important, differences; the most important being the voluntary nature of altruism.
Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world. If it was, THEN would His people fight. John 18:36
So, no, he was not advocating overthrowing existing governments and politicians and redistributing everybody's belongings. He taught no such thing.
You are right. It was ALL voluntary. If you say you love God then love one another, love your enemy, feed the hungry, etc.
Socialism means taking by force the excess from some people and distributing it to other people.
No it doesn't!!
It's economic organization based on either public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources. Simplified, those that produce should have a greater share in what they produce and what is produced should be used for the benefit of all rather than the few...as in Capitalism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
