Community = Unity

[Amy F]

Do you think Christians are called to this type of community living today? Why or Why not? What would be the pros? Cons?

Acts 4:32-35
And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them. And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all. For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales and lay them at the apostles' feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need.

[John Roberts]

It's the perfect form of government because it's the form of government that God had established for His people when they were brought into the land promised. They were to divide the land as people had need. If more was needed then more was given if less was required then less was given. It's the ideal form of government and all would have been well except Israel did not keep their part of the bargin "all that you say we will do" Not! so God took from them what he gave them and they were dispersed throughout all nations.

The Apostles seem to have had the same idea for themselves as a people. To divide what they had and give as was needed. The difference though is that God had already taken the land from them and given it to the heathen nations and they would eventually be dispersed again after the resurrection of Christ when Christianity was made Illegal. The fact that God has set the basest of men over all the kingdoms of the world (Dan 4:17) prevented the first Christians from fully realizing the perfect community of believers. That and the fact that Christianity was being corrupted by false prophets and teaching.

But Christians today can help one another as they have need. And we have the hope and promise of God that one day we shall inherit the earth (the promised land) and Jesus shall reign over all the kingdoms of the world and we will "sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven." (Matt 5:5; Rev 11:15; Matt 8:11).

[Ratatösk]

Yes, this is what we ought to be up to, but I think I'd disagree with John's characterizing it as a government.

Not because of the political implications. I believe the church is a competing polis (apparently, so did Caesar by the way), but rather because 'government' sounds too 'top down.'

This type of sharing comes from an actual sense of community. That is what is missing among God's people, in my opinion.

Its not solved by enforcing economic theory. It's solve by understanding that 'you' are truly in 'them' and 'they' in 'you.' Its solved by a sense of identity and the desire to live out the Trinitarian faith we profess.

It seems to me that there is a world of difference between saying 'What's mine is yours." and insisting "What's yours is mine." Every family and community taps into the first... or they aren't families. The later is the way of Communists.

[John Roberts]

The idea or promise that communism promoted sounded good. But we see again how God sets the basest of men over the kingdoms of the world. Communism eventually made religion illegal. And it never lived up to its promise. It killed millions of people with famine, it created two classes: those who worshiped Stalin did "good" those who did not died.

But God is not Stalin. God is Love, Truth, and Just.

[Char]

What type of community? One heart and soul, or common property, or giving testimony to the resurrection, or not one needy (which we can see didn't last very long, as they were all needy by the time of Paul's missionary journeys), or laying goods at the apostles' feet?

Cause it would be hard to lay our proceeds at the apostles' feet since they aren't really around at the moment.

[Marv]

And do we have to let Canadians in?

Char said:

What type of community? One heart and soul, or common property, or giving testimony to the resurrection, or not one needy (which we can see didn't last very long, as they were all needy by the time of Paul's missionary journeys), or laying goods at the apostles' feet?

Cause it would be hard to lay our proceeds at the apostles' feet since they aren't really around at the moment.

[John Roberts]

I think you are right, it is solved by idenity or it will be solved by identity. Jesus will do the identifing. Being of the same mind or understanding is what brings people together and it's the opposite which separates. Differences separate. It would be nice if we were all of the same mind but we are not, on the other hand we are told to be. "let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:" Although we are all made in the image of God, being equal with God is something we can not nor should not grasp for. It's what led to the fall of Adam. He was made in the image of God and when he thought that grasping the forbidden fruit would make him equal with God he found out that it did not, it was a lie. The rulers of this world seek to grasp at being equal with God, they set themselves up as God (the pope for example) but they are not God. Jesus was declared to be the son of God by his resurrection from the dead (Rom 1:4) and so are they he accepts at their resurrection, and until he returns to rule this world there will be no world-wide unity of all things in common.

Ratatösk said:

Yes, this is what we ought to be up to, but I think I'd disagree with John's characterizing it as a government.

Not because of the political implications. I believe the church is a competing polis (apparently, so did Caesar by the way), but rather because 'government' sounds too 'top down.'

This type of sharing comes from an actual sense of community. That is what is missing among God's people, in my opinion.

Its not solved by enforcing economic theory. It's solve by understanding that 'you' are truly in 'them' and 'they' in 'you.' Its solved by a sense of identity and the desire to live out the Trinitarian faith we profess.

It seems to me that there is a world of difference between saying 'What's mine is yours." and insisting "What's yours is mine." Every family and community taps into the first... or they aren't families. The later is the way of Communists.

[joan elizabeth mazzu]

I, too, agree with Ratatosk's summary.
Further, I'd say that humans have a strong tendency to get off track. God, of course, knows this.
Jesus said about trying to do God's will perfectly, "With man this is impossible. But with God, all things are possible." Was Jesus perhaps commenting on Hillel's "Torah in a nutshell" of "do not do to others what is odious to yourself"? Hillel, who taught maybe 100 years before Jesus, totally left God out of his summary of the Torah. I believe that God is making it more and more clear by letting us try to govern that without Him it IS impossible.

[Rick C.]

The Primitive Church (in Acts-Jerusalem) was comprised of Jewish-Christians. Their communal lifestyle very closely resembled that of the Essenes. I believe thousands of early Christians had been Essenes.
=================================
Paula Fredrickson commented on this @ PBS's From Jesus to Christ where she wrote:

"The Essenes are another group of people very concerned with purity. There is a lot of purity ritual associated with them. Josephus and another first century historian and writer, Philo, talk about the Essenes as being a philosophic community [with] communal property. There was a group within the Essenes who were celibate. What's interesting is that this is the community that's also represented by the Dead Sea Scroll library. And, given what we now know about them, as a result of finding that library, we can measure the distance between a respectful description by somebody who's not an Essene, and what the Essenes were actually up to. The Essenes, themselves, were very apocalyptic. They were very concerned with purity. They were so concerned about the holiness of the Temple that at least the ones in Qumran had a reputation of not going up there at all....

But how many people are we actually talking about?... [W]e have no way of testing [Josephus'] numbers, but if they're like any other kind of guess done either by a modern newspaper or by an ancient historian, they're not absolute. He mentions ... I'm not absolutely certain. I think his figures are like 6000 Pharisees, 4000 Essenes...maybe there were 20,000 Priests. Of those Priests, how many were aristocrats and therefore Sadducees? I don't know ... but a fraction of that. So that doesn't give us very many Jews actually accounted for. But there were millions of Jews in antiquity, which means that most people belonged to none of these groups. Who were these people? What did they think? We don't know because we only have the evidence for the groups that have articulated ideologies. I think we have to assume that most Jews who did not associate with one group or the other did the best they could interpreting what they thought was leading a Jewish life according to how the Bible happened to be interpreted in their neighborhood. Again, this is the vast majority of Jews, and as is the case with most populations in history, it's a silent majority because we don't have written evidence from them. "
=====================================================

The Essenes called themselves both "the poor (ones)" and (literally) "the pious (or righteous) ones." Joseph, the early father of Jesus, was referred to as a "righteous" man. Paul brought funds back for famine relief to "the poor" in Acts.

In any event, the numbers of Essenes in NT times was possibly about 2/3rd as many as there were Pharisees - if Josephus' numbers were correct. We must keep in mind that not all Essenes were celibate. There was a celibate monastery in the Essene Quarter in Jesus' day. In fact, an Essene monk who lived there arranged the Last Supper (cf. Lu 22:10). It was these Essene monks' job to bring fresh water to the public latrine which was just outside the city (beyond the Essene Gate). A great book that confirms this is Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, edited by James Charesworth.

There are direct 'parallels' between the Primitive Church's "government" and the Essenes'. Though the requirements and various laws varied, e.g., on penalties for breaking a law or rule, the commonalities are unmistakable and entirely fascinating! "The Community Rule" and other texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) reveal these striking parallelisms. One was a three year probationary period before being fully admitted into the sect (cf. Gal 1:17-18).

Do I think Christians are called to this type of community living today?
Why or Why not?
What would be the pros?
Cons?

Obviously, people who live a monastic life live something like the Essenes and/or Primitive Church. There are those who live in same-sex arrangements (monasteries, convents) as well as others who are married, similarly as were married Essenes of whom Josephus said "they live in every city." We don't know for sure - (at least I don't, anyway, lol) - if these married Essenes lived together as families in the same housing. But I think some of them probably did. Josephus said they were like celibate Essenes in all other repsects, outside of marrying and having children.

My take on the Primitive Church was that it was either comprised mostly of Essenes or was very Essene-like in all it did.

I believe all are called to make our possessions God's. That is, to be good stewards of what He has given (everything)! Some are called to celibate and/or monastic living - a gift and calling Protestant Christianity all but dismisses, save Anglicans (if they're Protestant, lol).

So. We all take the Acts 'pattern' of lifestyle and polity to greater and lesser degrees, I would suppose.

But must we "become" like the Essenes/Primitive Church exactly? I don't think so. Why not? Because the Pharisees who converted didn't have to give up being Pharisees totally (outside of believing Jesus is the Christ, and later not requiring circumcision, (cf. Acts 15). Many of the priests and others believed. Thousands of them (cf. Acts 21:20).

As time went on, the Primitive Church probably "branched out" beyond its initial 'borders' of the Essene-like lifestyle, to include Pharisees and Sadducees (priests, scribes, and lawyers who had their own housing in the Temple or elsewhere). Yet at the same time, no one was required to give in the Primitive Church, as the Essenes demanded one sells all of one's property. So there were differences.

Finally, if one feels called to a communal lifestyle, I'd say "Do it!"
If not, be a good steward.

My imo's....have a great weekend!

[Rick C.]

Errata
(I need to do posts in Word first, sorry)!

One line should read:
"Joseph, the earthly father of Jesus....".

May have missed more.
Take care!

[Jack]

I don't recall the scripture commanding the early disciples, in Jerusalem, to live in commune style. It appears to have been a matter of choice, based upon their current circumstances.
While Peter was rebuking Ananias, he said: "Wasn't that your property to do with, as you pleased?" He was not commanded to sell and share. The rebuke was for putting up a false-front, and lying to the Holy Spirit!
Through-out Paul's letters, the churches were sending aid to the believers, in Jerusalem, because of their on-going needy circumstances.

[Rick C.]

Hello Jack, I hope you're feeling well!
(my reply below).....
Jack said:

I don't recall the scripture commanding the early disciples, in Jerusalem, to live in commune style. It appears to have been a matter of choice, based upon their current circumstances.
While Peter was rebuking Ananias, he said: "Wasn't that your property to do with, as you pleased?" He was not commanded to sell and share. The rebuke was for putting up a false-front, and lying to the Holy Spirit! Through-out Paul's letters, the churches were sending aid to the believers, in Jerusalem, because of their on-going needy circumstances.

I found an old post of mine (from another forum):

From DSS: The Community Rule, Geza Vermes' translation

Column I
. . . Book of the Community Rule....that they may seek
2. God with a whole heart and soul. and do good and right before Him as
3. He commanded by the hand of Moses and all His servants the Prophets;
that they may love
4. all that He has chosen and hate all that he has rejected; that they may
abstain from all evil and
5. hold fast to all good; that they may practice truth, righteousness, and
justice
6. upon earth and no longer stubbornly follow a sinful heart and lustful
eyes committing
7. all manner of evil. He shall admit into the Covenant of Grace all those
who have freely devoted themselves to the observance of God's precepts,
8. that they may be joined to the counsel of God and may live perfectly
before Him in accordance with all that
9. has been revealed concerning their appointed times, and that they may
love all the sons of light, each
10. according to his lot in God's design, and hate all the sons of darkness,
each according to his guilt
11. in God's vengeance. All those who freely devote themselves to His
truth shall bring all their knowledge, powers,
12. and possessions into the Community of God, that they may purify their
knowledge in the truth of God's precepts and order their powers according
to His
13. ways of perfection and all their possessions according to His righteous
counsel.
14. from any command of God concerning their times; they shall be neither
early nor late for any of
15. their appointed times, they shall stray neither to the right nor to left of
any of His true precepts.
16. All those who embrace the Community Rule shall enter into the
Covenant before God to obey
17. all His commandments so that they may not abandon Him during
18. the dominion of Satan because of fear or terror or affliction.

Colum VI
24. These are the rules by which they shall judge at a Community
(court of) inquiry according to the cases If one of them has lied
25. deliberately in matters of property, he shall be excluded from the
pure Meal of the Congregation for one year and shall do penance with
respect to one quarter of his food.
=================================================

There are many parallels and/or similarities between the early Acts {Jerusalem} Church and The Community {of the Community Rule, i.e., Essenes}. Note the much 'lighter the consequences' of lying about property {possessions} in the Essene Community. Also note how no Council of Elders needed to "try" Ananias & Sapphira in a special court session; the Holy Spirit apparently revealed their lies directly to Peter.

I've always felt that Ananias & Sapphira died from pure fear {cf. Col.I:16-18}.

Unlike the Essenes in The Community; nothing in scripture says that giving possessions into the Jerusalem community {Church} was required. It seems to have been a completely voluntary "sharing." At the same time, scripture doesn't show that anyone held anything back, till Ananias & Sapphira:
Acts 4 (NIV)
32All 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. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There 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 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

The Essenes had a reputation for being the most devout Jews, according to Josephus. The early Christians excelled even them.

Btw, I believe Jesus and the disciples probably encountered Essenes daily and that Essenes were everywhere they went {not all Essenes were celibate or living in communes...but these things are an aside for the thread}.
=======================================================

Easy copy & paste......

Take care!

[Amy F]

Yes, Char, all of thee above.

I agree, John, it is a form of government.. the perfect government. In order for this to work correctly (and not become corrupt) is to have the perfect leader which is Jesus Christ. But unfortunately he is not reigning on earth at the moment and ppl come in and sin gets involved. So this type of governement doesnt work (as seen in Communism).

But the question still remains, as a church or group of believers.. should we strive to live like this?

Pros being you would become unified (in physical and spiritual), you would not lack, no materialistic jealousy, constant accountability, set apart as Christians, etc.

Cons being you could have a corrupt leader, community quarrels, outsiders opinions, etc.

Obviously the early church thought this was important (not a requirement)...What holds us back today?

As well as the Essene, you could equate this to monks...