What Happened to the Primitive Church of Acts 2:44 and 4:32

[Shemiyah]

I was talking with someone this morning in a restaurant about the life of the early believers chronicled in the book of Acts. Everyone gave up all their possessions, lived in houses together, and they distributed all their goods to meet the needs of their friends. They were saying this was a response to the command given in Luke 14:33, where no one could follow Him without first giving up all that he had. Was that life the witness of the kingdom?

What do we think about that life? What happened to the first century church? Why did those foundational items change?

 

[David1967]

I was talking with someone this morning in a restaurant about the life of the early believers chronicled in the book of Acts. Everyone gave up all their possessions, lived in houses together, and they distributed all their goods to meet the needs of their friends. They were saying this was a response to the command given in Luke 14:33, where no one could follow Him without first giving up all that he had. Was that life the witness of the kingdom?

What do we think about that life? What happened to the first century church? Why did those foundational items change?

Times and circumstances changed.

 

[Ellen Brown]

I was talking with someone this morning in a restaurant about the life of the early believers chronicled in the book of Acts. Everyone gave up all their possessions, lived in houses together, and they distributed all their goods to meet the needs of their friends. They were saying this was a response to the command given in Luke 14:33, where no one could follow Him without first giving up all that he had. Was that life the witness of the kingdom?

What do we think about that life? What happened to the first century church? Why did those foundational items change?

Communes have never really worked, and it didn't then. I've never felt good about the Murder of Ananias and Sapphira, and I do not think that God did it.

 

[leov]

I was talking with someone this morning in a restaurant about the life of the early believers chronicled in the book of Acts. Everyone gave up all their possessions, lived in houses together, and they distributed all their goods to meet the needs of their friends. They were saying this was a response to the command given in Luke 14:33, where no one could follow Him without first giving up all that he had. Was that life the witness of the kingdom?

What do we think about that life? What happened to the first century church? Why did those foundational items change?

It came out of Essenes. Ebionites the Poor. Ebionites - Wikipedia
I think that it merged into Islam.

 

[MikeDwight]

You give away your stuff, where's it going? I don't think its' anti-accounting, its in-groups like the Tax Collector out-group and the Heathen out-group mentioned by Jesus. That's about Christian Community. Matthew 18:17 casts out Heathens, its good not to look like a suicidal, they're always giving away everything.

covet

1. yearn to possess or have (something).

 

[MJS]

The LDS believe in what's called the "Law of Consecration". It was tried with little success in the early days of the church and members believe that it will be re-instituted in the future.

Law of consecration - Wikipedia

 

[Goodman John]

Cathar 'Perfects' (the more hard-core set of the faith) carried this over into their vows, largely giving up most or all of their possessions and living very simply in their rejection of the world and material wealth and such. As they considered themselves to be carrying on the tradition of the Early Church it was a natural progression of the Gospels that they take that approach.

Although not adopted completely, the Cathar Perfect's vows were a model that many of the Church's monastic Orders incorporated into their various Rules; Dominic Guzman was moved specifically by the Cathars to create the Dominican Order to counter the 'heresy' of the former, while shoplifting their practices left and right to suit his own agenda.

 

[Quagmire]

***Thread Moved to Interfaith Discussion***​

 

[MikeDwight]

OH ya I totally didn't mean to discount actual poverty groups especially in the clergy. Most of them not even heresies like cathar or fretacelli, St. Francis' Franciscan Order Minor is famous throughout history and for wondering poverty.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

I was talking with someone this morning in a restaurant about the life of the early believers chronicled in the book of Acts. Everyone gave up all their possessions, lived in houses together, and they distributed all their goods to meet the needs of their friends. They were saying this was a response to the command given in Luke 14:33, where no one could follow Him without first giving up all that he had. Was that life the witness of the kingdom?

What do we think about that life? What happened to the first century church? Why did those foundational items change?

They kinda had communism happen. Basically, one guy was like "Uhhhh NO, I don't want to share my house." And he basically got punished hard for this, and they're like maybe this doesn't work actually.

Also, no this is NOT a command for everyone to do this. Jesus's many followers had often extreme problems with poverty. As Kant's Test of a Universalized Maxim asks "what if everyone did it?" If everyone gave all earthly possessions, everyone would be poor, cuz nobody keeps the money. Btw, since I wasn't familiar with Luke 14:33 I actually looked up the context. It's not about materially giving all you have. It's about COMMITTING FULLY to God and your desire to follow him. Always read the sections before! The 14th chapter begins with a question of healing on the Sabbath, and he talks about ppl making excuses not to go to a banquet, and how if an ox is hurting on the Sabvath, wouldn't you help anyway? And he talks about how the cost of being a disciple is devotion, to give all you have to help, not cop out because it's the Sabbath. He uses building a tower as an example. If you endeavor to work on something great, you should try to finish even if you die. Because lasting things only happen if you give your all. Whether it's a massive book like Tolkien wrote, or a statue to honor someone, or whatever.
Even if following God loses you a girlfriend, family member, or friend, or even your life, you're all in. Jesus commanded nobody, except the rich man to do so, and this was because it was clear his possessions were owning him. You should treat God as the Dearest thing to you, and not want to let this one go for anything. If you value things more, when they are taken away, you will suffer. But no, Jesus never commanded ppl to monetarily give all they had, and we saw how it ruined widows under the Pharisees.

 

[Ellen Brown]

They kinda had communism happen. Basically, one guy was like "Uhhhh NO, I don't want to share my house." And he basically got punished hard for this, and they're like maybe this doesn't work actually.

Also, no this is NOT a command for everyone to do this. Jesus's many followers had often extreme problems with poverty. As Kant's Test of a Universalized Maxim asks "what if everyone did it?" If everyone gave all earthly possessions, everyone would be poor, cuz nobody keeps the money. Btw, since I wasn't familiar with Luke 14:33 I actually looked up the context. It's not about materially giving all you have. It's about COMMITTING FULLY to God and your desire to follow him. Even if to do so loses you a girlfriend, family member, or friend, or even your life. Jesus commanded nobody, except the rich man to do so, and this was because it was clear his possessions were owning him. You should treat God as the Dearest thing to you, and not want to let this one go for anything. If you value things more, when they are taken away, you will suffer. But no, Jesus never commanded ppl to monetarily give all they had, and we saw how it ruined widows under the Pharisees.

Matt 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

It was instruction for those who wish to be perfect, not an order punishable by death.

 

[MJS]

Matt 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

It was instruction for those who wish to be perfect, not an order punishable by death.

That direction from Christ was for a specific individual. While we can take truth from that for all of us, I can't say with certainty that Christ is telling ALL people to do the same. This seems like an invitation for the "young man" in the story to become one of His followers, or disciples called to preach the gospel and administer in the church.

 

[Goodman John]

That direction from Christ was for a specific individual. While we can take truth from that for all of us, I can't say with certainty that Christ is telling ALL people to do the same. This seems like an invitation for the "young man" in the story to become one of His followers, or disciples called to preach the gospel and administer in the church.

But why single out one man for that instruction? Wouldn't it make more sense if this were intended to be a General Order for would-be followers, to be a minimum standard for disciples?

While it's true that everyone couldn't do this- for obvious social and economic reasons, at least- I don't think it's an unreasonable request for those who wanted be in an 'elite' group, close to Jesus himself. (Using the example of past and modern-day cults, how many of them require an initiate to sell everything and donate it to the organization? Even Catholic monastic orders used to do this in place of a 'dowry' in order to sign up.)

 

[metis]

What do we think about that life?

Like with Jamestown, it worked when the group was small and intimate but became unmanageable with a much large number.

What happened to the first century church?

It's still here but went through name changes and then dividing over politics-- what's new, aye?

Why did those foundational items change?

The Church was never mean to be static as Jesus said he'd guide the Church until the end of times. An unchanging church wouldn't need guiding.

 

[MJS]

But why single out one man for that instruction? Wouldn't it make more sense if this were intended to be a General Order for would-be followers, to be a minimum standard for disciples?

While it's true that everyone couldn't do this- for obvious social and economic reasons, at least- I don't think it's an unreasonable request for those who wanted be in an 'elite' group, close to Jesus himself. (Using the example of past and modern-day cults, how many of them require an initiate to sell everything and donate it to the organization? Even Catholic monastic orders used to do this in place of a 'dowry' in order to sign up.)

Well, the young man came to Jesus Christ and asked him what he needed to do. Christ told him, basically, to keep the commandments. He replied that he had observed all of those things from the time he was a youth and asked what more he needed to do. Then Jesus "beholding him, loved him" (only in the Mark account) and invited him to sell everything and give it to the poor and to join him as a disciple. To me, this was an individual call to that specific person.

There is certainly something each of us can take from this, and namely what I take is that we must all be WILLING to do that. If Christ were to call us to forsake everything and follow him, we should be willing to do that. We must be willing to sacrifice. In the story, the young man seemed to be unwilling to do this because he went away and was sorrowful because he "had great possessions".

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I was talking with someone this morning in a restaurant about the life of the early believers chronicled in the book of Acts. Everyone gave up all their possessions, lived in houses together, and they distributed all their goods to meet the needs of their friends. They were saying this was a response to the command given in Luke 14:33, where no one could follow Him without first giving up all that he had. Was that life the witness of the kingdom?

What do we think about that life? What happened to the first century church? Why did those foundational items change?

A good part of it was that it simply grew too large for such informal structures to work any longer.

It is a tenet of Judaism that we really don't own what we have. All belongs to God, and he merely allows us to use it. In fact, in the case of Tzedakah, a portion of what God gives us is bestowed on behalf of the poor and our job is to get it to them.