I think of private property partially through this analogy (though I realize it is incomplete): If you have forty dollars, you could buy yourself a fancy dinner. Or you could buy me fancy dinner. Or you could get McDonald’s eight times. Or you could buy dinner for some kid for a month in the third word, for a month, along with a month worth of education and basic medical, through a charity like my personal favorite, Compassion International.

Now, you’d be doing a much better deed if you gave it to the third-world kid. And since the money is really the Lord’s we could argue that you must give it to the kid. Perhaps you would be selfish and choose McD’s instead. Suppose I, believing that you were misusing God’s property, decided to forcibly take it from you and give it to the kid. I would be wrong, because whether you are making a good or bad choice, it’s your money.

One problem that occurs when people discuss “capitalism” is that they may mean any of several different things. Some people mean a system which is designed to concentrate as much wealth as possible by legalizing the forceful exploitation of others, as happened in the early years of the U.S. and the Americas when they were first colonized. This I reject as immoral.

Some people mean an attitude of trying to make as much money as possible no matter what, and hoarding wealth at the expense of other people. This attitude I also reject as evil.

But when I use the word capitalism, I am referring to a system which allows people to spend their money as they see fit and work wherever they and an employer can reach mutual agreement on wages. That’s all. And I fail to see any clear reason that this capitalism is evil. Certainly, the fact that it did not exist in the garden of Eden does not make it evil, or else clothing, Old Testament law, Jesus Christ, and children would all be considered evil.

Again, the NT teaches against sin, but does allow that Christians will sin. Does that implicitly validate the sin?

I would after to disagree about capitalism. It is about individual profits, where as socialism is about creating a way for others to make profits. For me, capitalism is evil. For that matter, so is any economic system, as it wasn’t in God’s original plan.

I’d have to disagree with you as to whether private property is a biblical concept, because both the Old and New Testaments contain repeated support for the concept that people have the right to decide what to do with what is theirs. And if that’s not private property, I don’t know what is. And socialism, for all its talk of sharing common resources, inevitably includes redistribution of wealth and governmental control of factors of production, even when those were previously privately owned.

The passage in Acts was not about validating property rights, but property rights are implicitly assumed by Peter as valid in the discussion, as Peter makes it clear that Ananias was, before and after the sale, free to do what he wanted with his own land and money, but that it was his fraudulent speech that was unnacceptable.

There is no doubt that pooling of resources communally, and sharing, are part of the New Testament mindset. And it is my firm belief it should be part of our mindset today. But throughout the NT, as made clear by both Paul’s letters and Peter’s words to Ananias, it was always the sharing of whatever resources were voluntarily given from the possessions of private individuals. The agape meals are a continuation of that principle.

I disagree with your statement that capitalism is about profits. Both capitalism, socialism, and communism are systems which are all about money. I don’t see capitalism as a uniquely wealth-motivated system any more than the other two; it’s just a more efficient producer of material prosperity.

If humanity was without sin, any system would work. But in the meantime, one which recognizes the rights of the individual and contains strong incentives for effective work (capitalism) is still going to be the best at preventing poverty and allowing for the rule of law and order.

That all being said, I want to stress that I am absolutely in favor of the Church sharing resources.

No, the New Testament texts do not mention government enforcement, unless, you know, you count God among that. Considering that sharing resources is a church imitative, and that one day, we will rule with Christ, then pretty soon, you will have to sign a red card

In reality, a socialistic government is not about private property – which is not a biblical concept – neither is socialism about redistribution of wealth; but about sharing common resources through a democratically elected government. Nor was the passage in Acts about validating property rights, far from it. It is about lying to God, first of all, and second, about honoring your devotion to the community.

No, there is no government enforcement, but neither is their government enforcement with a lot of biblical (NT) commands. The passage does detect a communal understanding of resources and the sharing of resources, which is followed with the agape meals in later works and later times in the life of the primitive Church. Remember, a Christian is free to see after he or she comes to Christ, but does that mean that we are validating that sin? Hardly.

If capitalism is about profits – and it really is – then socialism is about the providing the basic needs of the community, especially those who cannot fend for themselves. Granted, if humanity was without sin, then no government or economic system on earth would be imperfect.

And legendary? Yeah, I can see that.