What does the non-gospel portion of the New Testament have to say about wealth and abundance? In most ways, it is consistent with what we have seen in the rest of Scripture. But we need to go no further than Chapter 2 in Acts before we come across one of the more controversial passages concerning wealth. Following Pentecost, we read:

Acts 2:44-45

44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need.

Acts 4:34

There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold.

It simply isn’t clear what this entailed. Acts chapter 5 speaks of Ananias and Sapphira, who apparently were a part of the community and still owned land. They appear to have sold a portion (not all?) of their land and brought the money for distribution to the needy. Their sin was apparently dishonesty about how much they were giving, not that they had retained a portion of the money. “Holding things in common” appears to have meant that each retained control of their own property, but as needs arose, folks made their property available to address the needs of others.

This appears to have been a response to the large number of conversions. No doubt many were ostracized from their families and lost their livelihoods. The early chapters of Acts give a descriptive, not a prescriptive, presentation of how these problems were handled. What is instructive is that an economic response was seen as a natural outflow of becoming a Christian, and the needs of the poor were addressed.

We find no teaching in the New Testament that prescribes radical society-wide redistribution or communal ownership. In fact, we find explicit instruction like:

1 Corinthians 16:1-2

1 Now concerning the collection for the saints: you should follow the directions I gave to the churches of Galatia. 2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save whatever extra you earn, so that collections need not be taken when I come.

Ephesians 4:28

Thieves must give up stealing; rather let them labor and work honestly with their own hands, so as to have something to share with the needy.

2 Thessalonians 3:10-13

10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: Anyone unwilling to work should not eat. 11 For we hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere busybodies, not doing any work. 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living.

Passages such as these presume private ownership of goods. Furthermore, passages such as 1 Corinthians 11:17-22 chastise the wealthy for eating the Lord’s Supper before the poor have a chance to arrive. This presumes, as happens in several other places that there are wealth differences among the believers. Private ownership has not been eliminated, and if we refer back to the Jubilee Code, we see that communal ownership of all property would directly contradict God’s decree that each Israelite has a private ownership stake in the land.

So what of the New Testament passages that speak specifically to wealth, abundance, and giving?

[Index]


Comments

4 responses to “Living Simply in Abundance (10)”

  1. The other important issue with respect to Jerusalem was that, unlike most modern Christians, the early Christians understood the message of Matt 24:1-35. They knew that Jerusalems’s days were numbered. Pentecost confirmed that the Jewish temple was no longer needed, so the rest of what Jesus predicted would follow.
    Owning property in Jerusalem was as good an investment as owning property in Florida at the moment. Sensible stewards sold there land in Jerusalem at the top of the market. Those who rejected Jesus warning and put their faith in the temple lost all their wealth when George W Caesar rolled in with Shock and Awe in AD 70. Acts 4:34 was simply a wise invetment decision.

  2. “George W Caesar”
    LOL
    Never really thought of Matthew 24 as a “sell” signal but you could be on to something.

  3. The implication is that Acts 2-4 took place in a unique political and economic situation, so the behaviour cannot be generalised to all situations.
    The irony with this view is that we may be living in a time that parallels Acts 2-4: the market has peaked and the nation is under judgment. I note that the Dubai government investment company has just sold both 230 and 280 Park Avenue in New York. Maybe thy are better at reading the signs of the times than Christians. It may actually be a good time to sell propery and buy riches in heaven by giving to the poor.

  4. Brad Cooper Avatar
    Brad Cooper

    Ron,
    Very interesting. Never thought about it from that angle either. I have a strong sense that you may be right about the decline of the U.S. economy, also. But then, we’ve been at this point a few times before and bounced back stronger than ever….But it is certain that the United States has no guarantee that it will continue to prosper.
    I love your sense of humor, too. 🙂
    Have a great weekend! You too, Michael! Peace to both of you.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading