Those who promote communal living with no private property as authentically Biblical and Apostolic will go to Acts 2:44-45 (describing the earliest Christians in Jerusalem): “And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.”

Is this proof that the Christian church in its purest form abolished private property among its members and practiced Communism?  Some believe so.  

Besides the proofs we’ll see that the early Christians in the churches founded by Christ’s Apostles did not practice Communism among themselves, it’s important to understand the situation in Jerusalem immediately after the birth of the Christian church at Pentecost (recorded in Acts chapter 2 as well).  That was a strange and unique situation.  

That situation is that there were many thousands of people from foreign lands who had visited Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost and came to believe in Jesus Christ at that time through the Apostles’ preaching.  

Look back a little in Acts 2:41-42: “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.  And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”

The new disciples from foreign lands needed to stick around Jerusalem for a while- and they could not just fly back home and get more supplies for the lengthened stay.  They also could not go back and forth on weekends or anything along those lines.

There were doubtless also multitudes of locals from Jerusalem, and the surrounding region in Judea, who were among the disciples at Jerusalem too. 

We see a little later in Acts, when this initial congregation of the disciples of Christ from a multitude of nations had not yet been dissolved (remember these were all Jews or gentile converts to Judaism before they had believed in Jesus Christ) we’re given more details on how the earliest Christians having all things common among themselves worked. 

Acts 4:32: “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought (any) of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.”

No new information yet at this point.  This is the extension of the same unusual situation that we saw in Acts chapter 2 with the same statement echoed from there.

We’ll see now that this was not mandated Communism for those who endeavored to be faithful to Christ.

Acts 4:33-37: “And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.  Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.  And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.”

Continuing immediately now into Acts chapter 5- while remembering that there are no chapter breaks in the original text.

Acts 5:1-2: “But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, (knowledgeable of it) and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.”

Though there’s little doubt that it would have been good that Ananias and Sapphira had given the full price of the sale for the Apostles to distribute, their failure to do so was not why they were rebuked by Peter and judged severely by God.  

Acts 5:3-6: “But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?  Whiles it remained, was it not thine own?  and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?  why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart?  thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.  And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.  And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.”

Ananias’ evil was that he, with the agreement of his wife, had kept part of the price of the land while saying that he had given the full price of the land away.  

Some who advocate Communism among Christians will say that Ananias’ freedom here only applied with the Romans who recognized private property rights, and which the Apostles could not legally override.  They’ll basically say that the Romans’ recognized Ananias’ right to his own land, and his right to the money of the sale of the land after it had been sold, but the Christians didn’t recognize such among themselves as a right which one could retain before the Lord to any degree at all while being faithful to Him and qualified for fellowship and communion among them.

Yet Peter recognized Ananias’ private property rights before God too.  Peter acknowledged Ananias’ right to keep the land within the context of the church and the distribution process to the needy which was occurring then.  If Peter was speaking only in regard to the laws of the Romans, his words were pointless in the context of his rebuke to Ananias.  Peter was dealing with Ananias as a spiritual leader, not a civil authority.  Ananias would not have been judged nor even separated from the Apostle’s fellowship if he had only been honest.  

This is all further demonstrated by how Peter dealt with Ananias’ wife Sapphira afterwards.

Acts 5:7-11: “And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.  And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much?  And she said, Yea, for so much.  Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?  behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.  Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.  And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.”

Being a Christian in God’s grace necessitates surrendering one’s own life, including one’s finances to meet the needs of the poor, and especially the poor of Christ’s brethren who call on Him out of a pure heart.  

Jesus’ illustration of the sheep and the goats on Judgment Day could not be applied to members of the same church, like it obviously should be, especially members of churches which Christ Himself was really among, if such churches mandated Communism among themselves with no private property- and hence took away all individual discretion concerning use of money and possessions.

Matthew 25:31-46: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.  Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee?  or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in?  or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”

If the Socialists, Communists, and the so-called Christian Communists who want to implement their vision of a Christian church commune were taken up with their own Biblical duties towards the poor, they wouldn’t have the time nor the heart to gripe about the inequality or inequity or whatever they call the things which they consider obstacles to their delusional vision.

The Apostles of Christ simply did not necessitate renouncing one’s right to private property to be in their fellowship.  

Here is a statement from the frequently asked questions page of a certain actual group of communes (Bruderhof) who claim that they are living like the Apostles arranged their churches as seen in the Book of Acts.

(Emphases in the quote below are mine)

(Begin quote) “What is “community of goods”?

Community of goods, also known as the common purse, simply means we share everything together.  None of us owns any property in our name, and none of us receives a paycheck, stipend, or allowance.  Everything belongs to the collective membership.

When someone becomes a member, all their earnings and inheritances are given to the church, and each receives necessities such as food, clothing, and housing.  Each of us is accountable to the church community for money we spend.  No one member, or any one Bruderhof location, is richer or poorer than any other.  This idea is not ours; this is how the first Christians lived, as described in Acts 2.” (End quote)

Contrast that with the reality of the first century Christian churches when all the details are practically analyzed rather than when a few statements, which don’t tell the whole story, are taken and wrenched out of context to promote a Communist agenda in the name of Christ.

Faithful Christians in the Apostolic churches did indeed own property in their name:

Acts 12:11-12: “And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews.  And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.”

Acts 16:14-15: “And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.  And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there.  And she constrained us.”

The so-called Christian Communists would have called her to surrender her house and hand it over to the church upon her baptism.

Acts 28:30-31 (Paul was a prisoner of the Romans here, but there were other Christians at Rome who could have helped pay for this house so that it would not be in Paul’s name -if Paul had really had to surrender all of his income and possessions over to the Christian churches): “And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.”

Not all of the earnings and inheritances of the early Christians were given to the church:

Romans 12:11-13: “Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.”

You can’t do these last two things at all if all your money is given to the church and you have no personal possessions anyways.  

Communism and Socialism, when practiced on any level, militate against authentic generosity and even against authentic sacrificial giving in many cases.

Luke 21:1-4: “And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites (two small copper coins).  And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all: For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury (poverty) hath cast in all the living that she had.”

2 Corinthians 9:6-7: “But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.  Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.”

Obviously, these verses get abused in several different ways.  There are still situations where it is sin not to give.  There are also ways in which manipulative preachers abuse these verses when they are taking an offering.  Yet these verses surely do prove that not all of the earnings and inheritances of the Christians were given to the church.  Otherwise, the instruction and exhortation in them, written directly to members of Apostolic first century churches, would have no purpose at all and be totally irrelevant. 

Some early Christian church members were indeed richer or poorer than others:

Acts 12:27-30: “And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.  And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth (famine) throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.  Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea: Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.”

Yet the fact that everyone in the church at Antioch sent relief according to his ability proves that not everyone’s ability to help was the same.  This also proves that not all their earnings and inheritances were given to the church.  

1 Timothy 6:1-2: “Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.  And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit.  These things teach and exhort.”

Much slavery in the Roman world was not from kidnapping (which God prescribed death for in the Law of Moses).  Slavery in the Roman world was also very different in many ways than what it was in America.  Don’t read slavery in America into this passage.  With that said, this passage demonstrates that not all Christians in the first century churches were socially equal nor financially equal.  The fact that some Christians were masters of other Christians who served them proves that.

Later in the same chapter we also read in 1 Timothy 6:17-19: “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.”

Being a Christian in the first century in the fellowships of the Apostles simply did not necessitate renouncing one’s right to private property.  Therefore, the concept that there should be Christian Communism is unbiblical and evil.

The only people who would teach otherwise are at least one of the following: Looking to freeload off others, extremely naive, want to destroy others’ lives because they are bitter about their own failure, wolves looking to get a following for themselves and gain unrighteous, God-like control over others.

Communism and Socialism, whether on a societal level or on a lesser scale, always involve some having improper, unrighteous, God-like control- while others are enslaved under such control.  

Such societies can also be fitting for those who refused the true God’s reign over them.

This is one potential issue which wolves rising up from within, and wolves attacking a promising Christian group from without, will use to attempt to draw away disciples after themselves.  There is a lust which some follow to start such a community to fleece sheep for themselves and/or to make a name for themselves.  That is mainly why I bring up this topic and do a study on it.  

For all we know, the Tower of Babel and the accompanying city which God confounded the building of may have been part of an attempt at forming a Communist or Socialist society.

Aaron’s email is: [email protected]

CLICK HERE TO GO TO OUR FRONT PAGE FOR ALL THE STUDIES

CLICK HERE TO GO TO OUR 3RD WORLD MISSION TO THE IMPOVERISHED