Less than $100 to go to reach 21% in our freepathon!
Posted on 4/22/2023, 7:53:41 PM by Jim Robinson
Let’s get ‘er done.
It was voluntary giving, in response to a famine in Jerusalem.
Ananias and Saphira, were guilty of claiming to have given away more than they did, not that they were accused of not giving enough.
They would not have been condemned, if they had claimed to give what they actually gave.
Actually, the communalism of the early Church resulted in their being the poorest of congregations, and led to a lot of strife between Jews and Greeks. The Pilgrims tried it at Plymouth at first, but after it turned out as disastrously for them as it did for the first church, they abandoned it, and went with Saint Paul’s admonition: No work, no eat.
The entire communist theory may be summed up in the single sentence: abolition of private property rights
Socialism appropriates and controls private property rights - leaving you holding property over which you have little to no control, other than how you manage your compliance with the regime.
bkmk
It is not communist, but it is definitely socialist of one of the decentralized types, such as libertarian socialism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Socialism is a political philosophy and movement encompassing a wide range of economic and social systems,[1] which are characterised by social ownership of the means of production,[2][3][4] as opposed to private ownership.[5][6][4] As a term, it describes the economic, political, and social theories and movements associated with the implementation of such systems.[7] Social ownership can be public, community, collective, cooperative,[8][9][10] or employee.[11][12] While no single definition encapsulates the many types of socialism,[13] social ownership is the one common element,[6][14] and is considered left-wing.[15] Different types of socialism vary based on the role of markets and planning in resource allocation, on the structure of management in organizations, and from below or from above approaches, with some socialists favouring a party, state, or technocratic-driven approach. Socialists disagree on whether government, particularly existing government, is the correct vehicle for change.[16][17]
I do not think the Lord had a position on economics.
The most important phrase in all of these texts is “and they were of one accord.” They willingly, individually, and voluntarily agreed to share. When Anias and Sapphira tried to hold back, they were killed because they LIED, not because they did not share.
Yes, “communism” can work if everyone agrees to put in more and take out less. But the first time someone doesn’t, it always becomes tyranny and we have no record of other churches in the early period adopting this as a model.
What is in early Acts was neither Communism nor communalism.
I was a one-time move of the Holy Spirit (never repeated later) that led people to give FROM THE HEART because they wanted to and felt led to do so.
Both communism and communalism are imposed EXTERNALLY, from the outside. They differ in force.
Acts was done internally in people’s hearts, who willfully and joyfully wanted to do the giving.
The few who wanted credit and recognition for doing so when they didn’t do it were simply liars, deceivers - for which they were judged by the same one who led others to give - the Holy Spirit.
This was a unique, one-time event in the early days of the church when the impact and results of such selflessness and love for others was of supreme importance to the spontaneous and explosive expansion of the church.
It was never repeated in scripture.
Could the Holy Spirit so lead again? Of course. But it should be tested to not be something led by men/man.
Someone should explain this to the current Pope, who is quoted as saying “...I am a Communist...”
It was a communal community as a matter of necessity. The earliest Christians were banned from the Temple and shunned by other Jews. As a result many could not earn a living or obtain food. Such an arrangement was necessary for survival. We don’t see it anywhere else in Acts or, for the most part, in early church history.