Act 4:32-5:10 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 32. And the multitude . The number of believers at this tune had become large. In , it is said that it was five thousand; and the number was constantly increasing. One heart . This expression denotes tender union. They felt alike, or were attached to the same things, and this preserved them from jars and dissensions. One soul . This phrase also denotes close and tender union. No expression could denote it more strikingly than to say of friends they have one soul . Plutarch cites an ancient verse in his life of Cato of Utica, with this very expression, "Two friends, one soul." ( Grotius .) Thus Diogenes Laertius also (5 i. 11) says respecting Aristotle, that "being asked what was a friend, answered, that it was one soul dwelling in two bodies." ( Kuin�el .) The Hebrews spake of two friends as being "one man." There can be no more striking demonstration of union and love than to say of more than five thousand suddenly drawn together, that they had one soul! And this union they evinced in every way possible; in their conduct, in their prayers, and in their property. How different would have been the aspect of the church, if the union had continued to the present time! Neither said , etc. That is, they did not regard it as their own, but to be used for the benefit of the whole society. . (e) "one heart" (f) "but they"

Acts 4:32-37

Verse 32. And the multitude. The number of believers at this tune had become large. In Acts 4:4, it is said that it was five thousand; and the number was constantly increasing.

One heart. This expression denotes tender union. They felt alike, or were attached to the same things, and this preserved them from jars and dissensions.

One soul. This phrase also denotes close and tender union. No expression could denote it more strikingly than to say of friends they have one soul. Plutarch cites an ancient verse in his life of Cato of Utica, with this very expression, "Two friends, one soul." (Grotius.) Thus Diogenes Laertius also (5 i. 11) says respecting Aristotle, that "being asked what was a friend, answered, that it was one soul dwelling in two bodies." (Kuin�el.) The Hebrews spake of two friends as being "one man." There can be no more striking demonstration of union and love than to say of more than five thousand suddenly drawn together, that they had one soul! And this union they evinced in every way possible; in their conduct, in their prayers, and in their property. How different would have been the aspect of the church, if the union had continued to the present time!

Neither said, etc. That is, they did not regard it as their own, but to be used for the benefit of the whole society. Acts 2:44.

(e) "one heart" Rom 15:5,6, 2Cor 13:11, Php 2:2, 1Pet 3:8 (f) "but they" Acts 1:8 Verse 33. And with great power. See Ac 1:8. The word power here denotes efficacy; and means that they had ability given them to bear witness of the resurrection of the Saviour. It refers, therefore, rather to their preaching, than to their miracles.

Gave the apostles witness, etc. The apostles bore testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. This was the main point to be established. If it was proved that the Lord Jesus came to life again after having been put to death, it established all that he taught, and was a demonstration that he was sent from God. They exerted, therefore, all their powers to prove this; and their success was such as might have been expected. Multitudes were converted to the Christian faith.

And great grace, etc. The word grace means favour. Jn 1:16. And the expression here may mean either that the favour of God was remarkably shown to them, or that they had great favour in the sight of the people. It does not refer, as the expression now does commonly, to the internal blessings of religion on a man's own soul; to their personal advancement in the Christian graces of humility, etc.; but to the favour or success that attended their preaching. The meaning probably is, that the favour of the people towards them was great; or that great success attended their ministry among them. Thus the same word grace (Greek) is used in Acts 2:47. If this is its meaning, then here is an instance of the power of the testimony of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus to impress the minds of men. But this is not all, nor probably is it the main idea. It is that their union, their benevolence, their liberality in supplying the wants of the needy, was a means of opening the hearts of the people, and of winning them to the Saviour. If we wish to incline others to our opinions, or to bring them to be Christians, nothing is better adapted to it than to show them kindness, and even to minister to their temporal wants. Benevolence towards them softens the heart, and inclines them to listen to us. It disarms their prejudices, and disposes them to the exercise of the mild and amiable feelings of religion. Hence our Saviour was engaged in healing the diseases, and supplying the wants of the people. He drew around him the poor, the needy, and the diseased, and supplied their necessities, and thus prepared them to receive his message of truth. Thus God is love, and is constantly doing good, that his goodness may lead men to repentance, Rom 2:4. And hence no persons have better opportunities to spread the true sentiments of religion, or are clothed with higher responsibilities, than those who have it in their power to do good; or than those who are habitually engaged in bestowing favours. Thus physicians have access to the hearts of men which other persons have not. Thus parents have an easy access to the minds of children, for they are constantly doing them good. And thus Sunday-school teachers, whose whole work is a work of benevolence, have direct and most efficient access to the hearts of the children committed to their care.

(g) "power" Acts 1:8 (h) "witness of the resurrection" Lk 1:48,49, Acts 1:22 (i) "great grace" Jn 1:16 Verse 34. That lacked. That was in want; or whose wants were not supplied by the others.

As many as, etc. The word used here is employed in a large, indefinite sense; but it would be improper to press it so as to suppose that every individual that became a Christian sold at once all his property. The sense doubtless is, that this was done when it was necessary; they parted with whatever property was needful to supply the wants of their poor brethren. That it was by no means considered a matter of obligation, or enjoined by the apostles, is apparent from the case of Ananias, Acts 5:4. The fact that Joses is particularly mentioned, Acts 4:36, shows that it was by no means a universal practice thus to part with all their possessions. He was one instance in which it was done. Perhaps there were many other similar instances; but all that the passage requires us to believe is, that they parted with whatever was needful to supply the wants of the poor. This was an eminent and instructive instance of Christian liberality, and of the power of the gospel in overcoming one of the strongest passions that ever exist in the human bosom--the love of money. Many of the early Christians were poor. They were collected from the lower orders of the people. But all were not so. Some of them, it seems, were men of affluence. The effect of religion was to bring them all, in regard to feeling at least, on a level. They felt that they were members of one family; belonging to the same Redeemer; and they therefore imparted their property cheerfully to their brethren. Besides this, they were about to go to other lands to preach the gospel. They were to leave their native country; and they cheerfully parted with their lands, that they might go and proclaim the unsearchable riches of Christ. Acts 2:44.

(*) "lacked" "wanted" Verse 35. And laid them down, etc. That is, they committed the money received for their property to the disposal of the apostles, to distribute it as was necessary among the poor. This soon became a burdensome and inconvenient office, and they therefore appointed men who had especial charge of it, Acts 6:1,2, etc.

(a) "laid them down" Acts 4:37 (b) "distribution" Acts 2:45, 6:1 Verse 36. And Joses. Many manuscripts, instead of Joses, here read Joseph. The reasons why this individual is selected and specified particularly were, doubtless, because he was a foreigner; because it was a remarkable instance of liberality; and because he subsequently distinguished himself in the work of the ministry. He gave himself, his property, his all, to the service of the Lord Jesus, and went forth to the self-denying labours of the gospel. He is elsewhere mentioned with honour in the New Testament, Acts 11:24,30; and usually as the companion of the apostle Paul. The occasion on which he became connected with Paul in the ministry was, when he himself was sent forth by the church at Jerusalem to Antioch. There, it seems, he heard of the fame of Paul, and went to Tarsus to seek him, and brought him with him to Antioch, Acts 11:22-26. Before this, he had been acquainted with him, and had introduced him to the other apostles at a time when they were afraid of Paul, and unwilling to acknowledge him as an apostle, Acts 9:26,27. At Antioch, Barnabas was led into dissimulation by Peter in regard to the Gentiles, and was reproved by his friend and companion Paul, Gal 2:13. He and Paul continued to travel in fellowship until a dispute arose at Antioch about Mark; and they separated, Paul going with Silas through Syria and Cilicia, and Barnabas with Mark sailing for his native place, Cyprus, Acts 15:35-41. See the following places for particulars of his history: Acts 11:22,25,30, 12:25; Acts 13:1,2,50, 14:12, 15:12, 1Cor 9:6, Gal 2:1,9.

Who by the apostles was surnamed, etc. This name was doubtless given by the apostles. The practice of giving surnames, as expressive of character, was not uncommon. Thus Simon was called Peter, or Cephas, Jn 1:42; and thus James and John were surnamed Boanerges, Mk 3:17.

Barnabas, which is, etc. This word properly denotes the son of prophecy. It is compounded of two Syriac words, the one meaning son, and the other prophecy. The Greek word which is used to interpret this, παρακλησεως, translated consolation, means properly also, exhortation, entreaty, petition, or advocacy. It also means consolation, or solace; and from this meaning the interpretation has been given to the word Barnabas, but with evident impropriety. It does not appear that the name was bestowed on account of this; though it is probable that he possessed it in an eminent degree; but on account of his talent for speaking, or exhorting the people to holiness, and his success in preaching. Comp. Acts 11:23,24.

A Levite. One of the descendants of Levi, employed in the lower services of the temple. The whole tribe of Levi was set apart to the service of religion. It was divided into Priests and Levites. The three sons of Levi were Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. Of the family of Kohath. Aaron was descended, who was the first high priest, His eldest son succeeded him, and the remainder of his sons were priests.

All the others of the tribe of Levi were called Levites, and were employed in the work of the temple, in assisting the priests in performing sacred music, etc., Nu 3; De 12:18,19, 18:6-8; 1Chr 23:24.

Of the country of Cyprus. Cyprus is the largest island in the Mediterranean; an island extremely fertile, abounding in wine, honey, oil, wool, etc. It is mentioned in Acts 13:4, 15:39. The island is near to Cilicia, and is not far from the Jewish coast. It is mentioned by Dion Cassius, (lib. 68, 69,) that the Jews were very numerous in that island.--Clark.

Barnabas afterwards became, with Paul, a distinguished preacher to the Gentiles. It is worthy of remark, that both were born in heathen countries, though by descent Jews; and as they were trained in heathen lands, they were better fitted for their peculiar work. The case of Barnabas is that of a man who had property, who entered the ministry, and gave up all for the Lord Jesus. The great mass of ministers, like very many who have been distinguished in other professions, have been taken from the poor, and from humble ranks in life. But all have not been. Many have been wealthy, and have devoted all to Christ; and in regard to others, it is to be remarked, that a very considerable proportion of them could have gained more wealth in some other profession than they do in the ministry. The ministry is a work of self-denial; and none should enter it who are not prepared to devote all to the service of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Acts 5:1-10

CHAPTER 5

Verse 1. But a certain man. In the previous chapter, the historian had given an account of the eminent liberality and sincerity of the mass of early Christians, in being willing to give up their property to provide for the poor, and had mentioned the case of Barnabas as worthy of special attention. In this chapter he proceeds to mention a case, quite as striking, of insincerity and hypocrisy, and of the just judgment of God on those who were guilty of it. The case is a remarkable instance of the nature of hypocrisy, and goes to illustrate the art and cunning of the enemy of souls in attempting to corrupt the church, and to pervert the religion of the gospel. Hypocrisy consists in an attempt to imitate the people of God, or to assume the appearance of religion, in whatever form it may be manifested. In this case religion had been manifested by great self-denial and benevolence. The hypocrisy of Ananias consisted in attempting to imitate this appearance, and to impose in this way on the early Christians and on God.

With Sapphira his wife. With her concurrence, or consent. It was a matter of agreement between them, Acts 5:2,9.

Sold a possession. The word here used κτημα does not indicate whether this was land or some other property. In Acts 5:3, however, we learn that it was land that was sold; and the word here translated possession, is translated in the Syriac, Arabic, and the Latin Vulgate, land. The pretence for which this was sold was doubtless to have the appearance of religion. That it was sold could be easily known by the Christian society, but it might not be so easily known for how much it was sold. Hence the attempt to impose on the apostles. It is clear that they were not under obligation to sell their property. But having sold it for the purposes of religion, it became their duty, if they professed to devote the avails of it to God, to do it entirely, and without any reservation. Verse 2. And kept back. The word here used means, properly, to separate, to part; and then it means to separate surreptitiously or clandestinely for our own use a part of public property, as taxes, etc. It is used ut three times in the New Testament, Acts 5:3, Tit 2:10, where it is rendered purloining. Here it means that they secretly kept back a part, while professedly devoting all to God.

His wife also being privy to it. His wife knowing it, and evidently concurring in it.

And laid it at the apostles' feet. This was evidently an act professedly of devoting all to God. Comp. Acts 4:37, 5:8,9. That this was his profession, or pretence, is further implied in the fact that Peter charges him with having lied unto God, Acts 5:3,4.

(a) "brought a certain part" Acts 4:34,37 Verse 3. But Peter said, etc. Peter could have known this only by revelation. It was the manifest design of Ananias to deceive; nor was there any way of detecting him but by its being revealed to him by the Spirit of God. As it was an instance of enormous wickedness, and as it was very important to detect and punish the crime, it was made known to Peter directly by God.

Why hath Satan. Great deeds of wickedness in the Scripture are traced to the influence and temptation of Satan. Compare Lk 22:3; Jn 13:27. Especially is Satan called the father of lies, Jn 8:44,55. Comp. Gen 3:1-5. As this was an act of falsehood, or an attempt to deceive, it is with great propriety traced to the influence of Satan. The sin of Ananias consisted in his yielding to the temptation. Nowhere in the Bible are men supposed to be free from guilt, from the fact that they have been tempted to commit it. God requires them to resist temptation; and if they yield to it, they must be punished.

Filled thine heart. A man's heart or mind is full of a thing when he is intent on it; when he is strongly impelled to it; or when he is fully occupied with it. The expression here means, that he was strongly impelled or excited by Satan to this crime.

To lie to. To attempt to deceive. The deception which he meant to practise was to keep back a part of the price, while he pretended to bring the whole of it; thus tempting God, and supposing that he could not detect the fraud.

The Holy Ghost. τοπνευματοαγιον. The main inquiry here is, whether the apostle Peter intended to designate in this place the Third Person of the Trinity; or whether he meant to speak of God as God, without any reference to the distinction of persons; or to the Divine influence which inspired the apostles, without reference to the peculiar offices which are commonly ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Or, in other words, is there a distinction here recognised between the Father and the Holy Spirit? That there is will be apparent from the following considerations:

(1.) If no such distinction is intended, it is remarkable that Peter did not use the usual and customary name of God. It does not appear why he guarded it so carefully as to denote that this offence was committed against the Holy Ghost, and the Spirit of the Lord, Acts 5:9.

(2.) The name here used is the one employed in the Scriptures to designate the Third Person of the Trinity, as implying a distinction from the Father. See Mt 3:16, 1:18,20, 3:11, 12:32, 28:19, Mk 1:8; Mk 3:29, 12:36, Lk 12:10, Jn 14:26, 7:39, 20:22, Acts 4:8, 5:32, etc.

(3.) Peter intended, doubtless, to designate an offence as committed particularly against the Person, or Influence, by which he and the other apostles were inspired. Ananias supposed that he could escape detection: and the offence was one, therefore, against the Inspirer of the apostles. Yet that was the Holy Ghost as distinct from the Father. See Jn 14:16,17,26, 15:26, 16:7-11, 20:22. Comp. Acts 5:32. The offence, therefore, beeing against Him who was sent by the Father, who was appointed to a particular work, clearly supposes that the Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father.

(4.) A farther incidental proof of this may be found in the fact that the sin here committed was one of peculiar magnitude; so great as to be deemed worthy of the immediate and signal vengeance of God. Yet the sin against the Holy Ghost is uniformly represented to be of this description. Comp. Mt 12:31,32, Mk 3:28,29. As these sins evidently coincide in enormity, it is clear that the same class of sins is referred to in both places; or, in other words, the sin of Ananias was against the Third Person of the Trinity. Two remarks may be made here.

(1.) The Holy Ghost is a distinct Person from the Father and the Son; or, in other words, there is a distinction of some kind in the Divine Nature that may be denominated by the word person. This is clear from the fact that sin is said to have been committed against him; a sin which it was supposed could not be detected. Sin cannot be committed against an attribute of God, or an influence from God. We cannot lie unto an attribute, or against wisdom, or power, or goodness; nor can we lie unto an influence, merely, of the Most High. Sin is committed against a being, not against an attribute; and as a sin is here charged on Ananias against the Holy Ghost, it follows that the Holy Ghost has a personal existence; or there is such a distinction in the Divine Essence as that it may be proper to specify a sin as committed particularly against him. In the same way sin may be represented as committed peculiarly against the Father, when his name is blasphemed; when his dominion is denied; when his mercy in sending his Son is called in question. Sin may be represented as committed against the Son, when his atonement is denied, his Divinity assailed, his character derided, or his invitations slighted. And thus sin may be represented as committed against the Holy Ghost, when his office of renewing the heart, or sanctifying the soul, is called in question, or when his work is ascribed to some malign or other influence. See Mr 3:22-30. And as sin against the Son proves that he is in some sense distinct from the Father, so does sin against the Holy Ghost prove that in some sense he is distinct from the Father and the Son.

(2.) The Holy Ghost is Divine. This is proved, because he is represented here as being able to search the heart, and to detect insincerity and hypocrisy. Comp. Jer 17:10, 1Chr 28:9, 1Cor 2:10, "The Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God;" Rev 2:23. And he is expressly called God. Acts 5:4.

(b) "filled thine heart" Lk 22:3 (1) "to lie", "to deceive" (c) "to lie", Acts 5:9 (d) "keep back" Nu 30:2, De 23:21, Eccl 5:4 Verse 9. Whiles it remained. As long as it remained unsold. This place proves that there was an obligation imposed on the disciples to sell their property. They who did it, did it voluntarily; and it does not appear that it was done by all, or expected to be done by all.

And after it was sold, etc. Even after the property was sold, and Ananias had the money, still there was no obligation on him to de- vote it in this way. He had the disposal of it still. The apostle mentions this to show him that his offence was peculiarly aggravated. He was not compelled to sell his property; and he had not even the poor pretence that he was obliged to dispose of it, and was tempted to withhold it for his own use. It was all his, and might have been retained if he had chosen.

Thou hast not lied unto men. Unto men only; or, it is not your main and chief offence that you have attempted to deceive men. It is true that Ananias had attempted to deceive the apostles, and it is true also that this was a crime; but still, the principal magnitude of the offence was that he had attempted to deceive God. So small was his crime as committed against men, that it was lost sight of by the apostles; and the great, crowning sin of attempting to deceive God was brought fully into view. Thus David also saw his sin as committed against God to be so enormous, that he lost sight of it as an offence to man, and said, "Against thee, thee ONLY, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight," Ps 51:4.

But unto God. It has been particularly and eminently against God. This is true, because

(1.) he had professedly devoted it to God. The act, therefore, had express and direct reference to him.

(2.) It was an attempt to deceive him. It implied the belief of Ananias that God would not detect the crime, or see the motives of the heart.

(3.) It is the prerogative of God to judge Of sincerity and hypocrisy; and this was a case, therefore, which came under his special notice. Comp. Ps 139:1-4. The word God here is evidently used in its plain and obvious sense, as denoting the supreme Divinity; and the use of the word here shows that the Holy Ghost is Divine; and the whole passage demonstrates, therefore, one of the important doctrines of the Christian religion, that the Holy Ghost is distinct from the Father and the Son, and yet is Divine.

(e) "unto God" Ps 139:4 Verse 5. An Ananias hearing these words, etc. Seeing that his guilt was known; and being charged with the enormous crime of attempting to deceive God. he had not expected to be thus exposed; and it is clear that the exposure and the charge came upon him unexpectedly and terribly, like a bolt of thunder.

Fell down. Greek, Having fallen down.

Gave up the ghost. This is an unhappy translation. The original means simply, he expired, or he died. Mt 27:50. This remarkable fact may be accounted for in this way:

(1.) It is evidently to be regarded as a judgment of God for the sin of Ananias and his wife. It was not the act of Peter, but of God; and was clearly designed to show his abhorrence of this sin. Acts 5:11.

(2.) Though it was the act of God, yet it does not follow that it was not in connexion with the usual laws by which he governs men, or that he did not make use of natural means to do it. The sin was one of great aggravation. It was suddenly and unexpectedly detected. The fact that it was known--the solemn charge that he had lied unto God --struck him with horror, His conscience would reprove him for the enormity of his crime, and overwhelm him at the memory of his act of wickedness. These circumstances may be sufficient to account for this remarkable event. It has occurred in other cases that the consciousness of crime, or the fact of being suddenly detected, has given such a shock to the frame that it has never recovered from it. The effect commonly is that the memory of guilt preys secretly and silently upon the frame, until, worn out with the want of rest and peace, it sinks exhausted into the grave. But there have not been wanting instances where the shock has been so great as to destroy the vital powers at once, and plunge the wretched man, like Ananias, into eternity. It is not at all improbable that the shock in the case of Ananias was so great as at once to take his life.

Great fear came, etc. Such a striking and awful judgment on insincerity and hypocrisy was fitted to excite awful emotions among the people. Sudden death always does it; but sudden death in immediate connexion with crime is fitted much more deeply to affect the mind.

(f) "these words" Acts 5:10,11 (*) "gave up the ghost" "died" (a) "great fear" Ps 64:9 Verse 6. And the young men. The youth of the congregation; very probably young men who were in attendance as servants, or those whose business it was to attend on the congregation, and perform various offices when Christians celebrated their worship, (Mosheim.) The word used here sometimes denotes a servant. It is used also Acts 5:10, to denote soldiers, as they were commonly enlisted of the vigorous and young. The fact that they took up Ananias voluntarily, implies that they were accustomed to perform offices of servitude to the congregation.

Wound him up. It was the usual custom with the Jews to wind the body up in many folds of linen before it was buried; commonly also with spices, to preserve it from putrefaction. Jn 11:44. It may be asked why he was so soon buried; and especially why he was hurried away without giving information to his wife. In reply to this, it may be remarked,

(1.) that it does not appear from the narrative that it was known that Sapphira was privy to the transaction, or was near at hand, or even that he had a wife. Ananias came himself and offered the money; and the judgment fell at once on him.

(2.) It was customary among the ancient Persians to bury the body almost immediately after death, (Jahn;) and it seems probable that the Jews, when the body was not embalmed, imitated the custom. It would also appear that this was an ancient custom among the Jews. See Gen 23:19, 25:9, 35:29, 48:7, 1Kgs 13:30. Different nations differ in their customs in burying the dead; and there is no impropriety in committing a body soon after death to the tomb.

(3.) There might have been some danger of an excitement and tumult in regard to this scene, if the corpse had not soon been removed; and as no valuable purpose could be answered by delaying the burial, the body was decently committed to the dust.

(b) "wound him" Jn 19:40 Verse 7. And it was about the space, etc. As Sapphira had been no less guilty than her husband, so it was ordered, in the Providence of God, that the same judgment should come upon both. Verse 8. For so much. That is, for the sum which Ananias had presented. This was true, that this sum had been received for it; but it was also true that a larger sum had been received. It is as really a falsehood to deceive in this manner, as it would have been to have affirmed that they received much more than they actually did for the land. Falsehood consists in making an erroneous representation of a thing in any way for the purpose of deceiving. And this species is much more common than an open and bold lie, declaring what is in no sense true.

(+) "answered" "Said" Verse 9. Agreed together. Conspired, or laid a plan. From this, it seems that Sapphira was as guilty as her husband.

To tempt. To try; to endeavour to impose on, or to deceive; that is, to act as if the Spirit of the Lord could not detect the crime. They did this by trying to see whether the Spirit of God could detect hypocrisy.

At the door. Are near at hand. They had not yet returned. The dead were buried without the walls of cities; and this space of three hours, it seems, had elapsed before they returned from the burial.

Shall carry thee out. This passage shows that it was by Divine interposition or judgment that their lives were taken. The judgment was in immediate connexion with their crime, and was designed as an expression of the Divine displeasure.

If it be asked here, why Ananias and Sapphira were punished in this severe and awful manner, an answer may be found in the following considerations:

(1.) This was an atrocious crime; a deep and dreadful act of iniquity. It was committed knowingly, and without excuse, Acts 5:4. It was important that sudden and exemplary punishment should follow it, because the society of Christians was just then organized, and it was designed that it should be a pure society, and be regarded as a body of holy men. Much was gained by making this impression on the people, that sin could not be allowed in this new community, but would be detected and punished.

(2.) God has often, in a most solemn manner, showed his abhorrence of hypocrisy and insincerity. By awful declarations and fearful judgments he has declared his displeasure at it. In a particular manner no small part of the preaching of the Saviour was employed in detecting the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees, and denouncing heavy judgments on them. See Mt 23 throughout, for the most sublime and awful denunciation of hypocrisy anywhere to be found. Compare Mk 12:15; Lk 12:1, 1Timm 4:2, Job 8:13, 13:16, 15:34, 20:5, 36:13, Mt 7:5, Lk 11:44. In the very beginning of the Christian church, therefore, it was important, by a decided and awful act, to impress upon the church and the world the danger and guilt of hypocrisy. Well did the Saviour know that it would be one of the most insidious and deadly foes to the purity of the church; and at its very threshold, therefore, he set up this solemn warning to guard it; and laid the bodies of Ananias and Sapphira in the path of every hypocrite that would enter the church. If they enter and are destroyed, they cannot plead that they were not fully warned. If they practise iniquity in the church, they cannot plead ignorance of the fact that God intends to detect and punish them.

(3.) The apostles were just then establishing their authority. They claimed to be under the influence of inspiration. To establish that, it was necessary to show that they could know the views and motives of those who became connected with the church. If easily imposed on, it would go far to destroy their authority and their claim to infallibility. If they showed that they could detect hypocrisy, even where most artfully concealed, it would establish the Divine authority of their message. At the commencement of their work, therefore, they gave this decisive and most awful proof that they were under the guidance of an infallible Teacher.

(4.) This case does not stand alone in the New Testament. It is clear from other instances that the apostles had the power of punishing sinners, and that a violation of the commands of Christ was attended by sudden and fearful judgments. See 1Cor 11:30. See the case of Elymas the sorcerer, in Acts 13:8-11.

(5.) Neither does this event stand alone in the history of the world Acts of judgment sometimes occur as sudden and decided, in the Providence of God, as in this case. The profane man, the drunkard, the profligate is sometimes as suddenly stricken down as in this instance. Cases have not been uncommon where the blasphemer has been smitten in death with the curse on his lips; and God often thus comes forth in judgment to slay the wicked, and to show that there is a God that reigns in the earth. This narrative cannot be objected to as improbable until all such eases are disposed of; nor can this infliction be regarded as unjust, until all the instances where men die by remorse of conscience, or by the direct judgment of heaven, are proved to be unjust also.

In view of this narrative, we may remark,

(1.) that God searches the heart, and knows the purposes of the soul. Comp. Ps 139.

(2.) God judges the motives of men. It is not so much the external act, as it is the views and feelings by which it is prompted, that determines the character of the act.

(3.) God will bring forth sin that man may not be able to detect; or that may elude human justice. The day is coming when the secrets of all hearts shall be revealed, and God will reward every man according as his works shall be.

(4.) Fraud and hypocrisy will be detected. They are often revealed in this life. The Providence of God often lays them open to human view, and overwhelms the soul in shame at the guilt which was long concealed. But if not in this life, yet the day is coming when they will be disclosed, and the sinner shall stand revealed to an assembling universe.

(5.) We have here an illustration of the powers of conscience. If such was its overwhelming effect here, what will it be when all the crimes of the life shall be disclosed in the day of judgment, and when the soul shall sink to the woes of hell. Through eternity the conscience shall do its office; and these terrible inflictions shall go on from age to age, for ever and ever, in the dark world of hell.

(6.) We see here the guilt of attempting to impose on God in regard to property. There is no subject in which men are more liable to hypocrisy; none in which they are more apt to keep back a part. Christians professedly devote all that they have to God. They profess to believe that God has a right to the silver and the gold, and the cattle on a thousand hills, Ps 50:10. Their property, as well as their bodies and their spirits, they have devoted to him; and profess to desire to employ it as he shall direct and please. And yet, is it not clear that the sin of Ananias has not ceased in the church? How many professing Christians there are who give nothing really to God; who contribute nothing for the poor and needy; who give nothing, or next to nothing, to any purposes of benevolence; who would devote "millions" for their own gratification, and their families, but not a penny for "tribute" to God. The case of Ananias is to all such a case of most fearful warning. And on no point should Christians more faithfully examine themselves than in regard to the professed devotion of their property to God. If God punished this sin in the beginning of the Christian church, he will do it still in its progress; and in nothing have professed Christians more to fear the wrath of God than on this very subject.

(7.) Sinners should fear and tremble before God. He holds their breath in his hands, he can cut them down in an instant. The bold blasphemer, the unjust, the liar, the scoffer, he can destroy in a moment, and sink them in all the woes of hell. Nor have they security that he will not do it. The profane man has no evidence that he will live to finish the curse which he has begun; nor the drunkard, that he will again become sober; nor the seducer, that God will not arrest him in his act of wickedness, and send him down to hell! The sinner walks over his grave, and over hell! In an instant he may die, and be summoned to the judgment-seat of God! How awful it is to sin in a world like this; and how fearful the doom which must soon overtake the ungodly.

(d) "fell she down" Actst 5:5 (&) "straitway" "immediately" (+) "ghost" "expired"