In spite of the title, this is not a cautionary tale. Instead it investigates a few aspects of Acts 5, the story of the unenviable married couple, Ananias and Sapphira. They were among the early church when,
All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. (Acts 4:32)
Accordingly, Ananias and Sapphira sold a piece of land and gave some of the money to the apostles. However, they lied, claiming it was all the money. When Peter understood that they were lying, he declared: “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.” The story continues, “When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died.” When Sapphira, who was not present, arrived later, she, too, maintained the lie and she, too, fell down dead.
Note that Peter did not tell Ananias that he was to die. Nor did he curse Ananias. Nor did he pray Ananias would die. He simply exposed the lie. Ananias and Sapphira were the ones that died seemingly of their own accord. No other agent is mentioned. Most Christians, of course, believe that one way or another, the Holy Spirit either killed them or withdrew from them the grace to continue living. But that is only conjecture.
The fruit of their deaths was that “Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.” Apparently, the church, in spite of being at one of its historical high points in terms of giving, sharing, and experiencing miracles, nevertheless suffered from a lack of respect for the truth and the consequences of lying. But through the death of the couple, it gained deeper respect of God and truth. Non believers also “heard about these events,” with the result that “No one else dared join them [the followers of Jesus], even though they were highly regarded by the people.” Far from being laughable or lamentable, the church was, for the moment, fully respectable.
At this point, I’d like to reiterate the fact that the agent of death is not specified, only the cause (lying to God). Some of my favorite Christian teachers think it impossible that a true Christian would die upon lying to God. Joseph Prince, James Barron, and Andrew Farley, three contemporary teachers on the grace of God, find it impossible. Their arguments assume that God only punishes a person who is not forgiven—thus the need to relegate Ananias and Sapphira to the category of unbelievers.[1]
But is that true? We find a case of discipline among the Corinthians that was both severe enough to be considered punishment and was clearly imposed on a believer. It involved the man sleeping with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5). Paul orders the Corinthian church to “hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.” The destruction of the flesh suggests something dire, such as death or suicide. The redeeming aspect of the punishment is that the man’s spirit may be saved—something I assume happens with Ananias and Sapphira.
There’s an irony here. Those who judge Ananias and Sapphira as being unbelievers do so in order to maintain the supremacy of God’s grace. However, in doing so, they relegate Ananias and Sapphira to hell as a result. By contrast, I see Ananias and Sapphira as proceeding on a very dangerous course (lying to God publicly) with the result that God their Father disciplines them by allowing them to die so that they, being rid of their earthly identity, can enjoy their true relationship with God forever.
It would be, according to the instance in Corinth, Satan who is the author of destruction. And so it must be with Ananias and Sapphira. In lying deliberately to the apostles, they are siding with Satan, the father of lies. Somehow Peter’s presence and recognition made life unbearable to Ananias and, later, to Sapphira, so that they imploded, so to speak. Admittedly, it’s a mystery how a revelation of sin could have such disastrous consequences to the human body. Perhaps the couple were so attached to the lie that, in exposing it, Peter shined a light so bright that the removal of the lie pushed them beyond their human limits.
Far from excluding Ananias and Sapphira from the body of Christ, I welcome them. What happened to them would be tragic from the human point of view but blessed in eternity. It prevented them from pursuing a course of apostasy. It prevented the church from taking the reality of God glibly. It prevented outsiders from looking at the Christians as a pathetic, powerless, compromising sect.
This corrective miracle of destruction, like all miracles, is needed still in this world. Think of the scandalous Christian preachers who, if they had died at the moment of being exposed, would have had, really, a better end. In addition, think of how much more respect the world would have for believers if telling lies were seen as consequential.
Peter later wrote, “For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God” (1 Peter 4:17). Perhaps he was reflecting on the benefits of the great and terrible deaths of Ananias and Sapphira.
| Footnotes |
[1] In this YouTube video, Joseph Prince asserts Ananias and Sapphira were not believers: “Top 6 Most Misunderstood Verses in the Bible Explained.” Prince leans heavily on the fact that Ananias was referred to as “a man” and not “a disciple,” a distinction that often applies in the book of Acts.
But I find exceptions. The most notable one is where the angel tells Cornelius to summon “a man called Simon [Peter]” in Acts 10. Clearly Peter qualifies as a disciple. I’d hate to think angels could not keep the terminology straight, being by definition, messengers from God. In several instances a “man” with faith gets healed, the first being in Acts 3, where the “man who was lame from birth” was healed by Jesus’ name as commanded by Peter. The next one, in Acts 9, where Peter found “a man named Aeneas, who was paralyzed and had been bedridden for eight years.” Peter healed him on the spot. Finally, in Acts 14, involved another “man who was lame.” Paul sees that the man “had faith to be healed” and commanded him to stand up, which the man did, being instantly.
Using Prince’s logic, these recipients of healing were not true believers (as he claims Ananias and Sapphira were not true believers). At this point his logic works against him because he would be the first to say that faith in Jesus is all that is required to make one a new creation.
James Barron also asserts Ananias and Sapphira were not believers in this YouTube video: “Jesus The Door To A New Reality Now | Seeing Grace 7-24-2025.” Barron uses the argument that Prince used, stating that Ananias and Sapphira are not called disciples.
Andrew Farley also asserts they were not believers in several YouTube videos, including this one: “The Truth About Ananias and Sapphira.” His treatment is more nuanced than the others. He admits that the scriptures do not say God killed them, only that they died. He suggests that the scriptures also do not say they were believers. Finally, he asserts that Satan cannot fill a believer’s heart, something central to his theology. Farley goes on to make a useful distinction between punishment (always about the past) and discipline (always about the future). This distinction, however, raises the question of God’s character. Would the Father of light, the God of love, the One represented by Jesus ever impose a punishment that had no importance for the future? What, one asks, is the benefit of inflicting pain if it does not lead to the reformation of a person? Again, the logic works against itself. The attempt is to show how complete Christ’s sacrifice is, but by excluding Ananias and Sapphira from being recipients of severe “discipline,” Farley is, basically, concluding they are hell bound, making one wonder how the line between grace and condemnation can be drawn on such thin evidence.
One might ask why I am criticizing three contemporary teachers of the gospel whom I esteem. It is because their defense of their gospel of grace leads them to interpret Ananias and Sapphira with unnecessary condemnation. We know from the instance in Corinth that a believer can make such bad decisions that he can be handed over to Satan, but this is only so that his spirit may be saved.
I know that the polemical intensity these three teachers apply to Ananias and Sapphira arises from a defense of the gospel of grace. A false dichotomy is created in the following way. A critic of their gospel will say, “God’s grace is not sufficient to protect these believers from punishment.” The grace teachers, then, offer the rebuttal by arguing that Ananias and Sapphira are not at all believers. Another approach would be that God’s grace is unlimited and, instead of allowing the mislead couple to continue to hurt both themselves and the body of Christ, God delivered them from their bodies, fulfilling the cry of every mature believer, to be “away from the body and at home with the Lord” (Acts 5)
This post was first published on: Dec 7, 2025. If this article is significantly updated, the publication date beneath the title may change, just as it might change in order to bring current posts to the top (or bottom) of the directory.