Socialism in Acts
By Richard P. Joseph
2/3/2019
Socialism and/or communism is, and always was, a failing system. Socialism as
a form of government is a measure that guarantees that the human condition will
not be improved beyond a near poverty level. Socialism/communism is a system
that punishes anyone who dares to improve his lot in life therefore crushing all
incentive for prosperity or even decent living conditions. Once the incentive is
removed, poverty ensues.
So why would the apostles bring the church into a socialist system if it was bound
to fail?
In Acts chapter four we read about the new church giving up their own
possessions for the good of the church. They sold lands and property and laid
the proceeds at the feet of the apostles. First of all, why did they do this and
second of all what were the practical results of what they did?
My grandparents were from Lebanon. They came to the United States
around 1900. In the 1960’s one of my uncles wanted to visit Lebanon and
he looked up some of our relatives. When he found them, they suddenly
became suspicious of the reason for his visit. That, according to our
modern westernized thinking, was quite unnecessary but to them, in their
Middle Eastern culture was actually very necessary. According to Middle
Eastern law, the land is always passed down to the oldest male as far as I
can understand it. In other words they wanted to make sure that he was
not there to make a claim against the land that he very well may have had
a right to do. He agreed to sign a legal agreement that he just wanted to
visit with no strings attached. I still have a copy of those papers. This is
how it was in ancient Israel also. Land was kept in the family. If it was
sold then it would return back to the family during the year of jubilee which
was on every 50th year after seven sets of sevens. Land was vital to the
Jewish and ancient economies as farming was the most important
business. So what does this have to do with the seemingly socialist policy
that the apostles took part in?
The Apostles never displayed a good understanding of the return of Christ
all the way up until Pentecost AD 30. In most of their pre-Pentecost
statements, it appears that they were looking for a physical restoration of
the old order. It was not until Pentecost that these misgivings disappeared.
Acts 1:4 And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not
to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father,
“which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; 5 for John truly baptized with
water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from
now.” 6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying,
“Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said
to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has
put in His own authority. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy
Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be [c]witnesses to Me in
Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”
Once the Holy Spirit had enlightened them, something changed. They
began to preach as if the Parousia was imminent. And they no longer
thought of it as a purely physical transformation. There were, however,
two main things that they were sure of; that the Parousia would occur
within their generation and that Jerusalem would pay a heavy price for her
unfaithfulness. That translated into: “our land will be worthless before the
next Jubilee”. In fact, in Paul’s later epistles, he encouraged the
Christians not even to marry because the time of the Parousia was so
close. This of course is something that Jesus warned about in Matthew
24.
That is why Peter allowed them to adopt a temporary socialist type policy;
because it was temporary. This policy was never intended to be a permanent
way of life by any means. It was simply because the second coming of Christ
was absolutely going to occur within their lifetime so why hang onto land that
you will not be able to keep because of the coming doom or because you would
be killed or raptured. The tribulation that the Christians went through between
AD 63-66 would put an end to land use and that is not to mention the wrath that
was poured onto Jerusalem from 66-70. This devastation was like no other in
history. It left the house of Israel desolate.
Matthew 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones
those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together,
as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! 38 See!
Your house is left to you desolate; 39 for I say to you, you shall see Me no more
till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’
That is why the apostles were only worried about the temporary physical needs
of the church. They were more interested in their spiritual being at that point.
Good thing because the socialist aspect had its toll on them.
Acts 6:1 Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying,
there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists,[a]because their
widows were neglected in the daily distribution.
It didn’t take long for people to start complaining about getting free stuff
(sound familiar?). Since socialism is a completely failed system, the Christians
in Jerusalem were running out of food. They did not know how long Jesus
would take to return so they wanted to be ready at any time and wanted to grow
the church as much as possible before it occurred. Can you imagine if it didn’t
happen yet? It would be a complete disaster. But as Jesus had promised, it
took place in AD 70 which released them from all of their pre-AD 70 constraints.
But as it was they were beginning to feel the pain of socialism and the Apostles
had to choose seven men to handle those complaints. Not only that, in Acts 11,
we see that there was a famine approaching and a collection was taken up by
the gentiles and foreign Jews in order to send to the Church in Jerusalem.
This relief money had more than one effect on the Church but at least one of
them was physical. I believe the Jerusalem church was not only devastated by
the famine but also by their socialist policy. Ed Stevens points out that the
money also assisted in helping the Jews to accept the gentiles as brothers in
the Lord. Once you understand the Judaizer problem in its fullest, that
becomes a very reasonable conclusion.
