I posted this earlier, but this answers your question.
https://carolinareviewonline.org/2010/02/07/the-ultimate-bankruptcy-of-the-social-gospel/
But the biggest problems with Claiborne’s philosophy are not his proposals for social change but his theology.
Claiborne persist in perpetuating the idea that Jesus came as a social revolutionary. He goes so far as to write that “Jesus was crucified not for helping the poor but for joining them.” In portraying Jesus as an agent of class conflict, Claiborne conflates the Biblical idea of the poor with the Marxist concept of the proletariat. As Josef Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) wrote in his 1984 pamphlet, “
Instruction on Certain Aspects of ‘Theology of Liberation’“:
As you can see according to Shane Claiborne, Jesus died to start a revolution. That's false gospel, like the Episcopal Bishop at the royal wedding. This is what the Liberal Christians of the social gospel believe. And that is wrong. Jesus died and took the wrath of God that was meant to punish our sin.
