Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Acts 5:1 - 5:16
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
______
A.—THE INTERNAL DANGER; IT IS AVERTED BY THE JUDGMENT ON THE SIN OF ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA
Act_5:1-11
b. The bare facts in this case are perfectly intelligible. Ananias, whose wife is fully aware of the plan, sells a piece of land of which he is the owner. We are not told that he sold all his real estate; the original says: ἐðþëçóå êôῆìá ; in Act_5:3, Peter designated the property sold as ôὸ ÷ùñßïí , that is, that parcel of land, as to which the actual price that had been paid, was the point in question. Ananias reserves a portion of the money which had been paid to him, and appropriates it to his private use. The remainder he deposits as an offering, like others, at the feet of the apostles, and performs the act at the time when the believers are assembled for the purpose of worshipping God. No intimation is given in the text, whether he secreted only an inconsiderable part, or, as it is more probable, a large sum: the precise amount does not materially affect the moral character of the transaction. That he acted altogether in concert with his wife, and that both had previously arranged the whole plan, are facts that are indicated in Act_5:2, and fully substantiated by the statements furnished in Act_5:8 ff.
c. The internal character of the transaction is more complicated than the facts are that have just been adduced. We may readily assume that the original motive of these persons, when they effected the sale, was praiseworthy; it may have proceeded, in part, from the pleasure with which they contemplated the disinterested and fraternal conduct of others who willingly offered their property when the wants of the brethren called for relief. But when these two persons had actually sold the land, and held the money in their hands, avarice began to manifest its power. They had not set their affections on the land, but the money exercised such an influence on them that they could not resolve to resign the whole, and hence they retained at least a part of it. But they were unwilling to acknowledge this circumstance publicly. They brought the remainder as their offering, declared that it was the whole amount which they had received for the land, and thus assumed the appearance, in the eyes of the apostles and the whole church, of having performed an act of self-denial, charity and brotherly love. This was hypocrisy in its most odious form; the practice of it required the conscious utterance of a lie—a lie addressed not only to men, but also to God. And, further, when they declared that the whole amount of the sale now belonged to the church, and to its poor members in particular, but, at the same time, secretly retained a part of the sum, they were guilty of embezzling, and, indeed, virtually, of stealing money. Now this act was not simply the sin of individuals, but involved the whole church in very great danger. For if such hypocrisy should be practised by others, and if integrity and truth should disappear, the Church of Christ would lose her brightest ornaments, and Pharisaic hypocrisy would be substituted for Christian sanctification. It was, therefore, of vital importance to the Church, that the introduction of an evil of such magnitude should meet with an immediate and effectual resistance.
Act_5:3-4. Why hath Satan, etc.—The sin which threatened to invade the church was repelled, partly by the revelation of the secret transaction, partly by the judgment which instantly succeeded. In the former, human instrumentality was employed, in connection with a divine intimation; the latter was a direct act of God. It was Peter, who unreservedly exposed to Ananias (and also to the church, since the whole occurred when all were assembled, ðáñὰ ô . ðüä . ô . ̓ áðïóô ., Act_5:2; ïἱ íåþôåñïé Act_5:6; ôὴí ἐêêë . Act_5:11) the deceitfulness and excessive wickedness of his heart, and the awful enormity of his guilt, Act_5:3 f.; he adopted the same course with the woman, Act_5:9. He severely rebukes Ananias for permitting Satan [as äéáôß implies (de W.)] to take entire possession of his heart, insomuch that he attempted to deceive the Holy Ghost. He shows him that the lie referred not to men, but to God, whom he attempted to deceive; the sin—Peter continues—was aggravated by the circumstance that he had been perfectly at liberty to retain the property for his private use, or to dispose of the money obtained by the sale, according to his own pleasure. And he also represents to Sapphira, that she and her husband, in accordance with their private understanding, which rendered them doubly guilty ( óõíåöùíÞèç ), had tempted the Spirit of the Lord; øåýóáóèáé óå ôὸ ðíåῦìá ôὸ ἅãéïí ; ïὐê ἐøåýóù ἀíèñþðïéò , etc. Each of these two constructions [of øåýäù ] furnishes a sense of its own: øåýäåóèáé with the accusative, indicates the act of deceiving any one by a lie; with the dative, that of uttering a lie in reference to some one [see Robinson’s Lex. ad verb. for the usage of the New Testament and Sept.].—If the agency of Peter had been confined to the mere exposure of the fact that deception had been practised, the question whether he had not ascertained that fact by natural and ordinary means, would be strictly appropriate. But the apostle exposes not only the facts as far as they had actually occurred, but also their remote source, the secret personal motives, the inward frame of mind, the hidden sentiments and characteristic features of the heart; ôὴí êáñäéÜõ óïõ , Act_5:3; ἔèïõ ἐí ôῇ êáñäßᾳ óïõ , Act_5:4. No interpretation can here be possibly admitted, save one which recognizes that his knowledge was derived from the revelation of God through the Holy Spirit.
Act_5:5. Fell down.—The judgment itself—the immediate fall and death of Ananias, when Peter had addressed him—must be viewed as a direct act of God. For it is entirely inconsistent with the whole spirit of the narrative, to assume (with Heinrichs and others) that the sudden death of the man, and also that of the woman subsequently, was, in each case, occasioned by natural causes, such as the shock which the nervous system sustains (apoplexy) in consequence of fright. But on the other hand, the narrative furnishes as little support for the opinion (of Meyer and some earlier interpreters), that Peter had the immediate death of both persons in view at the time, and was the direct author of it, by an exercise of the miraculous power which dwelt in him. Not a trace of such a purpose appears on the part of the apostle, in the case of Ananias, either in his own words, Act_5:3 ff., or in the historical statement of Luke. And even the declaration of Peter to Sapphira, Act_5:9, (which, as Meyer supposes, would betray a presumptuous spirit, if he were not conscious that the result depended upon the determination of his own will), does not support this opinion: it was simply a prediction to the woman that her own death was at hand, and was not merely suggested by the fate of her husband, but, specially, derived from the inspiration of the Spirit. It was not the apostle, but God, who executed the judgment. The whole event must be regarded as the result of a direct divine interposition, by which a speedy and terrible punishment was inflicted. But neither the original text, nor any of the essential features of the case, forbid us to assign a psychological influence to the words of Peter who publicly unveiled the hidden wickedness, or to admit that those words powerfully affected the moral sense of the two sinners. For the course adopted at the beginning by the latter, demonstrated that they regarded the judgment of the apostles and public opinion in the church, as entitled to the highest consideration: under these circumstances, such an unexpected and complete exposure, and the censure which was publicly pronounced, could not fail to produce a terrible effect. We may recognize such influences, without necessarily incurring the charge of “confounding or halving divine and natural causes.” (Meyer.)
Act_5:6. And the young [younger] men arose.—The corpse of Ananias was at once so arranged as to be conveniently carried away ( óõíÝóôåéëáí ), that is, the limbs, which were more or less extended at the moment of the fall, were first properly disposed. Those persons who removed the two bodies in succession, and interred them in a burial-place lying beyond the walls of the city, are termed by the historian ïἱ íåþôåñïé , Act_5:6, and ïἱ íåáíßóêïé , Act_5:10. Some writers (Mosheim: De reb. Christ.; Olsh.; Meyer) suppose that they were regularly appointed church-officers, whose official duty required them to assume a task like the present. But the considerations which are advanced in favor of this view, possess no weight; it is, on the contrary, very doubtful whether, at that early period, any strictly defined office, with the exception of that of the apostles, existed in the church. It was, besides, quite natural and appropriate that the younger men who were present (particularly if the slightest indication had been given that such a service was expected of them,) should voluntarily and promptly come forward and lend their aid.
Act_5:7-10. The circumstance that Sapphira presented herself about the space of three hours after, has led Baumgarten (Apgsch. p. 99) to suppose that her death took place at a second assembly of the church, which, with the former, conformed to the stated hours of prayer among the Jews, between which such intervals of three hours occurred. But the language in Act_5:7 seems rather to imply that the religious exercises had continued during the whole period, and that Sapphira did not attend until three hours had elapsed after her husband’s death. When Peter asked, “Did ye sell the land for this sum of money?” it is very probable that ôïóïýôïõ indicates the gesture of the apostle, who pointed to the money which still lay before him, without mentioning the precise amount. [The apostle’s language: “ye have agreed, etc.,” Act_5:9, indicates that he regarded this previous agreement of the husband and wife as a serious aggravation of their sin, as it demonstrated that they had committed it deliberately, and not in haste or through ignorance. (J. A. Alexander).—Tr.]
Act_5:11. And great fear, etc.—Luke mentions, in the case of Ananias, and, again, in that of Sapphira, the impression which the event made on others. The only difference which appears between the two statements, Act_5:5 and Act_5:11, arises from the narrower or wider circle to which he refers. He describes, in the former case, the impressions which the hearers received, who had assembled for the purpose of being taught by the apostles ( ôïὺò ἀêïýïíôáò without ôáῦôá , the genuineness of the latter being doubted by critics). He refers, in Act_5:11, on the other hand, partly to the church, and partly to those who were unconnected with it, but who received tidings of the event. It is worthy of notice that the conception expressed by ἐêêëçóßá is first of all introduced in the Acts, in the present verse. [The author, who appears to regard the word as having been originally employed by Luke in Act_2:47, (see note 3, appended to that passage), has probably omitted any reference to it here, for the reason that eminent critics have doubted its genuineness.—Tr.] Luke had hitherto spoken of ïἱ ìáèçôáß , Act_1:15; ðÜíôåò ïἱ ðéóôåýïíôåò , Act_2:44; ôὸ ðëῆèïò ôῶí ðéóôåõóÜíôùí , Act_4:32. In contradistinction from these forms of expression, which were undoubtedly suggested when the believers were viewed simply as individuals, he now mentions ὅëç ἡ ἐêêëçóßá as a totality, or as a collective body. We cannot regard it as accidental that the collective conception of the Church, viewed as a distinctly defined whole, should present itself in connection with that event which assumes the character of an august “act of divine church - discipline.” (Thiersch).
2. The words of Peter in Act_5:3-4; Act_5:9, furnish us with most important instructions respecting the doctrine of the Holy Ghost. He views the act of Ananias and Sapphira solely in its relation to the Divine Spirit. He expresses no opinion of it, in so far as it may affect the apostles as individuals, or the Church as a human society, but views the act itself and the sentiments from which it proceeded only in so far as these define the position of the two offenders with respect to the Spirit of the Lord. Their sin is a trespass against the Holy Ghost, a crimen læsæ majestatis committed against the Holy Ghost. Now we have in this procedure of the apostle, essentially and directly, the evidence both of the personality and of the Deity of the Holy Ghost. He says: “Satan hath filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost—thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God—ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord”. But such solemn language, uttered so impressively, and intended to expose promptly and fully the secret guilt contracted by the persons here addressed, cannot consistently receive any interpretation which would assume that the term “Holy Ghost” simply denotes a power or an operation of God (Strauss, Glaubensl. I. 418). The Holy Ghost is here, on the contrary, distinctly assumed to be a Person, with whom men deal uprightly or deceitfully, whom they may put to the test ( ðåéñÜóáé , Act_5:9), or whom they may attempt to deceive by lying words. Again, Peter bears witness to the Deity of the Holy Ghost when he says: ïὐê ἐøåýóù ἀíèñþðïéò , ἀëëὰ ôῷ èåῷ , Act_5:4. Meyer makes the remark, it is true, that Ananias had lied unto God by belying His Spirit [virtually saying that the Spirit was ignorant of the fraud (Bengel)]; according to this explanation, èåῷ in Act_5:4 designates, not the Holy Ghost, himself, but God the Father. But the lie of Ananias, when he lied to the Holy Ghost, and when he lied to God, is, unquestionably, one and the same sin (Bengel). But even if we admit the distinction which Meyer makes, one circumstance stands forth preëminently in the whole narrative, which constitutes the heaviest charge brought by the apostle; namely, these two persons had insulted the Holy Ghost, and thus committed, in a direct manner, a grievous and unpardonable sin. The enormity of the guilt is, in this case, proportioned to the majesty and inviolable sanctity of the Spirit as a divine Person.
3. The indwelling of the Holy Ghost. Ananias had persuaded himself that he would not commit a very serious offence, if he should utter a falsehood, since they whom he intended to deceive, were merely human beings. But Peter says: “Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God,” for in these “men” the Holy Spirit himself has his dwelling. And as it was precisely in divine things that Ananias attempted to corrupt and mislead the Christian conscience and judgment of others, his wicked act was an outrage offered directly to the Holy Ghost; for He imparts all the truth that exists in the convictions of men, He is the author of every holy sentiment, He directs the judgment of believers in divine things, and it was on His work that Ananias attempted to lay a profane hand.—But who are the men, in whose persons the Holy Ghost was insulted? The apostles alone are usually supposed to be meant, but there is not a word in the text which can be adduced in favor of this opinion. It is true that Ananias laid his money at the feet of the apostles, but he had not these alone in view at the time; he intended to influence the opinion and judgment of the whole church. Now the Holy Ghost dwelt, as the narrative has already shown (Act_4:31), not only in the apostles, but also in all the believers; comp. Baumgarten: Apgsch. I. 100 ff.
Act_5:2. And kept back part of the price.—Avarice is a root of all evil [1Ti_6:10], as illustrated in the cases of Judas and Ananias.—Brought a certain part, etc.—Hypocrisy, a besetting sin among believers!—The offering of Ananias demonstrates how little confidence we can place in so-called “good works”.—God will not accept the fragments which avarice and hypocrisy are willing to relinquish; he demands the whole, Mal_1:12 f. (Quesn.).—Ananias and Sapphira probably sold their property more for the sake of avoiding shame, when all others were so liberal, than from any pure and disinterested impulse of their own. (K. H. Rieg.).—Those are wretched beings, who endow a charitable institution only for the sake of gaining honor in the world. (Starke).
Act_5:3. But Peter said, Ananias.—A pastor is not at liberty to behold the sins of his flock with indifference; his motives for lifting up his voice are, I. His love to God, and zeal for His house; II. His anxious care for the souls that are led astray; III. His concern for the welfare of those who may either take offence, or be corrupted by evil examples. (From Apost. Past).—Why hath Satan filled thine heart?—a solemn warning, I. In view of the power of Satan, who not only can influence, but also “fill” the hearts even of Christians by profession; II. In view of the guilt and responsibility of those whom he seduces. “Why” has he filled thine heart? How can the devil seduce him who is guided and controlled by Christ? (Apost. Past.).—A man who intentionally lies, and deceives his neighbor, has already surrendered his heart to Satan; Joh_8:44. (Starke).—And to keep back part of the price.—It is a sacrilegious act when we withdraw from the service of God that which we had resolved to consecrate and give to him, Deu_23:21. (Quesn.).
Act_5:4.—While it remained, was it not thine own?—God desires not our property, but our hearts. (Quesnel).—Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart?—It still occurs at times that those who are powerfully moved by the word of the Lord, feel as if he who proclaims that word, well knew and was setting forth all the secret sins and abominations of which they are guilty, when, in truth, he may possibly have never before seen those hearers. Such cases demonstrate the power of the divine word, which is a “discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” [Heb_4:12]. (Apost. Past.).—We may conjecture that if Ananias, or, afterwards, Sapphira, had still cherished in the heart only a faint love of the truth, and could have given an answer to the apostolic question: “Why?” the awful judgment might, in such a case, have been averted. (Rieger).—Thou hast not lied … unto God!—“Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God” [Eph_4:30], who speaks to you, inwardly, in your hearts, and externally, in his word; for, in such a case, you would, I. Offer an insult to the divine majesty of God; II. Pronounce a sentence on yourselves, which would consign the soul and body to destruction.
Act_5:5. Fell down, and gave up the ghost.—Be not deceived, dear brethren; God is not mocked; Gal_6:7. God has not ceased, under the new covenant, to be “a consuming fire, even a jealous God.” [Deu_4:24].—The truth, that the Holy Ghost is true God: I. Awfully demonstrated in the death of Ananias; II. Graciously revealed in the life of those who obey him. (From Apost. Past.).
Act_5:6. Buried him.—It is not inconsistent with divine justice, that those whom it has overwhelmed, should receive the last attentions from men, 1Ki_13:26; 1Ki_13:29. (Starke).—But an honorable funeral does not necessarily imply the salvation of the soul of the deceased!
Act_5:7. About the space of three hours after.—Three hours were given to Sapphira for the purpose of reflecting and changing her course. To one sinner God, in his long-suffering and mercy, grants a longer time for repentance, than to another, Isa_65:20. (Starke).—Not knowing what was done; but she did know that God had threatened in his word to punish the hypocritical and unrighteous. “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.” [Luk_16:29.] (Apost. Past.).
Act_5:8.—Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much?—The woman had not only had a longer time for reflection, but had also found another opportunity, which Peter’s question afforded, for examining her heart and giving glory to God [Jos_7:19]. But as she replied with increased audacity, the sentence which was pronounced, inflicted an additional pang, when she heard of the judgment that had overtaken her husband.
Act_5:9. How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?—It is a gross violation of the duties of married life, when the parties agree to do evil.—The iniquitous perversion of the ties of marriage in many families: I. When the marriage is simply a community of goods, a business transaction designed to consolidate wealth, instead of being a union of hearts in the Lord; II. When the union is effected for the purpose of serving the flesh, the world and the devil, instead of being influenced by the holy principle: “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord” [Jos_24:15]; III. When married life is thus converted into a downward path, conducting both parties to hell, whether it be a hell on earth (domestic strife), or eternal perdition; whereas they should have been partners in every holy joy, and have aided each other in their common efforts to obtain eternal blessedness in heaven.—How is it that ye have agreed?—a solemn question addressed to the conscience of every married believer.
Act_5:10. Then fell she down, etc.—“Thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness.—The foolish shall not stand in thy sight.—Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing.” Psa_5:4-6. If these two persons suddenly died, when a mere mortal spoke, how shall sinners for one moment endure the rebukes which truth will utter on the day of judgment? 2Th_1:8-10. (Starke).—But if, in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, it was only “for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” [1Co_5:5], then, that day will reveal it. (Rieger). [For another view of 1Co_5:5, see Kling’s exegesis in a subsequent volume of this Commentary.—Tr.]
Act_5:11. And great fear came upon all the church.—The Church was not founded for the purpose of fostering sinful inclinations, or securing impunity for the sinner. (Quesnel).—Divine judgments are intended to awaken a holy fear; yet they are often regarded only with idle wonder, or with levity, or with uncharitableness and self-righteousness!—When the Lord purges his floor, [Mat_3:12], and the chaff is scattered [or burned], his own kingdom sustains no loss, for true believers are then protected and confirmed in the faith. (Apost. Past.).
The sin of Ananias and Sapphira, venial according to the standard of the world, bat heinous in the sight of God: for, I. It was a theft (Act_5:3), proceeding from the love of money, the root of all evil; II. It was a lie and a hypocritical act, an abomination in the eyes of the God of truth (Act_5:3; Act_5:8); III. It was committed intentionally and wantonly (“was it not in thine own power?” Act_5:4); IV. It was committed in accordance with a secret understanding of the two persons, who combined to do evil, in place of addressing to each other’s conscience the words: “How can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” [Gen_39:9]. (“How is it that ye have agreed?” Act_5:9); V. It grieved the Holy Spirit of God, who warned, rebuked, and admonished them, not only by the mouth of Peter, but also in their own hearts, as believing members of the Church (Act_5:3-4; Act_5:9); VI. It was an offence to the Church, which should “not have spot or wrinkle, or any such thing” [Eph_5:27], and which just began to exhibit such beauty and vigor in the Holy Ghost (4:32). “Woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” [Mat_18:7]; VII. It had a tendency to cause the name of Jesus Christ to be blasphemed among the Gentiles.—The first tares among the wheat: I. How the enemy sows them; II. How the householder gathers them up:—The judgment which overtook Ananias and Sapphira, an august example of the procedure of divine justice: I. The summons; it accepts no man’s person [Gal_2:6], but cites alike believers and unbelievers before His tribunal, yea, is even more prompt in the case of the former, who are servants who know their Master’s will; “judgment must begin at the house of God.” (1Pe_4:17); II. The trial; the investigation is rigid, making manifest the counsels of the hearts [1Co_4:5]; III. The sentence of condemnation; divine justice exhibits no weakness, but cuts off a diseased member of the Church, so that the whole body may not perish, and prefers to inflict on the flesh, if the spirit may thereby be saved unto life eternal.—The first case of discipline in the Christian Church, decided by its divine Head: I. The occasion, and the subjects: a stumbling-block in the Church; II. The means and instruments in administering discipline: the words of rebuke pronounced by the ministerial office; III. The object and design of the disciplinary measures: the promotion of the honor of God, by cleansing the Church, enlightening the conscience, and maintaining a salutary fear. (Here, however, the practical application must carefully distinguish between life in this world and its objects, on the one hand, and eternity, on the other).—The divine administration of Church discipline in the case of Ananias and Sapphira—a humiliating lesson for our Church, which dispenses with all discipline: I. The subjects: there, a stumbling-block in the church; here, hundreds and thousands whose cases cannot be reached. II. The agents: there, a resolute and divinely inspired apostle; here, feeble guides and officers of the Church, whom either the Spirit of the Lord has forsaken, or whom the Church does not sustain. III. The effects: there, devout fear and salutary awe; here, levity and ridicule.—[The death of Ananias and Sapphira: I. The circumstances connected with the event; (a) personal history of Ananias and Sapphira (Jews—converts—possessed property—ambitious—selfish—ignorant); (b) their sin (its source, concomitants—form—effects); (c) the penalty (divine interposition—design); (d) effects which it produced. II. Lessons taught by the event: concerning (a) the purity of the Church, as a divine law (sound doctrine—devout sentiments—holy life); (b) the divine attributes; (c) the nature of death (originally a penalty—in Christ alone its nature changed); (d) the accountability of man.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
Act_5:2.—One of the principal MSS., (E), inserts áὐôïῦ after ôῆò ãõíáéêüò , and has been followed by the text. rec.; the word is, however, a later addition (perhaps repeated from Act_5:1), as well as the words with which, in the same MS., Act_5:1 begins, viz.: ἐí áὐôῷ äὲ ôῷ êáéñῷ ἀíÞñ ôéò . [Alf., Lach., and Tisch. omit the word, in accordance with A. B. D., and Cod. Sin.—Tr.]
Act_5:3.—[For to lie to, the margin proposes the words to deceive; the former version is preferable; but see the note below.—Tr.]
Act_5:5.— ôáῦôá after ἀêïýïíôáò [of text. rec.] is, likewise, an addition found in the same MS., without doubt taken from Act_5:11. [Alf., like Lach. and Tisch., omits it, with A. B. D. and Cod. Sin. (original); a later hand (C) inserted ôáῦôá in Cod. Sin.—Tr.]
Act_5:9.— åἶðå is wanting in Cod. Alex. [marked A., as well as in B. D. Cod. Sin.], has a different position in the manuscript of St. Germain (E), and is exchanged by Origen for öçóßí ; it was, without doubt, not in the text originally, as several MSS. testify. [The MS. usually designated by the capital letter E, (the four Gospels) is Codex Basileensis; but two others, Codd. Laudianus and Sangermanensis, also receive the same designation. The last, the one meant by the author, derives its name from the monastery of St. Germain-des-Prés, in Paris, where it was deposited before its removal to Petersburg; it is regarded as a copy of D.—The verb is omitted after Ðåô . by Lach., Tisch., and Alf.—Tr.]
Act_5:10.— ðñὸò ôïὺò ðüäáò ; other readings are: ðáñὰ [text. rec. with E.], ἐðὶ , ὑðü [with minuscules]; ðñὸò is better sustained than the others [adopted by Lach., Tisch., and Alf. with A. B. D. and Cod. Sin.—Tr.]