Was Jesus Christ really a socialist?

October 4th of this year, Michael Moore posted a blog on his website aimed at those going to church that Sunday morning. He eventually arrived at this point: “I have come to believe that there is no getting around the fact that capitalism is opposite everything that Jesus… taught. All the great religions are clear about one thing: It is evil to take the majority of the pie and leave what’s left for everyone to fight over.” At the end of this letter to churchgoers, he makes this closing comment about Jesus and the feeding of the 5,000: “Either he was the first socialist or his disciples were really bad at packing lunch.”

Was Jesus Christ really a socialist? Well, first, socialism must have a definition. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary has 3 definitions for the word, and they all involve collectivism, governmental ownership of the means of production in a society, and the lack of private property rights by individuals. Socialism is much closer to diet-communism, containing all the potential for a collectivist society without quite so much bloodshed. The goal of all Marxist theories (including socialism, fascism, and communism) was to eventually create a paradise on earth. This paradise would be governed by the principle that each person was not unique. That person simply worked as part of the whole, putting in as much as they could and being given only what they needed by the all-powerful government.

Now that socialism is defined, the work of Jesus must be put into a similar light for comparison. Jesus was sent to Earth as the Son of God, preaching salvation for belief in Him, and of a paradise AFTER this life is over. Jesus did in fact do many wondrous acts for people throughout His ministry, including healing the sick, feeding multitudes through miracles, and even raising others from the dead. Jesus once said, “Give, and it will be given to you…” (Luke 6:38a), and on another occasion stated, “Sell your possessions and give to charity.” (Luke 12:33a). In His interaction with the “rich, young ruler” in Luke Chapter 18, Jesus told the rich man, who argued that he had followed the law, to sell all his possessions and give to the poor. Later, once the rich man went away sad, Jesus said, “Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

So what comparison can be made here? Both socialism and Jesus do indeed advocate giving. The difference comes in the motivation for the giving, the method of the giving, and in the scope of the giving. Jesus advocated giving to others in order to store up treasures in heaven. Socialism advocates giving to others in order to do your duty to society, and to eventually create a collectivist paradise. Jesus told people to give freely, since God loves a cheerful giver. Socialism doesn’t really care about the mindset in which the individual gives up possessions and liberty, for it is taken by force in the end anyway. Jesus did not teach that one should wait until government takes the money to give it to the poor; he said to do it personally so that it can be used in the furtherance of the ministry. Socialism actually prefers government redistribution of wealth to personal charity, so it makes personal charity more difficult and redistribution of wealth the norm.

Dr. Timothy Faber, pastor at East Tipp Baptist Church in Lafayette, disagreed that Jesus was a socialist. He stated, “The ability to own personal property, to recognize that people have the right to have possessions, is a God-given right.” Dr. Faber referenced 2 Corinthians 11 and 12, where believers are urged not to be a burden upon anyone. This is a clear message for self-reliance. 1 Thessalonians also talks about personal responsibility, saying to “lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you, so that you will behave properly toward outsiders and not be in any need.” Clearly, the Bible doesn’t advocate any type of reliance upon the government, which happens to be a central tenet of socialism.

As far as who should be doing the giving, and at what level, Dr. Faber explained that the Bible makes it clear that individuals are to care for themselves and their family first, and then for others within their community. He pointed to 1 Timothy 5:8 which states, “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” How can one provide for their family unless they have a job and keep some money for themselves? How can one raise a family unless they have possessions, such as a house? Dr. Faber went on to say “The Bible makes it clear that the church or individuals are to meet the needs of the poor, not the government.” He made it clear that one teaching of Scripture (being self-reliant) can’t be ignored in order to fulfill another (giving to the poor.)

Leftist individuals would argue that churches don’t give enoug