Acts 5 commentary

ACTS 5 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Ananias and Sapphira
1 ow a man named Ananias, together with his
wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property.
It is against this beautiful backdrop that we come to verse 1 of chapter 5 and are
introduced to the first recorded hypocrites in the church, Ananias and Sapphira.
The gracious act of giving is set in direct contrast to the sham giving of Ananias and
Sapphira. It would appear, though I cannot be dogmatic about this, that they may
have tried to gain the same kind of respect as Barnabas did when he gave, and that
may be more speculative than fact because there was nothing said about how the
apostles or the other believers responded when he gave.
Ananias and Sapphira sold a possession, which means, land or property. ow notice
that the giving was not mandatory, not legislated, not mandated, not pressured, but
completely and totally voluntary. This is a very significant point that is just about
completely overlooked in today’s church when it comes to giving to needs. The Holy
Spirit was, and is, very capable to move on the hearts of His people to give to needs.
This is why I do not feel comfortable at all about even the hint of legislating finances
and I have been that way for all of the years I have been in the pastorate. The
church so much relies on other humans telling them what to do that they never seem
to simply rely on what the Spirit of God leads them to do. Again, what we will
clearly see in the text was that giving in the church was completely voluntary. In
fact, it has always been that way and should stay that way.
BAR ES, "But a certain man - In the previous chapter the historian had given an
account of the eminent liberality and sincerity of the mass of early Christians, in being
willing to give up their property to provide for the poor, and had mentioned the case of
Barnabas as worthy of special attention. In this chapter he proceeds to mention a case,
quite as striking, of insincerity, and hypocrisy, and of the just judgment of God on those
who were guilty of it. The case is a remarkable instance of the nature of “hypocrisy,” and
goes to illustrate the art and cunning of the enemy of souls in attempting to corrupt the
church, and to pervert the religion of the gospel. Hypocrisy consists in an attempt to
“imitate” the people of God, or to assume the “appearance” of religion, in whatever form
it may be manifested. In this case religion had been manifested by great self-denial and
benevolence. The hypocrisy of Ananias consisted in “attempting” to imitate this in
appearance, and to impose in this way on the early Christians and on God.

With Sapphira his wife - With her concurrence or consent. It was a matter of
“agreement” between them, Act_5:2, Act_5:9.
Sold a possession - The word used here κτᇿµα ktēma does not indicate whether this
was “land” or some other property. In Act_5:3, however, we learn that it was “land” that
was sold; and the word here translated “possession” is translated in the Syriac, Arabic,
and the Latin Vulgate as “land.” The pretence for which this was sold was doubtless to
have the appearance of religion. That it was “sold” could be easily known by the
Christian society, but it might not be so easily known for “how much” it was sold. Hence,
the attempt to impose on the apostles. It is clear that they were not under obligation to
sell their property. But, “having” sold it for the purposes of religion, it became their duty,
if they professed to devote the avails of it to God, to do it entirely, and without any
reservation.
CLARKE, "But a certain man named Ananias - Of these unhappy people we
have no farther account than what is recorded here. In reference to birth, connections,
etc., their names are written in the dust. The import of his name, ‫חנניה‬ chananiyah, the
grace or mercy of the Lord, agrees very ill with his conduct.
GILL, "But a certain man named Ananias,.... A name common among the Jews,
the same with Hananiah, Jer_28:1 it signifies not the humility of the Lord, or the
affliction of the Lord, or the answer of the Lord, as say some, as if it was derived from ‫ענה‬
; but the grace of the Lord, or the Lord's gracious one, coming from ‫:חנן‬ there is no
dependence on names; though this man's name signified one that was in the grace and
favour of God; he was not so, but a graceless person, as appears by what follows. It is
very likely he was a minister of the word, since the account of him follows upon that of
Barnabas, and is opposed to it; it may be he was one of the hundred and twenty, on
whom the Holy Ghost fell on the day of Pentecost; and yet, though he had great gifts,
had no grace. This shows there are hypocrites among men of the greatest names and
characters, and in the purest churches; this first and pure church, which, in the
preceding chapter, has such large encomiums, was not free from them:
with Sapphira his wife; whether this is the same name with "Shiphrah", Exo_1:15 or
"Zipporah", Exo_2:21 both which are by the Septuagint called "Sephora", or whether
another, and may signify "beautiful", is not very material. Jerom (c) says, in the Syriac
language this name signifies "beautiful"; though he first gives other explanations of it, as
"narrantem, literatam, sive librariam", as though it was derived from the Hebrew word
‫.ספר‬ The precious stone called sapphire seems to come from the same root as this, and to
be so called because of its beautiful azure colour. The name "Sappho", which was the
name of a famous poetess, the inventress of a kind of verse called "Sapphic" verse, is said
to be the diminutive of this name "Sapphira". Drusius observes, it may be read ‫,צפירא‬
"Tzephira"; which comes near to "Zipporah", and among other things signifies a "she
goat"; and it was usual to give women names taken from such creatures. So "Rachel", a
"sheep", and "Tabitha", or "Dorcas", a "doe". But whatever her name or person were, her
actions were disagreeable:

sold a possession; which was their own. So the Arabic and Syriac versions read, "their
own field", or "farm"; find the Ethiopic version, "their own vineyard": it might be his
wife's dowry or jointure, and so her consent was necessary; or they might be jointly
concerned in this sale, to show not only their concord and harmony among themselves;
but that they agreed in their devotion and religious actions, and that being both filled
with zeal for God, and love to the brethren, sold their estate to support the common
cause.
HE RY, "The chapter begins with a melancholy but, which puts a stop to the
pleasant and agreeable prospect of things which we had in the foregoing chapters;
as every man, so every church, in its best state has its but. 1. The disciples were very
holy, and heavenly, and seemed to be all exceedingly good; but there were
hypocrites among them, whose hearts were not right in the sight of God, who, when
they were baptized, and took upon them the form of godliness, denied the power of
godliness, and stopped short of that. There is a mixture of bad with good in the best
societies on this side heaven; tares will grow among the wheat until the harvest. 2. It
was the praise of the disciples that they came up to that perfection which Christ
recommended to the rich young man--they sold what they had, and gave to the poor;
but even that proved a cloak and cover of hypocrisy which was thought the greatest
proof and evidence of sincerity. 3. The signs and wonders which the apostles
wrought were hitherto miracles of mercy; but now comes in a miracle of judgment,
and here is an instance of severity following the instances of goodness, that God may
be both loved and feared.
JAMISO , "Act_5:1-11. Ananias and Sapphira.
“The first trace of a shade upon the bright form of the young Church. Probably among
the new Christians a kind of holy rivalry had sprung up, every one eager to place his
means at the disposal of the apostles” [Olshausen]. Thus might the new-born zeal of
some outrun their abiding principle, while others might be tempted to seek credit for a
liberality which was not in their character.
CALVI , "1.Those things which Luke hath reported hitherto did show that that
company, which was gathered together under the name of Christ, was rather a
company of angels than of men, Moreover, that was incredible virtue, that the rich
men did despoil themselves of their own accord, not only of their money, but also of
their land, that they might relieve the poor. But now he showeth that Satan had
invented a shift to get into that holy company, and that under color of such excellent
virtue; for he hath wonderful wiles of hypocrisy to insinuate himself. This way doth
Satan assault the Church, when as he cannot prevail by open war. But we must
specially in this place have respect unto the drift of the Holy Ghost. For in this
history he meant to declare, first, how acceptable singleness of heart is to God, and
what an abomination hypocrisy is in his sight; secondly, how greatly he alloweth
[approves] the holy and pure policy and govermnent of his Church. For this is the
principal point, the punishment wherewith punished Ananias and his wife. As the
greatness thereof did at that time terrify them all, so it is unto us a testimony that

God cannot abide this unfaithfulness, when as bearing a show of holiness where
there is none, we do mock him contemptibly. For if, having weighed all the
circumstances, we be desirous to know the sum, Luke condemneth no other fault in
Ananias than this, that he meant to deceive God and the Church with a reigned
offering. Yet there were more evils packed under this dissimulation: the contempt of
God, whom he feareth not, though he knew his wickedness; sacrilegious defrauding,
because he keepeth back part of that which he professeth to be holy to God;
perverse vanity and ambition, because he vaunteth himself in the presence of men,
without having any respect unto God’s judgment; want of faith, because he would
never have gone this way to work, unless he had mistrusted God; the corrupting of a
godly and holy order; furthermore, the hypocrisy itself was a great offense of itself.
(237) The fact of Ananias did bear a goodly show, (238) although he had given only
the half of his land. either is this a small virtue, for a rich man to bestow the half of
his goods upon the poor; but the sacrifices of the ungodly are an abomination to
God, (Proverbs 15:8;) neither can any thing please him where the singleness of heart
is wanting. For this cause is it that Christ maketh more account of the two mites
offered by the widow, than of the great sums of others, who of their great heaps
gave some part, (Luke 21:2.) This is the cause why God doth show an example of
such sharp punishment in Ananias. ow, let us note every point by itself.He laid it
at the feet of the apostles. Lo, what ambition doth! Ananias is ashamed not to be
accounted one of the best; therefore, although he be greedy of money, yet to the end
he may purchase a name amongst men, he depriveth himself of some part of his
riches. In the meanwhile, he doth not consider that he lieth and deceiveth in the
sight of God, and that God will punish this lie. So it is, that he honoreth the apostles’
feet more than God’s eyes. Wherefore, we must take good heed, that when we do
well, we do not seek to be praised of the bystanders; (239) and it is not without cause
that Christ saith, that it is profitable for us when we give our alms, to have the left
hand ignorant of that which the right hand doth.
BARCLAY, "TROUBLE I THE CHURCH Ac.5:1-11
A man called Ananias, together with his wife Sapphire, sold a bit of ground he had,
and surreptitiously kept back part of the price, and his wife knew about it. He
brought some part of the price and laid it at the feet of the apostles. Peter said to
him, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart so that you have deceived the Holy
Spirit and kept back part of the price of your ground? While it remained yours did
it not remain your own, and after it had been sold was it not entirely at your
disposal? Why did you put this business into your heart? It is not to men you have
lied but to God." As Ananias listened to these words, he collapsed and breathed his
life out. Great awe came upon all who heard it. The young men rose and bound him
up and carried him out and buried him.
After an interval of about three hours his wife came in and she was not aware of
what had happened. Peter said to her, "Tell me, did you sell the piece of ground for
so much?" "Yes," she said, "for so much." Peter said to her, "Why is it that you
agreed to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Look now, the feet of those who have buried
your husband are at the door and they will carry you out." Immediately she

collapsed at his feet and breathed her life out. When the young men came in they
found her dead and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. And
great awe came upon the whole Church and upon all who heard these things.
There is no more vivid story in the book of Acts. There is no need to make a miracle
of it. But it does show us something of the atmosphere which prevailed in the early
Church. It is on record that once Edward the First blazed with anger at one of his
courtiers and the man dropped dead in sheer fear. This story shows two things
about the early Church, the expectancy of men's minds and the extraordinary
respect in which the apostles were held. It was in that atmosphere that the rebuke of
Peter acted as it did.
This is one of the stories which demonstrate the almost stubborn honesty of the
Bible. It might well have been left out because it shows that even in the early Church
there were very imperfect Christians; but the Bible refuses to present an idealised
picture of anything. Once a court painter painted the portrait of Oliver Cromwell.
Cromwell was disfigured by warts upon his face. The painter, thinking to please the
great man, omitted the disfiguring warts. When Cromwell saw the picture, he said,
"Take it away, and paint me warts and all." It is one of the great virtues of the Bible
that it shows us its heroes, warts and all.
There is a certain encouragement in this story, for it shows us that even in its
greatest days the Church was a mixture of good and bad.
Peter insists that sin is sin against God. We do well to remember that, very specially
in certain directions. (i) Failure in diligence is sin against God. Everything, however
humble it may be, that contributes to the health, the happiness and the welfare of
mankind is work done for God. Antonio Stradivari, the great maker of violins, said,
"If my hand slacked, I should rob God." That is a motto for every man to take. (ii)
Failure to use our talents is sin against God. God gave us such talents as we have; we
hold them in stewardship for him; and we are responsible to him for the use we
make of them. (iii) Failure in truth is sin against God. When we slip into falsehood it
is sin against the guidance of the Spirit in our hearts.
COFFMA , "This chapter recounts the tragic fall of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts
5:1-11), the continued success and popularity of the apostolic mission (Acts 5:12-16),
the renewed opposition of the Sanhedrin with another arraignment of the apostles
before them (Acts 5:17-32), the purpose of the Sanhedrin to slay the apostles
thwarted by Gamaliel, and the beating of the Twelve by the Jewish authorities (Acts
5:33-42).
But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. (Acts
5:1)
A A IAS A D SAPPHIRA
But ... This word clearly connects the event of Barnabas' generous action which had

just been narrated, with what ensues here. As Boles noted, "The two illustrations
here were intended to be brought in contrast, as the conjunction `but' introduces the
sentence."[1]
The parallel with the conquest of Canaan in the Old Testament is evident in this
event, this story being to the book of Acts what the story of Achan is to the book of
Joshua. "In both, an act of deceit interrupts the victorious progress of the people of
God."[2] (Joshua 7:1ff).
Ananias and Sapphira ... The first of these names means "Jehovah hath been
gracious," and "If SAPPHIRA is Greek, it means SAPPHIRE; if Aramaic, it means
BEAUTIFUL."[3] How tragic is the contrast between these lovely names and what
befell those who wore them.
Sold a possession ... This does not mean that they sold all that they had, or that they
had been commanded to sell anything at all.
The event about to be related was a dramatic change from the wonderful miracles of
mercy and healing which, until then, had marked the deeds of the apostles; but it
was necessary that the severity of God, as well as his mercy, should be stressed. And,
just as Jesus had withered the fig tree, there appeared here "an instance of severity,
following the instances of goodness: God is to be both loved and feared."[4]
The truth of the narrative of Ananias and Sapphira is guaranteed by its painful
character. o historian would have gone out of his way to invent it.[5]
As Ramsay saw this narrative, "It is a moral apologue, not as invented to embody a
moral, but as remembered because it did so."[6]
DeWelt was correct in making this wonder the first of a class:
We have witnessed in the past record the evil forces from without, but this chapter
opens with the account of the first marks of the evil one within the fold.[7]
Wesley, however, it seems to us, was wrong in his view of this incident as "the first
attempt to bring propriety of goods into the Christian Church."[8] Very few
scholars have ever agreed with Wesley on this. See under Acts 5:4.
[1] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on Acts ( ashville: Gospel Advocate Company,
1953), p. 77.
[2] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans,
Publishers, 1954), p. 110.
[3] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible ( ew York: The Macmillan
Company, 1937), p. 824.
[4] Thomas Scott, Henry-Scott Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book
House, 1960), p. 447.

[5] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 825.
[6] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 35.
[7] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p. 73.
[8] John Wesley, ew Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker
Book House), in loco.
OTES, Most movies and stories that have happy endings have very unhappy
endings for the evil ones who have made life miserable for the good. In Walt
Disney's version of Snow White the ending is at the wedding of the Prince and Snow
White, but in the original Grimm's Fairy Tales the wicked queen is invited to the
wedding, and when she sees Snow White she is enraged. She is made to put on iron
slippers heated in the fire, and she dances in the red hot shoes until she falls down
dead. Grim indeed, but happy endings need justice for the wicked who made it all a
complex mess to begin with.
This is a terrible chapter to read, for it frightened the first Christians and it is
frightning to read it yet today, for it is about aweful judgment that falls on a
Christian couple. It is about the folly of faking and the horror, yet humor of
hypocrisy. It is capital punishment falling from God without a trial or warning. It is
scary and not funny at all. It is only funny in the sense of being foolish. Foolishness
is funny for it can be easily avoided by being wise and honest. It was such a stupid
thing to do that God made a point of it being so stupid that is led to immediate
judgment. It was a warning not to deal falsely with God. What can be more stupid
than lying to God who knows all? This is not laugh funny but scary funny and
unbelievable stupid funny. When people do something so stupid that it leads to their
death we do not laugh but say "How stupid can you be!" It is so stupid that it is
funny. It is tragic funny, and sad funny, and so unnessarily aweful that it isn't even
funny.
Ananias and his wife
Came into some large cash.
But instead of it improving life
It led to their great crash.
They tried to play the cheater
And make themselves look kind.
But they could not fool old Peter
For he was to swift of mind.
You let Satan fill your heart
So that you lied to God.

ow in his church you have no part.
You'll be buried in the sod.
You did't have to give us any,
But you have had the gall
To say you gave us every penny,
And that's the cause of your downfall.
When Ananias heard this word
He fell right down and died.
The people thought what a nerd
And they never even cried.
The people then were seized with fear.
It was not a pleasant day.
There was not a single word of cheer
As they carried him away.
It was only three hours later
When his wife came in the door.
Peter did not debate her
But simply asked as he did before.
What was the total price
You two got for your land?
She tried to seem so nice
But she lied to beat the band.
Peter made it clear to her
She would join her husband soon.
Suddenly everything was a blur
And she fell into a swoon.
Young men came and found her dead.
By her husband she was laid.
The whole church was filled with dread,
For this event made them all afraid.
The issue here is motive. They saw great admiration for those who gave so much
and they were jealous of such fame and honor and wanted it for themselves, but
were not willing to pay the full price. They hoped to imitate Barnabus and get what
he had in reputation without the cost. Cheap glory was their goal, and if they had to
lie to God, what is the big deal? The tempation to get what others have gotten by
great sacrifice by making a small sacrifice is with all of us. We all crave recognition
and some degree of fame, and are tempted to find short cuts to get it.

IVP, "This chilling account of the sudden deaths of Ananias (Hebrew, "the Lord is
gracious") and Sapphira (Aramaic, "beautiful") makes us face the fact that God
deals with sin, especially church members' deceit and lack of integrity. If God acts
to preserve the integrity of the community that the gospel produced, we can have
increased confidence in the truthfulness of the message itself (Lk 1:4). That's the
good news for the inquirer. This narrative is bad news, though, for any who would
take a casual approach to entering the kingdom of God.
DAILY BREAD, "Two young women lost their lives in a fire that swept through
their apartment as they slept. Their home was equipped with a smoke detector that
was in good working order, but it hadn't gone off. Why? Fire inspectors concluded
that the device had been deactivated for a party the night before. The unit had been
disconnected to keep it from sounding off because of the smoke from cooking and
candles.
In Acts 5 we have another example of two people who apparently deactivated an
alarm system that could have saved their lives. Ananias and Sapphira must have
quenched the Holy Spirit by turning a deaf ear to their consciences, believing they
had plenty of good reasons for doing what they did. But their action cost them their
lives.
We need to realize that the Holy Spirit was not given to annoy us like a sensitive
smoke detector. He doesn't sound false alarms. When He activates our conscience by
bringing to mind a principle or warning from God's Word, it is really His love and
wisdom in action.
By weighing the warnings of His love against the cost of our foolishness, we'll soon
realize that it's always better to be safe than sorry. —MRD II —Mart De Haan
Our conscience is a gift from God,
It is a guiding light;
And when aligned with God's true Word,
It shows us what is right. —Sper
SBC 1-10, "From the conduct of Ananias and Sapphira we see:—
I. The vital difference between the spirit and the fashion of Christianity. (1) We may
imitate Christ, yet not know Him after the Spirit. (2) We may mingle with Christians,
and yet know nothing of the spiritual power of Christianity.
II. The fatal temptation to give the part as the whole.
III. The concealed sin, as well as the public iniquity will be followed by the judgment of
God. (1) There is yet to be a reading of hearts. (2) Not only what we have done, but what
we have left undone is to be judged. (3) Sins which apparently do no harm to society, are
to be punished.
Parker, City Temple, vol. ii., p. 124.

HAWKER 1-10. "But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a
possession, (2) And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and
brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. (3) But Peter said, Ananias, why
hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of
the land? (4) While 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. (5) And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up
the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things. (6) And the young
men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him. (7) And it was about the
space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in. (8) And
Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said,
Yea, for so much. (9) Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to
tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are
at the door, and shall carry thee out. (10) Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and
yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her
forth, buried her by her husband.
We have here a most interesting record of two abominable hypocrites, whose crimes and
punishment are circumstantially related, for the instruction and comfort of the Church
in all ages. It is blessed to observe how God the Holy Ghost watches over his Church, in
causing such histories to be handed down to the people. Without such records, we might
have been led to suppose, that in those happy days no characters of a contrary principle
to the Apostles standard were to be found. But now we learn that the best of Churches,
and the best of times, have their spots. In the ark, there was an Ham. Among the
Apostles, a Judas, Under the first days of the Holy Ghost’s ministry, the Lord permitted
Ananias and Sapphira to mingle for a space with the faithful. But so far are these things
from proving injurious to the Church, that they ultimately minister to her glory.
Reader, let us first contemplate the dreadful state of the human heart. Here were two
persons most fully convinced, as far as head-knowledge could carry conviction, of the
truths of God, professing a belief they never felt, and to preserve an opinion among the
faithful, consenting, apparently, to give up the whole of their worldly goods for the
benefit of the Church of Christ; and yet all the while had not the least real love to Jesus,
or his people. And are such instances singular? Alas! the reverse. Perhaps there is not
now upon earth a single congregation of professing Christians, of any number, but what
hath some of the same description. And doth not the Lord overrule such events to his
glory, and his people’s welfare? Yes! for it tends to make the Lord’s people jealous of
themselves, when they discover such goats got into the sheepfold. It tends to humble the
soul, under a sense of common corruption. And it operates most blessedly to the Lord’s
glory, when a child of God is thereby led to discover, that all the difference between one
and another is all of grace.
Let us next learn from this picture of human depravity, to admire the tender love of the
Lord to the Church, in qualifying Peter to the detection of it. By the power which the
Holy Ghost gave him of discerning spirits, the iniquity was found out, and the Church
cleansed from the impurity. And thus the Lord watches over his people for good in all
ages.
I beg the Reader particularly to remark with me, that Peter charged this man with lying
to the Holy Ghost. But why is it so specially said that the lie was to the Holy Ghost? I
apprehend on this account. Because conversion-work is the personal operation of God

the Holy Ghost? So that the whole, and every part of this man’s conduct, was directly
leveled against the Holy Ghost. He never had been converted. He never had felt the love
of God, and of Christ, in his heart And therefore the deception was principally against
God the Spirit. I pray the Reader, under this head, not to overlook how Peter speaks of
the Godhead of the Holy Ghost. In verse three, (Act_5:3) he chargeth Ananias with lying
to the Holy Ghost. And in another, (Act_5:4) he saith that lie was not unto men, but
unto God. A plain proof, in Peter’s view, that the Holy Ghost is God.
One observation more meets us on this wonderful transaction, I mean the judgment of
God, in instant death, both on the man and his wife. It must have been very awful; but it
should seem that the Lord deemed it to be necessary. The honor of God the Spirit. The
honor of the Church of Christ now more eminently forming. The dreadful alarm it must
have given hypocrites, to keep them from the Church. The fears it must have awakened
in cautioning the foes of Christ to be very careful how they molested the Apostles. And
the terror in all the future ages of the Church it might afford, to preserve the faithful
from numberless instances of deception. These were certainly among the causes for
which the speedy judgment of the Lord fell upon Ananias and Sapphira; and for which
they stand forth, and will stand forth to the end of the world, monuments of the Lord’s
anger. Reader! let you and I, in the contemplation, learn to bless God for his
unspeakable gift!
COKE, "Acts 5:1-2. But a certain man, &c.— In Psalms 110 where our Saviour is
prophetically described in the person of a king advanced to the throne of divine majesty,
glorious and triumphant, it is said, that his people, in the day of his power, should offer
him free-will-offerings; which alludes to the Eastern custom of bringing presents to their
kings on their inauguration. This prophesy was fulfilled in some small degree, in a
temporal sense, as we find in the fore-going chapter; when, after Christ's ascension into
heaven, and his inauguration was proclaimed by the descent of the Holy Ghost, they,
who by believing in him acknowledged him their king, dedicated their goods to his
service, selling their lands, &c. and laying down the money at the apostles' feet, to be
distributed for the relief of the poor. But the consecration of the heart to him, makes
infinitely the superior sense of the prophesy. Among those who had joined the church,
there was one Ananias, who, as if he had intended to imitate the zeal and liberality of
Barnabas, sold a possession of land for the supply of this charitable fund: but, after he
had sold it, he conspired with his wife Sapphira privately to keep back part of the price,
and yet publicly to deliver in the remainder as the whole price. St. Peter, who had the gift
of discerning spirits, and probably received a direct revelation from heaven on the
present occasion, immediately detected this lying and deceitful behaviour.
MCGARVEY, "1, 2. In close connection with this unprecedented liberality of the
brethren, we are now introduced to a remarkable case of corruption, of which it was
the occasion. The praise always lavished on disinterested benevolence sometimes
prompts illiberal men to make a pretense of liberality. But the mere desire of praise
is incapable of subduing selfishness, so as to make a truly liberal heart; for it is itself
a species of selfishness. In contrast with the course of Barnabas, we are told: (1)
"But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, (2) and
kept back part of the price, his wife being also privy to it, and brought a certain part
and laid it at the feet of the apostles." This language implies, what is distinctly

avowed by the wife below, that this part was represented as the whole price of the
possession.
GUZIK, "After they saw the great generosity of Barnabas, and how well he was
respected, Ananias and Sapphira decided they wanted some of the same respect.
b. He kept back part of the proceeds: They sold the possession, and gave only a
portion to the church, while implying that they had sacrificially given it all to the
church.
i. The word for kept back is nosphizomai, which means "to misappropriate." The
same word was used of Achan's theft in the Greek translation of the Old Testament
(Joshua 7:21), and in its only other ew Testament use, it means to steal (Titus
2:10).
ii. "The story of Ananias is to the Book of Acts what the story of Achan is to the
book of Joshua. In both narratives an act of deceit interrupts the victorious progress
of the people of God." (Bruce)
c. His wife also being aware of it: Clearly, both husband and wife were in on the
deception.
i. "There may indeed be the further implication that Ananias and Sapphira had
vowed to give the whole proceeds of the sale to God, but then changed their mind
and handed over only part." (Bruce)
ii. "Once the love of money takes possession of a person, there is no evil that he
cannot or will not do." (Horton)
THE HIGH COST OF DECEIT ACTS 5:1-11
To the all-seeing (omnipresent), all-knowing (omniscient) eyes of God, there are no
secret sins. As Thomas Brooks put it, "Those sins which lie closest and are most
secretly lurking in the heart, are as obvious and odious to God as those that are
most fairly written upon a man's forehead." We deceive ourselves to think that we
can nurture sin without its ugliness affecting our lives and those about us.
It is a remarkable thing that the Bible gives us not only the good and positive, but
also the evil and negative things that have happened throughout biblical history. We
can see a David slay Goliath by the hand of the Lord, then see him blacken his holy
reputation by his sin with Bathsheba. Peter received the divine revelation of Jesus
being Messiah, then found himself denying the very Messiah he had proclaimed. We
can learn from both the positive and negative.

The movement of the Spirit in the early church is captivating throughout the first
four chapters of Acts. We see the coming of the Spirit in power, the unforgettable
drama of Jerusalem coming together to hear Peter's "Pentecostal sermon," the
healing of the lame beggar, and the testimony of Peter and John before the Jewish
religious leaders. So far, so good!
When you read the latter part of chapter 4 you discover the practical unity of the
church displayed in their care for one another.
And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not
one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own; but all things were
common property to them. And with great power the apostles were giving witness to
the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all. For
there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or
houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales, and lay them at the
apostles' feet; and they would be distributed to each, as any had need. And Joseph, a
Levite of Cyprian birth, who was also called Barnabas by the apostles (which
translated means, Son of Encouragement), and who owned a tract of land, sold it
and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet. (Acts 4:32-37)
Here was the magnificence of Christian unity which Christ had prayed about in His
high priestly prayer of John 17. These brethren stood together in "one heart and
soul," giving of themselves and their means for the cause of the gospel and the good
of the church. They did not sell all their material possessions and put them in a
common fund as the Essenes did in the Qumran region, but as anyone had need,
they would sell property and goods, using the proceeds to meet the needs of others in
the body.
Luke carefully points out one such believer who acted in this way, a man we know
as Barnabas. He had a tract of land which he sold and gave all the proceeds for the
church. Obviously, he was held in great esteem by the rest of the church and this act
of sacrificial giving was admired by others in the body. Perhaps there was a buzz of
excitement about this substantial gift which Barnabas laid at the apostle's feet.
It is was in the context of such a selfless act of giving that we see the first real blight
upon the infant church. The names of Ananias and Sapphira will forever go down in
the annals of church history as the first members of the church to strike a blow
against the unity of the church as instruments in Satan's hands. The adversary had
assaulted the church externally, using religious persecution as a means to deter the
Christians from their Christ-centered mission. But that assault only served to
increase the church rather than destroy it. So Satan turned his evil attention inward
and filled the heart of two church members to do something that would pollute the
church.
Two important questions arise from this text. First, what is the nature of the church
for a member's secret sins to be so serious? Second, is the Holy Spirit really serious
about the purity and holiness of the church? Both of these questions are answered

with clarity in our text. We must never lose sight of the truth that the saving work of
Christ purifies a people for Himself (Titus 2:14). We must not presume upon the
purity and unity of the church. It is vital that we constantly search our motives and
actions to make sure that we do nothing to grieve the Spirit (Eph. 4:30) and hinder
the church of Jesus Christ.
With this exhortation in mind, let us see...
I. The nature of the church
I believe that one of the great benefits of studying the book of Acts is to understand
more about the whole nature and workings of the local church. It addresses the local
church as opposed to the mysterious, universal church. The first instance of the
word "church" being used in Acts is found in v. 11.
Let's admit that there is probably a great deal of confusion concerning precisely
what the church is in our day. I would point out that whatever the true church
"was" in the first century, it "is" in the 20th century. The problem comes in our
sifting through the many ideas of "church" that seem to be prevalent and coming to
some firm, biblical conclusions on the nature of the church.
The church is described by many terms. It is called "the body of Christ" (I Cor. 12;
Eph. 4), "the bride of Christ" (Eph. 5:23ff; Rev. 19:6,7), the "pillar and support of
the truth" (I Tim. 3:15), and dozens of other names. The church, in its truest sense,
is composed of all true disciples of Jesus Christ, i.e., those who have been redeemed
by the blood of Christ and who now live under the Lordship of Christ. ow, I am
speaking in the true, biblical terms concerning the church. The unfortunate thing is
that it is difficult to get a clear picture of the church by looking at the thousands of
organized churches which exist throughout our world. The term "church" seems to
imply more of the idea of a building or an active organization or a membership roll
or a calendar of programs and activities rather than the redeemed of the Lord. I
want to challenge us to think in biblical terms about the church rather than the
modern, worldly ideas. I would point out at least three truths concerning the nature
of the church that are inherent within our text.
1. A habitation of the Spirit
The emphasis on the sin of Ananias and Sapphira is that they have lied to the Holy
Spirit and sought to put the Holy Spirit to the test. The language used shows that
the activity and life of the church is in relationship to the Holy Spirit. We must
begin by noting that the deity of the Spirit is clearly confirmed in these verses.
otice in verse 3 that Peter tells Ananias that he has lied to the Holy Spirit. Then in
the next verse he states, "You have not lied to men, but to God." Again, in verse 9,
Peter calls the Holy Spirit "the Spirit of the Lord." The Holy Spirit is called "God"
by this use of parallelism in these verses. Just as the Father is God and the
Redeemer, Jesus Christ, is God, the Holy Spirit is Himself God of very God. The

1689 London Baptist Confession states: "Three divine Persons constitute the
Godhead--the Father, the Son (or the Word), and the Holy Spirit. They are one in
substance, in power, and in eternity. Each is fully God, and yet the Godhead is one
and indivisible..." (p. 19). If He is not God, then to pray to Him, to depend upon
Him, to trust in Him, to ask for His power would constitute the highest form of
idolatry!
We must understand that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Only a person can be lied to or
put to the test. Some have the mistaken notion that the Holy Spirit is an "it," albeit
a 'powerful it'. Others think that He is merely a 'force' or a 'power' that works in
people's lives. But Peter unmistakably shows that He is a Person. And as a Person,
He is involved in relationships with other persons. The Holy Spirit is One with
whom we have to do, One to whom we must answer, One whom we must not ignore
or presume upon. He is One with whom we have fellowship, according to II Cor.
13:14, and you cannot have fellowship with anyone who does not have personhood.
The fact of the Spirit's deity lays the groundwork for the essential truth we must
see. The church is a "habitation of the Spirit." Paul expressed it like this in
Ephesians 2:22, "in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in
the Spirit." That word "dwelling" means "a place of settling down" or "a
habitation." Think of the enormity of that statement. When the church gathers
together the Holy Spirit, God Himself, dwells right in our midst! When we come to
worship, the Spirit is among us. When we come and go to serve, the Spirit is among
us. When we come together in any fashion, the Spirit is among us. The point we
must see is that since the Holy Spirit is among us, we must not in any way offend
Him by unholiness or disobedience.
Let us consider some practical outworking of this truth. Do you prepare for Sunday
School and worship as if you are going to be in the presence of the Spirit of God
Himself? Perhaps your mind is on some project or a television show or an activity.
Do you think the Spirit is unaware of this, yet you are gathered with the church
which is His holy habitation? Maybe you are not really interested in the truth of
God's Word being proclaimed. Instead, you just want lots of programs and activities
to keep you busy and make you 'feel' spiritual. Dare you have such an attitude when
the Author of the Word of God who breathed the Scriptures into existence through
human personalities is right in our midst?
This Holy Spirit who habitates among us as a local church can be grieved by our sin
(Eph. 4:30), quenched by our resisting the proclamation of God's Word (I Thess.
5:19-20), and offended by our attempts to "use" the church for self-centered
purposes (context).
2. An organic unity
The seriousness of the sin of Ananias and Sapphira can be seen in how they took
liberty with the unity of the church. They were willing to treat the "one heart and
soul" of Acts 4:32 lightly by deceiving the church. They lived under the ruse that the

church was an organization they could use rather a body to whom they were
responsible.
Unity is to always be at the heart of the local church. This is not merely an
organizational unity. It is not a unity that is structured because you have all the
right programs and personalities in place. It is a unity that is grounded in the
redemptive work of Christ. It is a unity that is threaded together by the sanctifying
work of the Holy Spirit. It is a unity that is bound as tight as the unity of the Father
and the Son (John 17:21). It is a unity that is a grand display of the glory of the
indwelling Christ (John 17:22-23).
Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth. As Thou didst send Me into the
world, I also have sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify Myself,
that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth. I do not ask in behalf of these
alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be
one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us;
that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me. And the glory which Thou hast
given Me I have given to them; that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them,
and thou in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, that the world may know that
Thou didst send Me, and didst love them, even as Thou didst love Me. (John 17:17-
23)
Unity does not mean uniformity, that is, we all look alike, act alike, think alike.
Unity implies that we are bound together at the deepest level of the soul. Our hearts
and minds beat in sync though we may have different ideas and interests and
ministries. Unity is a fact that is wrought through Christ so that though we are
different in many ways, we harmonize together due to our common bond in Jesus
Christ and common desire to bring glory to His name. The truth is that as
Christians we have unity and we must not do anything to obscure the unity which
has been purchased at the cost of the blood of Jesus Christ.
This organic or living unity is described by Paul as the many members of the human
body functioning together though different in many ways (I Cor. 12). The hands,
feet, ears, eyes are all distinctly different but belong to the same "head" and have
the same purpose, to do all that the "head" desires them to do. Such unity can be
hindered only by one of two things: "There are always those in the church who are
not of it. Inevitably they occasion division....And those who are truly of the church
are still at best very poor Christians. The frequent disobedience of the members of
the church to its Head drives them apart" (R.B. Kuiper, The Glorious Body of
Christ, 97-98).
3. A holy people
The prayer of our Lord, "Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth," was a
prayer for our holiness as the people of God. Paul explained what it meant to be a
recipient of the grace of God in Christ:

For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to
deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in
the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our
great God and Savior, Christ Jesus: who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem
us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for His own possession,
zealous for good deeds. (Titus 2:11-14)
There is no doubt in this passage and many others like it, that the work of Christ in
the heart of a sinner is not to leave that sinner living the same old way. It is a work
that makes him a "new creation" (II Cor. 5:17), so that he lives in a way that is
distinctly Christian. Holiness means that we are set apart to the Lord. In practical
fashion, being a holy people means that we are living our lives as if we belong to the
Lord and not to this worldly system.
The threat by Ananias and Sapphira was that of obscuring the holiness of the
church. Christ had saved this body of believers, given them a new nature, filled
them with new desires, so that they distinctly lived as the people of God in the midst
of a corrupt people. When Ananias and Sapphira thought that they could deceive
the church, embezzle funds (the meaning of "kept back" in v. 2), lie about their gift,
and gain a position of prominence in the church for their own selfish purposes, the
Holy Spirit would not allow it to go on!
Holiness is one of those words which people don't like to talk about. Yet at the heart
of the saving work of Christ is that of producing a holy people. This does not mean
that we are just to be holy in "position" but not in practice. It implies that we are to
give ourselves to the practice of personal holiness in word, attitude, deed, and
actions. In his classic work, Holiness, J.C. Ryle has written, "I fear it is sometimes
forgotten that God has married together justification and sanctification. They are
distinct and different things, beyond question, but one is never found without the
other. All justified people are sanctified people, and all sanctified are justified....Tell
me not of your justification, unless you have also some marks of sanctification.
Boast not of Christ's work for you, unless you can show us the Spirit's work in you"
(p. 46).
II. An offense to the church
Keeping in mind that the nature of the church is one of being a habitation of the
Spirit which exists in unity as a holy people of God, when sin creeps in it is
something that is "foreign" to the church's nature. We have in our text the first
great offense of the church. There have been many since then, but perhaps none so
clearly seen and severely dealt with than the one found in our text.
We must remember that the church was in its infancy. If it began to tolerate sin
among its members it would soon become defiled and impure, losing its salty effect
in its ministry. It was in this pristine condition that the adversary assaulted the
church from within. Though Satan was at work, the blame lay not at his 'feet' but at
the feet two church members, Ananias and Sapphira. As Thomas Brooks has

pointed out, "Satan must have a double leave before he can do anything against us.
He must have leave from God, and leave from ourselves, before he can act anything
against our happiness" (Works, vol. 1, 153). Though Providence permitted this
assault, Ananias and Sapphira had the responsibility of opposing it and resisting it
(I Cor. 10:13; I Peter 5:8-9). They did not and we have for an example to us the
seriousness of an offense against the Holy Spirit and the church whom He inhabits.
1. Wrong motives
When we begin to analyze the sin of this husband and wife duo, we must see that at
the root of it lay wrong motives (an evidence of breaching the 10th commandment--
coveting). They wanted to use the church for personal gain and personal glory. They
were interested in drawing attention to themselves, receiving the accolades of their
fellow church members, and giving the perception that they were very spiritual,
sacrificial people. They were satisfying their own craving for personal prestige and
power. They hoped to gain greater influence within the infant church. Though their
hearts were corrupt they wanted everyone else to think they were good-hearted and
pure.
We must understand, as our text points out in verses 1-4, Ananias and Sapphira did
not have to sell their property and give all the proceeds to the church. They could
have sold it and given a portion to the church and that would have been fine. But
the ruse was that they were giving all of the proceeds of the sale of their property to
the church.
Can you imagine for a moment the scene in the gathering of the church. The body
had gathered for worship and the proclamation of the Word. At some particular
time, Ananias came before Peter with a sack of money which he had set aside and
presents to him as the full proceeds of the sale of his property. We have already seen
that Barnabas had done this. Evidently Ananias had stated that he was going to give
all of his proceeds to the church, so when he approached Peter it was under the
guise of giving a magnanimous gift. The smile on his face was suddenly dismissed by
the questioning of Peter. The wrong motives of Ananias and his wife were exposed.
o longer could Peter or the church be neutral about such a sin.
What of your motives? All of us are susceptible to falling prey to wrong motives. It
may be in our preaching or our teaching or our leadership or our singing or our acts
of service that we begin to think of 'what's in it for me' rather than the glory of God.
Perhaps we do what we do so that others will notice us and stroke us. If it bothers
you when no one notices your service then you best check your motives for serving.
Perhaps you come to church so that you might please others or satisfy some carnal
desire rather than the glory of God.
"Francois Fenelon was the court preacher for King Louis XIV of France in the 17th
century. One Sunday when the king and his attendants arrived at the chapel for the
regular service, no one else was there but the preacher. King Louis demanded,
"What does this mean?" Fenelon replied, "I had published that you would not come

to church today, in order that your Majesty might see who serves God in truth and
who flatters the king" (ODB).
We must have a motive check lest we find ourselves offending the Holy Spirit who
habitates the church.
2. Cruel deception
The act of Ananias and Sapphira is called "embezzling" by our text. In verse 2 it
states that he "kept back some of the price for himself," then in verse 3 Peter
questioned him because he kept back some of the price of the land. The word can
literally be translated 'embezzled'. This couple secretly took some of the larger
portion that belonged to the Lord for themselves and their own selfish purposes.
They intentionally sought to deceive the church.
Peter wastes no time in calling their sin an act of lying to the Holy Spirit. What they
had failed to recognize is that when you seek to deceive, you are actually deceiving
your own selves. "But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers
who delude themselves" (James 1:22).
How could they do such an act of deception to the church? They were part of this
pristine assembly of the redeemed of the Lord. They had joined together at the
Lord's table. They had partaken of the good things of God hand-in-hand. They had
prayed together, fellowshipped together, shared of their goods together. They had
witnessed the blessing of the Lord upon their fellowship. Then, with malice in their
hearts, they subtly attempted to improve their personal appearance before the
church by an act of embezzling. But, my brethren, God will not be mocked! 'Be sure
your sin will find you out!'
I would exhort any of you who may be flirting with such secret sins, whether of
brazen acts like Ananias and Sapphira or disdaining attitudes like David's wife
Michal or doctrinal deception like those at Galatia or abandoning the faith and
going after the world like Hymenaeus and Alexander (I Tim. 1:18-20), TUR
FROM YOUR SI ! Realize that your offense is not in isolation but in relationship
to the church and the Holy Spirit who dwells among us. It is odious in the sight of
God! You cannot please God, no matter how many good deeds you try to add to
your account, when you are living in such sin and rebellion against the Spirit of
God!
III. The price of an offense
Sin is always costly. For our redemption, sin demanded the precious blood of the
sinless Son of God. For those who are careless with sin, there is always a cost. When
Achan stealthily took a Babylonian garment along with gold and silver during the
battle of Jericho and hid them in his tent, he thought that no one would ever know.
Yet his sin cost the lives of 30 men who went to battle against the city of Ai. And his
sin ultimately caused the loss of his life, his family, and everything he possessed,

aside from the demoralizing of the congregation of Israel.
We seem to have too light of an attitude about sin in our day. Sin is odious in the
sight of God! He hates sin! Sin is the very opposite of His holy character and acts.
Sin is a description of everything which God loathes and declares that He will
punish. Since sin is so contrary to God and His character it should come as no
surprise that when those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ give way to sin it
affects that body that has been set apart to holy living.
1. Costly to the church's unity and purity
You may think that the quick execution of Ananias and Sapphira by the Holy Spirit
was not fair, perhaps even bordering on the edge of injustice. But I would submit to
you that what was done was merciful to the entire church! Their unity was at stake.
Without unity they could not worship, they could not fellowship, and they would not
go forward in the work of proclaiming the gospel. To have let this sin of wrong
motives and deception slide would have amounted to a cruelty exacted upon the
church.
Everyone of us contributes to the ongoing unity of this church. Unity is as much
your responsibility as it is mine. I must guard my motives, my attitudes, my tongue,
my actions, my thoughts, and my deeds. But so must you, for you are as much a part
of the church as anyone else if you are indeed born again.
The redemptive purpose of our Lord is seen Ephesians 5:25-27. "Husbands, love
your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; that
He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or
wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless." In light of
this, we cannot allow ourselves to do anything that would affect the purity of the
body. Is there a sin you are harboring, nurturing, hiding? Then repent of it! Call
upon the Lord for His forgiveness and mercy and turn away from such sin. The
unity and purity of this church is before you, so give glory to God by holy living.
2. Judgment upon the offender
Once Peter confronted Ananias, he fell dead at the hearing of those words. What
happened exactly in medical terms, we do not know. The text just says, "Ananias
fell down and breathed his last." And when Sapphira was confronted with the fact
that she "agreed together" with Ananias' deception of the church, she too "breathed
her last" and was carried out and buried by her husband.
ow the question is, were they saved? Our text does not state that, but you would
assume from the fact that they had evidently partaken of the Spirit to some degree
that they may well have been. They were part of the church, given all of the rights
and privileges of partakers of Christ. The fact that such severe discipline was dealt
to them appears to infer that they were indeed part of the church as believers, but

who had fallen into grievous sin. God mercifully stayed their sin by bringing severe
measures of death upon them. This is an example, I believe, of a "sin unto death"
which I John 5:16-17 speaks of. I would ask you, would it be better to live a life of
hypocrisy or for God to take them out of the way to protect the rest of the body?
The answer is obvious.
The ew Testament gives plenty of teaching about "church discipline." We might
say that the Holy Spirit took matters 'in his own hands' at this point, but we are
given strong teaching in both the gospels and epistles concerning not tolerating sin
in the body.
Conclusion
ow, what are we to make of all this? First, we must live with a deeper
consciousness of the nature of the church. We gather, not as an organization, but as
the body of Christ inhabited corporately by the Holy Spirit, preserving our unity
that has been purchased and paid for by Christ, and maintaining holy lives seven
days a week. We must realize that being part of the church is not like being part of a
civic club. We are in covenant with one another. We are responsible to the entire
body. We are accountable to one another and to the Holy Spirit who abides with us.
Consequently, we must regularly review our own motives in everything we do
within the church. If those motives are impure, then repent of them with haste! If
you are sinning against the church by attitude, conversation, or actions, then repent
of it immediately! If you are trying to use the church to bolster your own ego, then
repent of it now! If you are living as a hypocrite, then turn from your sin and cast
yourself upon God's mercy.
Realize that all of us are to guard the unity and purity of the body. The Holy Spirit
is serious about the church indwells being pure and holy before the Lord. Let us not
take this lightly. Let's exhort and admonish and even correct one another for the
sake of the body. Let's not resist the brotherly admonitions for the sake of the
church of Jesus Christ.
Copyright 2007, South Woods Baptist Church, All Rights Reserved
EBC, "HONESTY AND PRETENCE IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH
THE exact period in the history of the apostolic Church at which we have now arrived is
a most interesting one. We stand at the very first origin of a new development in
Christian life and thought. Let us observe it well, for the whole future of the Church is
bound up with it. Christianity was at the beginning simply a sect, of Judaism. It is plain
that the Apostles at first thus regarded it. They observed Jewish rites, they joined in the
temple and synagogue worship, they restricted salvation and God’s favour to the
children of Abraham, and merely added belief in Jesus of Nazareth as the promised
Messiah to the common Jewish faith. The spirit of God was indeed speaking through the
Apostles, leading them, as it led St. Peter on the day of Pentecost, to speak words with a
meaning and scope far beyond their thoughts. They, like the prophets of old, knew not as
yet what manner, of things the Spirit which was in them did signify.

"As little children lisp, and tell of Heaven, So thoughts beyond their thought to those
high bards were given."
Their speech had a grander and wider application than they themselves dreamt of; but
the power of prejudice and education was far too great even for the Apostles, and so,
though the nobility and profuseness of God’s mercy were revealed and the plenteousness
of His grace was announced by St. Peter himself, yet the glory of the Divine gift was still
unrecognised. Jerusalem, the Temple, the Old Covenant, Israel after the flesh, -these
things as yet bounded and limited the horizon of Christ’s Church. How were the new
ideas to gain an entrance? How was the Church to rise to a sense of the magnificence and
universality of its mission? Joseph, who by the Apostles was surnamed Barnabas,
emerges upon the scene and supplies the answer, proving himself in very deed a son of
consolation, because he became the occasion of consoling the masses of mankind with
that truest comfort, the peace of God which passes all understanding. Let us see how this
came about.
I. The Christian leaders belonged originally to the extreme party in Judaism. The Jews
were at this time divided into two sections. There was the Hebrew party on the one
hand; extreme Nationalists as we might call them. They hated everything foreign. They
clung to the soil of Palestine, to its language and to its customs. They trained up their
children in an abhorrence of Greek civilisation, and could see nothing good in it. This
party was very unprogressive, very narrow-minded, and, therefore, unfit to recognise the
developments of God’s purposes. The Galileans were very prominent among them. They
lived in a provincial district, remote from the influences of the great centres of thought
and life, and missed, therefore, the revelations of God’s mind which He is evermore
making through the course of His providential dealings with mankind. The Galileans
furnished the majority of the earliest Christian leaders, and they were not fitted from
their narowness to grasp the Divine intentions with respect to Christianity and its
mission. What a lesson for every age do we behold in this intellectual and spiritual defect
of the Galileans. They were conscientious, earnest, devout, spiritually-minded men.
Christ loved them as such, and devoted Himself to their instruction. But they were one-
sided and illiberal. Their very provincialism, which had sheltered them from Sadduceism
and unbelief, had filled them with blind prejudices, and as the result had rendered them
unable to read aright the mind of God and the development of His purposes. Man, alas!
is a very weak creature, and human nature is very narrow. Piety is no guarantee for
wisdom and breadth, and strong faith in God’s dealings in the past often hinders men
from realising and obeying the Divine guidance and the evolution of His purposes amid
the changed circumstances of the present. The Galilean leaders were best fitted to testify
with unfaltering zeal to the miracles and resurrection of Christ. They were not best fitted
to lead the Church into the possession of the Gentiles.
There was another party among the Jews whom God had trained by the guidance of His
providence for this purpose. The Acts of the Apostles casts a strong and comforting light
back upon the history of the Lord’s dealings with the Jews ever since the days of the
Babylonish Captivity. We can see in the story told in the Acts the reason why God
permitted the overthrow of Jerusalem by the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, and the
apparent defeat for the time of His own designs towards the chosen people. The story of
the dispersion is a standing example how wonderfully God evolves good out of seeming
ill, making all things work together for the good of His Church. The dispersion prepared
a section of the Jews, by travel, by foreign civilisation, by culture, and by that breadth of
mind and sympathy which is thereby produced, to be mediators between the Hebrew
party with all their narrowness and the masses of the Gentile world whom the strict Jews
would fain have shut out from the hope of God’s mercy. This liberal and progressive

party is called in the Acts of the Apostles the Hellenists. They were looked at askance by
the more old-fashioned Hebrews. They were Jews, children of Abraham indeed, of the
genuine stock of Israel. As such they had a true standing-ground within the Jewish fold,
and as true Jews could exercise their influence from within much more effectually than if
they stood without; for it has been well remarked by a shrewd observer, that every party,
religious or political, is much more powerfully affected by movements springing from
within than by attacks directed from without. An explosive operates with much more
destructive force when acting from within or underneath a fortification than when
brought into play from outside. Such was the Hellenistic party. No one could deny their
true Jewish character, but they had been liberalised by their heaven-sent contact with
foreigners and foreign lands; and hence it is that we discern in the Hellenistic party, and
specially in Joseph, who by the Apostles was surnamed Barnabas, the beginnings of the
glorious ingathering of the Gentiles, the very first rift in the thick dark cloud of prejudice
which as yet kept back even the Apostles themselves from realising the great object of
the gospel dispensation.
The Hellenists, with their wealth, their culture, their new ideas, their sense and value of
Greek thought, were the bridge by which the spiritual life, hitherto wrapped in Jewish
swaddling clothes, was to pass over to the masses of the Gentile world. The community
of goods led Joseph Barnabas to dedicate his substance to the same noble cause of
unselfishness. That dedication led to disputes between Hellenists and Hebrews, and
these disputes occasioned the election of the seven deacons, who, in part, at least,
belonged to the more liberal section. Among these deacons we find St. Stephen, whose
teaching and martyrdom were directly followed by St. Paul and his conversion, and St.
Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles and the vindicator of Christian freedom and
Christian liberty. St. Barnabas and his act of self-denial and self-sacrifice in surrendering
his landed estate are thus immediately connected with St. Paul by direct historic contact,
even if they had not been subsequently associated as joint Apostles and messengers of
the Churches in their first missionary journeys; while again the mistaken policy of
communism is overruled to the world’s abiding benefit and blessing. How wonderful,
indeed, are the Lord’s doings towards the children of men!
II. We have thus suggested one of the main lines of thought which run through the first
half of this book of the Acts. Let us now look a little more particularly at this Joseph
Barnabas who was the occasion of this great, this new departure. We learn then, upon
consulting the sacred text, that Joseph was a Levite, a man of Cyprus by race; he
belonged, that is, to the class among the Jews whose interests were bound up with the
maintenance of the existing order of things; and yet he had become a convert to the
belief proclaimed by the Apostles. At the same time, while we give full credit to this
Levite for his action, we must not imagine that either priests or Levites or Jews at that
period fully realised all the consequences of their decisions. We find that men at every
age take steps blindly, without thoroughly realising all the results which logically and
necessarily flow forth from them. Men in religious, political, social matters are blind and
cannot see afar off. It is only step by step that the purposes of God dawn upon them, and
Joseph Barnabas, the Levite of Cyprus, was no exception to this universal rule. He was
not only a Levite, but a native of Cyprus, for Cyprus was then a great stronghold and
resort of the Jewish race. It continued to be a great centre of Jewish influence for long
afterwards. In the next century, for instance, a great Jewish rebellion burst forth
wherever the Jews were strong enough. They rose in Palestine against the power of the
Emperor Hadrian, and under their leader Barcochba vindicated the ancient reputation
of the nation for desperate and daring courage; while, in sympathy with their brethren
on the mainland, the Jews in Cyprus seized their arms and massacred a vast multitude of

the Greek and Roman settlers, numbering, it is said, two hundred and forty thousand
persons. The concourse of Jews to Cyprus in the time of the Apostles is easily explained.
Augustus Caesar was a great friend and patron of Herod the Great, and he leased the
great copper mines of the island to that Herod, exacting a royalty upon their produce as
we learn from Josephus, the well-known Jewish historian (‘Antiqq.,’ 16. 4:5). It was only
to be expected, then, that when a Jewish monarch was leasehoulder and manager of the
great mining industry of the island, his Jewish subjects should flock thither, and it was
very natural that amongst the crowds who sought Cyprus there should be found a
minister of the Jewish faith whose tribal descent as a Levite reminded them of Palestine,
and of the City of God, and of the Temple of Jehovah, and of its solemn, stately worship.
This residence of Barnabas in Cyprus accounts for his landed property, which he had the
right to sell just as he liked. A Levite in Palestine could not, according to the law of
Moses when strictly construed, possess any private landed estate save in a Levitical city.
Meyer, a German commentator of great reputation, has indeed suggested that Jer_32:7,
where Jeremiah is asked to redeem his cousin’s field in the suburbs of Anathoth, proves
that a member of the tribe of Levi could possess landed estate in Palestine. He therefore
concludes that the old explanation that the landed property of Barnabas was in Cyprus,
not in Palestine, could not stand. But the simple fact is that even the cleverest German
expositors are not familiar with the text of their Bibles, for had Meyer been thus familiar
he would have remembered that Anathoth was a city belonging to the priests and the
tribe of Levi, and that the circumstance of Jeremiah the priest possessing a right to
landed property in Anathoth was no proof whatsoever that he could hold landed
property anywhere else, and, above all, affords no ground for the conclusion that he
could dispose of it in the absolute style which Barnabas here displayed. We conclude
then that the action of Barnabas on this occasion dealt with his landed estate in Cyprus,
the country where he was born, where he was well-known, and where his memory is
even still cherished on account of the work he there performed in conjunction with St.
Paul.
III. Let us see what else we can glean concerning this person thus prominent in the early
Church, first for his generosity, and then for his missionary character and success. It is
indeed one of the most fruitful and interesting lines upon which Bible study can be
pursued thus to trace the scattered features of the less known and less prominent
characters of Scripture, and see wherein God’s grace specially abounded in them.
The very personal appearance of Barnabas can be recalled by the careful student of this
book. Though it lies a little out of our way, we shall note the circumstance, as it will help
us to form a more lively image of Barnabas, the Son of Consolation. The two Apostles,
Paul and Barnabas, were on their first missionary tour when they came to the city of
Lystra in Lycaonia. There the multitude, astonished at the miracle wrought upon the
cripple by St. Paul, attempted to pay. divine honours to the two Christian missionaries.
"They called Barnabas Jupiter, and Paul Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker." It
must have been their physical characteristics as well as the mode of address used by the
Apostles which led to these names; and from the extant records of antiquity we know
that Jupiter was always depicted as a man with a fine commanding presence, while
Mercury, the god of eloquent speech, was a more insignificant figure. Jupiter, therefore,
struck the Lycaonian people as the fittest name for the taller and more imposing-looking
Apostle, while St. Paul, who was in bodily presence contemptible, was designated by the
name of the active and restless Mercury. His character again shines through every
recorded action of St. Barnabas. He was a thoroughly sympathetic man, and, like all such
characters, he was ever swept along by the prevailing wave of thought or action, without
allowing that supreme place to the judgment and the natural powers which they should

always hold if the feelings and sympathies are not to land us in positions involving dire
ruin and loss. He was carried away by the enthusiasm for Christian communism which
now seized upon the Jerusalem Church. He was influenced by the Judaising movement
at Antioch, so that "even Barnabas was carried away with the Petrine dissimulation." His
sympathies got the better of his judgment in the matter of St. Mark’s conduct in
abandoning the ministry to which St. Paul had called him. His heart was stronger, in
fact, than his head. And yet this very weakness qualified him to be the Son of
Consolation. A question has, indeed, been raised, whether he should be called the Son of
Consolation or the Son of Exhortation, but practically, there is no difference. His
consolations were administered through his exhortations. His speech and his advice
were of a consoling, healing, comforting kind. There are still such men to be found in the
Church. Just as all other apostolic graces and characteristics are still manifested, -the
eloquence of a Paul, the courage of a Peter, the speculative flights of a John, - so the
sympathetic power of Barnabas is granted to some. And a very precious gift it is. There
are some good men whose very tone of voice and bodily attitudes-their heads thrown
back and their arms akimbo and their aggressive walk-at once provoke opposition. They
are pugnacious Christians, ever on the lookout for some topic of blame and controversy.
There are others, like this Barnabas, whose voices bring consolation, and whose words,
even when not the clearest or the most practical, speak counsels of peace, and come to us
thick-laden with the blessed dews of charity. Their advice, is not, indeed, always the
wisest. Their ardent cry is always, Peace, peace. Such a man on the political stage was the
celebrated Lucius Carey, Lord Falkland, in the days of the great civil war, who, though he
adhered to the royalist cause, seemed, as the historian tells us, to have utterly lost all
heart once that active hostilities commenced. Men of this type appear in times of great
religious strife. Erasmus, for instance, at the time of the Reformation, possessed a good
deal of this spirit which is devoted to compromise, and ever inclined to place the
interests of peace and charity above those of truth; and principle, just as Barnabas would
have done at Antioch were it not for the protest of his stronger and sterner friend St.
Paul. And yet such men, with their sympathetic hearts and speech, have their own great
use, infusing a healing, consoling tone into seasons of strife, when others are only too apt
to lose sight of the sweet image of Christian love in pursuit of what they consider the
supreme interests of religious or political truth. Such a man was Barnabas all his life,
and such we behold him on his first visible entrance upon the stage of Church history,
when his sympathies and his generosity led him to consecrate his independent property
in Cyprus to his brethren’s support, and to bring the money and lay it down at the
Apostles’ feet.
IV. Now for the contrast drawn for us by the inspired pen of St. Luke, a contrast we find
oft repeating itself in Church history. Here we have the generous, sympathetic Son of
Consolation on the one side, and here, too, we have a warning and a type for all time that
the tares must evermore be mingled with the wheat, the false with the true, the
hypocrites with real servants of God, even until the final separation. The accidental
division of the book into chapters hinders casual readers from noticing that the action of
Ananias and his wife is set by the writer over against that of Barnabas. Barnabas sold his
estate and brought the price, the whole price, and surrendered it as an offering to the
Church. The spirit of enthusiastic giving was abroad, and had seized upon the
community; and Barnabas sympathised with it. Ananias and Sapphira were carried away
too, but their spirits were meaner. They desired to have all the credit the Church would
give them for acting as generously as Barnabas did, and yet, while getting credit for
unselfish and unstinting liberality, to be able to enjoy in private somewhat of that which
they were believed to have surrendered. And their calculations were terribly

disappointed. They tried to play the hypocrite’s part on most dangerous ground just
when the Divine Spirit of purity, sincerity, and truth had been abundantly poured out,
and when the spirit of deceit and hypocrisy was therefore at once recognised. It was with
the Apostles and their spiritual natures then as it is with ourselves and our physical
natures still. When we are living in a crowded city we notice not strange scents and ill
odours and foul gases: our senses are dulled, and our perceptive powers are rendered
obtuse because the whole atmosphere is a tainted one. But when we dwell in the pure.
air of the country, and the glorious breezes from mountain and moor blow round us
fresh and free, then we detect at once, and at a long distance, the slightest ill-odour or
the least trace of offensive gas. The outpoured presence of the Spirit, and the abounding
love which was produced thereby, quickened the perception of St. Peter. He recognised
the hypocrisy, characterised the sin of Ananias as a lie against the Holy Ghost; and then
the Spirit and Giver of life, seconding and supporting the words of St. Peter, withdrew
His support from the human frame of the sinner, and Ananias ceased to live, just as
Sapphira, his partner in deceit, ceased to live a few hours later. The deaths of Ananias
and Sapphira have been ofttimes the subject of much criticism and objection, on the part
of persons who do not realise the awfulness of their position, the full depths of their
hypocrisy, and the importance of the lesson taught by their punishment to the Church of
every age. Their position was a specially awful one, for they were brought into closest
contact, as no Christian can now be brought, with the powers of the world to come. The
Spirit was vouchsafed during those earliest days of the Church in a manner and style
which we hear nothing of during the later years of the Apostles. He proved His presence
by physical manifestations, as when the whole house was shaken where the Apostles
were assembled; a phenomenon of which we read nothing in the latter portion of the
Acts. By the gift of tongues, by miracles of healing, by abounding spiritual life and
discernment, by physical manifestations, the most careless and thoughtless in the
Christian community were compelled to feel that a supernatural power was present in
their midst and specially resting upon the Apostles. Yet it was into such an atmosphere
that the spirit of hypocrisy and of covetousness, the two vices to which Christianity was
specially opposed, and which the great Master had specially denounced, obtruded itself
as Satan gained entrance into Eden, to defile with their foul presence the chosen
dwelling-place of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost vindicated His authority therefore,
because, as it must be observed, it was not St. Peter sentenced Ananias to death. No one
may have been more surprised than St. Peter himself at the consequences which
followed his stern rebuke. St. Peter merely declared his sin, "Thou hast not lied unto
men, but unto God"; and then it is expressly said, "Ananias hearing these words fell
down, and gave up the ghost." It was a stern action indeed; but then all God’s judgments
have a stern side. Ananias and Sapphira were cut off in their sins, but men are every day
summoned into eternity in precisely the same state and the same way, and the only
difference is that in the case of Ananias we see the sin which provoked the punishment
and then we see the punishment immediately following. Men object to this narrative
simply because they have a one-sided conception of Christianity such as this period of
the world’s history delights in. They would make it a religion of pure, unmitigated love;
they would eliminate from it every trace of sternness, and would thus leave it a poor,
weak, flabby thing, without backbone or earnestness, and utterly unlike all other
dispensations of the Lord, which have their stern sides and aspects as well as their
loving.
It may well have been that this incident was inserted in this typical church history to
correct a false idea which would otherwise have grown up. The Jews were quite well
accustomed to regard the Almighty as a God of judgment as well as a God of love.

Perhaps we might even say that they viewed Him more in the former light than in the
latter. Our Lord was obliged, in fact, to direct some of His most searching discourses to
rebuke this very tendency. The Galileans, whose blood Pilate mingled with their
sacrifices, the men upon whom the tower of Siloam fell-neither party were sinners above
all that were at Jerusalem, or were punished as such. Such was His teaching in
opposition to the popular idea. The Apostles were once quite ready to ascribe the
infirmity of the man born blind to the direct judgment of the Almighty upon himself or
upon his parents. But men are apt to rush from one extreme to another. The Apostles
and their followers were now realising their freedom in the Spirit; and some were
inclined to run into licentiousness as the result of that same freedom. They were
realising, too, their relationship to God as one of pure filial love, and they were in great
danger of forgetting that God was a God of justice and judgment as well, till this stern
dispensation recalled them to a sense of the fact that eternal love is also eternal purity
and eternal truth, and will by no means clear the guilty. This is a lesson very necessary
for every age of the Church. Men are always inclined, and never, perhaps, so much as at
the present time, to look away from the severe side of religion, or even to deny that
religion can have a severe side at all. This tendency in religious matters is indeed simply
an exhibition of the spirit of the age. It is a time of great material prosperity and comfort,
when pain is regarded as the greatest possible evil, softness, ease, and enjoyment the
greatest possible good. Men shrink from the infliction of pain even upon the greatest
criminals; and this spirit infects their religion, which they would fain turn into a mere
matter of weakly sentiment. Against such a notion the judicial action of the Holy Ghost
in this. case raises an eternal protest, warning the Church against one-sided and partial
views of truth, and bidding her never to lower her standard at the world’s call. Men may
ignore the fact that God has His severe aspect and His stern dispensations in nature, but
yet the fact remains. And as it is in nature so is it in grace: God is. merciful and loving to
the penitent, but towards the hypocritical and covetous He is a stern judge, as the
punishment of Ananias and Sapphira proved.
V. This seems one of the great permanent lessons for the Church of every age which this
passage embodies, but it is not the only one. There are many others, and they most
important. An eminent modern commentator and expositor has drawn out at great
length, and with many modern applications and illustrations, four great lessons which
may be derived from this transaction. We shall just note them, giving a brief analysis of
each.
(1) There is such a thing as acting as well as telling a falsehood. Ananias did not say that
the money he brought was the whole price of his land; he simply allowed men to draw
this conclusion for themselves, suggesting merely by his conduct that he was doing
exactly the same as Barnabas. There was no science of casuistry in the apostolic Church,
teaching how near to the borders of a lie a man may go without actually being guilty of
lying. The lie of Ananias was a spiritual act, a piece of deception attempted in the abyss
of the human soul, and perpetrated, or attempted rather, upon the Holy Spirit. How
often men lie after the same example. They do not speak a lie, but they act a lie, throwing
dust into the eyes of others as to their real motives and objects, as Ananias did here. He
sold his estate, brought the money to the Apostles, and would fain have got the character
of a man of extraordinary liberality and unselfishness, just like others who truly
sacrificed their all, while he enjoyed in private the portion which he had kept back.
Ananias wished to make the best of both worlds, and failed in his object. He sought to
obtain a great reputation among men, but had no regard to the secret eye and judgment
of the Almighty. Alas! how many of our actions, how much of our piety and of our
almsgiving are tainted by precisely the same vice. Our good. works are done with a view

to man’s approbation, and not as in the sight of the Eternal God.
(2) What an illustration we find in this passage of the saying of the Apostle, "The love of
money is the root of all evil; which while some coveted after, they have erred from the
faith, and pierced themselves with many sorrows!" The other scriptures are full of
warnings against this vice of covetousness; and so this typical history does not leave the
Church without an illustration of its power and danger. Surely if at a time when the
supernatural forces of the unseen life were specially manifested, this vice intruded into
the special sphere of their influence, the Church of every age should be on its perpetual
guard against this spirit of covetousness which the Bible characterises as idolatry.
(3) What a responsibility is involved in being brought near to God as members of His
Son’s Church below! There were hypocrites in abundance at Jerusalem at that time, but
they had not been blessed as Ananias had been, and therefore were not punished as he.
There is a reality in our connection with Christ which must tell upon us, if not for good,
then inevitably for evil. Christ is either the savour of life unto life or else the savour of
death unto death unto all brought into contact with Him. In a far more awful sense than
for the Jews the words of the prophet Ezekiel are true, "That which cometh into your
mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the
countries, to serve wood and stone"; (Eze_20:32) or as the poet of the "Christian Year"
has well put it in his hymn for the eighteenth Sunday after Trinity:-
"Fain would our lawless hearts escape, And with the heathen be, To worship every
monstrous shape In fancied darkness free."
"Vain thought, that shall not be at all, Refuse we or obey; Our ears have heardth’
Almighty’s call, We cannot be as they."
"We cannot hope the heathen’s doom To whom God’s Son is given, Whose eyes have
seen beyond the tomb, Who have the key of Heaven."
(4) Lastly, let us learn from this history how to cast out the fear of one another by the
greater and more awful fear of God. The fear of man is a good thing in a degree. We
should have respect to the opinion of our fellows, and strive to win it in a legitimate way.
But Ananias and his consort desired the good opinion of the Christian community
regardless of the approval or the watchful eye of the Supreme Judge, who interposed to
teach His people by an awful example that in the new dispensation of Love, as well as in
the old dispensation of Law, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and that
they and they alone have a good understanding who order their lives according to that
fear, whether in their secret thoughts or in their public actions.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 1-11, "But a certain man named Ananias, with
Sapphira his wife, sold a possession.
The word Ananias means “grace of God”; and the word Sapphira signifies just “a
sapphire,” the familiar jewel of brilliance and beauty. We should suppose these two
people had an unusually bright prospect in the outset. Somebody there was who loved
them enough to give them very fine names when they were little. Ananias lied; then it
was that “the grace of God” went out of him for ever. Sapphira lied; when a woman loses
the truth, it is as if the last light went out of a sapphire. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

Hitherto all has been progress and triumph. Faith has become enthusiasm. Earth caught
the colouring, yea, the very life of heaven. Private ownership was swallowed up by social
beneficence, and little restrictions and classifications were swept away by a generosity
akin to the love of God. Now we come upon another aspect of affairs. We find a twist in
the golden thread. The whole thing must come to a stop until this be rectified. Think of
the Church standing still, though glowing with the enthusiasm of love, until judgment be
satisfied! Why not treat the offence as a trifling one? Why not pass it over without
notice? Because the Church is called unto holiness, and sin must ever bring down the
anger and judgment of God. From the conduct of these people we see—
I. The vital difference between the spirit and the fashion of Christianity. We might say
between a principle and a mere rule. Ananias tried to be a Christian from the outside. He
put the hands of the clock to the right time, but left the mainspring broken and the
pendulum still
1. We may imitate Christ, and yet not know Him after the spirit.
2. We may mingle with Christians, and yet know nothing of the spiritual power of
Christianity. The incident says, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”
II. The fatal temptation to give the part as the whole. Observe not the part instead of the
whole: not to give the part distinctly and avowedly as the part; but to give it as if it were
really all. This is illustrated—
1. In speaking half-heartedly as if sincerely.
2. In giving a small contribution as if it exhausted our resources. “I cannot afford
more,” is the chief lie of the Church.
3. In concealing our convictions by using words with various meanings.
4. In having outward associations which do not express the whole tendency and
trust of the heart.
5. In modifying vows according to changes in circumstances—young man dedicating
himself to the ministry: young tradesman vowing to consecrate his property: young
Christian vowing to offer a solemn testimony for Christ.
III. The concealed sin as well as the public iniquity will be followed by the judgment of
God. “Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.” “How is it that ye have agreed
together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?”
1. There is vet to be a reading of hearts.
2. Not only what we have done, but what we have left undone is to be judged.
3. Sins which apparently do no harm to society are to be punished. The voice of the
judgment is, “The wages of sin is death.”
Application—
1. The Church is to be holy.
2. Though hand join in hand the wicked shall not go unpunished.
3. Discipline is of greater consequence than numbers.
4. The Christian power which heals one man destroys another. Contrast the cripple
with Ananias. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The apostolic Church had been welded into a remarkable unity of experience and
purpose. All hours and places seemed filled with the presence of God. Men had forgotten
their selfishness, and lived for each other and their Lord. Pentecost and millennium were
apparently but a little way and a short time apart; and then suddenly, like lightning from
a clear sky, came the crime of Ananias and Sapphira. The Church was the Church
militant, and not triumphant, after all. The Judas among the apostles had, and was to
continue to have, his descendants. The Church in the world was to be crippled and
compromised by the world in the Church. The transaction was typical and the narrative
suggestive. Notice, then—
I. The character of the sin. It was not simple falsehood. Misrepresentation, deceit, lying,
in the ordinary affairs of life, are evils of incalculable magnitude; but this sin was the
attempt to deceive and defraud God. In the fervour of their new-born faith and
experience, men were parting with their property, and consecrating the price of it to
Christ and His Church. Ananias and Sapphira had seen enough of the new religion to
wish to be numbered among its followers; so they plotted to buy discipleship at a
cheaper rate than their neighbours. In this they thought that they were measuring their
business capacity against the business ignorance of Peter; in fact, they were trying to
deceive the eyes that look through eternity. Many a man since has ventured upon the
same experiment, In every community there are some who are convinced of the worth of
religion, and outwardly unite with the Church. Neither their conduct nor their neglect is
such as to subject them to discipline; and yet they are far from having made a complete
surrender of themselves to God. Their religious life is a compromise. The bulk of their
time and energy is devoted to self and the world; the dust and sweepings are offered to
God. Fingers that glisten with diamonds drop dimes into the contribution-box. Luxuries
are cheerfully paid for; but poverty and prudence are urged as excuses for mere pittances
towards the cause of God. Ananias in broadcloth and Sapphira in silk Sit in the churches
every sabbath, trying to cheapen the bargain with God, and cheating as well, by offering
less than complete surrender.
II. The origin of the sin. In general it was due to an evil heart, but its specific root was
the love of money.
1. Ananias and Sapphira, while they were not averse to the reputation of having
made great sacrifices for the gospel, could not give up the pleasure of feeling that
they had property; and so, as avaricious people, they “kept back part of the price.”
2. Perhaps they desired to have the means of purchasing more luxuries than were
enjoyed by those who “had all things in common”; and so, as selfish people, they
“kept back part of the price.”
3. Not impossibly, they were uncertain as to the permanence of this new faith, whose
collapse would leave them without means of support; and so, as prudent people, they
“kept back part of the price.” In our day, when men are called to choose between
piety and property, there are many who prevaricate, and end with a compromise.
The great aggressive enterprises of the Church are crippled for lack of financial
support, and yet a very considerable portion of the wealth of Christian lands is in the
hands of professed disciples. They are prodigal in their prayers and hymns and
exhortations, but close-handed with their money. Like the tree in the ancient legend,
which uttered a moan and bled whenever a twig was broken off, they writhe when

forced to give for the glory of God and the salvation of men. The old poison of avarice
is still in the veins of the Church; and Christ is dishonoured, and thousands perish,
because so many, who call themselves His followers, “keep back part of the price.”
III. The discovery of the sin. It seemed unlikely that the transaction would be made
public. The land was probably sold to some one outside the company. Ananias and
Sapphira would not circulate the story of what they had done. But there was an
uncalculated factor in the equation. It affected the kingdom of God, as well as the real
estate market. It was fair dealing as between man and man; as between man and God it
was fraud, and so it was sure to be discovered. It is a truth which men are slow to learn,
that there is a Divine detective system in the universe. It is easy to deceive the world.
Men may consider us generous, when in reality we are pinched in our charities; they may
call us self-sacrificing, when in fact self-pleasing is the sovereign motive of our lives; they
may esteem us devout, when we are cold and formal: but what is our trickery worth, so
long as there is One that knows us altogether? Dionysius constructed a prison, so that he
could hear all that was said by the prisoners, and so made them self-accusers in the day
of their trial. To God this world is one vast whispering-gallery, and every sin which men
commit reports itself to Him. What a wonderful day that will be when the secrets of all
hearts are made known! Men ought always to live as in the light of the Great White
Throne.
IV. The punishment of the sin.
1. It was startling and severe. One moment Ananias and Sapphira stood before the
apostle in the flush of life and health, with the lie upon their lips; She next they were
in eternity, beginning the experience of its unchanging awards. The penalty might be
judged extreme for a single sin: but
(1) At the outset of the Christian Church it was important to emphasise the fact
that the liberty of the gospel was not license.
(2) More than that, the sin itself was significant. As the single blossom is
evidence whether the stock is weed or flower, so this action was proof of a heart
alienated from God. Grace is ample in its provisions, but strict in its conditions.
The Redeemer will have the whole of men, or He will have none of them. “Every
branch that beareth not fruit, He taketh away.”
2. It was anticipative and representative. The judgment continues to be executed.
Men now who attempt to defraud God are not beaten down as with a lightning-
stroke; but, all the same, they die spiritually. (Monday Club Sermons.)
Deception exposed and punished
I. Impious deception.
1. The possession devoted. “Ananias with Sapphira his wife sold a possession” (Act_
4:34; Act_5:1; Lev_27:28; Ecc_5:4).
2. The part kept back (Mal_3:8; Jos_7:11; Joh_12:6; 1Ti_6:10).
3. Counterfeit benevolence. Lessons:
(1) Has as its motive the praise of men rather than the approval of God.
(2) Aims chiefly at making a big impression upon people.

Acts 5 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to Acts 5 commentary

Similar to Acts 5 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Acts 5 commentary