. Jesus is NOT socialist.
Of course, from time to time, someone will make the claim that He is a socialist and will use language found, among other verses, in Matthew 19:
“I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, 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.”
God is an Anarchist and a Capitalist, rather than a statist or a socialist. He is libertarian, not authoritarian.
Consider the birth of Christ and the plot of King Herod to destroy him. Upon learning of the child's survival, Herod orders the murder of every newborn son. The gov't kills every child in the land. Consider the crowd in Mark 15:13 who calls him Messiah and then calls for his crucifixion! Or the parable of the shepherd seeking his single lost sheep by leaving the flock behind (Matthew 18:12) or how Pontius Pilute allows Christs crucifixion - the gov't tortures the individual. What are any of these texts but proofs of God's preference for individualism and abhorrence of the State?
In the vineyard parable, (Matt. 20:1–15) Jesus tells the story of a landowner who hires servants to work in his vineyard. The servants voluntarily enter into an arrangement and negotiate a contract for their wages. At the end of the day the landowner pays each of them the same amount, even though they have worked differing lengths of time. When some of the laborers complain, the landowner answers them, "Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius?" (Matt. 20:13) Then, "Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? Or is your eye evil because I am good?" (Matt. 20:15) What is this statement but an embrace of individual liberty and freedom? What can we discern about contract law from this parable?
Even Luke 14:26 seems to attack the foundations of collectivism in favor of individualism: If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. What is this but a dismissal of the desire to act at the behest of "the family" rather than of the self? And then we have the parable in Matthew 25 where the three servants are given talents. Two mix those talents with their minds, and their labor, in order to create wealth. The third buries his and finds his wealth failing to increase. What is this but a championing of individually creative production and an utter rejection of the avoidance of risk, lest the individual be "cast into the outer darkness"?
Even when we consider the miracles of Christ directly (say in Mark 6:30–44) where buddy feeds 5000 hungry souls by multiplying fish and bread, we find capitalism. Jesus doesn't take the fish and bread available to him and then redistribute it among the crowd, does he? He mixes his own talents with his labor and the resources at his disposal and... viola! Prosperity!
The bible goes in depth on the tragedies that befall the collective world order time and time again, not just in the NT but in the OT as well. Try this if you wish to read more about it.
But I haven't described God's libertarianism yet, have I? Well, allow me to correct that oversight. Shall we start with a verse?
“Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he bent down and wrote on the ground. And in response, they went away one by one, beginning with the elders. So he was left alone with the woman before him. Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She replied, "No one, sir." Then Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin anymore." (John 8: 3–11)
Do I even need to explain this to you? We should recognize that Jesus does not condone the sin that the woman has committed. He shames away the mob, and commands her to sin no more. He also does not suggest that her behavior might not have consequences for her soul. Jesus teaches us the true meaning of freedom: that God grants us the liberty to do as we wish, even to reject him and his laws, but that we also bear the full consequences of our actions. What is this but Libertarianism?
Often times, the critic of God as the Authoritarian will cite OT passages as though they are enough to condemn Christians for believing in Him. Such tactics fail to remember that the NT exists at all. In fact, the entire NT is filled Christ's critiques and attacks on the Jewish proto-State that had, until the coming of Christ, used the Scripture to oppress individuals and collude with the Roman proto-State.
Consider John 18:33-36. In the confrontation with Pilate, Christ dismisses Pilate's questions regarding Christs role in Jewish gov't.
"My kingdom is not of this world"
Over and over we find Christ combating the encroachment of Statism:
“Love one another as I have loved you. Love your enemies. Do unto others as you have them do unto you.”
The Pharisees, the political sycophants they were, hated this message - and so did the Romans. Such a message calls into question every depravity that the State, even in this early form, admonishes its citizens to embrace: war, expropriation, and persecution. Whenever man made laws, or "traditions," challenge the sovereignty of God, does Jesus not openly dismiss them as irrelevant and of no value?
Jesus was very clear about his views on what would lead to salvation and what would not. Jesus condemned many behaviors, like adultery. He also said that “no one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) However, he does not follow that with, “Therefore, if your brother does not come to me willingly, then draw your sword and force him.”
Salvation must be chosen; God did not create a race of slaves. God is Libertarian, not Authoritarian. No amount biblical revisionism will alter this fact.
Distruzio wrote:Hippostania wrote:God and Jesus are what a person wants them to be. Someone thinks that God is an angry communist who wants to torture and kill all bourgeois scum who are oppressing the proletariat, while some other guy might think that God is a happy anarchist fellow who smokes weed and dances in the meadows. The point is, you can't say what something is like because you don't know if it exists, thus it cannot be investigated and claiming that Jesus was an anarchist/communist/hippopotamus is absolutely useless.
My points above are clear enough. The context, I now see, is not so much. I was playing on the bibliolatrous assertions made by so many critics of Christianity and of the bibliolaters within Christianity themselves.
The Bible is NOT an authority unless it is accompanied by appropriate discernment. I am, in the above, using the text in the Scripture the way a bibliolater would, as though my interpretation were infallible b/c I read it and it's there. I was hoping someone would catch that, and you did (). The Bible can be used to say whatever you want. Which is why it's utter bullshit to presume that it is an authority on anything without spiritual discernment.
