Why do people avoid the fact that in the Church was originally SOCIALIST?

Question

Note how I used the word "socialist" instead of "communist." This is so I can avoid having a virus sent to my Inbox by some Jesus -lover again.

When you seriously think about it though, Jesus was more likely a communist (apart from the religious factor).

The early Christian Church practiced a form of socialism. People joining the Church were required to give all of their possessions to Church leaders. If they failed to do this, and kept some back for themselves, they would be murdered. This is documented in Acts of the Apostles.

Jesus himself was not too fond of the rich either:
-Jesus disliked very much the tax collectors because they were money-driven and money-hungry (Matthew 5:46, 9:10, and Luke 3:11-13).
-Jesus disliked the rich people and promised that only few of them will make it to Heaven (Matthew 19:23-26)
-Jesus owned practically no material possessions.


***In this case, why is Jesus often often associated with capitalism?

Answer 1

Its a cyclical thing reflecting society as a whole. You speak from the vantage point of 21st century America, in many parts of the world and at different times the Church is actually fairly left-wing.

Answer 2

I think you are just saying this so you can make me give you my stuff!

I would never say that the Church was Communist, but Socialist is a given. They were not required to give the Leaders anything, but did so out of love so that all would be better off. The lesson from Acts 5 is stated clearly in verse 3. It was because they lied and tried to deceive the other believers into thinking they were doing the same. I believe that it was a lesson hard learned because of the infancy of the Church. While it does not happen today it will be found out on the last day.

Jesus was buried in a rich man's tomb. Lazarus was most likely well off. Zacheus was likewise well off. Jesus was stating an obvious truth that with wealth it is very easy to forget others and the one who gave you the wealth. He also spoke of treasure in Heaven so it is not wealth that he had a problem with but matters of the heart.

As for why Jesus is often associated with capitalism is the same reason Jesus was associated with the Crusades and other such acts. Greed and in this instance the "non-Christian" are right it makes the masses easier to manipulate. But, it is not Christianity that does this only those who abuse it.

I hope you appreciate that I did not cut and paste this time, but when I do it I am trying to save the asker a step and also hope that they may actually read the text in context.

Answer 3

I believe you have things backwards, dear. Socialism is based on an athiestic version of the early Christian Church communal lifestyle, not the other way around. Which one pre-dates the other? Hmmmmmmm...

Also, nobody was "required" to sell all their possessions and give the proceeds to the Church leaders in Jerusalem. You are misquoting the Acts portion here! Some people CHOSE to sell some property, and donate the proceeds to the poor, but this was not a requirement. There was certainly no threat of violence or murder if believers kept personal property. Whoever told you this lied!

The people who dropped dead were a married couple, Ananias and Saphira. They were not murdered by church leadership! The record states that they willingly sold their own property, and divided some of the money: some for themselves, some for distribution to the poor. The problem was, they misrepresented the amount to the church! THEY LIED ABOUT IT, claiming that their charitable gift represented ALL of the money from the sale of their field.

When he did this, Ananias dropped dead, possibly from a stroke or a heart attack. NO physical violence is recorded against him by ANY member of the church or leadership. Peter was a fisherman, not an alchemist or a wizard! If you want to accuse Peter of Ananias' murder, I strongly urge you to provide some sort of evidence, especially to contradict a written eyewitness of the account. Your own assumptions DON'T COUNT.

Saphira, coming in some time later, and not knowing her husband was dead, was asked "Is this the amount you got for selling your property?". She repeated her husband's lie, and also died on the spot. Again, if you have evidence of any human violence against Saphira, by all means trot it out. Otherwise, you are only guilty of slander.

We have a well-preserved 2,000 year old record for our side of the story. What do you have?

As for Jesus' fondness(or not) of rich people, I think you are again mistaken. It was the way that people BECAME rich that was often repugnant, as well as their treatment of non-rich people. Tax collectors were known thieves; they just had the Roman army backing them up. People belonging to the "upper class" are notorious for taking advantage of the lower, assuming their material wealth means they have "the right" to do so. Material possessions can themselves be an addiction, another reason to eschew them.

IDK about Jesus and capitalism. Who made that point, anyway?

Answer 4

People in general have a hard time reconciling their spiritual life with their physical existence. The best way to deal with the difference between the way they treated worldly goods and the way the modern church does (mainly in the west, I guess) is to remember that we're called to live peaceably and in submission to the government so long as it doesn't directly conflict with God's word. The trend in some branches or denominations to heap wealth upon themselves is due to a self centered view of God. But I always thought the early church was pretty communistic. Any system of government would work if all the people were on the same page. It's corruption that ruins any system.

--some Jesus Lover

Answer 5

The idea that the church was socialist comes from the necessity that was placed upon early Jewish converts who lost their businesses and property as a result of persecution. It wasn't a doctrine that was taught by Jesus or the Apostles. Instead this is what was said.

1 Timothy 6:17 As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. 18 They are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, 19 thus storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life.

There is a difference between charitable giving to help out brothers and sisters in need and everybody putting their money at the feet of the Apostles as is described in the book of Acts when there was a crisis going on because of persecution.

Answer 6

The early Church did try to have "all things common" although private property was also allowed. However, as time went on they found that "socialism" simply did not work. Jesus did not have alot of material possessions, not because He was opposed to owning things but because they did not fit in with the overall plan of God in accomplishing His mission on earth.

Answer 7

Jesus promoted a VOLUNTARY communal lifestyle for some people.

There is nothing voluntary about socialism, for those who do not vote for it.

EDIT: Only parasites, brainwashed unfortunates, and the evil people who would manipulate them want a socialist government.

Answer 8

you are off about Jesus disliking rich people, in mathew 19, he was saying that because of alot of rich people's pride. Not because he wouldn't let them in. God gave riches to people, but once they are put before God himself he dislikes it.

Answer 9

Whoa there.
Yes,the early Christian church was communal.But early Christians were NOT forced to give their possesions to the leaders,and they were NOT murdered if they didn't.I think someone needs to re-read Acts,and stop spreading lies.