For all their "christianity", republicans in the US are pretty hypocritical.
Jesus actually teached that everybody deserves to get fed and housed. That everybody deserves healthcare. That people should care for other people in their community. That is essentially the core principles of socialism.
More than that, giving food and drink to the hungry and thirsty, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, and giving comfort to the imprisoned, is literally the same as doing those things for Jesus Christ, himself, from his perspective. And, moreover, those who do those things will earn their place in heaven, and those who fail to do those things will be eternally damned to hell. It's not subtextual. It's not ambiguous and up for interpretation. It says very clearly that Jesus separated those who are going to heaven and hell to either side and the distinction between the groups was how they treated "the least" of his brothers and sisters. Matthew 25:31-46.
So, bad news Christian Republicans. Might want to correct yourself now before it's too late.
You are absolutely right. It isn't complicated. A fundamental principle from the teachings of Jesus is that everyone should share their "wealth" (i.e. food, housing, medical care, etc.) with those in need. No one should ever be hungry, homeless, or sick without treatment. It follows naturally from the idea of loving everyone, without exception.
I'm not going to argue the questions about whether Jesus was divine or even existed. I am simply talking about the philosophy that is presented as his by the Gospels. That is the core of Christianity, but it is ignored by a majority of those who call themselves Christians. The fact that it is difficult and calls for personal sacrifices is not an excuse. He never said that it would be easy.
I accept that Christian principles can be viewed as aspirational goals and not an absolute code of conduct, but that is not what we see in the would-be Christians. They have no interest in working toward those goals.
35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
From a theological point of view, Jesus was indeed a socialist. However, he wasn't a socialist in a Marxist sense, he was a different kind of socialist. Christian socialism actually has a very interesting history that goes back quite back in time.
No no no. I see where you went wrong, you were thinking about Jesus from the bible, people dont really believe in him anymore. The Jesus followed today is Supply-Side Jesus, I know it gets confusing since they are both named Jesus.
"44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
46 ¶And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, " ( Acts 2:44-46 KJV).
However, tearing a political philosophy away from its associated worldview leads to trouble.
This is one of the things I find strange about the political parties in the U.S. the Republican party, which seems to claim the majority of members who claim to be Christians, largely espouse a capitalist economic system. Capitalism is much more congruent with a Darwinist world view than a Christian one.
Meanwhile, the Democrat party, at least the more progressive wing, espouse more of a socialist system but seemingly oppose Christianity and claim a world view more congruent with a capitalist system.
Wait until the suckers learn that he doesn't want people to eat animals in the apocryphal writings.
But that's just how Christianity works... Take what fits the bill (Emperor Constantine, Jerome of Stridon, anyone?).
Jesus literally REFUSED to be dragged into ideological politics of his time (John 6:10-15)
He even defied those who tried to put him to test and force a political statement come from him against the current political leader, the Caesar, by trying to have him a forced position on taxes (Mark 12:13-17)
All this makes sense, as he himself said about himself and his followers that they are not part of this world (John 15:19)
He LITERALLY made his teaching revolve around god’s kingdom, not any human ideology (Matthew 6:9, 10)
I mean FUCK, even Satan himself offered him to be the ruler of the whole FUCKING world and he rejected it flat out (John 14:30)
He did care about people, and alleviated the physical suffering of many, but he made clear his and his followers priority should be preaching and teaching God’s word (Mark 1:32-38)
And why wouldn’t he, after all, part of his teachings are that all the world governments and ideologies are to be destroyed. (Revelation 16:14) Every. Single. one.
Yes, including socialism.
So anyone using his teachings to attack whoever and linking him to your ideology, calling him a representative of brand "X" collectivism, should get down from any high horse they think they are, it’s not doing you or them any favor and they clearly don’t know what they are talking about.
Case in point, people talking in here about a hell existing in the bible when there is none. That’s basically all it takes
100%. I've been reading about early christianity for the last 20 months and a major characteristic was shared meals. They were absolutely following a socialist model. But we do capitalism. Woohoo.
Do we really know what the real Jesus was like, what his teachings were, and that they are not just fairy tales created by someone? or changed by someone. I don't think there is/was much socialistic in his teachings.
Christianity is incredibly easy to fake. Anyone can call themselves a Christian with little, if any, blowback. It's the whole 'sinner saved by grace' schtick - which is, essentially, "Yup, I'm a Christian but I don't really have to act like one."
I wish there were more Christianity comms (I've got some Bible shitposts too) but pretty much all of them get brigaded / downvoted by people who don't even follow the subs and by all appearances don't know what a block button is.
I'm no longer a Christian but when people tried to get jesus to weigh in on hot button political issues of his day (probably to entrap him into saying something that would piss off either the zealots or the romans) he told them "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's; render unto god what is God's". The meaning, I take it, is that he was there with a spiritual message, not a political one
Yea, but The Church (or, since you're specifically talking about Gringoland, rather, churchES) are capitalist enterprises - hence you can't expect them to criticise capitalism (even less, capitalists).
It is not really socialism since it is still based on a religious supernatural hierarchy and revelation and not any actual political theories as to how to achieve this without magic, but read literally, it is definitely closer to socialism than whatever basically all of the existing Christian denominations got out of it (with a few notable but not very popular exceptions).
The New Testament has been around for a couple of thousand years. The concept of socialism has only been around for less than 200.
I wonder, if religion survives for another thousand years, what will people then say Jesus taught regarding various other isms that have yet to be constructed.
If anything socialism is Christianism since that's what Jesus taught, not socialism.
Anyway Pope Leo XIII explained it better in the Rerum novarum (distributism not socialism), maybe an Anarchist (on Earth) because there is no ruler but Him, no government but God's.
Jesus was an authoritarian. He believed there should be one being with ultimate power and control who everyone else should obey unquestioningly.
He believed that this being was better than every living person. That any person who disobeyed the ruler should be tortured. That we are only alive, only well, only happy, if the ruler permits it.
Aristotle discussed some ideas central capitalism. Why don’t we start a new cult around him and his ideas? We could eventually use the cult to exploit vulnerable individuals, brainwash innocent people, commit human rights violations, incite people into committing hate crimes, start wars and promote chaos and suffering in general.
Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.
Socialist Jesus is
anachronistic (property+ownership, private vs social don't make much sense 2 kya),
incongruent with most of Christianity and Socialism,
"Thou hast nothing to lose but thy chains! Take all the tools from those that dare to enslave thee and build thy own communities where all of you equally decide what to do!"
Peace and love are not in man's nature, regardless if you are a Christian or a Socialist, or both. "My god will fuck you up if I don't get my money!". That is the twist on capitalism.