rich’s blog

Pray with me, would you?

 

Prayer: 

Jesus, let this be good.  Seriously, Lord.  Give rise to goodness in our hearts; that what we hear might bring a blessing to your kingdom.  Give rise to goodness from my mouth, that nothing I may say might deceive.  And awaken us to all the goodness we have already received, because our memories are so selective, and so tiny.  In Jesus’ name. Amen.

 

Introduction: 

So today we are looking at a text that is as unusual as it is difficult; although, as we look at it this morning, we’ll see that it’s not all that unusual.  And we’ll talk about what makes this passage so difficult for us, and hopefully will find a way to bridge the gap between our complicated lives, and this bit of Bible.

 

So first, let’s walk through Acts 5:1-11–I’d invite you to open to there. If you want to use one of the bibles in the chairs, it’s page 1081.

 

Walking Through: 

So: Let’s walk through today’s passage together, okay? This small bit of Bible is from the early part of Acts, which is a book that everyone agrees was written by Luke, except for some crazy people on the fringes. And Luke of course wrote the gospel we call Luke, as well.  And we could if we wanted look at all sorts of ways Acts follows the Gospel of Luke in form and message; it would be really interesting, but sort of irrelevant.  Maybe someday!  For this morning, let’s walk through together what was read to us.

 

A Walk Through: 1-2

 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

 

So Luke is quick to tell us that Ananias and Sapphira are in on this together; they’ve conspired together.  And although it’s unspoken at the start of this passage, and only made clearer when Peter talks to Sapphira, what they’ve conspired to do is pretend that they are giving everything they received from the sale of their property.

 

And apparently at least Peter, but likely the whole community, knew that they were selling their property and had planned on giving what they earned to the church.  So this is not a private act, right? This giving; it’s a public act.

 

A Walk Through:3-4

    Then Peter said, “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.”

 

And Peter calls out Ananias, you know?  He knows, somehow–presumably the Holy Spirit has told him–that Ananias has kept back part of the money.  “How is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept some of the money you received for the land?”  Peter asks him this question; Ananias has just brought him money, all the money that supposedly came from the sale of their property.  And Peter attributes to Satan the “lie” Ananias is acting out, asks him how the devil has filled his heart.

 

Peter points out that the land and the money was Ananias’ own, and asks Ananias, frankly–although we read his words with an accusatory and aggressive tone–”What made you think of doing this?”  And again, ends by letting Ananias know he didn’t just lie to the community, or to him; he lied to God.  And this “lying to God” parallels in the passage “lying to the Holy Spirit.”

 

And in fact, this passage about lying to the Holy Spirit is one that people will cite when trying to discuss the way the Holy Spirit has personality, can act and think and do things–because we don’t lie to whisps of smoke or gas or power, we lie to persons, beings who can understand truth and lies and the difference between them both.

 

A Walk Through: 5-6

 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

 

And Ananias, hearing Peter, hearing that he has lied to God, he falls down and dies.  This makes people afraid. And he’s buried. This is interesting to me, his burial.  It takes effort & money–burial shrouds aren’t cheap, right?–and some “young men” volunteers to do it, and you get the sense that even though Ananias just died, Keeled over.  Even though his lie, his deception, was publicly exposed, and they were completely scared, the church took care of him. They didn’t proclaim him a sinner and dump his body in the landfill.

 

But for all their care of Ananias’ body & burial, they didn’t tell his wife Sapphira what had happened.  And I think that the reason they didn’t, that Paul didn’t, is not punitive, is not so that they can get her too; we can read it that way.  But we can just as legitimately read what follows these verses as an attempt to restore Sapphira, to give her an opportunity to choose truth instead of her prepared lie.  Peter might be asking her to toss the script she and her husband wrote out the window, and tell the truth.  But anyway.

 

A Walk Through: 7-10

  About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

   “Yes,” she said, “that is the price.” Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of those who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

    At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 

 

And Peter asks her, when she shows up, if what Ananias had presented to Peter was in fact all the money that he and she had earned from the sale of their land.  And this is hard for us, of course; we want Peter to rush to her and console her, to tell her what has happened.

 

And we all know that Peter was a bit of a blockhead, that he spoke out of turn a lot when he and the disciples hung out with Jesus.  But he wasn’t mean, right?  And yet, we read this passage and we see him standing up, overshadowing Sapphira. His words echo, you know, and he’s dressed in robes.  (like Jafar from Aladdin, or something.)

 

“Tell me whether you and your husband sold the land for such and such a price.”  He doesn’t say such and such, though.  But his eyes flash.

 

But he insert this tone in here, you know.  He could have just as easily asked her, gently, pastorally, hopefully, “Tell me whether you and your husband sold the land for whatever.”  And if we read this passage with this tone of voice in our heads, instead of the default one we’ve picked up, we realize that Peter was giving Sapphira a chance to choose against the lie.

 

And when she cements her decision to deceive the church, then Peter could have just as gently said “How is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the Test?”  He could have said defeatedly, “Look–the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” He could have been sad over this knowledge that the Spirit had given to him–the same Spirit who gave to him the knowledge that they were lying.  And for all we know Peter stayed there by her until the young men drew near and carried her out, and again, buried her beside her husband at someone’s expense, who knows whose?

 

I’m just suggesting here that when we read this passage, we insert Peter’s tone and attitude; and maybe we’re putting the wrong one in there.

 

A Walk Through: 11

    Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

 

And not surprisingly, when what happened to Sapphira is shared, the original fear that Ananias’ death caused grows even larger, and spreads outside the church and into the world.

 

 

Reflection: 

So we should ask, after looking at this together, “So what?”  So what?  How do we bridge the gap between this passage and our lives?  This is the application question, right? And one of the most basic ways to answer this question would be to look at how this event functioned within the life of the early church, how it functioned for its first audience.

 

And we’re told how it functioned, right? “Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these things!”  This event scared the church, scared the church with a mix of impressed awe, and downright caution, and reservation, and worry.

 

I wish we had a different word for this, you know? This fear is the sort of fear that causes us to think deeply about things, causes us to reflect for a moment on what we’ve gotten ourselves into.  It’s as much rational as it is emotional.  And it motivates us to think about whatever causes it.

 

So the events that happen in this passage are events that would motivate those near them, the first audience to this scene, to think about what it means to be a part of the church, just how much power they’ve drawn near to.  It’s a motivating scene.

 

Reflection: A Legitimizing Scene 

And this is relevant because this passage occurs in a part of acts where the authority of the apostles is being tested.  Are they legitimate witnesses to Jesus’ life? Does the church have the power it is claiming to have, and behind this, is God as powerfully present in Jesus as these witnesses say he is?  All these questions are going on, and this situation really validates the power that is present in the apostles and within the church.  So it’s a legitimizing scene.

 

Reflection: An exemplary scene

And it also occurs, if we pay attention to context, in a section of acts which models the life of the early church, a life that–and this is touchy in our current economic clime–practiced what is often called Christian Socialism.  “Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common…There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.”

 

And we’re told immediately before our passage, about a gentleman named Joseph. He’s an encouraging fella:

 

“There was a Levite, a native of Cyprus, Joseph, to whom the apostles gave the name Barnabas (which means “son of Encouragement”).  He sold a field that belonged to him, then brought the money and laid it at the apostles feet. (acts 5:36-37, nrsv)

 

Joseph was a shining example of the selflessness of this community; and Ananias & Sapphira…they were the opposite, in some ways, weren’t they? We don’t know what motivated them to present the money they “laid at the apostles’ feet” as the entire amount they received from the sale of their land–which again, seems to be the unstated assumption that’s going on here.

 

I mean, maybe they saw Barnabas, saw how honored he was, and wanted a little honor, too.  Maybe they had the best intentions, made some public promise to sell their land, too; but realized that they couldn’t afford to give away all of their profits, and just weren’t willing to lose face, for some reason.  Who knows; but they “lie,” as Peter says–not just to the church, but to the Holy Spirit, to God Himself.

 

And this lying isn’t something we talked about before, but its a lie that is meant to deceive, right? It’s not a little white lie, an “Oh I love this dessert!” lie–we’re clear on that, right?

 

But this scene is meant to motivate us not to be like Ananias & Sapphira–and at the same time, remind us to be like Barnabas, whom we just heard about. We are not to deceive, not to lie; but to be straightforward, act with integrity, let our yes’s be yes’s and our no’s, no’s.

 

Reflection: A Reminding Scene

And if we could remember that this is the early days of the church, when they are establishing themselves as a people with power and authority and blessed by God, it would be helpful to us to remember an earlier scene in the life of God’s People, long before Jesus shows up.

 

A scene that also took place during a transitional time for God’s People, when God was in the process of forming and firming up his people, long before Jesus & the Church and the Holy Spirit poured out on us.  The scene is in Joshua 7.

 

Joshua 7:

I won’t read the passage to us, but I will summarize it a little.

 

But to set this scene up: Israel has crossed the Jordan into the promised land, and they are in the process of taking the land so that they might be established there.  Joshua and the Israelites have just taken the walled city of Jericho through the miraculous intervention of God; and they are told explicitly not to take anything of value for themselves out of Jericho, but to burn it.  Raze it to the ground.  And when they do this, this total destruction, God counts these things as devoted to Himself.

 

But–there’s always a but, right?–but a guy named Achan “son of Carmison of Zabdison of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah”–you know, that Achan–took some of the things that were supposed to be devoted to God.  They were shiny; it was only a little bit–actually, it was an expensive robe, imported, 5 or so pounds of silver and a little over a pound of gold, so this was “rich stuff,” in the words of Goonies.  Achan has taken this stuff.  And because he took it God sets his hand against Israel.  The Lord’s anger “burns against Israel,” we’re told.

 

Not against Achan; against the whole nation.  Remember, we are God’s special people; all of us, and we’re in this covenant with God together, right?  Not just you and you and you.

 

The Israelites go up for a fight, and they lose.  And Joshua starts asking God “Why?” Starts talking about how they should have just never crossed the Jordan.  It’s a little whiny, but I’ve been there, you know. He’s on the ground lamenting; and God says to Joshua, “Stand up! …Israel has sinned; they have transgressed my covenant that I imposed on them. They have taken some of the devoted things; they have stolen, they have acted deceitfully, and they have put them among their own belongings.”  God goes on to say “I will be with you no more unless you destroy the devoted things form among you.”

 

The Covenant God made with Israel was a two-way street: great benefits, awesome benefits, but like a marriage, there were responsibilities, obligations.

 

God has Joshua tell the people to “sanctify themselves,” make themselves holy and set apart, because God is going to reveal who the thief is.

 

And Achan, eventually is found out; God reveals to Joshua, in front of the community, that Achan stole God’s stuff–and Achan is killed for it–and not just Achan, but all his property and his household are destroyed, and a pile of rocks is heaped up over them as a reminder not to steal from God.

 

And this Joshua scene is a hard scene: Israel gathers to stone Achan, it’s violent and feels vindictive.  But what we need to understand from it, have to understand with regard to it, is that God was serious about the purity of his people.  What was devoted to Him was His; God had promised so much good, and Achan had given into providing for himself. He had literally tainted the community of God’s People through his actions.

 

Similarities: 

Now: there are parallels between our scene today and the scene in Joshua, right?  And Luke wants us to see these parallels; he presents the situation with Ananias & Sapphira the way he does so that we would explicitly remember Achan.

 

And by presenting the scene of Ananias & Sapphira the way he does, Luke forces us to remember that being a part of God’s people is a serious business, that serious requirements follow the people of God, and lying and deceiving are not qualities the church should have among us.  And by doing this, reminding us of Achan as he tells us about Ananias & Sapphira, Luke really hits us over the head, frankly, with the message that being a part of God’s People means something.  That God’s people are supposed to be different from other people, live differently both as individuals and a group.

 

It means something to be a Christian. There are high standards when it comes to our behavior, and we shouldn’t forget it.

 

Differences: 

But there are significant differences; the church doesn’t stone Ananias & Sapphira.  It really does seem like Peter offers Sapphira a chance to tell the truth; and we don’t know what would have happened had she only done it. And the context is different, of course: in Joshua, the Lord only spoke to Joshua.  In acts the Spirit was alive and speaking to, and being spoken to–even if it was a lie–by the whole church.  Also, there is a much stronger personal dimension to our faith in the New Testament than there is in the old–although I’d argue that the communal dimension is in some ways just as strong. A very different context, really.

 

Transition: 

So where are we?  We’ve seen how Luke motivates us with the negative example of Ananias & Sapphira.  We’ve seen how God’s power at work in the church is legitimized; I mean this is a community where the power of God is at loose, and it can be dangerous if you try and act shady, deceive and disrespect the source of that power. And we’ve seen how Luke–and presumably God, of course–wants us to remember Achan, and his negative example as well, and wants us to remember just what it means to be a part of this Jesus-centered community.

 

 

The Fundamental Problem: 

There is a fundamental problem, though, that I think we have to deal with.  This passage–I can explain the mechanics of what Luke hoped we’d notice when we read it, how it functioned in the life of the first church, etc., etc.,–all fine stuff, right? But it can still feel difficult.  Peter still seems like a jerk, you know.  it still feels unfair or irrelevant?

 

Difficult or Irrelevant? 

It’s difficult simply because we don’t live the way the first church lived.  We need to acknowledge that. That isn’t necessarily wrong; but it is true.  We just aren’t as  involved in one another’s lives as the early church was.  That passage that I read from right before Acts 5, the Christian Socialist passage—it’s not really our experience.

 

We don’t really “buy” the idea that what happens to me affects you, really and objectively has an affect on you. We do forget that what happens in our church, whether we “see” its effects in some really practical way–you sin and my car blows up, right?–what happens to any one of us spiritually does affect our entire community, affects all of us.

 

Standards:

And because of oh, maybe our individual-oriented society—it’s like a fun Christian hobby to blame American society—and, and probably other things: sinfulness, augmented by the Devil our enemy, a gut-level reaction to anything that smells of “legalism,”–we no longer think about what I would call the base line standards of behavior in the church.  We don’t think about how “pure” the church should be, whether or not we are a community in which all of us act with integrity, and honesty, and present ourselves straightfowardly, without duplicity or deception all the time.

 

We don’t talk about basic Christian standards of behavior generally, and how being a part of God’s People demands them of us; it gets tricky, it gets uncomfortable, we don’t want to offend or alienate anyone.

 

But at least part of the reason that fear gripped the whole church and even those outside it, when Ananias & Sapphira dropped dead after their conspiracy was made public, is because the church realized that they had gotten themselves involved in a really high stakes game.  Life & death for real.  They realized that the church wasn’t a new club, a new Jewish sect they could be a part of–being a part of it left no more room for duplicity.  You couldn’t pretend to be something you’re not.

 

We need to wonder what it would have meant for the church if Ananias & Sapphira had succeeded.  I wish that Sapphira had told the truth when asked, that they hadn’t followed through with the plan they made.  I wish that even then they hadn’t died.  It is conjecture only, but they were a part of the church, and I suspect we will see them on the other side of the resurrection.  But we are apparently supposed to notice how important it is that we do not commit ourselves or something we have to God, and then decide to hold back part of it for our own use.

 

This is relevant when it comes to the offering; and it’s more relevant when it comes to our lives generally, right?

 

If God was about the business of making a Spirit-filled community, a group of ambassadors, missionaries to the world that would announce His reign in power and grace, then it did matter that they be different from the world, it mattered that they witness to an alternative way of life, made possible only through Jesus.  If I can paraphrase Chesterton, salt that tastes like beef isn’t useful on hamburger.  It mattered that the early church realize just how significant their commitment to follow Jesus was.

 

Relevant: 

This is something that should be basic for us in this room particular.  The early Brethren were put in jails, were persecuted precisely because they believed that following Jesus demanded things of them, mattered in a very real, pragmatic way–mattered so much, in fact, that it was a choice that should be made by those who can make such choices. And so they baptized believers only, baptized people who decided yes, I want to be a part of God’s People, an ambassador of God’s Reconciliatory, Peacable, and Merciful Kingdom. And I will fight to act like Jesus, who I am choosing to commit to, and I will fight to keep the witness of my community as blameless as it can be.

 

Tension:

And of course, being a part of this community didn’t mean losing your personal identity to the larger community.  Remember that Ananias & Sapphira didn’t have to sell their property, Peter makes that clear.  And yet they also conspired to deceive everyone and tear a hole in the fabric of the early church’s witness & integrity.

 

But this is the good news about the the church, in so many ways.

 

Being a part of the church doesn’t mean losing our personal identity or integrity to the larger community; it means gaining a larger community that can help shape and build both our personal identity and our personal integrity.  

 

Does this make sense?

We are called to live collectively, together, as a group of people who bear witness to a different way of living in the world, a whole-heartedly devoted to God way of living.  But we are individual people, and we join this community as individual people.

 

No pastor I know puts Acts 5:1-11 on their shiny “get to know us” mailer, right? But we as a church cannot forget it. We should, maybe, read this before we take communion; read it before we worship, before we eat and drink and go to the bathroom, and remind ourselves that personally, if we are Christians we live in houses with exposed wiring. Power is close, and with it comes a lot of good things.  But we do need to act correctly around it.  Or more than this; we live with a person who is power itself, a person who asks us not to lie when we speak, and demands that what we commit–especially ourselves–we give all of.

 

We need to remember to avoid duplicity and deception because God is real and watching us, and reminds us that those things are simply not ours.  They are not for us.  And we must say no to them. Leave them for other people, presents we don’t want to open.

 

Conclusion & Community 

But we are given a community, and not a lonely existence, because I think with the help of one another we can live safely with the exposed wires around us, safely in relationship with the God who asks us to be his witnesses to the world.  And this is not just a pastor’s task, a small group leader or ministry team leaders’ task, an older Christians’ task.  We can be Barnabas to one another; encouragements in times of need & models of devoted living.  We can share the things we have with one another, without fearing that we ourselves won’t be provided for.  We might need to be, sometimes, the young men who help bury one another after we’ve bad choices, but bigger than this, be like Jesus even, helping each other to come back to life & our community afterwards. We can and should be like Peter, asking each other difficult questions, and we should be unlike Sapphira, instead telling the truth and asking for the forgiveness and help that is always offered to us.

 

I don’t know if I can soften the force of this passage—even though I’ve tried—because God never meant for the reminder it gives us to be softened.  We are called to such a high standard; but we are called to it together, and with one another’s help, we can meet it. So whatever we commit to God, but especially ourselves, let’s give all of it without presenting ourselves as anything other than what we are.