Is socialism Christian?

Some would say so, especially in this election season.

Its purpose, they say, is to help the poor and to make things more equal.  Isn’t that what the early church did?

Let’s take a look at an incident in the early church that has some relevance: Ananias and Sapphira.  

At this point in his story (Acts 5.1-11), Luke is describing the entrance of sin into the first Christian community, just as Genesis tells of the entrance of sin into the first human community (Gen 3).  The case of Ananias and Sapphira is the opposite of that of Barnabas (Acts 4.36-37).  There it was sincere generosity, here it is pseudo-generosity.  So the first sin narrated in this history of the early church is hypocrisy—trying to appear more holy than was the case.

Luke apparently was using the OT story of Achan as a model.  For he uses the same Greek word for kept back (enosphizato) in v 2 that was used in the Greek version  (Septuagint) in Joshua of Achan.  Achan had stolen valuable property from the devoted things at Jericho, and lied about it (Josh 7.1, 10-11, 20-21).  Just as this happened at the beginning of the Jewish community as soon as they had entered the land of Israel, Ananias and Sapphira had coveted property and then lied about it shortly after the beginning of the Yeshua community in Israel.

One scholar suggests that this is Luke’s test case for whether a wealthy person can be saved.  In his gospel it is clear that the wealthy can be saved but that it is difficult.  It is clear from this story that riches can be a snare.

1 Now a man by the name of Ananias and his wife Sapphira sold a piece of property.

Ananias is from the Hebrew for “God is gracious” and Sapphira is Aramaic for “beautiful.”

The fact that this couple was singled out suggests that not everyone in the early church sold their properties.  Some did and some did not.  This tells us two things.  First, God leads different saints differently in how to dispose of their goods for the sake of the Kingdom.  We should not judge.  Some buy a big house and use it to serve the church.  Some buy a small house and use the difference to serve the church.  We should leave motivations and determinations to God.

Second, the church made these things voluntary; they did not compel.

Some Christians say that government policy to help the disadvantaged by levying taxes that pay for these services is an example of Christian ethics.  It is certainly Christian to help the poor.

But to compel taxation of all to pay for a policy decided by some is not what the early church did.  The church let the Holy Spirit lead some—not all—to give part or all of what they had, voluntarily, to help the poor.

It also respected the right of private property (see v 4 below), contrary to communism, which abolishes that right.  Hence although Marx was influenced by the early church, his economic policy was not, as some have claimed, fundamentally Christian.

What about socialism?  It is not communism in which private property is abolished.  Neither is it the free market in which government is focused more on equality of opportunity than equality of results.  Socialism compels redistribution in order to guarantee certain economic results.

In this campaign cycle free college is promised by a prominent socialist.  Who will pay for it?  Citizens through higher taxes.  The claim is that this helps the poor and disadvantaged and . . . that this is Christian.  After all, it is suggested, this is what the early church did.

Is it?  This incident in Acts suggests that it is Christian when you share some of your income voluntarily with the church or the poor.  For the state to compel you to share, on the other hand, is something else entirely.