• MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days 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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days 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.

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          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.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    4 days ago

    He wasn’t the first person to get in trouble with the establishment by suggesting charity and kindness.

    He wasn’t the last either. And we keep exiling or executing them all.

    Even if you’re not a believer in miracles, the bible tells us that this is not a new problem; The public and established authorities have been disregarding the impoverished, the foreigner, the widow and orphan since time immemorial, that civilization gets subverted time and time again to preserve old power structures that no longer serve the community (and suffer because they need a healthy community to survive)

    Oh and Free Palestine, Death to Monarchists, No War But Class War

    • pachrist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.