Dr. Couch, does the "all things in common" passage of Acts 2:44 support the Communist idea of community sharing of goods?
Of course not. The passage goes on and explains that they were selling
their goods in order to give to those that "might have need" (v. 45).
The believers were ostracized by the general society, and along with
this, there were a lot of poor people who were coming to Christ who had
little. This is further described in 4:32-37. They pooled their goods
for the "needy" (v. 34), and sold property with the funds and then
"distributed to each, as any had need" (v. 35). If someone did not have a
need he did not receive help!
The story of Ananias and Sapphira is part of this same context (ch. 5).
The couple was judged because they lied about what they received from
the sale of "a piece of property," implying that they were not forced to
sell all they had, but only sold a portion of what they owned. Their
sin was pretending to give all! They kept back some of the price, lied
about it, but brought it to the apostles as if they were giving the full
amount.
In the Scriptures individual capitalism (if you like) was the norm. The
ideal woman in Prov. 31 had her own business and generated profits. Paul
tells the lazy in 2 Thess. 3:12 to "work in quiet fashion and eat their
own bread," and "if anyone will not work, neither let him eat" (vv.
8-10).
The sharing in early Acts was for a specific moment in the early church and was not the norm.
Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
