Ananias and Sapphira

Ananias and Sapphira  

The Passage: Acts 5:1-11

Structure: (almost) straight parallelism

a. 5:1-2, Lie of Ananias

  b. 5:3-4, Words of St. Peter

    c. 5:5a, fell down and breathed his last

      d. 5:5b, great fear came upon

        e. 5:6 burial of the husband 

a’. 5:7-8, Lie of Sapphira – dialogue with the apostle

  b’. 5:9, Words of St. Peter

    c’. 5:10a, fell down and breathed her last

        e’. 5:10b, wife’s burial

      d’. 5:11, great fear came upon the church    

 

Historical and geographical context:

In a sense this passage is an addition or an appendix to the previous “story”. As we saw, by the end of ch. 4 the church experienced great unity on confessional, liturgical, and sociological levels. But, after that achievement there always comes a challenge. We can call it “Garden paradigm”. Gen. 1 and 2 end on a high note. Then we have a challenge in 2:25-3:7, complete failure… Similar models are revealed in other parts of the Bible (Vineyard after the flood and a challenge of Noah’s authority by Ham; finalized kingdom of David and a challenge of Bathsheba; etc.) 

Theology:

God created Adam and his wife to be in unity – two be one flesh (Gen. 2:23). So, can unity in a marriage be bad? Apparently, yes. The word “helper” in Gen. 2:18 is neutral, but the context of pre-fallen Garden forces us to take it as a helper in good things or actions. Here, though, Sapphira “helps” her husband to fall short (Rom. 3:23), in stead of being the one who can help him to stay on the paths of righteousness.   

Freedom of a believer to share an additional donation with the church. The speech of St. Peter sets the proper boundaries for financial involvement of the believers. On one hand, there is a biblical principle of tithing (Lev. 27:30, Matt. 22:21). That’s why the apostles welcomed everything that was brought to their feet. On the other hand, St. Peter clearly teaches that it was a free-will offering to sell the property, and to keep the proceeds in full or in part for themselves (5:3). The real problem – they wanted to be known as great donors who sacrifice all their land yet pocket a part of the money. Doing this, they tried to rob the Lord, not humans. And the Lord took care of it/them.    

Immediacy of God’s action. The word “immediate” is a prominent feature of Mark’s Gospel (cp. 1:18, 20, 21, 23, 29…). Here we have this word used once – only in the second part relating to Sapphira. In the context of the initial growth of the church it was important that the apostles established the boundaries of the godly behavior. At the same time, we do not always see the similar speed of realization of cause-effect model. Same St. Peter says in his 2nd epistle: And count the patience of our Lord as salvation (3:15). So, the “speed” of God’s response cannot be used as an indication of goodness of the actions.       

Other themes:

“Bad Friday” story.

Whenever you read a biblical passage (not only a biblical one), always ask yourself a question: does it resemble any previous story? Here are two clues:

  three hours (cp. Matt. 27:45)

  Breathing last (cp. John 19:30).

What we see here is Good Friday elements which would lead to negative consequences. In three hours difference Sapphira was illuminated by the words of St. Peter, yet she preferred to stay in the dark. Both the husband and wife breathe their last, yet we do not see or expect a consequent resurrection.