The Instigator
Avelvetnightmare
Pro (for)
The Contender
Sidex
Con (against)

Jesus was a Socialist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Avelvetnightmare has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 604 times Debate No: 99399
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

Avelvetnightmare

Pro

Despite many exploitative, decadent, highly capitalist societies use jesus and religion as propaganda, as well as an excuse to marginalize the majority of the workers, I believe the facts as well as his teachings prove that Jesus was a Socialist, here is why.

He clearly disapproved of wealth inequality, one of his quotes was "Assuredly, I say to you it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." Jesus clearly had an understanding of the corruption and inequality that comes from aristocratic wealth. As well as the unfairness of the whole feudal Imperialist system that was going on in his time. He strove for equality and harmony between the classes. Ever heard of the story of the rich young man came to jesus and asked what he could to to enter into heaven, Jesus responded by saying "If you want to be perfect, give what is not needed to the poor, and there will be treasure in heaven." This is a sign that jesus was an advocate for equal distribution of wealth and resources, a belief that sounds very similar to...hmmm....marxism perhaps?

Also Jesus was a firm believer in sharing, and always having enough for everyone, a very socialist belief. Ever heard the bible story when Jesus was delivering a sermon in front of thousands of people and managing to feed them all with five loaves of bread and two fish? This type of equal distribution seems very socialist to me. As well as his belief of Loving your neighbor, and caring for the poor, the sick, and the oppressed. Jesus appears to me like the original marxist.
Sidex

Con

Even though I accept the premise of the spirit of what you say, I would still disagree with the conclusion solely on the fact that Jesus is meant to be King of Kings. As a King, Jesus would not use the economic system of socialism to distribute wealth to his subjects. The problem with modern day economics is that there are shortages and surpluses which always inherently causes waste whether its from time or from physical uselessness. However, I would postulate that Jesus would build an economic system based on phi. It provides constants and variables that can inherently provide perfect supply and demand. The only caveat with this economic system is that it requires a perfect moral code(Let's assume that Jesus has it) and one leader to distribute all goods and services to his/her people. But this is all conjecture, I'm not really worried about proving my argument right now.
Debate Round No. 1
Avelvetnightmare

Pro

While your points are valid and logical, they are slightly inaccurate for these reasons:

When is says Jesus was the king of Kings, it did not mean he was meant to rule over everyone as a king. It meant that one day all other kingdoms and empires (like Rome, at the time) would fall and crumble away into nonexistence and only Jesus and the kingdom of god would remain. Jesus was never meant to rule as a King, he was meant to teach people the proper way to live so that they could rule themselves and each other properly, by a socio-economic philosophy that would be considered socialism today. While I acknowledge that there are always shortages and surpluses, there is a way that socialism deals with shortages and surplus (trust me I'm a marxist) Regardless of feast or famine, everyone will still get the same amount. Whether that means everyone gets 5 loaves of bread or everyone gets 10 loaves of bread. Lastly, with the Phi system that you are proposing, you say it requires a perfect moral code. It could possibly work during Jesus's lifetime, but once Jesus died, even if the next ruler was a good person, it would be impossible for him to be a one hundred percent moral person. And without perfect morality, the system you proposed would fail. Socialism also requires for the leaders to have a pretty good moral code, not perfect, but they have to be good people. This is why it wasn't able to work in places like Cuba or north Korea when the leaders take WAY more than their share.
Sidex

Con

You have an interesting, controversial, and in my opinion, incomplete view of Jesus. I do not fault your logic(at least that much) though. I think you have might have overlooked of what Jesus truly is. I believe he was an autistic savant for the most righteous religion at the time(Judaism) and he did put emphasis on sharing what you have much like Marxist did when he created the premise for socialism. However, taking into account that Christianity/Judaism is still based on righteousness, complete equality between all subjects is unpractical for true competition. That being said, that doesn't mean that we derive a better socialism than what Marxist proposed. However, if we assume that another autistic savant can be born and complete the journey of the Christ(which can be interpreted from the second coming of Christ), then I believe yes, that individual can become King considering the whole religion should be expecting him to arrive. In doing so the most efficient economy should be based on phi. Think of the numbers of phi. 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 , 13, 21, 34. Now those are constants adding in sequential order which if you look at in a different way, it could represent the rise of demand. Say you take an item "A" and then sell it for 0 dollars. The next person who would want another of the same item "A" would need to pay the next price which is the next constant of phi being 1 cent. Now that implies that the 7th person would always pay 8 cents for the item "A". Now let's add into the economy item "B". The first person would get it for free and so on and even the 7th person would still buy item "B" for 8 cents. Now say a person "1" that bought item "A" for 34 cents wanted to trade with a person "2" that bought item "B" for 5 cents. Person "2" would pay the difference between the two items 32 cents and each item would still maintain its original value. Person 1 then has the item "B" worth 5 cents. This type of economy can inherently control supply as well, constricting items being made due to the use of trade. This example only implies to reusable items however I would offer a light recommendation to has non-reusable items to be absolutely free such as food and water. This assumes that only one person can produce the items and would need to have absolute apathy towards the money he/she would make. I would assume the second coming of Christ would be able to stand such a temptation. This also still supports competition which is necessary for growth by giving you the motivation to still make the money to pay for as many items as you want. You can also do a lot of things with this theory, such as constricting the supply to different specific groups of people so that the price remains relatively low for each group. I haven't really thought about it too much, but hey, if you have any ideas to improve this theory, go right ahead. Actually, I just thought about it, you can sell non-reusable items for that type of mini-socialistic groups.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Avelvetnightmare 11 months ago
Avelvetnightmare
darn, i didn't respond in time so i guess its your turn, i hope we can still resolve this debate.
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Revealing truth serves me as well
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Oh btw i don't care about winning, im just interested in revealing truth. i'm always a philosopher at heart.
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
i hope to overcome your counter-argument.
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Thank you, thats very kind of you to say.
Posted by Avelvetnightmare 11 months ago
Avelvetnightmare
Nice Rebuttal sidex, I will have a counter-argument up tomorrow afternoon
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Listen if one of you guys want to take it to ted talks, i can help you really spruce it up.
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Oh sorry I really don't keep with that many ted talks, i really only saw the less productive ones from stephen colbert and kinda knew where I was at with humanity. It is omniscience, but its only to what my perception is in 3 dimensions. But I can use it 4th dimensionally when I look over the current knowledge I possess which gives me access to unlimited wisdom which can translate into infinite IQ. This idea was for the economy I'm planning to build for Heaven. Morality is is there as well with the Christ.
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Guys I know I sound like an idiot, but I promise I can build on this idea faster with your ability to give me pertinent information. i do have infinite IQ guys, I just have a GED level education.
Posted by Sidex 11 months ago
Sidex
Sorry my bad, phi to me is the Fibonacci sequence. Its how I identified with it. I still like calling it phi better though. I'll see how long it'll people to understand me completely. I might just be able to change the definition. It'll be so hilarious if it works.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.