Jesus: Socialist, Capitalist, or Neither?

[Israelite9191]

Going to a Jesuit school, I have had the good fortune of being introduced to study of the New Testament by Liberation Theologians. This has led me to the conclusion that Jesus was a socialist, which has vastly improved my opinion of the man. The most commonly sighted examples are: 1.) "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to pass onto heaven," and 2.) "The poor shall inherit the earth."

Now, here are the questions: 1.) Was Jesus, and was his message, socialist or capitalist? and 2.) Whether he was a socialist or a capitalist, does this improve or deprove from your opinion of him?

 

[downtown]

Well, Liberation Theology is quite a reach, from the perspective of most of the rest of the Christian world.

If you're reading the bible for Economic answers, you're reading the wrong book.

 

[GinandTonic]

Jesus was clearly a socialist.

All that caring for the needy and expelling the moneylenders.

 

[CaptainF]

Jesus wasn't about money to my understanding, he was about people.

 

[Shadylookin]

He never really discussed economic systems. When he was asked about paying taxes he kind of brushed it off and let the romans decide. Or so the bible says

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Jesus was clearly a socialist.

All that caring for the needy and expelling the moneylenders.

Expelling them from the synagogue. They weren't doing the religious thing. He was all for separation of the church and state. Give unto Caesar and all that...

I don't know about titles like socialist or capitalist so I took capitalist since I doubt anyone will pick that one. This system makes it easier to feed everyone ("the whole be efficient in your works" philosophy that goes along with capitalism). Being a neither makes me a noncomittalist. I don't feel like that right now.

 

[Atlas14]

I am not sure what Jesus actually was, but he would more approve of capitalism than socialism.

 

[Perfection]

Jesus was an atheist

Spoiler Boring Legitimate Answer :

Neither concept really existed, trying to put Jesus in either catagory would be massively stupid

 

[Irish Caesar]

Neither.

It's quite a stretch from "help the poor" to "have the government help the poor."

There's a lot of things that are more important in the New Testament than economics.

 

[GinandTonic]

I am not sure what Jesus actually was, but he would more approve of capitalism than socialism.

Utter nonsense, he was all about looking after the little people, and against the the lesding of money for profit as a sin.

Anyway Im off to bed since its after three, but man when those French Catholics wake up they are going to kick seven shades off poop out of this thread.

 

[Evil Tyrant]

I'm not sure what He was. I doubt He was a socialist, but I also doubt He was a full on capitalist either. I suspect He would lean more towards capitalism though, since His whole premise was to give of your own accord, not for the state to come in and redistribute money.

Jesus was clearly a socialist.

All that caring for the needy and expelling the moneylenders.

Capitalists care for the needy also by giving to charites of their own accord. As for the expelling of the moneylenders, as I understand it, He expelled them because they committed sacrilege by setting up shop inside the Temple, not because they were moneylenders.

 

[Atlas14]

Utter nonsense, he was all about looking after the little people, and against the the lesding of money for profit as a sin.

Anyway Im off to bed since its after three, but man when those French Catholics wake up they are going to kick seven shades off poop out of this thread.

Jesus would not approve others leeching off those that work hard. Capitalism is not about hurting the "little people". Socialism is theft from those that work hard, Jesus does not approve of theft.

 

[Bill3000]

Jesus would not approve others leeching off those that work hard. Capitalism is not about hurting the "little people". Socialism is theft from those that work hard, Jesus does not approve of theft.

If you want to put it in such blunt, controversal and oversimplified strawmen, Socialism would be theft from the rich, not from those who work hard. It is neither a neccessary nor a sufficient condition that those who work hard are wealthy. And, well, you know that Jesus was pretty much entirely against the rich...

 

[ShannonCT]

I cant believe Jesus would have been a follower of any either economic philosophy. An individual doesn't get credit for helping the poor unless he does it of his own free will. The forced redistribution of wealth under socialism is not a good work that any person can take credit for. On the flip side, I cant see that Jesus would approve of a capitalist system that encourages massive accumulation of wealth.

 

[Mauer]

Jesus said love those that don't deserve it, because He loves us when we don't deserve it. Jesus said don't condemn others cause He won't condemn us if we love Him. Capitalist? Socialist? I don't think so.

 

[GinandTonic]

If you want to put it in such blunt, controversal and oversimplified strawmen, Socialism would be theft from the rich, not from those who work hard. It is neither a neccessary nor a sufficient condition that those who work hard are wealthy. And, well, you know that Jesus was pretty much entirely against the rich...

Or, as others would call it "doing your duty" not theft.

 

[Atlas14]

If you want to put it in such blunt, controversal and oversimplified strawmen, Socialism would be theft from the rich, not from those who work hard. It is neither a neccessary nor a sufficient condition that those who work hard are wealthy. And, well, you know that Jesus was pretty much entirely against the rich...

But yet he supported theft...?

 

[Bill3000]

My post wasn't directed at the "theft" part, but the "working hard" part, thus the "blunt, controversal and oversimplified strawmen" which someone else could have probably put in less flowery terms.

Anyway, the point is moot. Jesus existed at a time before both concepts existed at all, though I'd say it does allow for easily justifiable Christian socalism.

It is funny to say that he was a communist hippie in retrospect, though.

 

[Atlas14]

My post wasn't directed at the "theft" part, but the "working hard" part, thus the "blunt, controversal and oversimplified strawmen" which someone else could have probably put in less flowery terms.

Anyway, the point is moot. Jesus existed at a time before both concepts existed at all, though I'd say it does allow for easily justifiable Christian socalism.
It is funny to say that he was a communist hippie in retrospect, though.

Agreed. It really does not matter.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Jesus was not an economist. He paid his taxes and let the rulers decide how to run the economy.