Uhhh… Some Republicans are unironically saying this stuff right now.
I’m pretty sure this is just regular news.
Jesus has always been fairly liberal and borderline to actually socialist. He literally said rich people are more likely to go to hell because they cause problems for the poor by not helping them, and told someone rich that it’s not good enough to be a nice person, but to actually follow him, that he had to donate to charity.
He also hated and actively fought with organized religion, and especially profit-driven organized religion. People say stuff like “What would Jesus do.” but he made himself a whip and used it to chase people out of a synagogue and flipped tables because they were trying to profit off of religion like they were an extortionate business.
Hell, even the messianic prophets like Isaiah are very socialist. I would honestly say that parties like one of the Christian Socialist parties would better fit his stated ideologies than any conservative party. People have the wrong view about Jesus because Republicans and similar parties misrepresenting him, but he HATED people like the Republicans and Mega-churches.
Jesus was all like, “Love you enemies and be kind to those who use you.” but then turned around and said stuff like, “You brood of vipers, you are sons of your father the devil, and how can you be saved from the fires of hell?!” to the leaders of the church at the time. Which shows you how much he hated and was angry at them, that he didn’t even try to reconcile with them, which is why they assassinated him later.
Note than I’m not Christian (anymore) but I spent a long time as one and I learned a lot, and the biggest think I learned is that Republicans are not only not Christian, they actively misrepresent Christ and everything Christianity is about.
Does eating the Onion count if what’s in the article is happening irl?
Liberal?
The mans straight up socialist
Zero books recently published a Marxist (hot)take on Jesus in the book Jesus: A Life in Class Conflict that might be of interest to people.
I haven’t read it yet so idk if it’s decent or not.
He was a divine right monarchist. He didn’t once talk about seizing the means of production, and I don’t think his healthcare plan of “laying hands on everyone” is scalable to today’s population!
Being anti-authority simply doesn’t mean the same thing when the authorities are the Romans.
I have a rebuttal but simply no time to type it up unfortunately. The core idea is that translating the teachings of a middle eastern rabbi almost 1900 years into the future and comparing them to a western European economist is going to be difficult so don’t read too much into it.
The teachings of Jesus weren’t macropolitical and any government form claiming to be “the way Jesus would have wanted a country run” is wrong.
When James spoke of helping the poor, he said, “is is not enough to say ‘be warm and well fed’, you must actually give him food and clothing”. He might also have said, “it is not enough to say, ‘be healed!’, you must also pay his medical bill”.
Also, the “divine monarchist” point is a weird one. When asked about it, Jesus asserted that his kingdom is “not of this world”. And when the Israelite demanded of them relief from the anarchy of the period of the Judges in the form of “a king like the nations have”, the response was “don’t you already have an even better one?” Which is what John Locke cited when writing against monarchy as practiced at the time.
