@sinbach socialist could be nice. The first christians was kind of socialist they put all in common and nobody was missing something

@kaleb @sinbach DUDE, no, no,no. My country barelly managed to leave socialism.
After 40 years socialism brought only economical, environmental, mental, social & spiritual DESTRUCTION.
We are 30 years after leaving this anti-God system and still struggling with the social damage.
Please, in the name of Jesus, re-think your statement.
First Christians were NEVER socialistic, in Jerusalem they sold what they had, but they distributed acording to needs and socialism is about so called "equal distibution", this never works.
We, the Polish people are a living testimony of the socialistic horrors.

@tymektt @kaleb I personally believe that the first disciples were not socialist, they were part of a co-op. What is the difference? The difference is simply this - socialism is mandatory, co-op is volunteer. When governments become socialist, they enforce equal distribution through threat of force. When the early Christians joined together, it was from desire, not from force. Jesus did not force His disciples to join - in fact many chose to leave the group (John 6:66).
I write about this in our book CHINA AND END TIME PROPHECY when comparing the Communist Party to the JESUS FAMILY. The Jesus Family in China was made up of believers that volunteered to live together and distribute everything. The Communist Party believed in the same idea of equal distribution, but they did it through force. The fatal flaw of socialism is that the heart of man cannot be forced. It MUST choose.
Perhaps this is why socialist nations are more anti-Israel and anti-Christian???

@sinbach @tymektt

Disciple are forced to share and give. Read Actes 5
Ananias didn't do it and died.

@kaleb @sinbach @tymektt … hi kaleb I saw this discussion and thought I would join 😁 … I will just say it’s very important that we pay close attention to all the small details of Scripture. At a closer look of acts 5 you’ll discover that Ananias did not die for failing to give to the believers. He died for lying to the Holy Spirit. His greed and his desire to people please led him to deceive. Based on those verses,, he could have given any amount and then been honest. His deceit is what was condemned. That’s a huge difference. Also take note of acts 4:32- these believers were of one heart and mind. Their hearts led them to give freely.

Can you tell me all those who suffer under communist regimes are of one heart? Do they give freely from their heart? I don’t think so. If they were, then why would they try to escape from places like north Korea or others.

@kaleb @sinbach @tymektt
I’m addition to the last post — EVERYWHERE else in the Bible that financial giving is talked about (both for Old Testament Israelites and New Testament believers), collections are made based on freely and generously giving as each one desires from their heart

@kaleb @tymektt we are going to have to disagree, because scripture is clear it was a choice. Acts 5 is not about force, it's about deception and lies. Ananias could have kept everything. it was his to give, but he took credit for something he didn't do. "Whilst it remained, was it not thine own???? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power???? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God!!!" its great to have a debate, but let's pls not pretend that one of us understands the Bible more than the other by telling one to read something.

@tymektt @sinbach

I learned at school that Kibutz in Israel was kind of socialism too.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

dingdash.com is one server in the network