No, Jesus is not a socialist

WND ^ | October 12, 2006 | Tom Snyder

[Patrick1]

If Christ were a socialist he would have never, ever, called Matthew away from being a tax collector.

[Nextrush]

These "progressive" "Red Letter Christians" are just some of Hillary's hordes in waiting.

[steve-b]

Furthermore, any members of any political party, including Republicans, Democrats, Reform Party members, Libertarians or whatever, who advocate such a socialist system

LOL -- what a glaringly stupid example of false "even-handedness" by spreading criticism across the board no matter how little it applies to some of the people grafted on to the list (for the purpose of making the actually guilty seem a bit less so).

[what's up]

Government welfare is an impersonal, compelled giving by which, incidentally, thousands of workers in the bureaucracy earn a living.

The personal, targetted giving which Jesus advocates is the caring, personal type which is effective.

Because the former is forced and mandatory, it eats up funds which would be used for the latter.

Thus, millions of people go uncared for. A travesty.

[ryan71]

"feed those who are hungry"

True. Go out and feed your neighbor. Where's the government enter into this?

[Disambiguator]

God presents us with three general ways in the Bible to take care of the poor and needy: 1) through the family; 2) through the church; and 3) through individual charity. The applicable passages for these three ways are Deuteronomy 14:28, 29, Numbers 18:24, Matthew 6:1-4 and 1 Timothy 5:3-16.

This is the part that makes liberals nervous, as it requires direct action from them and from THEIR pocketbook.

I saw a great quote about the liberal approach to charity (and I paraphrase), "charity begins at someone else's wallet."

I've been saying for a long time that entitlement programs are not charity, and Christians should not support them. Charity is YOU giving YOUR MONEY/TIME to someone or some non-governmental organization.

Thank you for posting this.

[ryan71]

"...clearly shows that the American welfare state is anti-Christian and unbiblical"

Say it again!

[jude24]

In other words, Jesus is not a socialist. Nor is he a liberal. In fact, in none of the Bible passages just cited, nor in any others I know of, does Jesus, God or even Moses cite the government as the means by which the poor, needy, widowed and orphaned are housed, clothed and fed.

That's not entirely true. Lev. 19:9-10 indicates some sort of societal obligation to ensure that the poor and needy are housed, clothed, and fed. Likewise, Deu. 14:28-29 indicates some sort of social welfare program instituted under force of divine law.

[Michael Goldsberry]

I seem to recall prophecy having something to do with a Monarchy.

[altura]

The parable of the good samaritan is an example. Jesus did not call for a law mandating that the country had to take in people who were assaulted by robbers.

He told the story of one man who decided to help another.

[VRWCTexan]

The selfsame Tony Campolo - who after the Lewinsky scandal blew-up (pun intended)worked so hard to comfort and council the much suffering Billy Klintoon

[rightsmart]

I have to introduce Tony Campolo at a Christian educator's conference in a couple of weeks. I wonder what I will say...?

[Reeses]

This is the part that makes liberals nervous, as it requires direct action from them and from THEIR pocketbook.

The evil force the drives socialism is envy. It's all about taking from others that are viewed as having more money, a big SUV, a nicer house. It is not charity at all, which is the reason leftists are not interested in giving away their own money.

Evil people who envy others accomplishments are the same that flew airplanes into the Twin Towers, killed the Jews in WW2, and nailed Jesus to the cross.

[LadyNavyVet]

How does being told by God to leave a little in the fields to be gleaned by widows and orphans, and being told by God to take a little to the community storehouse for the Levites, orphans and widows translate into a governmental obligation to provide welfare?

God demands that we as individuals help the needy in our midst. There is nowhere in the Bible a requirement for the government to take, under penalty of fines and/or imprisonment, money from one individual and give it to another. In all cases giving to others is a matter of individual conscience--God sets the standard of giving, but nowhere does He give to government the right to define or enforce that standard. In all cases, complying with God's will is an individual responsibility.

Jesus makes it clear that we are judged individually for our actions. If I "give" to others under duress, I have helped no one's soul, including my own.

[unlearner]

The Bible refers to the "poor" differently than we do today.

The Biblical poor were those who had no means to acquire the basic essentials of life - food, clothing, shelter. In fact, even slaves were not exactly "poor". The poor were so destitute that they could not even get a job as a slave because they could not even offer an ability to do manual labor. Often the poor were in this condition due to illness or infirmity such as being crippled or blind. In some cases it was due to aging, such as widows who ran out of money. The only thing they could do was beg and depend on the mercy of others.

The so called "poor" of America generally not only have the bare essentials, they have an abundance - enough food to be fat, a car, a TV, a DVD player, free education (and thus childcare), electricity, and indoor plumbing with running water. A hundred years ago most Americans did not have these things, which illustrates that they are not essential.

In our nation we have the rich, the middle class, the working class (who liberals will call poor), and the truly poor (who are very few in number). (The first three distinctions are relative, in that there is no precise point at which one could be definitively described as any one of these categories.)

I do not think helping the truly poor through individual charity, church charity, or even forced government taxation (even if wrong) makes a big impact on our pocketbook.

What is truly evil is to promote class envy of the working class against those who have more. Using the force of government to steal is at the heart of socialism. Socialism has the outcome of making only two classes: the rich and poor.

[muawiyah]

At the same time Jesus never said "Feed the poor at the point of a gun", yet that's what SOcialists demand of government ~ taxes are, after all, collected at the point of a gun.

[VOA]

This is the part that makes liberals nervous, as it requires direct action
from them and from THEIR pocketbook.

As telemarketers and demographic studies will tell you...
Getting charitable donations (on average) is an arduous task in
socialist paradises like Massachussetts, and relatively easy in
the Bible Belt and redneck South.

[avg_freeper]

My way of looking at it is that it is pure arrogance to believe that just any man or organization could decide how finite supplies of goods and resources can be distributed for everyone.

As a result it is better now for us to have the freedom that capitalism provides to decide for our selves what we need and what we should supply to others.

It's not a perfect system. But only one man, Jesus Christ, will do that perfectly as King.

[TheRightGuy]

our congregation had a guest preacher fill in for a week a year or so ago ...

... the guy preached from the gospels of Marx and Engels calling it "biblical economics" ... I was one who walked out.