Dugard and O'Reilly play down (almost entirely omit) Jesus' central message about the "Kingdom of God" to paint him as a preacher of love and hope. This reading is understandable. It is a common mistake in the Christianized West. At the same time, it is indeed anachronistic (and "anarnistic" too, I suppose) to call Jesus a socialist. Perhaps we'd do better to use the phrase "economic collectivism" for the disciples of Jesus.
I discuss this at length in my new book, The Wife of Jesus: Ancient Texts and Modern Scandals.
My full review of Killing Jesus will be published soon in the Los Angeles Review of Books.
-anthony
I discuss this at length in my new book, The Wife of Jesus: Ancient Texts and Modern Scandals.
My full review of Killing Jesus will be published soon in the Los Angeles Review of Books.
-anthony
“Perhaps we'd do better to use the phrase "economic collectivism" for the disciples of Jesus.” For disciples, yes (Acts, 5:1-11) but I’m not sure if that was also Jesus’ view on money. My impression is that he wasn’t much concerned of how to organize and structure disciples’ communities, as well as how to organize and structure a new religion movement. Maybe, Jesus thought that money was bad because it distracted people from loving God and love others, money leaded to wars and social injustices.
ReplyDeleteLorenzo in my newest book (see above) I discuss this. I argue that the impact of Jesus' subversive message about collectivism (including economic collectivism) explains a diversity of social problems within earliest Christianity.
Delete-anthony
Anarnistic indeed.
ReplyDelete