Posted on 11/02/2008 8:54:30 AM PST by SeekAndFind
While I truly tremble at the mere mention of the name "Jesus" in the same sentence with the word, "socialism," this question is one of the central issues of this presidential election, with Barack Obama a convert to the Marxist Black Liberation Theology practiced by Jeremiah Wright. And I believe it deserves consideration.
Of course, who am I to even attempt to answer such a question? I've spent two days now trying to figure out where to begin.
After all, Jesus preceded Marx historically by nearly 19 whole centuries. In addition, Marx built his entire socialist philosophy on the initial premise that God was merely a human delusion, and the second that religion was nothing more than an "opiate of the masses."
Therefore, any attempt to make Jesus a socialist begins with many contradictions.
As Pope Benedict XVI has written:
"Let us recall the fact that atheism and the denial of the human person, his liberty and his rights, are at the core of the Marxist theory...Moreover, to attempt to integrate into theology an analysis whose criterion of interpretation depends on this atheistic conception is to involve oneself in terrible contradictions. What is more, this misunderstanding of the spiritual nature of the person leads to a total subordination of the person to the collectivity, and thus to the denial of the principles of a social and political life which is in keeping with human dignity."
Both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have had to confront various forms of liberation theology and socialist interpretations of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And both concluded unequivocally that all such attempts at transforming Christianity into a political creed, giving special favor to the materially poor, was like mixing oil with water. They simply do not mix.
As Pope Benedict XVI explains further:
"In its positive meaning the Church of the poor signifies the preference given to the poor, without exclusion, whatever the form of their poverty, because they are preferred by God...But the theologies of liberation...go on to a disastrous confusion between the poor of the Scripture and the proletariat of Marx. In this way they pervert the Christian meaning of the poor, and they transform the fight for the rights of the poor into a class fight within the ideological perspective of the class struggle."
So, what is the Christian meaning of the poor? It is simply that there are a host of ways to be poor. And according to the Christian faith the worst form of poverty is not material; it is spiritual. One can be rolling in money and material goods, but be spiritually impoverished. One can be materially poor as dirt, but spiritually rich.
Jesus did make many statements about the virtues of being generous with one's own material wealth, whether it be great or small. However, the innate crux of every one of Jesus' admonitions to give to those less fortunate was freedom. Unless the deed was done freely, according to the giver's own free will, there was no blessing in the deed at all.
Today, the faith component of Barack Obama's candidacy rests upon this one particle of Jesus' ministry, that by coercively "spreading the wealth" to all by means of a state collective distribution center we will somehow achieve the kingdom of Jesus on earth. In this belief, Obama is backed by a host of religious left people of a host of faiths, most predominantly those claiming to be Christian.
Much of the theological component to the Christian left's support for Barack Obama is found in Matthew 25:31-46, which refers to the Judgment of the Nations at the prophesied Second Coming of Christ.
Matthew 25:31-32:
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats."
The Gospel writer then goes on to define how God will separate the "good" nations from the "bad" nations, based upon how each nation has treated the "least of these" among them. These "least" are enumerated by Matthew as the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the ill, and the imprisoned. In the Gospel, Jesus tells the nations, when you did good to these "least" you did it to me, and you will be deemed good and worthy of the God's kingdom.
This judgment of the nations was to occur at Jesus' Second Coming. According to Catholic Biblical commentary, the definition of the "least of these" described in Matthew was not absent theological meaning. Although there is some disagreement over the authentic meaning of these verses, "a stronger case can be made for the view that in the evangelist's sense the sufferers are Christians, probably Christian missionaries whose sufferings were brought upon them by their preaching of the gospel."
The real problem with assuming that all of these merciful works can be taken at face value and given a purely political meaning is that these words were intended to apply to Christian missionaries carrying out the Great Commandment given by Jesus immediately before his Ascension into heaven.
And what was that Great Commandment?
"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."
Gospel of Mark: 28:18-20
Personally, I think one could write volumes about this intersection of faith and politics. Indeed, volumes have been written. And what we are left with is still the very question that Jesus posed to the Apostle Peter:
"Who do you say I am?"
Kyle-Anne Shiver is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. She blogs at commonsenseregained.com
“Reverend” Wright is not a Christian.
This question seems to come up from time to time, and frankly, it’s stupid. Jesus was not a socialist, an Jesus was not a capitalist. Where we (especially me) fall so short of Jesus’ example is that we place more importance on earthly material things than on heaven itself.
I detest this question almost as much as “what would Jesus do”. If Jesus believed in socialism, his teachings would promote socialism and his followers would be socialist, THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
you don't own all the lakes and determine what someone eats or just give him the fish...that makes him your slave.
Jesus taught that the compassion to share comes from the individual through His teachings and the love of God. Conservatives consistently give more to the poor without a mandate from the government. There’s no scripture that says the pathway to heaven is through paying your taxes.
Jesus' preceeding quote leads me to believe that he was NOT a socialist.
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword.
were references to spiritual conflict, not the clumsy human-all-too-human desire to subjugate others to one's will.
God expects us to give out of the goodness of our hearts - redistrbution of wealth takes away that capacity as the money we ought to be allocating to the charities we choose gets taken away and given to ACORN and Planned Parenthood. Jesus was not against paying taxes but he was definately not a socialist.The rich may have a harder time getting to heaven (camel through the eye of a needle) because of the temptation of keeping hold of all of your money and not counting it as a blessing to pass on, however this generation of lazy people who demand something for nothing are gunna have a heluva time getting into heaven for exactly the same reason but they have not even worked for their money!
Mel
What in what I posted could have possible led you to think I thought otherwise?
and to email to the regulars in our media list - and to everyone in your email address box - and ask them to also. They truly hate whites and intend to rule - and to make whitey pay. Read it in their own words.
Here is my email to the media and friends:
“ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cA0GEV1ibY&eurl=http://maggiesnotebook.blogspot.com/2008/04/im-speechless.html
Are you all such wusses that you won't tell the people what the people have a right to know?
Kudos t Glen Beck - at least he brought it out months ago.
What has happened to the premise for a Free Press: the people's right to know?” ARe you afraid to show the truth because you're swallowing the Kool Ade that to even mention the word ‘black’ will get you condemned as ‘racist?” You don't’ mind being controlled through these Socialist tactics?
Are you honest enough to show this video now - or do you not mind living under Socialism”
************okay folks. Time to step up and not just sit here at the keyboard nattering.
Take 5 minutes to email this - using “the formula”
the formula of the networks: The office people that screen the emails only pass them on when they get X-amount on a given subject.
So this is OUR part - WE the PEOPLE - in protecting our freedoms.
and the McC/Sarah campaign at:
info@McCainPalinVictory2008.com
and deputy campaign manager
Be sure to add your name and town and email - or they won't read them.
IMPORTANT when emailing. they won’t read mass emails - SO,
put just one email add in the “to” line then click on BBC at the end of that line. a BCC line will open just above subject line. copy paste the rest of the addresses in there and each recipient will see ONLY their name - and in the subject line make reference to Obama was taught...
Let’s make it happen. This is our part in protecting our freedoms = WE THE PEOPLE - we act now or get ready for Jack Boots and Brown Shirts...Obama already has his personal police force plans ready
>>Interesting that President Bush, in one of his addresses to the nation about the current crisis, used the term “democratic capitalism”
Most of GWB’s speechwriters have been neoconservatives (Frum, Gerson, etc) who were greatly influenced by the political philosophy of Irving Kristol, Michael Novak, Norman Podhoretz, and others who thought that capitalism was a socially beneficial economic system when counterbalanced by a modest welfare state and democratic institutions.
I do not fully agree with these thinkers, but their ideas have been influential in conservative circles.
Jesus taught charity from the individual through one’s own will.
Marx teaches charity by the forced imposition of the state. The indvidual means nothing according to Marx.
-—If you believe that a poor person should not suffer because he can’t afford treatment are you a Socialist, a Capitalist or a Christian?—
What a great lefty talking point.
Of course its not about the belief that the poor should not suffer, its how this suffering can best be addressed. Christians founded hospitals and cared for the poor from the beginning of Christian history.
Its on how to best address the suffering of the poor. Christians believe that charity benefits the giver as well as the receiver. Socialists believe that there must be government coercion to help the poor. If the elite Socialists live well while coercing the middle class in the interests of the poor, well that’s just the socialist model. Note how little Socialist Obama gave to charity before he was running for president. Note how Kim Jong Il lives a decadent lobster-laden life while his poor people eat grass and starve by the millions. Note how the Russian nomenkatura were able to shop at exclusive stores.
Hope you don’t believe the myth that Socialists have concern for the poor, its just silly claptrap meant to gain and maintain power.
Socialism, and, indeed, all leftist thought, is of and from Satan.
Any other questions?
JUDAS WAS THE RADICAL POLITICAL ZEALOT.
Those who warp christianity into political socialism are following Judas not Jesus.
The John Birchers figured out this “Jesus was Marxist” ruse a long time back.
I remember doing research on it.
The demonic lie of Marxism is a counterfeit to the words in Acts of the Early Church of the first century where
“They held all things in common, as each man had need...”
But this is VOLUNTARILY giving and sharing and doing this sort of Christian community living.
To have the State FORCE you to give and share by the point of a bayonet or gun is NOT God’s way or will.
Forced charity is not charity, it is tyranny.
Sorry Obama. You lose.
EXCELLENT!!
I’M ON IT!!
……and Jesus said, What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take custom or taxes? From their sons, or from strangers? Peter said to Him, from strangers. Jesus said to him, Then truly the sons are free.
- Matthew 17:25-26
Maine-iac,
Thank you for all the work you’re putting into pings and posts! Just want to make sure you know it’s appreciated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.