Was Christ a communist?

well, we know he wasn't an anarchist...i think it's just too easy to say that with how much he supported other people that he lived in a communistic manner. but we say this because he doesn't talk about having a house. he said he had no home city, but he never said he didn't have a house. but what does not having a house have to do with being a communist anyways?as to early christians, i think being more interested in other things than profit and property and becoming practically hobos doesn't really have anything to do with communism either. communism is an economic process. it's a theory of redistribution of wealth. but it means much more than charity donation.jesus told one man to sell all he owned and give away the proceeds. this is not communism; this is taking on a life of poverty and living to serve others. communism is working and sharing your wares or produce with the community.i don't buy for a second that to be a christian you have to be a communist or live in abject poverty. if you buy the scripture, paul doesn't support that, at least not with his words. also, consider all the wealthy businessmen in jesus' family, arimethea, magdalena, whoever had the wedding... it is vital to be more concerned with others than with self, i think, but that doesn't preclude having a business or making a living. but then many christians don't even give to charity beyond their tithe.

yes, and if you'd actually read my post, you'd know that i was talking about something completely different.being self-sufficient is an honorable goal. but you didn't ask if early american christians or benedictine monks had communistic societies, you asked if jesus was a communist. i answered your question.

there's nothing communist about giving away all you own and living off the kindness of others.

haha. it can be done.still not a communist, though.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

i completely agree. i'm just saying that the premise of the thread is whether he was a communist. clearly he was not.but you can't just pick out the things he said about selling all you own. you have to take it in context of the reality of his family and people he associated with and with other things he said and said about him. his uncle was the richest tin merchant in the world. his lady friend was also a phenomenal business woman and probably his biggest source of funding, whatever the nature of their relationship. mary and martha kept their own home and were still held in high regard. he will never ask more of us than we can bear. some of us can bear to live on meager means. some of us need to have a car. but none of us has an excuse against giving to those less fortunate. even the widow gave her very last mite. also, we are called to work and be responsible and provide for our families. so it is that there is a role in the family of god for those who can give all they own and go to the streets and care for the dying and also for the successful businessman who starts a foundation to heal the world. whether you are mother theresa or bill gates, you have a job and he has given you the tools to serve him. should the bill gates types live in a shack and cut out all their spending? why? god says he sometimes chooses to bless his followers financially. abraham was reasonably well off. jacob probably was since he could afford to move his family to egypt during the famine instead of staying and starving like the rest of the people there. job too had a pretty household.but human charity does not equal communism. communism is necessarily a nationwide economic program. jesus was demonstrably for acting outside of the government system. pay your taxes and then give to the poor also.

no. not at all.sharing is not a government program. the benedictines have a government. sure, a small, local government, but jesus specifically acted outside of any form of government. communism is a government instituted equalization of income. yes it's usually some kind of revolving door low-level oligarchy of sorts, but it is run by a government. this idea of a bunch of people who randomly live near each other and give each other stuff is silly. a barter system is neither communist nor is it what jesus was into.did jesus tell the rich people in the crowd on the hill to give their money to the poor guy sitting next to them? no. he fed everyone (i think because the markets were closed, right?). did he institute an income equalizing system among his followers? nope.

precisely. and after we have given according to our conviction, we will be judged by our intentions. he will decide if we have given what he told us to give.my general policy is to give when i have the opportunity and the means. thus, i haven't failed to give when i ought to have. but i also judge my donations wisely so that it is not wasted. i don't give say, to the christian childrens fund, because they have all those fancy ads. also, i don't think aid should be predicated and dependent on religious training.

but believing in the abolition of the state and actually achieving such are entirely different. besides, the state is not the exclusive domain of government. government is a fancy word for the organization of society. the rule of law does not require a state system. communism is kind of designed around local elected government councils or soviets. this word was utilized and not invented by the russians. the simplified explanation that people in this country get about communism is quite flawed.'first the capitalists are overthrown by a mob and then there is an anarchical system where people just give each other stuff.'it's crap. capitalism develops into a socialist system of the redistribution of wealth to ensure that everyone gets both what they need and what they deserve. see norway. everyone has at least a living wage and there is increased income for those with higher training or education. eventually everyone pursues the higher wages and the social distinctions begin to disappear until the social values equalize as well. at this point, there's no real political differences. there are some, say, i think we need to better support fire services over increased clinics, but the fundamental political differences disappear. then, there's no real need or desire for a government outside of an oversight body to ensure the continuation of the distribution of goods and services. this is kind of inherently democratic in that the people then elect the officers who will support the specific programs they think are most needed instead of electing people who will fundamentally change the government. but there is still a need for oversight. this is wherein the problems with communism occur. these officers often are corrupted by the control they have over the resources.further, capitalism, not communism, is the anarchical system. it has simply tended to be controlled by government regulation.this is an occasion where wiki is really not your best source. i'd suggest a solid comparitive political theory book... and that's not one that discusses current governments and compares their populations and shit.

there is no such thing as voluntary communism. either the whole society is involved or there is no communism. jesus preached charity. you can't make it communism no matter how hard you try.

and yet you keep arguing about christians being communists. that's not a legitimate argument. just because i have a classfull of students who decide to start a genocide after attending my class doesn't mean i'm a genocidaire.

i don't think jesus really cares about economic systems. christians are supposed to live for today apparently and look for treasure in heaven. they are supposed to be in but not of the world.as far as i can tell, government and economics are not for christians. otherwise, paul would have been working on overthrowing the government, no? it seems to me, though, that jesus was interested in the actions of individuals, not of states or governments. i'll tell you again. jesus was interested in individual self-denial and charity, not in a social system of equalization or redistribution of wealth.

no, you don't. but, your op is whether or not jesus was a communist, and yet you keep asking me about benedictines and early christians. their personal government choices have little to nothing to do with the personal economic policies of that crazy desert fellow.

yes, but their conclusions have nothing to do with the life of a man who is no longer available to defend himself.and just because they decide that the scripture tells them that they should be communistic doesn't mean that jesus was a communist. it's not a legitimate argument.

i'm not saying that they don't have a legitimate argument. i'm saying that you don't have one by using their existence to say he was a communist. argue the scripture, not the followers.and you don't have to be a communist or a socialist to defend the poor.

congrats. a listing of early christians being communistic. still has nothing to do with jesus.