Christianity, Enemy of Socialism
For the last several installments of my contribution here we have been looking at variations of the idea that Jesus taught Socialism/ Communism/ Marxism. Or that He taught that Christians should be one to be a “real” Christian. Or that the early Christian Church lived as a Socialist model- and so should we. Bluntly, the more we understand of Jesus & living as transformed Christians, the more we see any of those options are unsubstantiated and unsupportable. Even further, we should understand that this claim is spurious, if not blasphemous.
Last month, we took a look at one of the passages used by socialists hopeful to find Scripture to be a friend-- or a stick to compel critics to be silent. That was in Acts 2, soon after Jesus' resurrection and “departure”. Many thousands were in Jerusalem for the Pentecost. Thousands of them became Christians and stayed to learn more in a once-in-the-history-of-the-Church moment. NOT a lesson for all time.
Another passage used to supposedly support Socialism is the related events of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5. Ananias & Sapphira sold some land as did many others, but to look extra holy, they said they were giving it ALL to the church, but lied and kept some back. In a dramatic turn, they were each struck dead in the presence of the other Christians. Marxists state that God was mad and struck them dead because they didn't give everything away. Sort of “See what would happen if you're not Communist?”
The first problem is that there is NO Socialist who would suggest that any church should get money to distribute to the poor. Or that Christians would do a better, more economical job of getting it to those most in need. (Christianity is the enemy of Socialism in their eyes as you may recall from my 1st installment.)
In the second place, this passage must be read very much out of context and ignore the full passage. In verses 3 & 4 Peter says: “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
Good heavens! Did Peter just support the idea that it was fine to own property? That even when sold, Ananias could've given any amount he wanted? Yep, the property was his and Sapphira's and so was the money they received for it.
A Marxist interpretation takes a pretty selective reading. And a hope that you can't read, apparently. This is often called Proof-texting. No, nothing to do with your phone. Proof texting is the method to use a Bible text to prove or justify a theological position without considering (or by dismissing) the context of the passage. Any honest, legitimate desire to understand Scripture should at least consider the genre and context. The related saying goes, "a text without a context is a pretext for a proof text."
But—be aware that the other end of the spectrum is also used when trying to convince us of an unbiblical stance—some will try to put straight-up rules or Commandments into the category of merely being a contextual statement. Sort of like saying “that was then, and is not relevant now”. Either method is incomplete and usually an intellectually insincere attempt to manipulate people into a behavior that serves the manipulaor's purposes.
My hope is that none of you would be manipulated into being chumps for a lie. Next month we'll take a look at several more Bible passages used suggest that Christianity and Socialism are related. Pastor Geoff As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith. 1 Timothy 3-4