ACTS 5:1-6 1
But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession.
2 And he kept back part of the proceeds, his
wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the
apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, “Ananias,
why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part
of the price of the land for yourself? 4
While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in
your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have
not lied to men but to God.” 5 Then Ananias,
hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last. So great fear came
upon all those who heard these things. 6 And
the young men arose and wrapped him up, carried him out, and buried him.
What "possession" did Ananias and Sapphira sell?
Their
"land." (Acts 5:3)
What did they do with the "proceeds"?
Ananias
"kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware
of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles' feet."
What was wrong with keeping back part of the proceeds?
There was nothing intrinsically wrong with it. Peter even told him he could
have done whatever he wanted with it:
"While it remained, was it not
your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control?"
Then what was Ananias guilty of?
Lying to God. He had claimed that what he brought in was the entire proceeds
from the sale. He thought he was lying to men, but Peter corrected him:
"You have not lied to men but to God."
Why would Ananias make that claim?
He was probably jealous of and trying to copy Joses, who had been named the "Son of Encouragement"
by the Apostles and who had brought in the entire proceeds from the sale of his land as
mentioned at the end of the previous chapter:
"And Joses, who was also named
Barnabas by the apostles (which is translated Son of Encouragement), a
Levite of the country of Cyprus,
having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’
feet." (Acts 4:36-37)
What would have happened if Ananias had simply brought
in some money for the needs of others?
He would have been fine and probably praised. But he had wanted more, to be
known as someone who had at least matched Joses' devotion. His motivation
wasn't to please God and help people, at least not purely, but (also) to
glorify himself, while being led by greed to hold back some money, and by
Satan to lie.
What does this passage say about the Holy Spirit?
By telling Ananias,
"why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the
Holy Spirit... You have not lied to men but to God", Peter testified
that Holy Spirit is God.
ACTS 5:7-11 7 Now it was about three hours later when
his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8
And Peter answered her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?” She
said, “Yes, for so much.” 9 Then Peter said
to her, “How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the
Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door,
and they will carry you out.” 10 Then
immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. And the young
men came in and found her dead, and carrying her out, buried her by her
husband. 11 So great fear came upon all the
church and upon all who heard these things.
Did Peter trap Sapphira with his question, "Tell me whether
you sold the land for so much?"
No, he
"answered" her with that question, which means she
first asked him a question or said something that led him to respond with
this question.
Why do Peter and Sapphira converse in terms of "so much"?
Both of them most likely could visualize the money that Ananias had brought in and
were conversing while looking at and/or pointing to it.
What does Peter learn from her answer?
She had been party to the lie:
"How is it that you have agreed
together to test the Spirit of the Lord?"
Did Peter kill her?
No, he prophesied that she would end up like her husband.
What effect did this incident have on the church?
"Great fear came upon all the church and upon all who heard these
things."
How can the offerings of Joses, Ananias and Sapphira be
compared?
We don't know the values of the land sold by Joses and Ananias and Sapphira.
It's possible that Ananias and Sapphira's land was much larger and they had
brought in more money than the entire proceeds from the sale of Joses' land.
But the amount isn't what God is cares about, since everything in the
universe is His, and He just wants to see how we treat and what we do with
what He has entrusted to our care. Joses brought in God's money to God out
of a true desire to serve Him and fellow Christians, and was praised.
Ananias and Sapphira brought in "their" money to be praised by men, out of
pride, and were struck dead.
Why do you give "your" money, skills and time to God?
ACTS 5:12-16 12
And through the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among
the people. And they were all with one accord in Solomon’s Porch.
13 Yet none of the rest dared join them, but the people esteemed them
highly. 14 And believers were increasingly
added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women,
15 so that they brought the sick out into
the streets and laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow of
Peter passing by might fall on some of them. 16
Also a multitude gathered from the surrounding cities to Jerusalem, bringing
sick people and those who were tormented by unclean spirits, and they were
all healed.
Why did they keep gathering at "Solomon’s
Porch"?
Most likely because it was centrally located and the only public place in
Jerusalem that was large enough to accommodate the crowd.
How can "believers" be "increasingly added" when "none of
the rest dared join them"?
The key phrase is
"the rest", which could be referring to the
other hypocrites like Ananias and Sapphira who
"dared" not
"join them" lest they be struck dead as well. In addition
or alternatively, since Acts 5:13 contrasts "the rest" against
"the
people", it could be referring to the priests and the others who
ruled over the people and who were inside the temple just next to the Solomon's Porch.
ACTS 5:17-26 17 Then the high priest rose up,
and all those who were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and
they were filled with indignation, 18 and
laid their hands on the apostles and put them in the common prison.
19 But at night an angel of the Lord opened
the prison doors and brought them out, and said, 20
“Go, stand in the temple and speak to the people all the words of this
life.” 21 And when they heard that, they
entered the temple early in the morning and taught. But the high priest and
those with him came and called the council together, with all the elders of
the children of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.
22 But when the officers came and did not
find them in the prison, they returned and reported,
23 saying, “Indeed we found the prison shut
securely, and the guards standing outside before the doors; but when we
opened them, we found no one inside!” 24 Now
when the high priest, the captain of the temple, and the chief priests heard
these things, they wondered what the outcome would be.
25 So one came and told them, saying, “Look,
the men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the
people!” 26 Then the captain went with the
officers and brought them without violence, for they feared the people, lest
they should be stoned.
Why were the high priest and the Sadducees "filled with
indignation"?
For one,
"a multitude gathered from the surrounding cities to
Jerusalem" (Acts 5:16) not to come to them but to go to the
apostles, so they were envious. For another,
Sadducees didn't believe
in resurrection and didn't appreciate the apostles preaching about Jesus'
resurrection.
Whom did they arrest, and why?
Acts 5:29 indicates that they arrested least three of the apostles, but they
may arrested all of them. They wanted to convene the
Sanhedrin and try them the
next day.
Did the angel open the prison doors to let the apostles
escape?
No, since he told them to go and preach
"in the temple",
instead of just outside of it as they had been preaching thus far. The Lord
wanted the apostles to confront the Sanhedrin, but first wanted to
demonstrate His power, which was appreciated by at least one alert member
of the Sanhedrin, as we will read below.
Who were the "officers" and how did they bring the apostles
"without violence"?
They were the temple guards, not the Roman soldiers, and they most likely
just asked the apostles to come with them.
ACTS 5:27-28 27 And when they had
brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked
them, 28 saying, “Did we not strictly
command you not to teach in this name? And look, you have filled Jerusalem
with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!”
What might have been the high priest's demeanor?
Having convened the Sanhedrin, he had ordered the prisoners to be brought,
and been told that the men he put in jail are teaching in the temple. So he
was probably flustered after having been embarrassed in front of the crowd
he should have impressed.
What is he admitting to the apostles in Acts 5:28?
We can’t control you, and you’re
beating us.
What does he mean by, "you... intend to bring this Man's
blood on us!"
He's accusing the apostles of trying to make them guilty of killing Jesus.
Who already answered that question?
The high priest himself:
"When Pilate saw that he could not prevail
at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his
hands before the multitude, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this just
Person. You see to it.” And all the people answered and said, “His blood be
on us and on our children."
(Matt 27:24-25)
Do the apostles intend to bring Jesus' blood on them?
Spiritually, they should hope so since only by the blood of Jesus could
their sins be forgiven.
ACTS 5:29-32 29 But Peter and the other apostles answered
and said: “We ought to obey God rather than men. 30
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a
tree. 31 Him God has exalted to His right
hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness
of sins. 32 And we are His witnesses to
these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who
obey Him.”
Do the apostles try to defend their actions?
No, they sound more like prosecutors, telling them,
"you murdered"
Jesus
"by hanging on a tree", and obeying their prior order
"not to speak at all nor to teach in the name of Jesus"
(Acts 4:18) would have been in disobedience to God, and also implying that
the high priest isn't among
"those who obey Him."
Why might the apostles have been particularly emboldened?
An angel of the Lord had just led them out of prison, right past guards who
couldn't see them. They knew God was with them.
ACTS 5:33-42 33 When they heard this, they
were furious and plotted to kill them. 34
Then one in the council stood up, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of
the law held in respect by all the people, and commanded them to put the
apostles outside for a little while. 35 And
he said to them: “Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to
do regarding these men. 36 For some time ago
Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody. A number of men, about four
hundred, joined him. He was slain, and all who obeyed him were scattered and
came to nothing. 37 After this man, Judas of
Galilee rose up in the days of the census, and drew away many people after
him. He also perished, and all who obeyed him were dispersed.
38 And now I say to you, keep away from
these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this work is of men, it
will come to nothing; 39 but if it is of
God, you cannot overthrow it - lest you even be found to fight against God.”
40 And they agreed with him, and when they
had called for the apostles and beaten them, they commanded that they should
not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go. 41
So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were
counted worthy to suffer shame for His name. 42
And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and
preaching Jesus as the Christ.
Who is "Gamaliel" and what did he do?
"A Pharisee... a teacher of the law held in respect by all the
people" and the "alert" member of the Sanhedrin previewed
above. He warned them and prophesied,
"if it is of God, you cannot
overthrow it."
How much do his words apply to today?
As much as they did back then. If any
"plan or... work is of men, it
will come to nothing," as Jesus had said:
"for without
Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5). But
"if it is of God",
nobody can
"overthrow it."
What is peculiar about Acts 5:40?
Since
"they agreed with" Gamaliel, they should have just
let the apostles go instead of beating them and commanding them
"that they should not speak in the name of Jesus."
How did the disciples take the beating and their command?
"They departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they
were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.
And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and
preaching Jesus as the Christ."
Was being beaten something that the apostles should really
be "rejoicing" over?
Very much so, according to Jesus:
"Blessed are those who are
persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of
evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for
great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were
before you." (Matthew 5:10-12)
What examples do the apostles set for us?
When we are persecuted for Christ, we should also "rejoice" for having been
counted worthy to suffer shame for His name. And when religious or
other authorities try to stop us from sharing the Lord, we should share with
them Peter's words,
"We ought to obey God rather than men"
and
"not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ."
The content of Just Bible.net can be printed, copied, emailed, linked to or distributed by other means without fees or consent, provided
that it remains free to the recipients. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.