Ananias and Sapphira
Introduction
I selected the story of Ananias and Sapphira found in the book of Acts because of the seemingly harsh treatment they received, the apparent contradictions related to redemption and forgiveness, and the questionable behavior of Peter. Just below the surface of the story are questions about the nature of God, the Holy Spirit, and Christ Himself.
Is the God of the New Testament the same as the God of the Old Testament? What is the nature of forgiveness? What is the nature of sin? Who was really responsible for the deaths? How should the church respond to the sins of its members?
Foundational Understanding
Before looking at the events associated with Ananias and Sapphira, I need to establish my presuppositions and assumptions. My understanding is grounded in my faith and belief in my Savior and God – reflected in the following:
First: the Bible is what God wants us to have – regardless of the sources or disagreements. I must believe that whatever translation I hold in my hand and whatever its evolution, I have what God wants me to have at this time.
Second: What I have is sufficient at this time for my understanding. Whatever message, lesson or idea that God wants me to derive from the story, He will provide me with what I need. That may be in the form of additional readings, discussions with others or revelation through contemplation.
Third: Although contradictions and questions will remain, the conflict is within my limited understanding and not in God’s Word. A deeper understanding exists that is, at this time, beyond my abilities. As I grow and mature in my relationship with my Savior, my understanding will also grow.
The Event and Related Information
In order to more fully understand the story it is important to include information before and after the confrontation with Ananias and Sapphira. Below is the scripture I am concerned with and is Acts 4:26-32 to Acts 5:1-16 from the Holman translation –
32 Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of his possessions was his own, but instead they held everything in common. 33 And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was on all of them. 34 For there was not a needy person among them, because all those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, 35 and laid them at the apostles’ feet. This was then distributed to each person as anyone had a need.
36 Joseph, a Levite and a Cypriot by birth, whom the apostles named Barnabas, which is translated Son of Encouragement, 37 sold a field he owned, brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.
5) 1 But a man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a piece of property. 2 However, he kept back part of the proceeds with his wife’s knowledge, and brought a portion of it and laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the proceeds from the field? 4 Wasn’t it yours while you possessed it? And after it was sold, wasn’t it at your disposal? Why is it that you planned this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God!” 5 When he heard these words, Ananias dropped dead, and a great fear came on all who heard. 6 The young men got up, wrapped his body, carried him out, and buried him. 7 There was an interval of about three hours; then his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 “Tell me,” Peter asked her, “did you sell the field for this price?” “Yes,” she said, “for that price.”
9 Then Peter said to her, “Why did you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look! The feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out!” 10 Instantly she dropped dead at his feet. When the young men came in, they found her dead, carried her out, and buried her beside her husband. 11 Then great fear came on the whole church and on all who heard these things.
12 Many signs and wonders were being done among the people through the hands of the apostles. By common consent they would all meet in Solomon’s Colonnade. 13 None of the rest dared to join them, but the people praised them highly. 14 Believers were added to the Lord in increasing numbers—crowds of both men and women. 15 As a result, they would carry the sick out into the streets and lay them on beds and pallets so that when Peter came by, at least his shadow might fall on some of them. 16 In addition, a multitude came together from the towns surrounding Jerusalem, bringing sick people and those who were tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all healed.
Some Problems Surrounding the Event and Their Possible Resolutions
Although there are a multitude of questions and concerns surrounding the passages concerning Ananias and Sapphira, I will discuss only a few of the key concerns and their possible resolution in the context of the culture of that time and in my fundamental beliefs.
Concern #1: Were Ananias and Sapphira actually part of the early church? By this I mean, had they truly accepted Christ as their Savior and Lord or were they pretenders? Acts 2:38; 10:44&45; 19:6 and many other passages tell us that the Holy Spirit comes upon Believers (those who repent and confess Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord) and dwells within them. So, if Ananias and Sapphira had truly been Believers, they would have shared the “one heart and soul” of the Body of Believers (Acts 4:32). Those who shared the “one heart and soul” were epitomized by Joseph, whom the apostles called Barnabas. He sold a field and gave the apostles all the money to use and distribute (Acts 4:36&37). Since Ananias and Sapphira plotted to deceive the Body of Believers and sought personal recognition and glorification – and not to glorify God or share the news of Jesus Christ – they did not share in the “one heart and soul” of the Body of Believers.
Could unbelievers infiltrate the Body of Believers and negatively affect their growth and development? Acts 5:13 says that, when the Believers gathered together in Solomon’s Colonnade, unbelievers did not dare join them. Unbelievers still sought the healing that was available from Peter by putting the sick on the street for him to see. This description comes after the incident with Ananias and Sapphira which suggests that their immediate punishment served as a warning: Satan’s agents were to stay away!
Could Satan fill Ananias and Sapphira’s hearts if the Holy Spirit was dwelling within? Their actions show that they did not share in the “one heart and one soul” of the Believers. This is not to say that Believers do not sin, but redemption and forgiveness are ours and our debt has been paid by Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord. Ananias and Sapphira’s punishment shows that their sin(s) had not been forgiven. They were not Believers. They tried to pay for their own debt.
Concern #2: What were Ananias and Sapphira’s sins? Superficially, we are told that Ananias “lied to the Holy Spirit,” and later, Sapphira also lied. The two lies are distinctly different. Evidently, Ananias did not speak a lie but allowed an untruth to be accepted by his silence. His actions implied that he had sold the land and was laying all the proceeds at Peter’s feet. Sapphira is directly confronted with the lie and actually said, “Yes, that was the price.” Although we may want to distinguish between the two forms of lying, the resulting sin was the same. So, is lying really so bad? In Revelations 21:8 equates liars with cowards, unbelievers, vile, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, and idolaters. In God’s eyes, liars are worthy of death.
To whom did they lie? Either directly or indirectly by inference they lied to Peter – but we are specifically told that they lied to the Holy Spirit. It is tempting to confuse the two, but if the Holy Spirit was indwelling all the Believers, then the lie was given to God and to the Body of Believers. But, the passage in Revelations does not differentiate. All liars are condemned. But, if all liars are condemned, are we all doomed (none of us has led a fully truthful life)? No. Believers are redeemed through the payment Jesus Christ made for us. Evidently, Ananias and Sapphira had not received that forgiveness and were condemned. But, lying was not their only sin. It was a result of their unrepentant and unredeemed sinful natures.
What was their underlying nature? Their desire for wealth and financial power is obvious and we can infer that they owned other pieces of property. They were not sacrificing all that they owned. Even the profit from the land they sold was not freely given but only a portion. Why did they keep some? Is it that they did not trust God? Did they want to keep control of their lives by keeping some of the money? They were not required to sell their property nor were they required to give any, part or all of the proceeds to the Followers of Christ. Possibly, their true and selfish motive was to gain power.
What was at the core of their sinning? There was their coveting the recognition and approval of other men, pride, greed for money and deceitfulness. But overshadowing all their weaknesses was a lack of true belief and acceptance of Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord. Their world was centered on themselves instead of God. Their ultimate and unredeemable sin was their rejection of Christ and a self-imposed separation from God – their hearts were on things of the flesh and not of the spirit.
Concern #3: Was not the immediate death a harsh punishment that was uncharacteristic of the message and nature of the new covenant? Romans 6:23 tells us that the “…wages of sin is death,” and Romans 3:23 reminds us that “…all have sinned and fall short.” Like me, Ananias and Sapphira fell short and sinned. We all deserve death, but some are redeemed by accepting the gift of grace provided by Christ. Evidently, Ananias and Sapphira did not accept that grace.
The key question about this concern is not the sentence of death but the timing. If the couple had been confronted with their sinful motives and actions, would they have repented and accepted Christ? They were not afforded the opportunity to change.
God knew their hearts and souls and decided accordingly. There is no indication of other nonbelievers within the group attaching themselves to the Band of Christ-Followers for personal or selfish reasons, but given the nature of both sin and man, we can assume that there were others like Ananias and Sapphira. Unbelievers in the assembly of followers would have weakened the faithful’s witness and fermented heresies that would undermine the truths and tainted their testimony. The immediacy of judgment, condemnation and death served as a warning and strengthened the troupe. Acts 5:13 tells us that afterwards, when the band of Believers met in Solomon’s Colonnade, none of the rest dared to join them. “None of the rest,” infers that there were those who were not followers who had been joining Followers of Christ for some other reason than worshipping God and celebrating their salvation through Jesus Christ.
The deaths of Ananias also reinforced the identity of the God of the New Covenant as being the same God as the Old Covenant. God was still intolerant of sin and active in the world. What had changed was God’s relationship to those who believed in Jesus Christ.
Concern #4: Peter did not appear to be “Christ-like” in his dealings with Ananias and Sapphira. Peter’s behavior a few hours later when Sapphira arrived was not what would be expected. A loving and caring person would have done one of the following:
Gently break the news of her husband death and offered condolences
Told her what happened and offered her a chance to repent and redeem herself
Told her what happened and cast her out of the fellowship
Instead, Peter asked her if the land had been sold for “such a price” (Acts 5:8). There is no way to know what would have happened if she had confessed the deceit at that time, but Sapphira’s response gave voice to the inferred lie of her husband. Peter does not call her a liar but tells her that she and her husband put the “Spirit of the Lord to the test.”
What does it mean to test the Spirit of the Lord? Ananias and Sapphira challenged the foundation and integrity of the Fellowship of Believers by attempting to gain prestige and power within the group. They wanted to manipulate and control Christ’s followers. Essentially, Ananias and Sapphira attempted to usurp the leadership of the Spirit of the Lord. Peter' first priority was to purge the fellowship of an evil that threatened the effectiveness of Christ’s Followers. It was not a time for discussion but for immediate action. Recognizing and acting on God’s priority was “Christ-like.”
Concern #5: Who really condemned and put Ananias and Sapphira to death? At first, a reader is tempted to say that Peter pronounced sentence, but a closer look reveals that he only uncovered the deceit. Peter recognized that they had not simply lied to him nor had they only lied to the group of Believers, but they had lied to God. It was God who passed sentence on Ananias and later on Sapphira. Peter was empowered by the Spirit of God to discern their sin.
Impact
There must have been thousands of individual stories of salvation, dedication, sacrifice and works during the first years after Christ’s Resurrection. So, why was the story of Ananias and Sapphira important enough to preserve? What was the immediate impact on the early church and what is its influence today?
The Early Church was immediately affected by the event as described in Acts 5:13. Evidently, before the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira there were “wolves among the sheep” in the form of unbelievers mingling with and pretending to be Followers of Christ. I suspect that Ananias was not the first or only individual to lie, practice deceit or seek undue acceptance and acclaim, but after they were punished nonbelievers evidently did not infiltrate the group. This solidarity was important for the group to coalesce into a viable unity that effectively spread the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ around the world. It was, in many ways, a turning point for uniting, organizing and validating the church.
The Church Throughout History has been influenced to one degree or another by the story of Ananias and Sapphira. Peter’s role in the story may be twisted to seemingly give him and any man who assumes his position the authority and power to pass judgment. Additionally, it may have been used to justify demands for a proof of salvation through sacrifice or a threat against those outside of the church who might have impeded the church’s secular objectives. The possibility of being sentenced to eternal damnation if you displease a church leader is a powerful tool.
Today’s Protestant Church is still affected by the sins of Ananias and Sapphira. It is possible that some sects or denominations may use this incident in conjunction with those about tithing to intimidate their members. Interpreting that the leader of a group, like Peter, would have a power of life-or-death over their members is also possible. Some churches may even profess the ability to excommunicate or separate a Believer from Christ’s Salvation. Just like many other passages, this one could easily be twisted to empower individuals and intimidate others.
Personally
I remember reading about Ananias and Sapphira when I was in High School many years ago. The story has always seemed out of place for me. Such a severe punishment seems out of place. Intellectually I rationalized that it was the early beginnings of the Christian Church and cruelty was the normal response during those times. Peter’s lack of compassion also bothered me but I never tried to rationalize it beyond the facts given. I simply accepted the statements without consideration (maybe Peter was having a bad day or there were other issues under the surface).
Now I understand the need for examples such as Ananias and Sapphira. Like the early church, I need to purge myself of the temptations and sins that weaken or dilute my testimony. Those sins that are still in me need to be banished or killed, like Ananias and Sapphira were removed from the Body of Believers.
Analyzing the story reminds me that God is in charge of all things! We can question and search for the reasons He allows or does things in our lives, but we cannot question His absolute sovereignty over His creation. If it is important for us to understand, He will provide us with the opportunities to learn.
Closing Comments
This brief paper does not fully delve into the ideas, impressions, impact, influence or significance of the incident involving Ananias and Sapphira. It only skims the surface and is not a rigorous study of the story or its effects at that time or through history. A few of the many other aspects include the following:
Is it possible that Ananias and Sapphira were saved Believers who succumbed to temptation? Their earthly death is not the eternal death due to sin and separation from God. They may have been weak, new Believers who may not have been able to resist the temptations of the past and did not call on God for the strength to resist. Who among us has not given into temptation at one time or another? It is not for us to judge.
The words “Spirit of God” that we interpret as the “Holy Spirit” imply our more modern concept of the “Trinity.” It may also be used in an argument for “modalism” which is considered by most churches as a heresy. These passages and other can be used to delve into the “three-in-one” nature of God.
The nature of the event can be compared to that of Achon son of Zerah found in the book of Joshua 7:16-26. Achon lied to God and was destroyed along with his entire family and possessions. This comparison helps identify the God of the New Testament and the same God of the Old Testament. There was once a movement that claimed that the God of the New Testament was a different God.
One aspect of my brief discussion was the need to keep the infant church’s purity (free from the influence of non-believers). This is also an idea found in the Old Testament in the form of God’s command to the invading Israelite army to kill all living things and destroy all the property of the people they were conquering. Nothing was to remain that could in any way dilute the purity of the Israelites. Purity of the soul from the influences of Satan and sin was important in the Old Testament and this story implies the importance to the New Testament peoples.
The passage can also be used to justify a closed congregation of Believers where membership is something earned or bestowed. A Christian Church would then become a closed, cult-like group with secrets. There is a danger of Gnosticism that could be supported by misinterpreting this passage.
There are probably many more comparisons possible and, like an onion, many layers of understanding. This paper is only a small taste of the possibilities and presents only generalizations and draws simple conclusions.
No comments:
Post a Comment