A close reading of each of these verses is interesting, as well as its overall structure. V. 32 a provides an introduction; v. 32b speak of a practice that arises out what is stated in v. 32a. Verse 33 focuses on the role of the apostles, and v. 34-36 takes up again in more detail what is described in v. 32b. The passage therefore has a ring structure:

Intro: v. 32a: unity of the many of those who had believed

v. 32b: common use of individual goods

v. 33: Apostolic sharing of the resurrection of Jesus and grace upon the whole

vv. 34-36: the distribution of the goods among those who had believed.

What does the text show by placing v. 33 in the middle? (We'll come back to this at the end)

I'm not real happy with the translation of v. 32 in the NIV, for it misses some of the distinct dynamics of the text. I would have translated v. 32a:

"And the many/multitude of those who had believed were of one heart and soul." What is the relationship of the many and the one? Why would this summary passage begin with this notification? How does it set the basis for what follows? What would happen in shared goods did not arise from "one heart and soul", if the external goods becomes separated from a common internal good? What is the basis of this internal good?

V. 32b I would rather translate:

"And any one of those who had control himself over goods (property) was not saying to himself that it was his own, but it was held in common for them (all)."

What is the purpose of economic goods, property here? Is private property abandoned for the believers?

As mentioned above v. 33 lies at the core of the passage. What is the reference to the resurrection important? What would "great grace being upon them" mean in this context?

Verses 34-37 speak about the practical means of distribution of the individual goods for the common good. What is the role of the believers? When and how do they distribute their goods? What is the role of the apostles? Why distribute through them? What is the result? Why would the passage mention Joseph's act?

For the first time, I've appended onto this some extensive reflections about how we continue to live this common good as the church -- all churches that I know of do so in some way, even if we don't recognize it. I am especially concerned to develop a more Christian way to talk about this outside the presuppositions of the world around us. You'll sense my Christian anarchy here, and my understanding of the church as an economic group in its own right, providing an alternative to the contemporary political economic right and left. You'll have to decide if it's conservative or liberal! If it is helpful, use the reflections. If it's too esoteric, just go to the last questions in it. After all is said and done, before praying to leave, maybe someone in the group could read Luke 6:20-36 as a final part of what the Acts passage discusses.

[Pastoral reflections on issues underlying this for our common practice: This use of property as depicted in this passage is important, for within our contemporary society, property is seen in a much different way. We can get caught in a false dichotomy between right-wing politics and left-wing politics because of how the contemporary nation-states has taught us to view property. Property is seen as an absolute individual right, yet even property is subordinated to the power of the state to redistribute -- all property is taxed and if one does not pay the tax, the property is confiscated by the coercive power of the state. In this right-wing capitalist nation-states, and left-wing 'Marxist' nation-states agree.

The differences between a right wing and a left wing politics is found in how and to whom the state redistributes the property income based on its sovereignty. In a capitalist society, the State exercises its power by distributing the goods to wealthy, private individuals to build its power by increasing its tax base -- evident as a recent Supreme Court decision gave a city's right to transfer property from one private owner to another to increase their tax base. It maintains the myth of 'private property' but requires rents (taxation) at all times. A special economic and power relationship arises between the state and the wealth "property owners". By increasing the wealth and power of the state, the wealthy become the beneficiaries of the state, support its sovereignty against those who might contest it.

On the left, the state takes direct control over property to oversee its direction distribution on account of 'the people'. It hopes to generate loyalty of "the masses" by its beneficial distribution to all, thus legitimating its sovereignty.

Acts 4:32-37 seems to call for a very different understanding of economic goods. It presupposes sovereignty over creation to be in God, as seen in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We can see, then, not to get caught up in contemporary contests between a left-wing politics and a right-wing politics in the world because both sides represent an economics that is based in a system of sovereignty that is alien to believers. The politics and economics of the church is very different. Property is seen as a good, but a good that must be subordinated to the good of others, especially the poor. Private property is not renounced, but profoundly subordinated to the distribution to the church so that the solidarity of heart and soul is also a solidarity of bodies within the one body, that is the Body of Christ.

If this is so, we need to develop the skills of learning to exist in this alien world, but not getting caught up in its divisions (i.e., sustaining the many in the one heart and soul), that can divide the body of Christ. The issue for the church, and individual believers, is how to order our goods for the common good that is the kingdom of God revealed in Jesus by the Spirit.

What do you think of this analysis? Does it make sense? (some of the analysis comes as a result of reading a book by an anthropologist named Tal Asad, Interventions of the Secular, Stanford University Press, 2004 if you care -- and not that you should!) Can you discuss ways that we currently live this out? Can you think of ways that we might live this out more completely?]