Communism under the label of a Christian church group may not be widespread nor on the radar of many- however a small but significant percentage of people have been exposed to, targeted, or even joined groups which are labeled as Christian communes (where those who join as members renounce ownership of private property and personal finances).  Though not nearly the full list, examples of these groups include the Hutterites, the Bruderhof, and the Twelve Tribes communities.  

Those who look into such groups often do so because they are fed up with the shallowness of denominations and superficial independent churches.  The same people tend to have great spiritual hunger.

It was also mentioned in the last study that wolves attacking promising Christian groups from both within and without could potentially be working on behalf of a commune in the name of Christ.  

For these reasons at least, it is important to understand that truly following Jesus is not compatible with being a Communist- even if/when Jesus’ name, along with many Biblical terms and practices, are attached to a Communist lifestyle.

We also saw in the last study (Communism: Never the Solution and Always Ungodly) how the situation with the very earliest Christians described in Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32 was descriptive of a strange and unique situation which has never existed since.  Though true Christian charity is seen in action in these places, the passages are descriptive of that particular situation and not prescriptive for those who would be faithful to Christ.

We went on to see how, even right in the Book of Acts, that faithful Christians did retain ownership of private property, they did not hand all of their finances and inheritances over to the church, and that some were indeed richer or poorer than others.  Therefore, the concept that being a faithful Christian means surrender to communal living with others is unbiblical and evil.  And Communism, whether practiced on a societal level or a lesser scale, always involves some having improper, unrighteous God-like control over others.  

And to add to that, such control is especially dangerous when it is unofficial and not spelled out clearly.  This enhances the deceit and makes it all the more difficult to demand accountability from the leadership- since they haven’t been up front concerning the power which they are practically exercising.  This is inevitably the case with Communism.  

This is even the case with the unrighteous shadow powers behind the world’s governments.  The fact that they rule over nations without even telling us what they’re doing means that they get away with things which they’d never get away with if they told us who they were, what their actual roles are, and what was actually going on.  Since they own most of  the media and control most politicians, they are covered for.  

The most dangerous leaders are the ones who won’t admit their role of leadership and/or cover up what their role of leadership actually entails.

This is all relevant to how the so-called “Christian communes” operate since they are inherently ungodly and inevitably involve some having power over others which is not fitting that any adult should have over another adult.  

You can be sure that such control is happening with any group which makes its members give up all personal property and not have any (or very limited) personal finances.  

Just consider the brutal, complicated trap that joining a commune puts someone in if they want to leave.  And beyond that, consider even the implicit pressure that joining a commune puts upon everyone who joins to not even think much of leaving due to how leaving is likely to seem so difficult and complicated after one has joined.

And by the way: You do not have to be accountable for leaving a commune since you are in a situation in which it was never righteous for you to have been put in at all.  One may be cut off already from all outside friends and family members.  Even in the worst case scenario though, there must still be someone who can get you or arrange for you to be picked up and taken somewhere.  If no help is freely available, offer to pay back whatever is spent in removing you from the commune, and spent in taking you in afterwards, after you have got a job and got on your feet.  Where there is a will, there is a way.  Get law enforcement involved also if you are being impeded from leaving; or even think you might be impeded from leaving.  The commune cannot legally hold you hostage.

We will continue now to build on the last study with proofs from the Bible that Communism being practiced among Christians is neither Biblically prescriptive nor Biblically normal.  

1 Timothy 5:16: “If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.”

This direction, and several other directions in this chapter, prove that some received support from the church and others did not.  Such directions would be pointless if the Christian church members did not own private property and had surrendered all of their income to the church.  In that case, all the members would be receiving their support through the church anyways.  

The fact that the Apostles gave directions for the church to support certain members means that the church did not support all of its members- and that means the Apostolic churches were not practicing Communism.

2 Timothy 4:13: “The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.”

No one, not even an Apostle, could assert a claim to these things both righteously and confidently like Paul did here unless they were his own personal possessions.

Philemon 1:10-14: “I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds: Which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me: Whom I have sent again: thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels: Whom I would have retained with me, that in thy stead he might have ministered unto me in the bonds of the gospel: But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly.”

Now that there is good reason to believe that Onesimus is repentant and trustworthy, he can be profitable to Paul in Rome in prison or he can go back to Philemon.  Paul is informing Philemon of the situation and letting him make the decision.  Since Paul regarded Philemon as faithful to the Lord, and sees this as Philemon’s rightful decision, this demonstrates that Philemon owned personal property (going along with 1 Timothy 6:1-2 in the previous study, along with the comments there about slavery in the Roman world).  

Hebrews 10:34 (the writer to the Hebrews is commending the Hebrews for their good start in the Christian race and exhorting them not to draw back- or exhorting them to repent from drawing back): “For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring substance.”

Though the Hebrew Christians had rejoiced in confidence at the spoiling of their goods due to their hope in Christ of a better and an enduring substance in heaven, this nevertheless labels the spoiling of their goods as a persecution done through the hands of persecutors.

1 Corinthians 6:1-8: “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?  Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?  and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?  Know ye not that we shall judge angels?  how much more things that pertain to this life?  If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.  I speak to your shame.  Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you?  no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?  But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.  Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another.  Why do ye not rather take wrong?  why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?  Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.”

If the norm among the Apostolic churches was that every member’s earnings all went into a common purse, then lawsuits between members would have been a non-issue- since no one would have owned anything anyways.  

Note also that the Apostle’s counsel was not that the dispute itself was irrelevant; it was that the church should handle it and not the civil judges.  

There would be no need for the church to solve the dispute though among its members if each member’s money went into a common purse which each member of the church was supported by anyways.

It’s notable that, in rebuking the most carnal church with the silliest problems, we see that Communism was not the answer to these problems nor were these problems among the Corinthians due to them straying from Communism.  

Both Communism and Socialism in general are reliant on the lie that their implementation would fix the greed problem in man’s heart.

1 Corinthians 11:20-22: “When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper.  For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.  What?  have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?  or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not?  what shall I say to you?  shall I praise you in this?  I praise you not.”

In the Apostle’s rebuke to the Corinthians for their neglect and shaming of the poor, it is implied that some are richer than others.  

That disparity is not rebuked.  

The ungodly way in which it was being managed is what was rebuked.

1 Corinthians 12:23-26: “And those members of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.  For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honor to that part which lacked.  That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.  And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it.”

No one can learn to properly regard others nor optimally learn to identify with the circumstances of others when there is mandatory, compelled financial equality already existing among the group.  

Consider: God doesn’t make people equal in other ways.  If He did, we would not be confronted with the lessons in righteousness which we need to learn in order to be fitting for His kingdom.

It’s also the case that many people over the course of a lifetime have significant shifts when it comes to how rich or how poor they are.

Also, consider: How is it fitting that a collective entity (or more likely the official or unwritten, unregulated rulers of a collective entity) be stewards of everything which those of that collective entity have earned?  It is unfitting.  This prevents excellence in stewardship and promotes mismanagement (to say the least).

Acts 11:27-30: “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.”

This was quoted also in the last study (only there I said Acts 12:27-30- my apologies).  It was quoted to show that not all the Christians were equal financially and that not all their income was given to the church.  

It also shows how it is best that the church members make their vote about how the church uses its income primarily by what they give to the needs brought up and the projects the church undertakes.  Overall, every disciple giving according to their ability showed more excellence than what the church could have shown by some collective decision.  They thus did better collectively by acting at their own individual discretion.  

You just have to read Acts chapter 11 before that point to show how the church at Antioch had received excellent Christian teaching and training which brought them to that point.  

Such teaching and training of disciples should be the focus of the church.  

Mandatory Communism in the church does nothing positive to that end.  It can however be passed off as “radical Christianity” when promoted in Christ’s name- though it is really just an alternative lifestyle that is a cheap substitute for, or a hindrance to, actual Christian discipleship.

Philippians 3:18-19: “(For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)”

To offer an alternative lifestyle with the alluring guarantee (for some) of the necessities of life and a close-knit, nurturing community, and equate joining that group (however pure and righteous it seems; and whatever it does) with authentically following Jesus is using Him to appeal to the natural interests of humans- thus it is opposing His cross.  

That much, along with how Communism is not prescribed for Christians, is not how the Christians typically lived in the Bible, and it is a dangerous philosophy overall when prescribed which always involves some exercising God-like control over others overall makes Communism proper to combat and to otherwise be avoided like the plague.

Luke 18:28-30 (this is right after Jesus had dealt with the Rich Young Ruler): “Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee.  And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God’s sake, Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.”

These promises are for after one forsakes all in repentance to carry their cross and follow Jesus in death to sin and self.  They are not to be used to appeal to the natural man who hasn’t died in that manner yet nor as a bait and switch to promote one’s own agenda which they have labeled as Christian.  However, that doesn’t stop many from misapplying these promises- including some in promoting their commune.

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