IS JESUS A SOCIALIST?

As socialism grows in popularity, the socialist has become increasingly insistent about claiming Jesus as one of their own. Peter Dreier, Professor of Politics, Occidental College, cites two verses in support of this claim:

·       The idea of Christian socialism has a long and proud tradition.  As capitalism emerged in the mid-1800s, many of its fiercest critics based their ideas on Jesus’ teachings. “No one can serve two masters,” Jesus says in Matthew 6:24. “Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” In Luke 12:15, Jesus says, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.’” (Huffington Post, Dec. 26, 2017)

However, neither of these verses say anything in favor of socialism. Dreier wrongly assumes that anyone who is growing tomatoes for market is a capitalist and is serving money before God. He also wrongly assumes that a capitalist is greedy, while the socialist is not greedy. He also seems to think that becoming a socialist will transform our nature for the better. Rather, Jesus’ teaching against having two masters can be easily applied to those who want to create a socialistic heaven on earth. Instead, Jesus had been teaching that God had to be first in our lives, above our commitments to anything else, whether the community, socialism, the State, or even our own families (Matthew 6:33; 10:37-39).

Dreier’s failure to find any verses more convincing than the two he has offered reveals the poverty of his case. He might have mentioned Jesus’ parable of “The Laborers in the Vineyard.” At the end of the day, the Master gave all of the workers the same wage despite the fact that some had worked much longer than others.

However, this cannot be used as evidence for Jesus equalizing wealth. For one thing, this parable was intended to illuminate truths about the “Kingdom of Heaven,” where His people will partake equally of God’s mercies (Matthew 20:1). Secondly, there is a vast difference between top-down enforced equalization of wealth and an employer freely giving all his staff the same bonus.

 Instead, rather than equalizing wealth, it seems that Jesus was ready to increase the disparity:

• “For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” (Matthew 25:29; ESV)

·       And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. (Matthew 13:11-12)

Jesus found no problem that some would be left with nothing, while others would have everything:

• “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear." (Matthew 13:41-43)

Jesus' teachings were based on those of the OT, where we find that God had often blessed His servants with riches, as He had done with Abraham and Job.

Jesus only had the highest regard for the Hebrew Scriptures (Matthew 4:4; 5:16-19) and never spoke against them. These Scriptures taught that the diligent would be blessed by their labors while the slothful would justly suffer need:

• A slack hand causes poverty, but the hand of the diligent makes rich. He who gathers in summer is a prudent son, but he who sleeps in harvest is a son who brings shame. (Proverbs 10:4-5)

Although the Mosaic Law provided many safeguards for the poor, its law would not dis-empower them by providing for the lazy. Instead, it was accepted that both the lazy and the diligent would reap the just fruits of their own labors:

• The hand of the diligent will rule, while the slothful will be put to forced labor...Whoever is slothful will not roast his game, but the diligent man will get precious wealth. (Proverbs 12:24, 26)

In many ways, the OT taught that we should reap what we sow, and this principle had been carried over into the NT (Galatians 6:9).

Were Jesus' Apostles socialists? They had been commissioned to carry abroad Jesus' teachings. Although they often wrote about the need to voluntarily contribute to the needs of the poor, they never enforced income equality. Nor did they teach that the Church should support every needy person among them (2 Thess. 3:10). Instead, widows were singled out for support but only if they met certain criteria (1 Timothy 5).

There was a brief period, following the resurrection, that some of His disciples had voluntarily sold what they had for the common support of the Church. However, one unfortunate couple had falsely claimed that they had given all the proceeds from the sale of their property to the Church. However, the Spirit had revealed to Peter their deception. Therefore, Peter confronted Ananias about his lie:

·       While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? Why is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to man but to God.” (Acts 5:4)

According to Peter, they could have retained their property or even 99% of the proceeds. Instead, their fault was lying. Jesus too emphasized voluntary alms giving. However, this was often to be given as a loan and not as an entitlement (Matthew 5:42).

It seemed that Jesus was in favor of the economic status quo, with its appeals to freely provide for the needy. No one ever accused Him of overturning the Mosaic system in favor of income redistribution. Instead, His remedy for the human malaise was our reconciliation to God through the Cross and not through a new economic vision.

Did Jesus teach us to pursue an earthly socialistic Kingdom of God? He didn’t think that this was possible. Instead, He recognized that this world would always be characterized by suffering, especially for His followers:

·       Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. (Matthew 10:21-22)

Clearly, Jesus had a dismal view of this sinful world and about the possibility of creating a utopia here. Instead, He taught His disciples to invest all their hope in heaven:

·       “Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’” (Luke 13:24-25)

Jesus hadn’t taught His disciples to abandon the world. Instead, they were to love and forgive others. However, He clearly believed that all of their efforts would not succeed in creating a socialistic utopia. Instead, He assured them that poverty would always be a problem:

·       For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them. (Mark 14:7)

While we might decide to devote our lives to the needs of the poor, and Jesus regarded this as laudable, the realities of this world would impose definite limits on what could be accomplished. This is because our problems are not fundamentally caused by our institutions but by us and our love for the darkness:

·       “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.” (John 3:19-20)

Socialism is unable to change our hatred of the light. This would only be changed at the time of Jesus’ return.

ADDENDUM: MY RESPONSE TO A CHRISTIAN SOCIALIST:

I tend to think that 2 Timothy 2:6 harkens back to the OT principle that the hard worker has a right to the fruit of their labors as opposed to the slacker:

• Proverbs 10:4 (ESV) A slack hand causes poverty, but the hand of the diligent makes rich.

• Proverbs 12:27 Whoever is slothful will not roast his game, but the diligent man will get precious wealth.

The socialistic thrust would rule against any income disparity. It would also disdain the model wife:

• Proverbs 31:28-31 Her children rise up and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her: “Many women have done excellently, but you surpass them all.” Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. GIVE HER OF THE FRUIT OF HER HANDS, and let her works praise her in the gates.

However, socialism would deprive her and her family of “the fruit of her hands.”