IDK, he didn’t call for a violent revolution to overthrow the rule of the Pharisees or the Romans, nor did he tell people to eat the rich or that they’d stolen their wealth. He didn’t even advocate for free healthcare or government welfare programs because he could supply these things by magic, and he was a staunch believer in taking personal responsibility.
I’d say he was a moderate leftist at best. Maybe even a centrist.
Government welfare programs are centrist, they were established in my country by a left-right alliance after the WWII… Jesus advocated something more radical : if you have something that you don’t need, it’s not yours anymore, it’s something you have to give to people who need what you have. It’s basically the end of private property, and not only of the means of production.
But no, he was not violent, that’s true. Is violence a leftist marker? I don’t think so.
Jesus advocated something more radical : if you have something that you don’t need, it’s not yours anymore, it’s something you have to give to people who need what you have.
You got any Bible verses to back that up? Because all I’ve seen is him reminding people that it would be beneficial for them to do so, but he never forced anyone’s hand.
For instance, Matthew 19:21 (also Mark 10:21 more or less the same):
“If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven”
Interestingly, in Luke 19:1-10 there is a story of a rich tax collector whom Jesus pays a visit, which ends with him pledging half of his wealth to the poor (and restoring fourfold any ill-gotten gains), to which Jesus replies “Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham; for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.”
This certainly does not sound like abolishing private property to me, more like responsible ownership and generous charitable giving.
What I think you might be referring to is a passage that I believe is somewhere in the epistles, which describes a certain church whose members voluntarily gave up all private ownership for the benefit of the community, unfortunately I cannot find it right now.
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 1 year ago
IDK, he didn’t call for a violent revolution to overthrow the rule of the Pharisees or the Romans, nor did he tell people to eat the rich or that they’d stolen their wealth. He didn’t even advocate for free healthcare or government welfare programs because he could supply these things by magic, and he was a staunch believer in taking personal responsibility.
I’d say he was a moderate leftist at best. Maybe even a centrist.
zloubida@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Government welfare programs are centrist, they were established in my country by a left-right alliance after the WWII… Jesus advocated something more radical : if you have something that you don’t need, it’s not yours anymore, it’s something you have to give to people who need what you have. It’s basically the end of private property, and not only of the means of production.
But no, he was not violent, that’s true. Is violence a leftist marker? I don’t think so.
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 1 year ago
You got any Bible verses to back that up? Because all I’ve seen is him reminding people that it would be beneficial for them to do so, but he never forced anyone’s hand.
For instance, Matthew 19:21 (also Mark 10:21 more or less the same):
Interestingly, in Luke 19:1-10 there is a story of a rich tax collector whom Jesus pays a visit, which ends with him pledging half of his wealth to the poor (and restoring fourfold any ill-gotten gains), to which Jesus replies “Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham; for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.”
This certainly does not sound like abolishing private property to me, more like responsible ownership and generous charitable giving.
What I think you might be referring to is a passage that I believe is somewhere in the epistles, which describes a certain church whose members voluntarily gave up all private ownership for the benefit of the community, unfortunately I cannot find it right now.