Acts 4 v 32-36

[mindlight]

In Acts 4 v 32-36 it says:

32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.
36Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means Son of Encouragement),

1) Is the notion of a Christian commune something that was a purely contextual response by the Early church or does it have any meaning for today?

2) How should we interpret this passage in the light of other passages in Proverbs etc which imply that wealth is a sign of blessing and a reward for hard work for instance?

3) Is the lesson of this passage prescriptive on the lines of the story of the rich young man and Jesus or is it , like that passage, prescriptive for some but not for others?

4) Was this sharing in the early Jerusalem church ultimately to prove a problem as by Acts 11 the church needed the support of other churches around the empire?

 

[FreezBee]

1) Is the notion of a Christian commune something that was a purely contextual response by the Early church or does it have any meaning for today?

Well, it has been tried out a few times, but usually goes wrong - the leaders developing into dictatoric tyrants.

2) How should we interpret this passage in the light of other passages in Proverbs etc which imply that wealth is a sign of blessing and a reward for hard work for instance?

In the Roman empire there were some philosophies that worshipped poverty, for instance stoicism. But I think the difference here is a change in perspective. In Psalms and Proverbs material wealth is indeed described as a blessing from God, so what if you are poor? Then you must be a bad person! What Jesus teaches is that you are even better, if you can give up your material wealth and give it to those in need.

3) Is the lesson of this passage prescriptive on the lines of the story of the rich young man and Jesus or is it , like that passage, prescriptive for some but not for others?

Remember that the main point in the teachings of Jesus is that we should trust God, not let ourselves be dependent on anything else. This goes for material wealth, and not only that, but also family. How much can you give up and say that God will replace it for you?

The story about the rich young man serves to illustrate that some people may be able to give up, what they have come to depend on, and enter the kingdom of God.

4) Was this sharing in the early Jerusalem church ultimately to prove a problem as by Acts 11 the church needed the support of other churches around the empire?

Not necessarily, it would depend on which people were members of the community. If only poor people were members, even sharing wouldn't help much.


- FreezBee

 

[mindlight]

Well, it has been tried out a few times, but usually goes wrong - the leaders developing into dictatoric tyrants.

Thats so true- Leftists/socialists often quote this passage but try to impose the principle of sharing. In this passage giving is clearly voluntary. Ananias and Saphira were punished not for not sharing the extra money they had actually got for their property but for lying to the Holy Spirit about it. Thus in practice so called egalitarian societies have been oppressive e.g. Communism. One can argue that equality by forced taxation is partially destructive of human choice and thus incentive and thus the potential productivity of a society.

In the Roman empire there were some philosophies that worshipped poverty, for instance stoicism. But I think the difference here is a change in perspective. In Psalms and Proverbs material wealth is indeed described as a blessing from God, so what if you are poor? Then you must be a bad person! What Jesus teaches is that you are even better, if you can give up your material wealth and give it to those in need.

Yes it is not a sin to use ones gifts and to create wealth for your self and community. It is indeed the basis of giving as it provides the resources which perhaps Christians should take more pleasure in sharing. Jesus could walk away from wealth confident that God would always provide what was appropriate for his purposes at every stage of his ministry. So also he receive the riches of heaven on his ascension to be with the Father. He receives as one who sees all the riches of Creation as what they are: good creations of the greater reality of God. Jesus example teaches us to trust in God rather than the gifts he gives us or takes from us.

Remember that the main point in the teachings of Jesus is that we should trust God, not let ourselves be dependent on anything else. This goes for material wealth, and not only that, but also family. How much can you give up and say that God will replace it for you?

Interesting question. Presumably Jesus maintained the family carpentry business after Josephs death and handed it on to brothers in the family. When he walked away he did not abandon those dependent on it to live but he showed that he did not need the money that his trade would have provided. The Lord would provide for his ministry.

The story about the rich young man serves to illustrate that some people may be able to give up, what they have come to depend on, and enter the kingdom of God.

The sadness of the rich young man illustrates his attachment to his things. He was not a steward who could pass his responsibilities on gladly nor a philanthropists eager to improve the lot of the poor. Nor was he first and foremost a disciple of Christ as unlike those Jesus called he could not simply walk away from the businesses e.g. fishing boats to gladly follow a greater calling.

Not necessarily, it would depend on which people were members of the community. If only poor people were members, even sharing wouldn't help much.


- FreezBee

I sometimes wonder if African Christianity in the modern era is often too communal in this respect. What is given is shared but never invested. Talents are given away rather than magnified as the Master would desire of his servants. Giving should empower materially and spiritually productive lifestyles