Was Jesus a Socialist?
Many assert directly, or indirectly, that He was
As often happens around elections, people throw around Christianity like a political football. Some argue you can’t be a Christian and support abortion (biblically supportable). Others say that if you’re a Christian, you should support government social welfare programs (not biblically supportable). This latter tends to get far more attention, at least from the left, both from the electorate and the media. This attention has carried over into the administration.
With DOGE helping pare government pilfering, people are railing about those who stand potentially to lose entitlements. Not only so, but they bring up Christianity in addition, wondering how Christian’s could cheer chopping charitable government giveaways.
Posts on X abound attempting to liken depriving the destitute of their government grants as anathema to the teachings of Christ. Is that what Jesus meant? Was Jesus a proponent of government social welfare programs?
Jesus called Christians to give; about this there is neither doubt nor argument. But how and to whom are Christians called to give?
While the person who posted this believes Jesus would have advocated for a welfare state, his misunderstanding is two-fold:
Jesus here is speaking to His Church (His sheep - v33, those on His right, “who are blessed of [His] Father” - v34), not the government;
Jesus is speaking specifically of what was done for His “brothers.”
As far as the “brothers” part, Let me bring to your attention two other quotes from Jesus:
Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.”
Matthew 12:47-50
Jesus did not consider all people to be his “siblings.” Only those who do the will of the Father (which means, believers) - “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day” (John 6:40).
In contrast, Jesus had some harsh words for others who didn’t believe:
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him.
John 8:42-44
Not everyone is a “child of God,” nor is everyone one of Jesus’ “brothers.”
In general, though Christians are called to be charitable, it is primarily toward other Christians. As Scripture says, we will be known as Christ’s disciples by our love for one another (John 13:35), not our love for everyone, not our love for the world.
This poster’s misunderstanding also stems from the mistaken view that the main purpose of Christianity is charity - it is not. The primary mission handed down to Christians by Christ is to spread the good news of God’s kingdom and to make disciples. While we are called to be charitable, that is only secondary.
Regarding Jesus assertion that believers should be caring for “His brothers,” though Christians are told they should be doing this, Scriptures exhorts that this be done willingly, not under compulsion. Likewise, they are to do so individually and communally (as Christians), not through government.
All New Testament instruction on giving, on caring for the needy, is aimed at individual and communal giving and is voluntary. Never did Jesus teach His disciples to give through government. Never did Jesus or his disciples encourage doing through government that with which the Church was tasked. Nor should we now.
Aside from the fact that government introduces inefficiencies and additional costs, government takes only by force. Taking by force, no matter who is the taker, is theft. Jesus did not endorse theft. Nor did His disciples who passed on His teachings.
Paul, in imploring the Corinthians to keep their promise of support for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem, stated that, “Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Corinthians 9:7). This is a very clear statement of voluntary, individual giving.
“But sometimes people need income!” This is true. This is why we work. As harsh and callous as it may seem, again looking to the Apostle Paul we find: “For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either” (2 Thessalonians 3:10).
In a free country, and by Christian standards, seeing to the needs of those who can’t provide for themselves, such as widows and orphans, should be left to family, friends, community, and religious and charitable organizations - not government. Voluntary assistance has far less overhead and is far more helpful. Government assistance is nothing more than looting.
As far as I know, Jesus never spoke as the voice of government. That could be debated though as 2000 years ago religions were the government. Sure we have the impression he advocated generosity and kindness. That's something we should all strive for on an individual level. But there is no justification for excessive socialism thievery (via taxation).
This is one where I have to say I draw a grey line. I like the idea of a socially responsible government, but only in the context of a *small* and fair government.
Rant warning!!!
I have always been a very outspoken proponent of our Constitution from the time I was able to understand its founding and its impact on not just a national but global scale. While there are flaws inherent in every structure or document created by the human race, this one period of history is a watershed moment in the history of humankind. With that out of the way, I would like to relay a conversation, albeit paraphrased version, I had with my wife yesterday.
For those that have any knowledge of our family's recent history with our youngest son's battle with ALL (acute lymphoblastic leukemia), and his subsequent healing, this conversation was in no way a nuanced discussion. I am very passionate or animated or...(insert preferred euphemism) about Constitutionally responsible government, as laid out in the U.S. Constitution. I do not spend any time on social media sites (X, Facebook, Instagram, et al), although I do post on a few news bulletin boards and Substack pages occasionally. My wife, Lori, had mentioned to me about a post from a mom of a child lost to childhood cancer and another subsequent by a 2nd mom, both from our hometown, concerning Trump using a child during the State of the Union Speech and childhood cancer funding being cut from a recent omnibus bill. At which point I explicitly let my wife know that my coming explosion was not directed at her but at the 300+ million morons that inhabit this nation that have no knowledge of the Constitutional parameters placed upon our federal bureaucracy. it is not mere ignorance, but a blatant disregard of the guiderails placed upon government as a specifically limited entity that has far outgrown anything allowed or envisioned by the framers. Funding cancer research is in no way a responsibility prescribed as an authority given to any federal agency. Advocating for an ever-expanding federal bureaucracy is contra-constitutional as our 10th Amendment clearly states that ALL powers not explicitly delegated to the United States nor prohibited by the states are reserved explicitly for the states and/or the people. This means that if you want cancer research, that is a function best served at the state, local, and private level. If we were to scale our federal bureaucracy back to Constitutional limits, I would surmise that we could cut some 75%-90% of ALL federal agencies, their employees, and the taxes that "We the People" pay to keep these bureaucratic machines functioning, and send that rightful authority back to the states and their respective citizens, where all of these concerns could and would be handled with a more responsible civilian oversight than is allowed at the moment. Promoting federal research funding and federal oversight for childhood cancer is tantamount to arguing for continued and additional intrusion in the private lives and liberty of ordinary citizens and goes against anything and everything outlined in our Constitution. While I understand the need for funding needed for childhood cancer (the current rate is roughly only 5% of all funding goes to childhood cancer research/95% adult cancer research), the answer does not lie an ever-expanding bureaucratic nightmare. It lies in the hands of the states and their respective citizens to prioritize these concerns and act accordingly. The federal government is not efficient in anything except waste. And I am tired of self-proclaimed Republicans, Conservatives, Constitutionalists, Christians, etc advocating for the federal government to do anything. Rather, get out of our way and let us get to work at restoring the greatness that is the United States of America.
Rant ended...