I am not a Christian, but if I were I would ask myself: how would Jesus vote? I believe Peter has answered this. If in doubt, I would reread The Sermon on the Mount.

The Kingdom of God is eternal, whereas social effects are temporal, thus it is a mistake to think of the Kingdom as a social construct.
Rather, the focus of the Kingdom of God is the individual turning to God and enthroning Him consciously as one's absolute ruler. Justice/Righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit [Romans 14:17] are the attributes of the devotee who submits to God's Kingdom.

Wealth or poverty are the gifts of God, it is foolish for man to believe that they can "fix" the situation by their will alone.

Yes, giving charity, sacrificing one's wealth, is part of the process of turning to God and putting His will first, but while the poor and needy can be helped in this process, this is only a side-effect, not the goal.

Now there is a problem: we can only be charitable by choice. When the poor and needy are helped by the state and our money is taken for that purpose without asking us first, then we miss on this great opportunity of choosing to do God's will by helping His children.

The solution is so simple: just make taxes [for individuals] voluntary!
This will allow us to pay our taxes with joy and devotion, using them to grow in our love of God.
Even if our personal taxes will slightly increase due to the few who refuse to pay theirs, this change is more than worthwhile.
Sadly no political party currently has this measure on its agenda.

Choosing how much tax I will pay is indeed heaven........
Or part thereof.

In one parable Jesus spoke of paying a man who worked one hour the same as others who worked 12. He pointed out that it was the employer's business as to how generous he wanted to be. Hardly socialism. Yes He warned against greed and selfishness but definitely did not endorse robbing from hard working people to give to bludgers or the swamp. Paul actually wrote that if a man was to lazy to work he should not eat.

Hi Runner,

"Paul actually wrote that if a man was too lazy to work he should not eat."

I think that Lenin might have said exactly the same thing. I'm not suggesting that Paul was a sort of Leninist, but that a Tertium Quid, a Third Factor, may be at work: that both Lenin and Paul had authoritarian tendencies.

Joe

This long essays describes how the Esoteric Spirit-Breathing Way of Life as taught and demonstrated by Saint Jesus of Galilee was converted into exoteric spirit-killing institutional Christian-ISM.
http://www.beezone.com/AdiDa/up/forgottenesotericismjesus.html

Plus this related essay too: http://www.dabase.org/up-1-5.htm

Israel Folau quoting from Corinthians

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.

He did not invent his apocalyptic view of the coming judgement day. It has been standard fare of Christian doctrine.

Of course, all through history, the down players of this uncomfortable acceptance of the literal interpretation of the judgement day, and the “coming” of the kingdom of God from on high, have objected.
Like Pete, attempted to soften the landing field for sinners. The same sinners Israel Folau was addressing with the hope of repentance in his heart.

Dan

Let's be honest Daffy Duck.

There is absolutely no evidence a Jesus of Nazareth ever existed.

It makes your theories incredible.

Dan

The Jewish money changers were running a scam out of the synagogue and Jesus exposed it, apparently.

People would come to the temple to pay homage
In order to do this one needed to convert their normal coin to the temple shekel.

Jesus exposed that these people were charging 2 or 3 hundred percent on the conversion.

That's why he tipped their tables over, and that's why they got pissed off; apparently.
He exposed their scam, and their greed.

Jesus spoke out against hypocrisy and corruption. No kingdom or government has matched that standard in the long haul. Therefore the kingdom of Heaven isn't a man made kingdom or a government voted for. None the less Jesus also said to submit to those ruling over you. Even though the people up top are corrupt themselves they have a place and a role to fill until God's kingdom is finally here on earth ruling the nations. They are also under God's rule and His judgement if they don't govern well.

With that in mind vote for who you think will be best, because you trust the politician over the other choices, or because you align with what they stand for. But know that even at their best that they can bring, what they have to offer is not the Kingdom of Heaven. That is still to come.

"There is absolutely no evidence a Jesus of Nazareth ever existed"

There are the writings of Paul (not the OLO Paul!!) who was in contact with people who knew Jesus.

.

Dear Peter,

.

You ask if Jesus was a socialist.

Perhaps he was inspired by Aristophanes’ play “The Ecclesiazusae”, written in 390 B.C., which parodies the society of Classical Athens in a way that could be described as socialist and feminist. In it, Athenian women are depicted as seizing control of Athenian government and banning all private property, as the character Praxagora puts it "I shall begin by making land, money, everything that is private property, common to all."

But that seems unlikely, given the type of life that Jesus led (according to the New Testament) as a carpenter and a preacher. And unlike Praxagora and the Athenian women, he is not depicted as wanting to seize control of the government.

Nevertheless, I suppose it cannot be totally ruled out that Jesus somehow got wind of the basic tenants of nascent socialism and reflected upon them, developing and adapting them to the social and religious environment in which he evolved in Judaea.

Socialism as we know it today did not really take on until the French revolution (1789), and the Russian revolution (1917) – the preceding short-lived English revolution (1688) and the American revolution (1776) not having qualified, strictly speaking, as socialist.

Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect of Judaea under the emperor, Tiberius, convicted Jesus of treason and declared that he considered he was King of the Jews, and had him crucified.

A few high-ranking Jewish authorities who owed their position and power to the Romans, conspired with the Gentile leaders to have Jesus put to death. They are said to have been jealous of him and to have viewed him as a threat to their power and authority.

In other words, Jesus was not crucified for his religious beliefs, per se, but for what was construed to be his insurrectional political action.

But Jesus did not foment “a revolution from below” as you suggest. Jesus, the “revolutionary”, believed he was “the son of God”. He celebrated the “Kingdom of God”. He did not call for its overthrow, nor for that of the Roman Empire.

.

Is Mise.

The esteemed preacher here, thinks the possibility Christ is simply a parable, could not be ruled out.

He has made it a plank, if you like, of his argument, bible stories are parables.

So if Christ and his many exploits can be seen simply as parables, then what is the truth?

Pray tell!

Dan

Dear Banjo,
I am more of a systematic theologian than a biblical scholar so I am a bit dim about the milieu of first century Palestine. It seems that Jesus was an observant Jew with a good knowledge of the OT. The writers of the NT also had a good knowledge of the OT by the way they used it to understand the phenomenon of Jesus. However, all of the NT is in Greek! Why not Latin, or Aramaic or Hebrew? Greek was the common language of the time and was more expressive than Hebrew or Aramaic. That does not, of course, apply to Latin.

You are right about the late development of socialism. Jesus was more about justice in an oppressive time. His source was the OT.

In my understanding, Marx got his idea of the perfect society from the NT and the idea of the Kingdom of God. However, it was a kingdom that was readily distorted by its leaders.

You are also right in saying that Jesus did not foment a revolution against the Roman oppressors. He was not one of the zealots. He also told Pilate in the gospel of John that his kingdom was not of this world. This is not a reference to an unearthly heaven but to a reality that was and was not a thing of human making. This is what I attempted to do in this essay, to indicate that our sense of the kingdom is often in error and that the parable of the kingdom is always more outrageous than we can imagine.
Peter

Diver Dan,
Anyone who says that Jesus did not exist must explain how the entire New Testament came to be. So many writers, so many points of view. How could it possibly exist if its central character is fictitious?

Sells.

Nice to see you shaking hands with all, even the commoners, at the church door.
I'll address the issue with you shortly.
I'm fitting a new boat motor today, and sad to say, it has a priority over Jesus ATM.

Dan

Given that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord it matters little how you define his ideology. Smart people will surrender to Him and receive forgiveness while the proud will be destroyed. Call that whatever you like however the created trying to tell the Creator what's best is super stupid.

.

Dear Sells,

.

You wrote :

« Jesus was more about justice in an oppressive time. His source was the OT »

That could well be, Sells – as the need for justice could also well be just as great today as it was in the “oppressive” time of Jesus. Justice has made considerable progress over the past 2,000 years, but, alas, injustice has too.

Which brings me to the dichotomy between socialism and capitalism which you mention in your article. While these two forms of social organisation are considered antagonistic by those endowed with a simplistic Manichean point of view, in my humble opinion, they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. I consider that they can be complementary, and quite often are.

All life forms interact with each other to a certain degree. They are interdependent. They cooperate with each other and share information and resources in a natural form of social organisation to the benefit of all – driven, no doubt, by the survival instinct endowed on them by nature.

Is that not what we human beings might call a form of socialism, perhaps, natural justice ?

Also, many life forms store resources to see them through difficult times.

Is that not what we might call a form of capitalism ?

Others migrate to more favourable regions as their environment changes, whether it be due to the seasons, natural disasters, or whatever.

As you say, a sense of justice and the OT may well have inspired Jesus. I, personally, am more inclined to think that that is what inspired those who wrote about Jesus so many years after he actually lived, if, indeed, he did live – and I am inclined to think that he may well have – but whether he corresponded to his biblical description or not is another matter.

I prefer to think that he was not only a carpenter and a preacher, but also a very talented philosopher who meditated deeply and wisely on the human condition as a fully fledged member of nature's animal kingdom, and drew his inspiration from that.

.

Dan,

Paul's letters hardly fit the definition of parables.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parable

Sells

Outside the notion of Jesus as a socialist, But emanating from your essay is:

Using the example of a boat motor. The logics of investing in a new boat motor are simple enough.
Resources are exchanged for a chosen benefit of reliability and safety.
But not without a cost.

The real cost of the exchange is measured against the negatives of the repayment of a loan maybe, or a real reduction in the resource of money, which will now be less available for other expenditure.

Compare that example, to trading away authenticity of the kingdom of God/heaven, as you appear to me to have done in your essay above, by classifying the Kingdom of Heaven as a parable.

By doing so, you have removed it from the metaphysical with its own arguments requiring explanation of a subject inside the noumena and phenomena.

Effectively, now the kingdom of heaven is non existent.

What do you gain in the trade of resources, from this approach?

Is Mise.
I'm not ignoring you.

Dan

"Was Jesus a socialist?"

Whats the bigger picture here?
It feels like you're moving around deckchairs on the titanic.

You'd think that someone with a religious perspective would comment on the seemingly real facts that the biblically prophesised 'End Times' are now here.

- At least that's what other Christian mobs are suggesting -

I don't recall at any point calling for state control of businesses?