What Does the Bible Say About Socialism?

Pix Edward

People are becoming more Christ-like and it shows, through socialism. Love thy neighbour, by ensuring they have healthcare, food, and shelter. Were there any exceptions? Your immigrant neighbour? Your trans neighbour? Your Republican/Democrat neighbour? Your Black neighbour? Your disabled, unemployed (hundreds of thousands of government employees lost their jobs in 2025, and more are being replaced by AI every day), single mother, single father, Muslim, or ? No. There were no exceptions. If Jesus were to return today, ICE would break his car window at an intersection, throw him on the ground, and masked men dressed for war would put him in a detention center thousands of miles from his home, where more and more people are dying each day from lack of medical care, spoiled food at best, with no blankets, no family support (they can't find him), physical abuse from staff, and every day is one more he's detained with no charges or due process. If Jesus returned right now, he'd be flipping tables of billionaires and advocating a wealth tax. Let's not forget why he was arrested in the first place. People don't have a problem with Christ, they're uniting to help one another in a time of unrest. People have a problem with the Church, when it tells them not to give a mother a can of formula and the congregation tells him they agree, she should get a job. Is that pro-life? Or when people treat immigrants the opposite of the way they'd treat Jesus if he knocked on their door. Jesus was a punk rock socialist democrat, as am I.

Lisbeth Kieran Bushey

Jesus wanted us to help each other and not be materialistic or greedy. The way that the Apostles and the early Christians lived was an early form of socialism before society had a word for it. This is clearly depicted in Acts 2:42-47 “42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.”

Rev Ned

Franklin Graham and Fox News have NOTHING to do with “Christianity”.

Ronnie Rozier

well I feel that yes we as Christians are to take care of each other when someone is in true need. However some people will take advantage of this and not work or contribute either. There has to be some commom used in this area, It is a question that can be debated forever..

Tom Acierno

Franklin Graham speaks of socialism as if it is a new concept in America. Maybe he should pick up an American history book. The United States was essentially founded on Christian socialistic principles. On July 4th, 1776, our founding fathers, 56 courageous Americans, pledged everything they had, including their very lives in the act of signing The Declaration of Independence. By their guidance, example, and willingness to sacrifice for the common good of all Americans throughout the 13 colonies, the very last line of the Declaration of Independence sets our course as a nation of Christian socialistic ideals, “with a firm reliance on the protection of Devine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”

Rev'd Andrew

I find it ironic the Franklin supports "socialism" when it comes to giving US taxpayer money to Israel, but not when it comes to US citizens.

Man of God

There are no political teachings in the Bible. Yes, we should honor laws that are just and fair. The teachings are about faith, love and it is very personal. Economic teachings like capitalism, socialism and communism are ideas created by man and driven by the evil one. Our God never teaches force. When I say our God I am talking about the God (The Father), The Son (Lord God), the Holy Spirit ( The Doer, Teacher and Comforter) They are ONE.. The Father, or the Creator made all things form into being. Then he Created Man to rule with justice. Then The Father created woman out of man so he would not be alone and have a suitable companion. There was never any money involved. He gave all and charged nothing. The Father taught us his character which is Holy and demanded that We Must be Holy. The Father demands that we follow his Commandments, Decrees, Ordinance and obey. The Father says do this and THIS life will be GOOD for you. The Father turns his back on the disbelievers and allows the evil ones to have their way. Evil meaning to disobey God. The Father send his Son, to make clear his Laws and define the Law through Love and Brotherhood. The Father is a forgiving God once a sinner confessed and ask for forgiveness does not sin again. No man can claim this power. Beware of false liars who want to claim this power. The Father handed our Judgement over to his Son, for he earned it. The Father, The Creator never created money for it is a trick to confuse the humanity of man.

Evylyn Rose

If we focus only on "the Jesus parts" of the Bible, then there's a very strong argument that Jesus would be called a socialist today. It's also to point out that socialism, generally speaking, does not detract from or discourage religious faith. While there are historical examples of atheistic socialist governments, those were also autocratic governments. A democratic government (or a Republic that is built on democratic principles, like the US) can value and incorporate socialist ideologies and practices without infringing on rights to religious freedoms.

But specifically to the question of whether or not the Bible is socialist, that's a moot point. Because no. The Bible does not push for, mandate, or even encourage a specific form of government or governing ideology. As this article points out, the passages in the Bible were written in the context of the needs and systems already in place within communities of those times and places. And, also, the Bible's purpose never had anything to do with the formation of a religious government. The Bible cannot be inherently pro- or anti- any particular form of government because that isn't what the book addresses. It addresses religion, faith, values, ethics, life lessons, spirituality, theology, etc. Not government.

Bottom line, the Bible certainly isn't "anti-Socialist" as the news appearance and social media post suggested.

Melinda Lieu Shodin

Paul is very clear that if you’re stealing, you should stop stealing and get a job. He talks extensively about taking care of himself in reality. We’re only commanded to help two people and there’s a caveat we help widows and we help orphans the way I interpret that is people who have lost their partner and are having a hard time and people who do not have any support no family and the caveat I spoke of is in their distress so, we come alongside people like Hebrews discussed, but doing things for others never benefits the grand scheme of things I like the way scouting is organized. Everybody stands on their own 2 feet takes turns being the boss and is self-sufficient, but can work together!

Shannon Patrick O'Neal

Hmm, how to be respectful?

This is an age-old issue. It's almost as if scripture can be interpreted any way anyone would like since the writings are inherently self-contradictory, being the work of many humans impersonating other humans over many, many years. Humans use them to control other humans. Scripture supports whatever case one wants to make and attacked whatever belief and behavior one wishes to attack.

The "prosperity Gospel" is the perfect example. God favors the preacher with all manner of things since the flock is aimed for the fleecing.

"Do unto others" is taken for action while the (self)righteous neglect the second half of the command.

Or maybe I'm wrong. Guessing someone might tell me. Peace. Be well.

Jon Nelson

With respect to capitalism vs. socialism, I do not see a necessarily "one or the other" approach to be taken in the teachings found in the Bible. The article highlights examples where Bible does not preach one over another. Our human tendency to want to be right coupled with our fears of being wrong, our fears of losing what we have or of not getting what we think we deserve are likely culprits in driving us to one extreme interpretation or another.

Morality may be the basis for a form of government, but Jesus clearly did not preach explicitly what a State or government should do with regards to socio-economic policy. The teachings of Jesus focus on ourselves as children of God, on how we relate to each other and how we may find and enact God's vision for us.

With humility and care for each other the ways Jesus taught, we can form a government and socio-economic system that is tempered and regulated. For example, a highly regulated capitalist society with highly decentralized and distributed power across several entities for checks and balances, while also having many more socialist policies and programs that are strictly not for profit and are themselves highly regulated and monitored against their own potential for abuse and corruption.

It is all too human and all too flawed and imperfect to want to concentrate power; our fears drive us to this state. To pray for freedom from our fear, and for knowledge of God's will for us rather than to pray for what we want or think we need and for our own selfish ends are not easy things to do. To do so sounds like perfection, which we obviously are not and realistically cannot achieve as flawed imperfect humans. Although we may never achieve the perfection of God, we should not stop striving for it. A way starts with changing ourselves from within, or allowing ourselves to be changed from within, to be free of the "it must be all this way for me and mine" rather than to ask "is this working for us all?" and "what can we do better?"

Delight Phillips

Several people stated that Christ did not force socialism on people. He didn't have to FORCE anything on people. He LIVED it. These people need to look at his life, not what was Forced on people. When people use the expression, "What would Jesus do?" He would never, ever do what modern Republicans are doing. He would not demonize people. He would not look down upon those with less than him. He would not take from the poor and make the rich much, much richer. He would not encourage ICE to invade cities, schools, churches and people's homes to throw them to the ground and attack them. He would not be a white suprematist. He would not be bombing defenseless people in boats. He would not be trying to take GAZA from the people living there and make a RESORT. Before you go saying all those things are good, look at "What Jesus would do."

Mark B. Trexler

There is always two sides to socialism or not. In Germany, everyone is taxed for their religion. So, does that make socialism? Not really. It is a tax. Scandinavian countries are all Socialist. Here in the United States all of us have one sort or more of socialism. We pay into Social Security and Medicare. Our local governments all have programs to help the needy and schools, etc. Jesus gave his life for all of us. His father brought him back to life and he returned to heaven. Our government gives food and money to poor foreign countries. So, all of us have a little bit of socialism in us. We give to the poor, medical like St Judes, church on Sunday, and the list goes on and on. There maybe people that think they don't have to help anyone but, chances are they do help others.

Lawyer John

Franklin Graham is not a good moral example, in my view. His organization is sponsoring a series of television ads that cost millions of dollars. Wouldn't that money be better spent helping the poor, the hungry, and the homeless?

obere mchugh

point blank the problem is with the bigotry and systemic disparity and hate and fear of those who think they are the only one and true way which is blantantly false. christianity,judaism and islam the big three of abrahamic faith are not and surely not the oldest faiths on the planet. you are not the one true way, maybe for your selfs but you do not speak for all human kind, you speak only for your selfts. i will never and have never been and never will be a member of the abrahamic faith as it is deplorable and anti to my beliefs. the big three are the problem with the world and the use of them in just name alone is where all the problems can be laid.

Gary. Collins

Socialism and communism have no place in America period

James Trenton Smith

Neither Socialism nor Capitalism are Anti-God. Evil is Anti-God. And there have been evil Theocracies in world history. It is the deeds of man and the intentions of his heart that are either Anti or Pro God. Do many Socialists do Evil or Good things ...yes... just like everyone else...

Phillip A. Garver

The idea that the Bible teaches radical self-ownership and independence from all obligation is not biblical. It is a modern ideology projected backward onto the text.

Scripture teaches personal responsibility, yes, but always within belonging to God and mutual responsibility to others. The New Testament does not praise self-sufficiency as the ideal. It calls believers to self-giving love.

“You are not your own” (1 Corinthians 6:19–20). “Bear one another’s burdens” (Galatians 6:2). “No one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything was held in common” (Acts 4:32).

These are not fringe verses. They are central themes.

Jesus consistently warns that attachment to wealth and self-sovereignty is spiritually dangerous. He praises generosity, self-denial, mercy, and sacrificial love. The command is not “Lord over your own life.” The command is “Deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow” (Mark 8:34).

The earliest Christians actually tried to live this out materially. Acts describes believers sharing their goods so that none among them was in need (Acts 2:44–45; Acts 4:34–35). That is not political theory. That is historical description.

The early Church Fathers are even clearer.

Basil the Great taught, “The bread you do not use is the bread of the hungry” (Homily on Luke 12:18).

John Chrysostom wrote, “Not to share our own wealth with the poor is theft from the poor and deprivation of their means of life” (Homily 34 on 1 Corinthians).

Ambrose of Milan taught, “You are not making a gift of your possessions to the poor person. You are handing over to him what is his” (De Nabuthe 12.53).

Augustine taught, “The superfluities of the rich are the necessities of the poor. They who possess superfluities possess the goods of others” (Sermon 50.6).

Even the Didache, a first-century Christian instruction manual, says: “Do not turn away from one in need, but share everything with your brother, and do not claim that anything is your own” (Didache 4:8).

These are not modern political activists. These are foundational Christian theologians, bishops, and teachers revered across Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant traditions.

Christianity does not mandate a specific modern economic system. But it absolutely rejects radical individualism and treats love of neighbor as materially costly, not sentimental. The moral vision of the Gospel is communion, not autonomy. Stewardship, not sovereignty. Gift, not grasping.

If someone reads the New Testament and concludes that “perfect living is independence from all and provider only for self,” they are not reading Christianity. They are reading modern ideology through biblical vocabulary.

Steven Ferrell

The scriptures mentioned here show it is the job of the church to care for others, it is not for the government to dictate. Look at every socialist country, there are still those that have everything, it the rulers who have all the money. It is not shared among the people, they keep all the people poor, to retain their power.

Terry Marcel Minear

If Turning Point USA is an example of the resurgence he feels to be happening, they are deceived. Theirs is a revival of exclusion and even prejudice. I have been in Evangelical circles and they propagate an end time SUPER Revival and the condition you and are conditioned to look for "revivals" Evern if there isn't one!!

Therese M. Boehlert

I think the bible would prefer that neighbors take care of neighbors. With all due respect to the protesters, have any of them gone to their elected officials and offered to take the illegal immigrants in at their expense? We might be far better off if state government officials worked with the federal government to turn the wanted illegals over and let them have their day in court.

Patricia Ann Gross

As I read the article these comments, one thing that most people either don't reailize or forget is that in Biblical times, there was no separation of Church and state, to the point that a heresy was a capital (as in death penalty) offense. The churches ran the government and were either the rulers or tightly coupled with them. This was true up until the Protestant Reformation, where the fractured Christian denominations became too numerous and disparate to get fully ingrained into the government. Therefore, "rules" generated in scripture became the laws of the land. By the 20th Century, most every country except the 3rd world nations had a written (or unwritten) understanding of separation of Chruch and State, so religion has been tied into the building of the world's governments and economies up until about the time of the Civil War.

The point of this history lesson, is that even though it doesn't specify the government enforce distribution of wealth, it is definitely implied, because in the 4th century CE (when the current Bible was canonized), that's the way things were done. One of the things that led to the revolt that caused the Reformation was that tithes were collected by taxing people who had no way to pay it. The church demanded a certain amount from every family (wealthy or not), and those that couldn't pay ended up in debtors prisons.

Kerry Jerome Greenwell

Does the Bible teach socialism? No more than it teaches democracy. The Bible has nothing to do with politics... it's a spiritual guide meant to guide people to God. Trying to put it in the context of politics is just another example of twisting the word of God into something to spread confusion and unnecessary fear. The old testament is the history of the Jews...has nothing to do with us today. And what did Jesus teach...love. That's it. I wonder sometimes if I'm reading the same Bible as anyone else. Beware false teachers and prophets... especially in today's world.

Joseph Grieco

In response to complaints from caravan operators, Governor Pilate and Tetrarch Herod have undertaken a joint operation to expand on the city gate known locally as "the Eye of the Needle" to accommodate camels laden with merchandise.

As a historical explanation for the above, during the time of Yeheshua, many cities, like Jerusalem, were walled and gated. Most of the gates were closed between sunset and sunrise. Only those narrow enough to allow pedestrian traffic were left open for passage, more for folks tending fields who needed to be out earlier and later than normal. One such was the "Needle's Eye" A low and narrow gate. It could accommodate a man or a donkey, but definitely NOT a camel. So the saying of it being easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for a rich man to get into Heaven was not just a nicety. It was well known to the people he was preaching to.

Throughout the Old and New Testaments, examples are given of Socialism, and socialist ideas - no interest on loans, giving unto others as they need, healing the sick, etc. So, in this, Franklin Graham is wrong - as usual.

Scholastic Mystic

Of course Franklin is anti-socialism. He’s an evangelical. A follower of self enrichment not a follower of Christ.

ServantOfJudgement

Again and again the bible describes perfect living as a man lording over his own life. Independent from all and provider for himself, man will be free of all forms of taxation and forced labor.

Today, charity is encouraged. Forced charity is theft or to put it politely, Socialism. People love to steal, especially the inclusive and loving left. They can't seem to bust loose from the nasty habit. It's looking like they're willing to kill in the spirit of generosity.

James Riggle-Johnson

I don’t think the Bible teaches socialism in the way we think of it today. It isn’t speaking to governments or political systems; it’s speaking to everyday people. The message is simple and consistent: those who have are expected to help those who do not.

Viewed from that religious perspective, figures like Franklin Graham are far behind the curve. He holds onto immense personal wealth and spends it on himself. If generosity toward the poor were truly a benchmark for getting into heaven—as many preach—then Franklin Graham should be deeply concerned.

Regarding socialism itself, many people today respond to the word with immediate hostility. That reaction is influenced by examples like Russia or Cuba. However, those systems hardly reflect what socialism purports to be. They use the label while political leaders and their close allies gather enormous wealth, leaving ordinary people to fend for themselves. That isn’t socialism. Just my two cents.

Dr. Zerpersande, NSC

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, does it? Like father, like son. Both of him are delusional hypocrites. Rich hypocrites, but still nonetheless hypocrites.

Douglas Robert Spindler

Jesuses teaches socialism and the Pastor being interviewed is saying socialism is anti-Christian.
Please explain that logic.

Bible sales are up because of Bible burnings parties are happening more often.

Keoni Ronald May

Look at how socialism and communism are being currently practiced today (2026).

Do not look to the past.

Why are many countries, who practice socialism and communism, having out-migrations and coming to the USA ?

Why are they leaving their beloved countries of origin, for the misery of living in the USA ?