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.
