First of all, let us review this passage of Scripture and see what it says and get a rounded view of what the context is. The Cambridge Dictionary explains what context means, as follows: “… the text or speech that comes immediately before and after a particular phrase or piece of text and helps to explain its meaning.”
Context is a vital piece of biblical understanding, eliminating the use of a particular word or passage of Scripture which, on its own, may give a misunderstanding of what is meant.
Acts 2:44-45 reads as follows:
“Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.”
This was written at a time following the birth of the New Testament Church after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. We read in Acts 2:41-42: “Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
These were amazing, exciting and dangerous times. It was a one-off demonstration of a tidal wave of conversions but the Bible makes no further explanations of any long-term continuance of this manner of living. For a while, they integrated and pooled their resources for their mutual safety and protection but scripture is silent on such an arrangement becoming the norm.
Let us get some definitions, firstly about socialism.
Wikipedia explains that “Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production, and democratic control, such as workers’ self-management of enterprises. It includes the political theories and movements associated with such systems. Social ownership can be public, collective, cooperative, or of equite. While no single definition encapsulates the many types of socialism, social ownership is the one common element.”
thebalance.com states that “socialism is an economic system where citizens share ownership of the various factors of production. That ownership is acquired through a democratically elected government, a cooperative, or a public corporation in which everyone owns shares.”
We can see from these brief and general explanations that socialism varies greatly from capitalism where thebalance.com states that “Capitalism is an economic system where private entities own the factors of production. The four factors are entrepreneurship, capital goods, natural resources, and labor. The owners of capital goods, natural resources, and entrepreneurship exercise control through companies. Individuals own their labor.”
Barnes Notes on the Bible makes these comments about Acts 2:44-45:
“All that believed – That is, that believed that Jesus was the Messiah; for that was the distinguishing point by which they were known from others.
“Were together – Were united; were joined in the same thing. It does not mean that they lived in the same house, but they were united in the same community, or engaged in the same thing. They were doubtless often together in the same place for prayer and praise. One of the best means for strengthening the faith of young converts is for them often to meet together for prayer, conversation, and praise.
“Had all things common – That is, all their property or possessions. See Acts 4:32-37; Acts 5:1-10. The apostles, in the time of the Saviour, evidently had all their property in common stock, and Judas was made their treasurer. They regarded themselves as one family, having common needs, and there was no use or propriety in their possessing extensive property by themselves [This seems to be wrong. We know, for example. that Jesus owned a house and maybe more than just one.] . Yet even then it is probable that some of them retained an interest in their property which was not supposed to be necessary to be devoted to the common use. It is evident that John thus possessed property which he retained, John 19:27. And it is clear that the Saviour did not command them to give up their property into a common stock, nor did the apostles enjoin it: Acts 5:4: ‘While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold was it not in thine own power?’ It was, therefore, perfectly voluntary, and was as evidently adapted to the special circumstances of the early converts.
“Many of them came from abroad. They were from Parthia, and Media, and Arabia, and Rome, and Africa, etc. It is probable, also, that they now remained longer in Jerusalem than they had at first proposed; and it is not at all improbable that they would be denied now the usual hospitalities of the Jews, and excluded from their customary kindness, because they had embraced Jesus of Nazareth, who had been just put to death. In these circumstances, it was natural and proper that they should share their property while they remained together.”
The reference to Acts 5:4 above is about Peter’s censure of Ananias behaviour where he exposed his deceit, not the retention of property. It is clear that Peter does not condemn private ownership of property both before and after the sale. The problem was the sin of lying by stating that Ananias and Sapphira had held back part of the proceeds for themselves while giving the impression that they were giving their all. Such sinful behaviour cost them their lives.
The Pulpit Commentary makes some other interesting observations:
“Had all things common. Just as the Transfiguration gave a passing glimpse of the state of glory, so here we have a specimen of what Christian love and unity in its perfection, and unchecked by contact with the world without, would, and perhaps someday will, produce. But even at Jerusalem this bright vision of a paradise on earth was soon troubled by the earthly dissensions recorded in Acts 6; and the Christian community received a timely lesson that things good in themselves are not always practicable in an evil world…..”
Another aspect of this situation is spelled out well by the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges:
“were together, and had all things common: With the words of the angels still in their ears (Acts 1:11): ‘This same Jesus shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven,’ the disciples were no doubt full of the thought that the return of Jesus was not far distant. Such an opinion spreading among the new disciples would make them ready to resign their worldly goods, and to devote all things to the use of their brethren. For so the spreading of a knowledge of Christ could be made the chief work of the whole body of believers.”
The faithful disciples realised after a short while that Jesus would not return during their lifetime and, down through the last 2,000 years, His return has been anticipated. In the meantime, we continue to look for the return of Jesus and the signs are now that it is close to fulfilment.
Biblehub.com observes: “Luke describes the spontaneous outcome of the Spirit’s outpouring at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-41). Verse 42 lists four core devotions—apostolic teaching, fellowship (κοινωνία), breaking of bread, and prayers—while verses 44-47 detail practical outworkings of that fellowship: meeting daily, eating together, praising God, and meeting material needs. Nothing in the context hints at governmental coercion or an imposed economic system; rather, Luke is chronicling the joyous generosity of a newborn community amazed by the risen Christ (v. 36).”
It is interesting that thebalance.com comments as follows: “Socialists assume that the basic nature of people is cooperative. They believe that this basic nature hasn’t yet emerged in full because capitalism or feudalism has forced people to be competitive. Socialists argue that the economic system must support this basic human nature before these qualities can emerge.”
Put, quite simply, man has been competitive by nature for the last 6,000 years and that is not going to change during this age of man. Socialism, as explained above, is doomed to failure as are all other types of human government. It will take the return of Jesus Christ to this earth to set up a theocratic government that will have everyone’s best interests at heart.
Coming back to the original question: “Is Acts 2:44-45 a biblical example of socialism?” The answer is “No.” Acts 2:44-45 describes a temporary solution to a problem that arose after the extraordinary events on the day of Pentecost and no other examples of this exist in the New Testament.
Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)