Quantcast

Why Do People Try To Claim Jesus Was Socialist?

Shigyrl but outspoken on my future 2012/04/02 06:29:52
You!
Add Photos & Videos
I have seen several polls quoting verses attributed to Jesus. That many try to claim support their position Jesus was a socialist. Shoot even our president uses Jesus to promote is spread the wealth philosophy. Let's not forget the liberal christians that skew the gospel. Omit some key teachings of christ. Guess what folks Jesus wasn't a socialist. He never expected people to give up their wealth by force or over taxation. He never taught life was supposed to be fair. He did teach people the following. Pay close attention to what he says about the poor. These verses come from the gospel of Mark ch. 14 verses 3-7
3 When he was in Bethany reclining at table in the house of Simon the leper, b a woman came with an alabaster jar of perfumed oil,costly genuine spikenard. She broke the alabaster jar and poured it on his head.

4 There were some who were indignant. “Why has there been this waste of perfumed oil?

5 It could have been sold for more than three hundred days’wages and the money given to the poor.” They were infuriated with her.

6 Jesus said,“Let her alone. Why do you make trouble for her? She has done a good thing for me.

7 The poor you will always have with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them,but you will not always have me.

8 She has done what she could. She has anticipated anointing my body for burial.

9 Amen,I say to you, wherever the gospel is proclaimed to the whole world,what she has done will be told in memory of her.”
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Andrew 2012/04/02 08:17:23 (edited)
    This is what I think.
    Andrew
    +10
    Socialism is government mandated "charity". But, charity is love and you don't love someone when you are forced to help and have no other connection to the poor then money missing from your paycheck. In addition, government "charity" is fraught with abuses which further frustrates the "givers" when it is so obvious. What Jesus advocated was individuals choosing to do the right thing in considering the plight of the poor and helping them of our own free will. He did not advocate governmental mandates that force us to be "charitable"! In Acts, the early church had "all things common". Again, this was because of the agape love the Christians had one toward another, not because it qwas mandated that they do so. Again this is not Socialism because it was of their own free will. Ananias and his wife Saffira died because they attempted to lie to the Holy Spirit of God by claiming to give all of the price of the land which they sold when they only gave a portion of the price. Peter said, Act 5: 4Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God." The sin was not in keeping part of the money, which was within their power, but in claiming to give all when they didn't. Jesus was not a Socialist, but a free market advocate of giving to the needy out of love for them!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • hdculpepper 2012/05/31 06:33:37
    This is what I think.
    hdculpepper
    Our top OPINION posted: "Socialism is government mandated "charity". But, charity is love and you don't love someone when you are forced to help and have no other connection to the poor then money missing from your paycheck. In addition, government "charity" is fraught with abuses which further frustrates the "givers" when it is so obvious. "
    BUT, Republicans claim to be Christian. Which means they should love HIS BROTHER, which means they should love EVERYONE. Including Democrats and those he is "forced to pay."
  • Shigyrl... hdculpe... 2012/08/22 13:46:50
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    Being Christian does not mean love everyone. It means follower of Christ. Just because you love someone doesn't mean you have to like them.
  • boots 2012/04/06 20:51:23
    This is what I think.
    boots
  • Shigyrl... boots 2012/04/07 04:31:32
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    Wrong again but what can I expect from someone that has been infected by liberation theology. That has been attempting for decades to change the narrative of christ. When all he was telling people is that they should act charitably.
  • jimrthy BN-0 2012/04/04 10:28:57
    This is what I think.
    jimrthy BN-0
    Jesus wanted people to forget about money and personal possessions. He wanted to go back to the "natural state" where there aren't any rich or poor.

    Pretty much the Marxist dream idea that sounds so Utopian and pretty.

    Except that it doesn't have anything to do with government. It just boils down to being a decent human being and having minimalist expectations about your living standards. There are *lots* of threads in the NT that support this view of approaching life.

    This one ("The poor you will always have with you") seems to recognize that people will not go back to living in accordance with God's Will.

    The poor only exist in "civilized" societies where someone has locked up the food and rigged the system to force everyone else to actually work to earn it.
  • Shigyrl... jimrthy... 2012/04/04 13:43:20
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    I completely disagree. As another poster noted. There is the parable of the three servants. Each of whom is entrusted with a certain amount of their masters money. The first two are industrious and double the money that was given them. Their master rewards their behavior. The last of the servants only hid the money he was given. He was punished for his lack of drive to be industrious like his fellow servants. He never said forget about your possessions or money. Just don't value them above all else. The verse stating the poor will always exist has nothing to do with a rigged system. Its about the fact period they will always exist. Society will never eliminate the poor as a part of it.
  • jimrthy... Shigyrl... 2012/04/08 13:28:49
    jimrthy BN-0
    Society is built upon the premise of protecting the resources of the rich by making sure the poor don't steal those resources.

    The basis is that we in the middle have enough of those resources that we're scared enough of the poor to support the system without resenting the rich enough to join with the poor to revolt and overturn the system.

    Society is about perpetuating the poor for the benefit of the rich. The natural state of humanity is exactly the same as the natural state of all other animals: we're all pretty much equal. I shouldn't need to scrounge through dumpsters to search for half-eaten food.

    We are shattered as a species into all sorts of us vs. them false dichotomies. Protestant vs. Catholic. White vs. Black. Irish vs. Italian. Republican vs. Democrat.

    All a bunch of crap so that we ignore Rich vs. Poor.

    Don't get me wrong. I intend to get rich so I don't have to worry about this. The system is what it is, and I will play its games to get what I want. This will not stop me from protesting that the system is wrong.
  • Shigyrl... jimrthy... 2012/04/08 17:58:26
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    Then you are a hypocrit plain and simple. You rail against the system yet you intend to use it. To gain some level of wealth. No where in the whole commentary did you say. Upon gaining my wealth I will give back to the less fortunate. This is not about rich and poor and it never has been.
  • jimrthy... Shigyrl... 2012/04/13 23:14:11
    jimrthy BN-0
    I am not a braggart.

    I will not make a big deal on a public forum about the time and money I've donated to food kitchens. That is between me and them.

    I'll advocate certain charities to which I've contributed and worked for (I think "Save the Children" is a *really* good one), but I'm not going to tweak my horn by making a big deal about contributing to them when I could.

    I'm also not going to make a big deal out of just buying meals for people who were hungry when they asked for help. Or the time I gave that crack junkie a ride to her next John after breakfast so she could get her fix. (She just got kicked out of the restaurant, and I didn't want to watch her stumble around in the snow).

    People are what we are. I'm not gonna pass judgment on anyone else.
  • Shigyrl... jimrthy... 2012/04/14 03:22:25
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    Funny how you attempt to appear so humble. Yet you fail in your attempt. Because you are bragging. While it is not your place to judge. If you chose to help those in need good for you. If you do it of your own free will good for you. It should never be forced action. That only breeds resentment. Helping the crackhead to her next john is not something to brag about. Helping her to a shelter or rehab would have been better. Never aide someone in sinful or immoral behavior.
  • jimrthy... Shigyrl... 2012/04/26 15:00:30
    jimrthy BN-0
    +1
    I'm pretty sure that this is the first time I've written about any of that. I only did so because you accused me of hypocrisy for not talking about charity. None of it was meant to brag (I don't consider any of it big enough to qualify as bragging).

    I *totally* agree that charity quits being charity when it's forced.

    I'm an arrogant SOB. I don't deny that. I try to be humble, because I consider that a virtue. And braggarts just strike me as pathetic people who are trying to compensate for their own lacks by telling everyone around them how wonderful they are instead of just being wonderful. We all have our flaws.

    I don't really believe in sin, and I'm pretty fuzzy on morals. I have my own standards of morality for me. I'm not going to try to impose them on anyone else. I don't allow junkies into my life, but I will help them get what they need when the alternatives are worse.

    I have helped people get to rehab when they were ready to go. I know from painful experience that it will not do any good before the addict is ready. Maybe I'm a bad person because I'm willing to let people make their own decisions about their lives. Personally, I believe that makes me a much better person than those who try to make decisions for others.
  • Shigyrl... jimrthy... 2012/04/27 00:54:46
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    +1
    Help people how you see fit. To help is always commendable. To say another's manner of helping is wrong or inappropriate because it is backed by their brand of faith or morals. Is in my opinion a form of judgement. Something for you to consider.
  • hdculpe... Shigyrl... 2012/05/31 06:45:56
    hdculpepper
    +2
    Recently I was having a "discussion" with a Southern Baptist friend of mine and I asked him how he could reconcile his well-to-do lifestyle with the verse in the Bible in which Jesus says, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God." His reply almost floored me. He said that The Eye of the Needle was a gate leading into Jerusalem which was notorious for being almost impossible to get a camel through, which is UNTRUE.

    According to Matthew, a certain rich young guy comes to Jesus and asks what he has to do to have eternal life. Jesus says it's simple: keep the commandments. The young man asks which particular commandments and Jesus says the ones about not murdering, stealing, lying, or committing adultery; honoring your mother and father and loving your neighbor as much as you love yourself — those commandments. The kid persists and says that he has always done those things, even when he was a child; there must be something else he needs to do. Jesus says, "Okay, I'll tell you what: if you want to be perfect, sell what you have, give the proceeds to the poor and come follow me." This is thought to be a suggestion that the rich young man was kidding himself if he thought he had kept the law perfectly. Odds are, like ...













    Recently I was having a "discussion" with a Southern Baptist friend of mine and I asked him how he could reconcile his well-to-do lifestyle with the verse in the Bible in which Jesus says, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God." His reply almost floored me. He said that The Eye of the Needle was a gate leading into Jerusalem which was notorious for being almost impossible to get a camel through, which is UNTRUE.

    According to Matthew, a certain rich young guy comes to Jesus and asks what he has to do to have eternal life. Jesus says it's simple: keep the commandments. The young man asks which particular commandments and Jesus says the ones about not murdering, stealing, lying, or committing adultery; honoring your mother and father and loving your neighbor as much as you love yourself — those commandments. The kid persists and says that he has always done those things, even when he was a child; there must be something else he needs to do. Jesus says, "Okay, I'll tell you what: if you want to be perfect, sell what you have, give the proceeds to the poor and come follow me." This is thought to be a suggestion that the rich young man was kidding himself if he thought he had kept the law perfectly. Odds are, like most of us, he loved himself a little bit better than he loved his neighbor.

    Anyway, the kid hears that and goes away sadly, "for he had great possessions" (Matthew 19:22). Then Jesus utters the famous line (Matthew 19:24) about how hard it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

    Next, the history and archaeology. The notion your Baptist friend has picked up apparently comes from a single ninth-century commentary asserting that in first-century Jerusalem there was a gate called the Needle's Eye which a camel could only get through on its knees. (Sort of like Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: "only the penitent man will pass …") A cute allegory, but there's no archaeological or historical evidence for the existence of such a gate.

    There's a good brief discussion in the article on "kamelos" in Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 3, pp. 592-594 (one of the standard works on New Testament language). TDNT, and other commentators with an interest in history, point out several parallels in later rabbinic language about the impossibility of getting an elephant through the eye of a needle: it's a way of describing something so difficult it's grotesque.

    So the "Gate of the Needle's Eye" notion has no firm historical basis. It looks like a way of getting around the plain (but inconvenient) meaning of the text.

    Setting the text in the whole New Testament context, wealth is consistently presented as problematic. I suspect the modern notion owes less to the Bible than to the Puritan notion that success in economic life was a sign of God's blessing.

    Now, the theology. The message was viewed by the disciples as pretty bleak. In 19:25 — just after Jesus uses the comparison — the disciples respond, "Then who can be saved?" "By human power, it is impossible," says Jesus. Then he offers a glimmer of hope: "With God, anything is possible." Even the salvation of the rich. As a miracle.

    On the other hand, it would be equally dangerous to argue "I'm poor, so I'm okay." The words of Jesus aren't intended to give anybody a false sense of security. My friend the pastor adds, "Apart from the mercy of God, we're all done for."
    (more)
  • Annie~Pro American~Pro Israel 2012/04/04 02:06:55
    This is what I think.
    Annie~Pro American~Pro Israel
    +1
    Liberals are desperate so they try to persuade people to their Marxist side by using Christianity. Apparently, they have never read and studied the bible.
  • Muskoka 2012/04/03 20:22:34
    This is what I think.
    Muskoka
    FIRST. this topic does not belong in NEWS AND POLITICS.

    Why are you alwasy trying to shove your religious views down the throats of everyone?

    Second, there never has been any words attributed to Jesus as not a single word was ever recorded during his life time. Every single word was made up at least 30 years AFTER his death.
  • Shigyrl... Muskoka 2012/04/04 05:21:44
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    One this topic is news. Either last month or in February Salon had an article calling Jesus a socialist. Two I am not shoving my religious views on anyone. I am disputing the arguments made by those who say otherwise. If you don't like the topic. Not my problem. I am free to express myself in a public forum irregardless as to how my chosen topic offends you. Thirdly there is this apparently little known practice called oral tradition. Not to mention Christians believed the apostles were led by the holy spirit. That they never had to be concerned about forgetting to pass on the teachings of Christ. So whenever his teachings were put on paper really doesn't matter. The Holy spirit is the guiding force. Not men contrary to your own false understanding.
  • Muskoka Shigyrl... 2012/04/06 20:45:50
    Muskoka
    1. Opinions about religion are definitely not news! There is no news related article to support your claim to that.

    2. There are huge amounts of YOUR opinions in the post here and a very long rant that goes along with that.

    3. I do not care what the topic is, just put it in the correct place.Opinions are NOT news.

    4. The only false understanding here is those who are willing to believe in superstitions, fantasies, talking snakes, apples with magical powers and fictional characters with super powers.
  • Shigyrl... Muskoka 2012/04/07 04:39:17
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    First off if it is in a news oriented publication it is news. Two there is not huge amounts of my opinion on this blog. Three your pissed because I refuse to be allow you to come on my post and attack my right to post this in any forum I choose. Four as I stated before what you want or your issues about this topic don't mean jack to me. No one asked you to comment on this thread. No one told you to even read it. You took it upon yourself because you take issue with the subject. As a christian I am sick of ignorant folks like you wanting to shut people like me up. As I say on my personal page you can kiss both my right and my left cheek, and I am not referring to the cheeks on my face. Don't worry about soul. I will pray for forgiveness for having to respond to you like this. I am not a turn the other cheek kind of person christian.
  • hdculpe... Shigyrl... 2012/06/02 09:17:05
    hdculpepper
    I'm pissed because I keep having to read your terrible grammar while you try to prove to people how "smart" you are.
  • Mikel_mad2002 2012/04/03 19:58:34
    This is what I think.
    Mikel_mad2002
    In the book of Acts, it says the early Christians lived in a society where there was no private ownership and everyone shared with their "brother." Many point to this and say that the early Christians lived in a socialist utopia.
  • Shigyrl... Mikel_m... 2012/04/04 05:25:17
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    The book of acts are not Christ words. That is what this blog is about. What Christ said and taught people. He never promoted no private ownership. Nor did he require that those who follow him share with their brother. If they did anything it was by his request and of their own free will. Not some collectivist group ideology.
  • Mikel_m... Shigyrl... 2012/04/04 06:34:07
    Mikel_mad2002
    True, Christ never said anything recorded in the bible about these things. However, the bible itself is inspired by God.
  • Shigyrl... Mikel_m... 2012/04/04 13:45:26
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    So what is your point? Its the inspired word of God. There is still no reference to a collectivist Marxist or socialist ideology being taught.
  • Mikel_m... Shigyrl... 2012/04/05 13:06:40
    Mikel_mad2002
    My question is If Jesus never said these things, why did the first Christians live that way?
  • Shigyrl... Mikel_m... 2012/04/05 17:27:31
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    I think what so many don't acknowledge because christ name is given to his followers. Is that God did not just use christ to spread his message or his teachings. He used many people. Their message because they followed christ or were taught by christ are included in the bible.
  • Angi 2012/04/03 17:49:58
    This is what I think.
    Angi
    I don't think Jesus was a Socialist I think he was a Communist and I mean pure communism, where everyone is equal.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/03 18:35:41
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    He wasn't a communist either sweetie. Communism does not allow for belief in a higher power. It does allow for free will. When it comes to equality in christ teachings as noted from verse 7 in my blog intro. He said there would always be poor for those who wish to help. Try again sweetie.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/04 23:57:13
    Angi
    The last part of your comment, just because Jesus knew there was always poor to help dosen't mean he wanted it that way.
    If Jesus wanted everyone to be equal in the sight of God what is it, it certainly is not captialism. Also the states that rule by communism see themselves as the supreme leaders. That is not what I meant.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/05 17:34:34
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    Christ wasn't talking about economic equality. That is what you fail to understand. He was talking about Gods love for us. In fact economic equality is not found in any part of the bible. While you may not have meant that christ is like a communist leader. The fact that you don't get in order to be a communist. You would have to abandon any belief in a higher power. Anything being greater then humanity. That is not of christ.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/06 13:29:52
    Angi
    +1
    In the ancient past when people were living as hunter gatherers they looked to Gods but practiced as form of communism where there were no supreme leaders. I think Jesus was before his time, the thing is he had time for everyone and he seemed to me to see people equally and not by any monetary sense.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/06 15:39:33
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    That is the way he still is. The way he expects all who follow his way to be.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/07 22:15:27
    Angi
    The problem is the world is not like that.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/07 23:57:53
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    The world is just more modern. Nothing else is all that new. I think that is the fatal mistake people make. Assuming a manner of thought or behavior has never existed. The reality is we always end up repeating past behavior.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/08 14:09:04
    Angi
    I agree with that the only thing is we have new technology now that makes that past behaviour more dangerous.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/08 18:01:46
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    So what we have new technology. That is why we have moral teachings handed down through a faith practice. It is when people think they are so modern and intelligent. They no longer need the limits of faith and moralistic teaching. That those modern weapons become dangerous. Men no longer have the line drawn telling them they have gone to far.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/09 16:02:21
    Angi
    The need for power seems just as much seductive to some as it ever was. The thing is the moral compass in some people is not there or barely there.
    Sometime on here so many people castigate the poor when many times the rich are getting away with murder.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/10 12:49:16
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    I don't think being poor is the issue. I think the issue is that because one is poor does not mean one is excused from working. Which is what welfare has allowed many people to do. There are far to many of our nations poor that no longer have drive. The rich aren't getting away with to much unless your Warren Buffet refusing to pay taxes.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/10 18:47:01
    Angi
    +1
    I stick to my previous comment. The welfare issue is just a cover for some to have ago at someone on tough times. Some people always need to feel superior. Also I think kicking people on welfare etc is a gimmick for some politicians, a easy target. No one says how they are going to create jobs. If the wealthy are so good at creating wealth how come there are no jobs?
    With respect I disagree with you.
  • Shigyrl... Angi 2012/04/10 22:34:26
    Shigyrl but outspoken on my future
    There are no new jobs because government has become hostile towards business. The fact is the vast majority of welfare recipients are not experiencing hard times. They are generational recipients. Agreeing to disagree is cool with me.
  • Angi Shigyrl... 2012/04/11 00:07:41
    Angi
    +1
    Well we are still disagreeing. I disagree on the majority of what you wrote here, but I can agree on your very last sentence.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/18 20:40:43

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals