towermonkey wrote: I think I know who you are now Mr. Know It All... It is really annoying to throw out something as a bit of a joke and have some idiot come back citing a bunch of history to prove that your joke is incorrect. You must be Mitt Romney...
It's really simpler than that. You were just flat wrong.
The Bible does teach a few things about wealth distribution (providing for widows and orphans would have a relatively high priority, and the early church lived in what was arguably an early version of a commune).
It also teaches a lot about giving. Curiously - the role models who gave to the church were the people who gave the least - but were least able to give, to begin with. (Widow's mite, the church at Philipi, and I'm sure many others)
I suspect one day, virtually all of us (me included) will be surprised when we see what the almighty really wanted the church to be and look like.
bailey bud wrote: The Bible does teach a few things about wealth distribution (providing for widows and orphans would have a relatively high priority, and the early church lived in what was arguably an early version of a commune).
It also teaches a lot about giving. Curiously - the role models who gave to the church were the people who gave the least - but were least able to give, to begin with. (Widow's mite, the church at Philipi, and I'm sure many others)
I suspect one day, virtually all of us (me included) will be surprised when we see what the almighty really wanted the church to be and look like.
What are you talking about? The early church did not live in any sorts of communes. Show me archeologically, historically or scripturally these communes? (Dr. Philban... your residence atheist)
42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.
(Acts 2)
I suppose you're correct - they didn't live in communes - but they did live, worship, and act corporately.
I'd argue that verses 44 and 45 are almost antithetical to the modern church .
Look at where the mega churches spend their money (facilities, media, etc). Most churches will give selectively to members who have need, few will give to anyone who has need.
My person opinion is that Francis Schaefer (who I'd note is a fallible human being) leaned in the correct direction with L'Abri.
42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.
(Acts 2)
I suppose you're correct - they didn't live in communes - but they did live, worship, and act corporately.
I'd argue that verses 44 and 45 are almost antithetical to the modern church .
Look at where the mega churches spend their money (facilities, media, etc). Most churches will give selectively to members who have need, few will give to anyone who has need.
My person opinion is that Francis Schaefer (who I'd note is a fallible human being) leaned in the correct direction with L'Abri.
Ok... midpoint agreement, although this form of corporate community was not like socialism (as this thread title proposes). These believers were not "off the grid," they respected the laws, both Hebrew Scriptural laws and Roman secular law and many of them held meaningful jobs. And the Greek word for "common" is also translated "shared." A more detailed account of this "community" can be found...
nd had all things common - Perhaps this has not been well understood. At all the public religious feasts in Jerusalem, there was a sort of community of goods. No man at such times hired houses or beds in Jerusalem; all were lent gratis by the owners: Yoma, fol. 12. Megill. fol. 26. The same may be well supposed of their ovens, cauldrons, tables, spits, and other utensils. Also, provisions of water were made for them at the public expense; Shekalim, cap. 9. See Lightfoot here. Therefore a sort of community of goods was no strange thing at Jerusalem, at such times as these. It appears, however, that this community of goods was carried farther; for we are informed, Acts 2:45, that they sold their possessions and their goods, and parted them to all, as every man had need. But, this probably means that, as in consequence of this remarkable outpouring of the Spirit of God; and their conversion, they were detained longer at Jerusalem than they had originally intended, they formed a kind of community for the time being, that none might suffer want on the present occasion; as no doubt the unbelieving Jews, who were mockers, Acts 2:13, would treat these new converts with the most marked disapprobation. That an absolute community of goods never obtained in the Church at Jerusalem, unless for a very short time, is evident from the apostolical precept, 1 Corinthians 16:1, etc.,
