Ananias and his wife

[jabcat]

Rob Bell [  ] has been sounding [  ] new-agey.

:nod:

[Shev]

I think in all this it is worth noting that:

1 - Judgment begins with the house of God.
2 - Judgment can be severe not pleasant - indeed, it is likened to scourging (He scourges every son He receives).
3 - Death does not look to God how it looks to us.

I have no problem with God disciplining His children How He sees fit, any more than I have a problem with an earthly father spanking a naughty child. God's love is for our maturity into the image of Christ and all things tend towards that end. It is not the love of an indulgent pushover who just brings us candy to rot our teeth.

[anti_nietzsche]

Much of the New Testament was written in code. The story of Hananias and Saphhira is no exception. It is not to be taken literally but instead it is really a funny little story about the early christians. Note the names, Hananias means "God is gracious" and Saphhira means "precious jewel". At that time none of the believers had died in Christ yet and this was the precious jewel of God's grace. Then Hananias died and they found some money in his pocket, so as a joke they said, he has stolen it from God, and that was his sin, and that is why he died. Then Saphhira died and they found nothing in her pocket. So they said she has no gift for us, that is why she died. It was written in code because the Old Testament was also written in code. Remember these were early oral traditions that only later were written down on papyrus or parchment. Either way, God is love and has not punished Hananias, he would have simply asked them to give their money, maybe with a threat of excommunication. But this did not happen so it must be a concealed story like I showed it. The Old Testament is full of these concealed stories. The NT writers tried to produce the same. Condemnation in the sense of damnation without a way out is impossible with Jesus Christ.

[Shev]

Much of the New Testament was written in code. The story of Hananias and Saphhira is no exception. It is not to be taken literally but instead it is really a funny little story about the early christians. Note the names, Hananias means "God is gracious" and Saphhira means "precious jewel". At that time none of the believers had died in Christ yet and this was the precious jewel of God's grace. Then Hananias died and they found some money in his pocket, so as a joke they said, he has stolen it from God, and that was his sin, and that is why he died. Then Saphhira died and they found nothing in her pocket. So they said she has no gift for us, that is why she died. It was written in code because the Old Testament was also written in code. Remember these were early oral traditions that only later were written down on papyrus or parchment. Either way, God is love and has not punished Hananias, he would have simply asked them to give their money, maybe with a threat of excommunication. But this did not happen so it must be a concealed story like I showed it. The Old Testament is full of these concealed stories. The NT writers tried to produce the same. Condemnation in the sense of damnation without a way out is impossible with Jesus Christ.

It is certainly important to know when the scriptures are being literal, and when they are being figurative, but to me the narratives are usually intended as factual accounts. Luke prefaces the Gospel - of which Acts is Part 2 - with it being a faithful account of the things having taken place among them. The apostles places emphasis on being eye witnesses, but if they were going to just make up non-factual stories, why does the witnessing matter?

The account above bears some parallel to 1 Corinthians 11:29-31 also:

For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner[a] eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.  30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.  31 For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged.

This again shows the reality of judgment in the house of God - not to be confused with punishing or condemning us for the sins Christ has died for once for all, but rather the process by which the house of God will be brought to conformity to Christ.

[anti_nietzsche]

Hi Shev,

this is exactly what I would question. In ancient times, the art of interpreting scripture was better than it is now. We either take scripture literally or we ignore them, and both of this is wrong. We must lay out the meaning of scripture by analyzing its language and looking for the words that sound similar. The surface reading of scripture only gives one story, and usually this story did not happen like it literally says, but differently. Oral tradition took these surface stories and used them as a binder for the books, but we must discover what really happened. And if you read the literal account of Hananias and Sapphira, it is easy to see that it is rather absurd. Jesus dies for the forgiveness of our sin and then people get killed for it for small sins and misunderstandings? This should not be because it would darken our faith life too much. It is similar with the mosaic law, it was never to be taken literally. Scripture is not an inerrant guide to life but provides learning and teaching material ... not  laws and orders that are binding. Of the latter there are only the 10 commandments which come close to that. And the commandment of Christ to love one another, the only one he ever spelled out. That should tell you what scripture really is, the code messages of a people that were persecuted and needed a cover.

Blessings!

Daniel

[Aerex]

I have no problem with God disciplining His children How He sees fit, any more than I have a problem with an earthly father spanking a naughty child. God's love is for our maturity into the image of Christ and all things tend towards that end. It is not the love of an indulgent pushover who just brings us candy to rot our teeth.

This is exactly my problem. My father beat me for very little things and it bothers me a lot that my heavenly father is no different than my father. If I do have children I will never lay a hand on them. There is always a better way to discipline a children without being violent. This is something I can't imitate or agree with God.

[anti_nietzsche]

Hi Aerex, God never beats his children. We are supposed to talk and learn understanding and use our minds together. Problems are supposed to be solved through wisdom and not through force. My dad never spanked me but just once, and for that I have much love and respect for him. Teaching people through application of pain only works out if the force really meets someone with evil intentions. But more often than not this goes astray and the violence hits someone not guilty. Or, it hits someone who would have cooperated had we resorted to civil dialogue. God is a good parent and doesn't think of doing evil to his children. That is what we should learn for our lives too, to have peaceful and wise ways to prevent our children from going all rogue, and that relies mostly on our ability to apply truthful and wise love in our educating of our children.

[marie glen]

I have no problem with God disciplining His children How He sees fit, any more than I have a problem with an earthly father spanking a naughty child. God's love is for our maturity into the image of Christ and all things tend towards that end. It is not the love of an indulgent pushover who just brings us candy to rot our teeth.

This is exactly my problem. My father beat me for very little things and it bothers me a lot that my heavenly father is no different than my father. If I do have children I will never lay a hand on them. There is always a better way to discipline a children without being violent. This is something I can't imitate or agree with God.

God only 'beats' the very evil.. If I saw someone abducting a child I would not hesitate to get violent in order to rescue that child from some real horror..

the "rod of discipline" God speaks of is the Word.. Jesus "will rule the nations with a rod of iron":.. it is iron, because it is un-breakable.. one doesn't break God's law, one breaks their self upon it (and Jesus became the broken one for us)

"Discipline" is not to beat.. any parent who beats their child and for small reasons is simply being mean.
God, our heavenly Father is not like that. This life is simply the letting people's ability to choose (tho limited) to run its course, otherwise He could have made us to be robots.. And if He did the choosing for us (other than election) what would the point and logic of that be?

Hence life as we presently know it.. and we all need deep healing from Him.. The laws for Israel, a tiny slice upon the earth, were indeed strict. a place prepared for messiah to be born into must have been needed (as opposed to His coming in the midst of tree worshipers or something). And yes there were stonings.. and the next thing such ones know will be resurrection and the opportunity for and the bending of the knee in awe, love and worship and their transformation..

Yet had witchcraft, rampant fornication, etc been allowed.. Well, Israel has had a hard road.. because Satan (who apparently, also is able to make choices, tho thankfully also very limited) hates Israel SO much.. but God has promised to bless them all the more because of it..

And the wars between Israel and the nations around them.. well, those nations were into human sacrifice, especially the placing of live babies into the fires of Molech.. And what God worth His salt would not want them gone!

The opposite of God, I believe, is predatorness (dog eat dog, and onward) and is a bottomless pit of potential.. And He has interfered two or three times, otherwise, humanity likely would have destroyed itself long ago. (And we would have never been born.)

It's my firm belief the adversary stands in front of God (seemingly from our viewpoint) and declares to be God.. We can see the viciousness of that one said to be 'god' in the mid east, inspiring great acts of barbarity in the world today, for instance. And the same of anyone who beats others in the name of YHWH or who take delight in the idea of 'hell'.. they are very deceived.. following a false 'god'. A demon. And, or their own mean-ness.

God bless.. :Peace2: :HeartThrob:

[Shev]

Hi Shev,

this is exactly what I would question. In ancient times, the art of interpreting scripture was better than it is now. We either take scripture literally or we ignore them, and both of this is wrong. We must lay out the meaning of scripture by analyzing its language and looking for the words that sound similar. The surface reading of scripture only gives one story, and usually this story did not happen like it literally says, but differently. Oral tradition took these surface stories and used them as a binder for the books, but we must discover what really happened. And if you read the literal account of Hananias and Sapphira, it is easy to see that it is rather absurd. Jesus dies for the forgiveness of our sin and then people get killed for it for small sins and misunderstandings? This should not be because it would darken our faith life too much. It is similar with the mosaic law, it was never to be taken literally. Scripture is not an inerrant guide to life but provides learning and teaching material ... not  laws and orders that are binding. Of the latter there are only the 10 commandments which come close to that. And the commandment of Christ to love one another, the only one he ever spelled out. That should tell you what scripture really is, the code messages of a people that were persecuted and needed a cover.

Blessings!

Daniel

So do you think the narratives concerning Jesus happened?

I don't say that to be confrontational, but to me it is a short road between 'the narratives are not factual', to 'the cross is a metaphor, not an actual event'. For if one narrative story is completely unreliable, how can we trust any of them? That is not to say there is no symbolism involved, but to me it is layer upon layer, just as literal feasts have spiritual fulfillment.

I believe in metaphor and symbolism, with the scriptures being so full of prophecy and parable, but I also believe the narratives - especially those of the gospels - were intended as faithful accounts. Yes, there was oral tradition, but the writers themselves were either eye witnesses or friends/protégés of eye witnesses, and this reality of having been an eye witness was taken seriously, as the apostles were indeed charged with relating factual accounts. There are some exceptions, such as the nature of the death of Judas, but these tend to be things that are not central to the gospel, or that the writers were eye witnesses to.

For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.  17 For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." (1 Peter 1:16-17)

And we are witnesses of all things which He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem, whom they[e] killed by hanging on a tree.  40 Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly,  41 not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. (Acts 10:39-41)

Rather than telling the stones (hard sayings of God) to become bread (sweet, satisfying words), we live out of every word that proceeds from His mouth.

[anti_nietzsche]

Hi Shev,

well it is my point of view that the bible is really a normal book, some of which is true, some is not, and where it is not factually true, there is symbolism and another level of meaning if you dig deeper into the text. So I don't think Hananias and Sapphira were killed by God, that does not match Christ's grace to his new congregation in Jerusalem. Instead we know for sure that these early christians were persecuted much and they also sought to match their stories with the stories of the Old Testament of which many are allegorical and metaphorical and have another meaning than the literal first glance reading would suggest. But to understand that you need to know the Hebrew and the Greek and cannot rely on a translated bible. The outlayed bible is usually true and profitable to read and know, the common and translated bible, literally read, is a locked book. We must be aware that we have a loving God in Yahweh and in Jesus Christ who do not seek to kill or make us afraid of them, for what would be the point? We have one sign from God, the cross and the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that sign speaks forgiveness and love to everyone. So I am binding myself to this sign and know that I have salvation in it. And it explains how Jesus is Lord, as he took the dreaded Day of the Lord on himself so that humans would live and love again.

Blessings!

Daniel

[Shev]

Hey Daniel,

I appreciate your response! I also agree with your comments on love and forgiveness being the sign of God. I suppose this conversation could turn into a discussion on the way God's love is demonstrated, as I believe fully in His love, and indeed Him being love, while also believing that love can be (and sometimes has to be) expressed in discipline.

And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:


"My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord,
Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;

6
For whom the Lord loves He chastens,
And scourges every son whom He receives."[a]

7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten?  8 But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.  9 Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?  10 For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness.  11 Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. (Hebrews 12:5-11)

My contention is not that God hates Ananias and his wife, if the story is true as told. Nor were they paying the penalty for their sin debt, which was paid by Christ. But if the story is true, and they died, then I have no problem with it being a form of discipline, with God ending their sojourn in the flesh and bringing them into the Spirit realm to continue their learning.

The passage I quoted above could be a kind of manifesto for loving discipline in Christ. It may sound harsh to defend hard things from the hand of God towards those He loves. But to me it builds faith to understand why we are chastised, rather than pulling down faith. If we can see the loving hand of God even in our trials and pains - and see it as compassionate discipline rather than punishment - then we will be prepared indeed for the rigors of life. On the other hand, I believe there is a danger in believing that God's love can only manifest in overly warm, emotionally soothing ways.

God bless, brother!

:dsunny:

[SevanthDay]

Hey Daniel,

I appreciate your response! I also agree with your comments on love and forgiveness being the sign of God. I suppose this conversation could turn into a discussion on the way God's love is demonstrated, as I believe fully in His love, and indeed Him being love, while also believing that love can be (and sometimes has to be) expressed in discipline.

And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:


"My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord,
Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;

6
For whom the Lord loves He chastens,
And scourges every son whom He receives."[a]

7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten?  8 But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.  9 Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?  10 For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness.  11 Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. (Hebrews 12:5-11)

My contention is not that God hates Ananias and his wife, if the story is true as told. Nor were they paying the penalty for their sin debt, which was paid by Christ. But if the story is true, and they died, then I have no problem with it being a form of discipline, with God ending their sojourn in the flesh and bringing them into the Spirit realm to continue their learning.

The passage I quoted above could be a kind of manifesto for loving discipline in Christ. It may sound harsh to defend hard things from the hand of God towards those He loves. But to me it builds faith to understand why we are chastised, rather than pulling down faith. If we can see the loving hand of God even in our trials and pains - and see it as compassionate discipline rather than punishment - then we will be prepared indeed for the rigors of life. On the other hand, I believe there is a danger in believing that God's love can only manifest in overly warm, emotionally soothing ways.

God bless, brother!

:dsunny:

The fact is that our Sovereign God is in control of all influences that come into play in which man chooses from. If God is in control of all influences and God is in control then God actually determines these influences though man chooses out of his own volition.

Php 2:9  Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

Php 2:10  That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

Php 2:11  And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Php 2:12  Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

Php 2:13  For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

You see God is determining the end from the beginning and not man. God made man with the mind he has whether it be a spiritual mind or a carnal mind and God influences both.

Now, God's will is being done in the righteous and the wicked and we who were once dead in trespasses and sin God has made us alive in Christ!

Thus, before we consider the outcome of what choices we make we ought to consider what God is doing that determines what choices we will make of our own volition and what God is doing to create us in the express image of Christ who is God at work in an anointed body set apart for God's purpose.

God bless you,

SeventhDay

[eaglesway]

In the narrative of acts we see that awesome things were happening and the presence of God was abundantly manifest. It was as if(and indeed was imo) the holy of holies was opened and the saints were gathered within it. To enter that place... To stand on that holy ground... And try to con the saints of God as if He does not see thru the schemes of men was(is) a grievous transgression. God is love...but He is no fool to b openly mocked. The lesson of Annanias and Saphira is that God is awesome and holy and to b respected. He was there in all His glory...to disregard that is to become a lightning rod, imo.

[Aerex]

I guess we can mock Jesus but we can't mock God despite the fact they are one in the same. Certainly I am not considering we do this but when Jesus was mocked he didn't call a bolt of lightning. There has to be reason why God decided to end the two people's lives because as others have said it contradicts in my mind what Christ taught.

The only thing that will ease my mind is if this was the only decision that could be made. It would be a problem if there were other solutions and God just arbitrary chose the sword.

[sheila]

 it's the sin against the Holy spirit. all things men say against God and Jesus Christ would be forgiven..but the sin against the Holy spirit is

   is not[but brings a judgement with it.]   Jesus was doing great and powerful works[just as what was going on with the congregation

  at the very time of Ananis and his wife's sin] when He spoke of this particular transgression.

[sheila]

satan would perform 'lying signs' to deceive...even the very elect if it were possible.  that is the very sin that was accomplished here.

    lie to the Holy spirit....a false sign[appearance of holding all things in common] But,that is not possible with the elect..for the

  spirit of truth is in/with them...and reveals it.

    I,myself.....have had the Holy spirit reveal to me..when someone was lying to me[doesn't always happen...wish it did.]  I would hear

   'you are dwelling in the midst of deception".  the spirit of truth deliver's us from all deception..when we are walking in obedience...

    but at the same time I do not have a great outworking of His Holy spirit at this time. Maybe a time will come..when He desires

  to do something like this again...and if/when He does..you may very well expect that the Holy spirit/truth..will most certainly

uncover such things.

[sheila]

there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed.  consider under the Old law covenant..when it become known God was displeased and

someone in the congregation of Israel had transgressed..and God was not willing to overlook it,but desired to deal with it.

  the very breastplate and urim and thummin[lights and perfection] uncovered it.


     Thus sinning against/grieving the Holy spirit....the Heart of God is LOVE AND TRUTH....and the power of LOVE to overcome all

   the power of the enemy requires LOVE AND TRUTH.  Ananais and sapphira were overcome of satan in this manner..d/t not holding to a

love of truth/love to their fellowmen.   and just as Judas,also was overcome..such lose their position in the congregation of God.


     satan like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.  Jesus come to 'break up' these machinations of the devil.....and the

helper and comforter[POWER}..most certainly will.

[micah7:9]

I guess we can mock Jesus but we can't mock God despite the fact they are one in the same. Certainly I am not considering we do this but when Jesus was mocked he didn't call a bolt of lightning. There has to be reason why God decided to end the two people's lives because as others have said it contradicts in my mind what Christ taught.

The only thing that will ease my mind is if this was the only decision that could be made. It would be a problem if there were other solutions and God just arbitrary chose the sword.

Your question is certainly one for thought. I have read that incident in Acts many times but your question never entered my thoughts. They dropped dead because they withheld and lied, and right after reading about the works of Jesus in the four Apostles who spoke of His love and nowhere did I read that He reacted or repaid in such a way. Yes your question is one for thought, but these thoughts are only my  :2c: :Peace2:

[Seth]

I guess we can mock Jesus but we can't mock God despite the fact they are one in the same. Certainly I am not considering we do this but when Jesus was mocked he didn't call a bolt of lightning. There has to be reason why God decided to end the two people's lives because as others have said it contradicts in my mind what Christ taught.

The only thing that will ease my mind is if this was the only decision that could be made. It would be a problem if there were other solutions and God just arbitrary chose the sword.

In my opinion there are far worse punishments than falling asleep. There are fates much worse than what happened to those two. I don't think what happened to them contradicts what Jesus taught. He predicted 70 AD after all. He warned about God's judgement all through his ministry. He just didn't have much respect for the wrath of man. That's why, I think, Paul tells us to let vengeance be God's area.

[Seth]

Also, I wonder how long God allowed their temptations before they became Chrstians. So, to me there's not enough here to say that God acted suddenly with them. He knew them since they were born and what the very cause and moment of their death would be. It was just their time.

[micah7:9]

Perhaps that is the answer, "It was just their time."  :dontknow:

[eaglesway]

I guess we can mock Jesus but we can't mock God despite the fact they are one in the same. Certainly I am not considering we do this but when Jesus was mocked he didn't call a bolt of lightning. There has to be reason why God decided to end the two people's lives because as others have said it contradicts in my mind what Christ taught.

The only thing that will ease my mind is if this was the only decision that could be made. It would be a problem if there were other solutions and God just arbitrary chose the sword.

Jesus being mocked by His enemies is different than God being mocked by two believers in the midst of the outpouring of the Spirit.

And Jesus threatened the Pharisees when they mocked His miracles, "His works are done by Baalzebub", and spoke about it as blaspheming the Holy Spirit and the serious consequences of that.

Attempting to remove the judgment of God from the scriptures is misrerpresenting His character imo. His mercy will overwhelm His judgement, but His judgment is real and to be respected.

IMO God killed them.

[Ross]

"  Attempting to remove the judgment of God from the scriptures is misrepresenting His character imo. His mercy will overwhelm His judgement, but His judgment is real and to be respected."

Indeed. Seems the whole misuse of the term judgment and what that means as well as entails causes many disagreements about the purpose of the cross.

To comprehend the mercy one needs to comprehend the accusation.
The law and the grace that follows are the key point Paul talks about. He emphasises the mercy of God as imperative.
To grasp judgment one also needs to understand that this process clarifies in full what has happened, what one should have done, and the need for Christ to pay for those mistakes. Correction is never pleasant- and I prefer the term "serious correction" than eternal condemnation.

[eaglesway]

I agree Ross. Serious correction is a good way to describe "kolassis"(punishment)

There are several different Greek words that are translated "judgment"(krisis, krino, diakrino) and that is part of the reason there is so much confusion. One emeans "to weigh objectively" while another means "to impute a sentence".

Also "condemn" means something different now than it did in the 16th century. When God "judges" he does not "condemn" beyond the point of correction, and that is His "judgment"- to correct. The word condemn comes from the same root as the word "indemnify" and meant to rectify an injustice or repay a deficit- not to burn in hell forever in torment.

His judgement involves the "whys" of the "wise" purposes of God in all things- which is to set the creation free from futility into the glorious liberty of the children of God, and is never about mere retribution.

[Aerex]

Jesus being mocked by His enemies is different than God being mocked by two believers in the midst of the outpouring of the Spirit.

I don't see how it is different considering they are one in the same; however Jesus did say

And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.(Matthew 12:31-32)

I never really understood why this is the case considering the responses from both of them are different (Jesus will forgive you but God won't). It doesn't make sense to me, especially since Jesus says you should always forgive.

To grasp judgment one also needs to understand that this process clarifies in full what has happened, what one should have done, and the need for Christ to pay for those mistakes. Correction is never pleasant- and I prefer the term "serious correction" than eternal condemnation.

This is making the assumption that man is capable of obeying. It seems misleading that God will judge on things we have no ability of changing or doing right. Of course, Jesus did die to save us from the consequences of our sin but is God blaming us for our sin as if we could have prevented them? Keep in mind, I am not saying God should not judge I just have a problem with the severity of the judgement if there is alternate solution.

Let me provide an example, Peter had a dream about a bunch of unclean animals and Jesus says to eat them and Peter says he should not eat unclean meat. Jesus says do not call anything impure that God has made clean. Later on he decides not to eat with the Gentiles when a bunch of Jews come to a gathering and Paul calls him out. I am not really sure if these stories are chronological considering one if in Acts and the other in Galatians. If my argument is valid why did God just strike him down after disobeying God after getting a direct revelation from Jesus?

Is it because of this verse?

For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. (Romans 9:15)

Yes, we should respect God's judgement because they are wise and good not because we are afraid of the consequences if we don't.