PDA

View Full Version : Early Christians were Communists



Loki
08-26-2009, 08:57 PM
Fact.

Acts 2:42-45 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:42-45&version=NIV)



The Fellowship of the Believers

42 They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.



Acts 4:32-37 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%204:32-37&version=NIV)



The Believers Share Their Possessions

32 All 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. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34 There 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 35 and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means Son of Encouragement), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles' feet.

Loki
08-26-2009, 08:59 PM
I wonder how many modern "believers" have faith so strong, that they would sell their homes and lands in order to be distributed to the needy. I reckon less than 0.0001%. :coffee:

Brännvin
08-26-2009, 09:01 PM
Usury was the basis for Jesus's calling the money changers thieves. :D

Æmeric
08-26-2009, 09:06 PM
I wonder how many modern "believers" have faith so strong, that they would sell their homes and lands in order to be distributed to the needy. I reckon less than 0.0001%. :coffee:That's because communism doesn't work. The Pilgrims tried to establish a communal system in Plymouth Colony, it failed & they resorted to private ownership. Quite successfully too, with New England becoming one of the wealthiest parts of British North America in spite of the fact that the quality of the land were low compared to areas in the South.

All Christian movements that have tried communalism have failed. I think it is because that communalism undermines the basic family unit. Teething is a much better way of funding a church.:angel

Loki
08-26-2009, 09:10 PM
All Christian movements that have tried communalism have failed. I think it is because that communalism undermines the basic family unit. Teething is a much better way of funding a church.:angel

That must have been an error on the side of the Holy Spirit then, since Acts states that the Spirit of God led the early believers after the day of Pentecost.

Brännvin
08-26-2009, 09:11 PM
Then you would have an exception for the Amish.

Æmeric
08-26-2009, 09:16 PM
That must have been an error on the side of the Holy Spirit then, since Acts states that the Spirit of God led the early believers after the day of Pentecost.

He led them, he didn't feed them.

Loki
08-26-2009, 09:18 PM
He led them, he didn't feed them.

Yeah! In my experience and knowledge, God seems unable to affect anything in the natural world. He kinda lost his touch after the parting of the Red Sea. :p And without humans paying tithes, God would go bankrupt very quickly. :rolleyes:

Æmeric
08-26-2009, 09:25 PM
You feel God has let you down, don't you? If everything doesn't go your way then it must be because there is no god. Did you ever think it was satan's fault.:flyingdev

Loki
08-26-2009, 09:35 PM
You feel God has let you down, don't you?


I used to think so, until I realised he didn't exist. :) Now I just blame myself for my failures. ;)



If everything doesn't go your way then it must be because there is no god. Did you ever think it was satan's fault.:flyingdev

For Christians, everything that go wrong must be the work of the devil. I know. I've been there, done that. He's one powerful foe! :wink I think many Christians actually worship Satan through fearing him, and attributing so many things to him. They also seem to think he is omnipresent. :coffee:

Lutiferre
08-26-2009, 09:38 PM
Fact.

Acts 2:42-45 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:42-45&version=NIV)




Acts 4:32-37 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%204:32-37&version=NIV)
Much of the early Christian Church was communal, a spirital brotherhood of unity. Just like monasticism continues to be today. What distinguishes this spiritual communalism from "communism" is that it was completely voluntary and done out of charity, and it was a spiritual brotherhood of men who know each other, interpersonal, not a system of government of society, and their spiritual brotherhood consisted in their dedicating their life and mission to God, with a vision of paradise not on Earth but in Heaven, as opposed to the secular and antitheistic system of government we know as communism, which aspires to a material utopia on Earth, not in Heaven, and which is radically anti-Christian and against everything these communal Christians stand for.

Cato
08-26-2009, 09:38 PM
If believers share everything it means more l00t for the L$rd!

Óttar
08-26-2009, 09:44 PM
I wonder how many modern "believers" have faith so strong, that they would sell their homes and lands in order to be distributed to the needy. I reckon less than 0.0001%. :coffee:
I've been saying this for a while. The very people (the Romans) whose culture Jesus was rebelling against has co-opted his name. Jesus said essentially a rich man cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven. He referred to the Jewish priestly caste, the Pharisees, as "whitewashed tombs" who dress in fine raiment, but who on the inside, are filled with rotting pus. Now we have another priestly caste dressed in fine raiment, but which is spiritually rotten.

A true Christian would go off into the desert and live communally with his fellow believers, praying and keeping feasts and fasts. Christianity is, at its core, a rejection of the material world and a subversion of aristocratic values. Which is OK by itself, separate, out in the desert in isolation; catastrophic when applied to worldly society.

Cato
08-26-2009, 09:48 PM
Aristocratic values are what the world is in sore need of, not brotherly love and communism.

Lutiferre
08-26-2009, 09:59 PM
A true Christian would go off into the desert and live communally with his fellow believers, praying and keeping feasts and fasts. Christianity is, at its core, a rejection of the material world and a subversion of aristocratic values. Which is OK by itself, separate, out in the desert in isolation; catastrophic when applied to worldly society.

As to whether vocational life is the only life for a "true Christian", that is certainly not the case. Vocational life is only for those who are called, thus vocatio, referring to the voice of God. Not everyone is called to a vocational life; far from it.

Jesus spoke favourably of the sanctity of marriage, and defended this institution vehemently from it's Pharasaic legalistic corruption. The human marriage has been the foundation for human worldly life since the beginning, and Christ by supporting it, underbuilt the possibility for the continuity of civilisation, happiness, harmony and cultivation in the common life of Christendom. Certainly, not only the vocational life is true to Christianity. The marital life is just as true to it. But don't underestimate the service that both have done to Christian life and civilisation. After the fall of Rome, it was Christian monasteries, clergies, monks and nuns who rebuilt civilisation, preserved the Greek literature, science and learning, started the universities of Europe, and laid the foundation for modern knowledge and society.

Even then, Christian communal life is far from the only kind of Christian vocational life. There is much richness and diversity within the Christian spiritual tradition and life. The monastic life itself embodies the paradox of both the communal and the completely individual, the cenobitic and the eremitic. This is evident in that the term comes from Grk. monos. It embodies both the eremitic life of solitude, whether it be the Christian mystics wandering alone in forests and deserts and mountains, and those cenobitic spiritual communities which are completely glued together, and everything in between.

Ariets
08-27-2009, 04:07 PM
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa221/murzynzglowa/commie2.jpg

:D

SwordoftheVistula
08-28-2009, 10:32 AM
Then you would have an exception for the Amish.

They are pretty capitalist, they all own their own farms, woodworking shops, etc, don't participate in government. They have 'community' functions and help eachother, but no different in this regard from the rest of society.


Usury was the basis for Jesus's calling the money changers thieves. :D

Wasn't it more that they were selling sacrificial animals (engaging in commerce) on temple grounds?


I've been saying this for a while. The very people (the Romans) whose culture Jesus was rebelling against has co-opted his name.

True, but if they hadn't, they would have created or co-opted something else as a figurehead for religion, and Christians would be like the zoroastrians or Druze.

Cato
08-28-2009, 12:57 PM
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee34/southerngooner_album/CommunistJesus1.jpg

Sally
08-28-2009, 03:09 PM
For Christians, everything that go wrong must be the work of the devil. I know. I've been there, done that. He's one powerful foe! :wink I think many Christians actually worship Satan through fearing him, and attributing so many things to him. They also seem to think he is omnipresent. :coffee:

I've heard many evangelicals and Pentecostals (though not exclusively, of course) blame their shortcomings on the devil. While I do believe the devil can attack believers, I think a lot may be attributed to our fallen nature and to concupiscence.

Óttar
08-28-2009, 08:12 PM
True, but if they hadn't, they would have created or co-opted something else as a figurehead for religion, and Christians would be like the zoroastrians or Druze.
Perhaps, but I wouldn't be complaining today if Constantine had adopted Mithraism instead of the cult of the Jewish sickly godman.

Cato
08-28-2009, 10:20 PM
Perhaps, but I wouldn't be complaining today if Constantine had adopted Mithraism instead of the cult of the Jewish sickly godman.

The sickly godman was recast into the image of an imperial warlord, just as he's been recast and remolded for 2,000 years.