Ananias and Sapphira
1 But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property,
2 and kept back some of the proceeds for himself, with his wife’s full knowledge, and bringing a portion, laid it at the apostles’ feet.
3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the proceeds of the land?
4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.”
5 And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came upon all who heard of it.
6 And the young men got up and wrapped him up, and carried him out and buried him.
7 Now there was an interval of about three hours, and his wife came in, not knowing what had happened.
8 And Peter responded to her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for such and such a price.” And she said, “Yes, for that price.”
9 Then Peter said to her, “Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out as well.”
10 And immediately she fell at his feet and breathed her last. And the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband.
11 And great fear came upon the whole church and upon all who heard of these things.
The placement of this story is deliberate. It follows immediately after the positive example of Barnabas (4:36–37), who sold his land and gave the full amount. Ananias and Sapphira are the dark mirror image. Luke presents both because his portrait of the early church is honest: the community produced both extraordinary generosity and calculated deception. The church is not a utopia; it is a community of real people under the Spirit’s power, which makes the stakes of dishonesty correspondingly higher.
ἐνοσφίσατο (enosphisato) — v.2: “Kept back” — the verb νοσφίζομαι (nosphizomai) means to embezzle, to misappropriate, to secretly keep back what belongs to another. The same word is used in the Septuagint of Joshua 7:1 for Achan’s theft from the devoted things after the conquest of Jericho. The parallel is exact and deliberate: Achan secretly kept back what was devoted to God and brought judgment on the whole community; Ananias secretly keeps back what he publicly claimed to give. In both cases, the sin is not simple theft but deception within a consecrated community — contamination of the holy.
v.3: Peter’s diagnosis is precise: “Satan filled your heart.” The language echoes John 13:2, where “the devil had already put into the heart of Judas” to betray Jesus. The parallel with Judas is not accidental — both involve financial deception within the community of Jesus’s followers, and both names (Ananias = “God is gracious”; Judas = “praise”) are bitterly ironic. But Peter’s question “why has Satan filled your heart?” also implies agency: Ananias allowed this to happen. Satan’s influence does not eliminate human responsibility.
v.4: This verse is crucial for understanding the nature of the sin. Peter makes explicitly clear that giving was voluntary: “While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal?” There was no obligation to sell the property. There was no obligation to give the full amount. The sin was not in keeping some of the money; the sin was in pretending to give all of it while secretly withholding a portion. The sin is deception — lying to God and to the community. It is the first recorded act of hypocrisy in the church.
v.4: “You have not lied to men but to God” — Peter equates lying to the Holy Spirit (v.3) with lying to God (v.4). This is one of the earliest implicit affirmations of the deity of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament: the Spirit to whom Ananias lied is God.
ἐξέψυξεν (exepsyxen) — v.5: “Breathed his last” — literally “breathed out,” “expired.” The verb ἐκψύχω (ekpsychō) appears only three times in the New Testament, all in Acts (5:5, 5:10, 12:23). Luke does not say Peter killed Ananias or that God struck him down; he simply says Ananias heard the words and died. The mechanism is left unexplained. This is not a curse or a punishment pronounced by Peter; it is a consequence. The text is spare and terrible: he heard, he fell, he died.
v.7: The three-hour gap is agonizing in retrospect. Sapphira arrives not knowing what has happened. Peter gives her a chance to tell the truth: “Did you sell the land for such and such a price?” It is a lifeline. She could have said no, we kept some back. She chooses to maintain the lie. The test is simple and the opportunity for honesty is explicit. She fails it.
πειράσαι τὸ πνεῦμα κυρίου (peirasai to pneuma kyriou) — v.9: “To put the Spirit of the Lord to the test” — πειράζω (peirazō) means to test, to try the limits of. Ananias and Sapphira’s act was a test of whether the Spirit would notice, whether God could be deceived. The presumption is staggering: they assumed they could lie to the Holy Spirit and get away with it. Peter names the sin not as greed but as testing God — the same sin Israel committed in the wilderness (Exodus 17:2, Deuteronomy 6:16), the same sin the devil attempted with Jesus (Luke 4:12). It is the sin of treating God as though he were not really there.
ἐκκλησίαν (ekklēsian) — v.11: This is the first use of the word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia, “church”) in Acts. It will become Luke’s standard term for the community. The word originally meant “assembly” — the gathering of citizens called out (ἐκ + καλέω, “called out from”) for public business. In the Septuagint it translates the Hebrew קָהָל (qahal), the assembly of Israel. That Luke first uses this word in the context of divine judgment is striking: the church is constituted not only by the Spirit’s joy (chapter 2) but by the Spirit’s holiness (chapter 5). The community is not just warm; it is dangerous. The presence of God is not only comforting; it is consuming.
Signs and Wonders Among the People
12 And at the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were taking place among the people; and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s Portico.
13 But none of the rest dared to associate with them; however, the people held them in high esteem.
14 And all the more believers in the Lord, multitudes of men and women, were constantly being added to their number,
15 to such an extent that they even carried the sick out into the streets and laid them on cots and pallets, so that when Peter came by, at least his shadow might fall on any of them.
16 And the people from the cities in the vicinity of Jerusalem were coming together, bringing the sick and those afflicted with unclean spirits, and they were all being healed.
v.12: Solomon’s Portico remains the church’s public meeting place (cf. 3:11). The apostles are still operating in the temple precincts, in full public view. The “signs and wonders” (σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα) recall the language of 2:43 and echo the exodus narrative, where God performed “signs and wonders” through Moses (Exodus 7:3, Deuteronomy 6:22). The apostles are presented as the new Moses-figures, mediating God’s power in the new exodus.
v.13: A fascinating tension. “None of the rest dared to associate with them” — the Ananias and Sapphira incident has created a boundary. People are awed but also afraid. The community’s holiness is both attractive and terrifying. This is not the modern image of a welcoming, comfortable church; it is a community crackling with the presence of God, and outsiders approach with reverence and caution. Yet simultaneously, “believers were constantly being added” (v.14). The fear and the growth coexist. The holiness that repels casual association intensifies genuine conversion.
κἂν ἡ σκιὰ ἐπισκιάσῃ (kan hē skia episkiasē) — v.15: “At least his shadow might fall on any of them” — Luke reports the people’s hope without explicitly endorsing or correcting it. The belief that a holy person’s shadow carried healing power was widespread in the ancient world and has parallels in Jesus’s ministry (the woman who touched his garment, Mark 5:28). Luke neither says Peter’s shadow healed anyone nor says it didn’t. He reports the phenomenon: the reputation of the apostles was so extraordinary that people brought the sick into the streets hoping for even incidental contact. The detail conveys the scale and intensity of what was happening.
v.16: The geographic radius is expanding. People are now coming from the towns around Jerusalem — the first hint of the movement from Jerusalem to “all Judea” (1:8). The summary “they were all being healed” (οἵτινες ἐθεραπεύοντο ἅπαντες) is comprehensive: not some, but all. The healings authenticate the message and demonstrate that the power of Jesus’s earthly ministry continues undiminished through his apostles.
The Apostles Arrested and Freed
17 But the high priest rose up, along with all his associates (that is, the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy.
18 They laid hands on the apostles and put them in a public jail.
19 But during the night an angel of the Lord opened the doors of the prison, and leading them out, said,
20 “Go, stand in the temple and speak to the people all the words of this Life.”
21 And upon hearing this, they entered the temple at daybreak and began to teach. Now when the high priest and his associates came, they called the Sanhedrin together, even the full senate of the sons of Israel, and sent orders to the prison to have them brought.
22 But the officers who came did not find them in the prison; and they returned and reported,
23 saying, “We found the prison locked quite securely and the guards standing at the doors; but when we opened them, we found no one inside.”
24 Now when the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these words, they were greatly perplexed about them as to what would come of this.
25 But someone came and reported to them, “The men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people!”
26 Then the captain went along with the officers and brought them back without violence, for they were afraid of the people, that they might be stoned.
ζήλου (zēlou) — v.17: “Jealousy” — ζῆλος (zēlos) can mean zeal or jealousy. In this context it carries the sense of professional resentment: the apostles are commanding the crowds, performing miracles, and teaching in the temple — all of which the priestly establishment considered their prerogative. The Sadducees are not just theologically offended by the resurrection preaching; they are institutionally threatened by the apostles’ growing authority.
v.18: This time it is not just Peter and John but “the apostles” — apparently all or most of the Twelve. The escalation from chapter 4 is clear: the first arrest took two apostles; the second takes them all.
τὰ ῥήματα τῆς ζωῆς ταύτης (ta rhēmata tēs zōēs tautēs) — v.20: “All the words of this Life” — the angel’s instruction calls the gospel “this Life” (τῆς ζωῆς ταύτης). The message is not a doctrine or a theology or a philosophy; it is a Life. The word ζωή (zōē) carries the full resonance of eternal, God-sourced life. The angel releases them from prison and sends them straight back to the temple to preach — exactly the place where they were arrested. The instruction is not “hide” or “flee” but “stand and speak.”
vv.22–25: The scene has an almost comic quality. The Sanhedrin assembles in full session (“the full senate of the sons of Israel” — Luke emphasizes the completeness of the assembly), sends officers to the prison, and receives the bewildered report: the doors are locked, the guards are standing at their posts, but the cells are empty. While the council processes this impossible report, someone arrives with the news that the prisoners are standing in the temple teaching publicly. The juxtaposition is absurd: the most powerful legal body in the nation is assembled to try men who have already left prison and resumed the activity they were arrested for.
v.26: The officers bring the apostles back “without violence” because they fear the people might stone them — the officers, not the apostles. The power dynamics have inverted: the authorities are afraid of the people, and the people support the apostles. The Sanhedrin’s institutional authority is becoming disconnected from popular sentiment.
The Apostles Before the Sanhedrin
27 When they had brought them, they stood them before the Sanhedrin. The high priest questioned them,
28 saying, “We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.”
29 But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.
30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging him on a tree.
31 He is the one whom God exalted to his right hand as Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
32 And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”
33 But when they heard this, they were cut to the quick and intended to kill them.
v.28: The high priest’s complaint is revealing on two levels. First, “you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching” — the Sanhedrin’s own words confirm the success of the mission. Jerusalem has been saturated with the gospel. Second, “you intend to bring this man’s blood upon us” — the high priest cannot even bring himself to say the name of Jesus (“this name,” “this man’s blood”). The reference to blood echoes the crowd’s own cry at Jesus’s trial: “His blood be on us and on our children” (Matthew 27:25). The Sanhedrin, which presided over the crucifixion, is now desperately trying to avoid the consequences of what they did.
πειθαρχεῖν δεῖ θεῷ μᾶλλον ἢ ἀνθρώποις (peitharchein dei theō mallon ē anthrōpois) — v.29: “We must obey God rather than men” — this sharpens Peter’s earlier statement in 4:19. There it was a question: “Whether it is right to listen to you rather than to God, you be the judges.” Here it is a declaration: we must (δεῖ, dei — the word of divine necessity) obey God. The rhetorical question has become a settled principle. The verb πειθαρχέω (peitharchēō) means to obey one in authority, to submit to a ruler. Peter is saying: God is the authority we answer to, and his command outranks yours.
κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου (kremasantes epi xylou) — v.30: “Hanging him on a tree” — the phrase “hanging on a tree” (ξύλον, xylon, “wood” or “tree”) deliberately echoes Deuteronomy 21:22–23: “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.” Peter is using the most provocative language available to describe the crucifixion: you hung him on a tree, making him cursed under the Law. And God raised this cursed man to his right hand. Paul will later develop this theology extensively in Galatians 3:13: Christ became a curse for us. But Peter plants the seed here: the shame of the cross is stated in its full legal and theological force.
ἀρχηγὸν καὶ σωτῆρα (archēgon kai sōtēra) — v.31: “Prince and Savior” — ἀρχηγός (archēgos) is the same word used in 3:15 (“Author of life”). Here paired with σωτήρ (sōtēr, “Savior”), it creates a double title: Jesus is the originator/pioneer and the deliverer. God exalted the man they cursed to the highest possible position in order to give Israel repentance and forgiveness. The gift of repentance is striking: repentance itself is not a human achievement but something God gives through the exalted Jesus. Even the ability to turn back is a grace.
v.32: Peter names two witnesses: “we” (the apostles, eyewitnesses of the resurrection) and “the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.” The Spirit is presented as a co-witness — the ongoing, living evidence that Jesus is exalted. The Spirit’s presence in the community is itself testimony. And the condition for receiving the Spirit is stated simply: obedience.
διεπρίοντο (dieprionto) — v.33: “Cut to the quick” — διαπρίω (diapriō) means to saw through, to be sawn apart with fury. It is a visceral word describing rage so intense it feels like physical pain. At Pentecost, the crowd was “pierced to the heart” (κατενύγησαν, 2:37) and asked “what shall we do?” Here the Sanhedrin is “sawn apart” and wants to kill. The same message produces opposite reactions depending on the condition of the heart.
Gamaliel’s Counsel
34 But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the Law respected by all the people, stood up in the Council and gave orders to put the men outside for a short time.
35 And he said to them, “Men of Israel, take care what you are about to do with these men.
36 For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a group of about four hundred men joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing.
37 After this man, Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census and drew away people after him; he too perished, and all who followed him were scattered.
38 So in the present case, I tell you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this work is of human origin, it will be overthrown;
39 but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them — or else you may even be found fighting against God.”
40 They took his advice; and after calling the apostles in, they had them flogged and ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and then released them.
41 So they went on their way from the presence of the Sanhedrin, rejoicing that they had been considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name.
42 And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they did not cease teaching and proclaiming Jesus as the Messiah.
v.34: Gamaliel is one of the most significant figures in Jewish history. He was a leading Pharisee, the grandson (or possibly son) of the great Rabbi Hillel, and the head of one of the two major rabbinic schools. The Mishnah (Sotah 9:15) says of him: “When Rabban Gamaliel the Elder died, the glory of the Torah ceased.” Paul identifies himself as Gamaliel’s student (Acts 22:3). His intervention here is historically plausible: as a respected Pharisee, he would have had standing to address the Sadducee-dominated council, and the Pharisees’ belief in resurrection would have made them more sympathetic to the apostles’ message than the Sadducees were.
vv.36–37: Gamaliel cites two failed messianic movements. Theudas led a revolt that was crushed; Judas the Galilean led a tax revolt during the census of AD 6 that was also suppressed. There is a well-known chronological difficulty here: Josephus dates Theudas’s revolt to approximately AD 44–46, which would be after this speech. Various explanations have been proposed: Josephus may have the wrong Theudas (the name was common), Gamaliel may be referring to a different Theudas, or there may be a minor historical error in either Josephus or Luke. The point of Gamaliel’s argument does not depend on the chronological sequence: failed movements collapse on their own.
θεομάχοι (theomachoi) — v.39: “Fighting against God” — the compound word θεομάχος (theomachos, “God-fighter”) is powerful and rare. It appears in Greek literature for those who oppose the divine will — a category of hubris that Greek culture regarded as the ultimate folly. Gamaliel is not endorsing the Christian movement; he is advising caution. His argument is prudential, not theological: if it’s human, it will fail; if it’s divine, you can’t stop it, and trying will put you on the wrong side of God. The wisdom is real but limited — it is a “wait and see” that avoids committing either way. History will vindicate the apostles, but Gamaliel himself, as far as we know, never became a follower of Jesus.
v.40: The council accepts Gamaliel’s advice — but not without violence. They flog the apostles before releasing them. This would have been the standard synagogue punishment of thirty-nine lashes (the “forty minus one” of 2 Corinthians 11:24, administered with a three-stranded whip). It was painful, humiliating, and left physical marks. The Sanhedrin compromises: they don’t kill the apostles, but they do beat them. The prohibition against speaking in Jesus’s name is restated, exactly as in 4:18. It will be ignored, exactly as it was before.
κατηξιώθησαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος ἀτιμασθῆναι (katēxiōthēsan hyper tou onomatos atimasthēnai) — v.41: “Considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name” — the paradox is extraordinary. Καταξιόω means “to deem worthy,” “to count deserving.” The apostles have just been flogged — beaten, bleeding, humiliated — and their response is joy. They consider the beating an honor. The inversion of values is total: shame has become glory, punishment has become privilege. “The Name” (τοῦ ὀνόματος) is used absolutely, without specifying whose name — for the early church, there was only one Name that mattered.
v.42: The chapter’s final verse is the quiet punchline. After arrest, imprisonment, miraculous release, re-arrest, flogging, and threats, the apostles do exactly what they have been doing all along: they teach and proclaim Jesus as the Messiah, every day, in the temple and in homes. Nothing has changed. The Sanhedrin has used every tool it has — threats, imprisonment, violence — and the preaching continues without interruption. The chapter ends where it began: with the word going out.
General Notes on the Chapter
Acts 5 presents the early church under pressure from two directions simultaneously: internal corruption (Ananias and Sapphira) and external persecution (the Sanhedrin). Luke’s willingness to narrate both is one of the strongest arguments for the historical honesty of Acts. A purely propagandistic account would omit the Ananias and Sapphira story; a purely triumphalist one would soften the violence of the flogging. Luke includes both because both are true, and both reveal something essential about the nature of the Spirit-filled community.
The Ananias and Sapphira episode is the most theologically disturbing passage in Acts. The severity of the judgment — instant death for lying about a donation — has troubled readers since the early church. But the story’s function in the narrative is clear: it establishes that the presence of the Holy Spirit in the community is not merely comforting but holy. The God who heals the lame and fills believers with joy is the same God who will not tolerate deception within his people. The Achan parallel from Joshua makes the logic explicit: contamination of the holy community endangers the whole community, and God acts to preserve the community’s integrity. The “great fear” that falls on everyone (v.5, v.11) is not terror but awe — the recognition that God is genuinely present and that his presence has consequences.
Gamaliel’s counsel (vv.34–39) is one of the most famous passages in Acts, and it has been cited for two thousand years as a model of wise restraint. But Luke’s presentation is subtly double-edged. Gamaliel’s argument is sound as far as it goes: human movements do collapse, and divine movements cannot be stopped. But the argument is also a way of avoiding a decision. Gamaliel counsels patience, but patience can be a form of evasion. The reader knows what Gamaliel does not yet know (or will not yet commit to): this movement is of God, and the appropriate response is not cautious observation but faith. Gamaliel’s wisdom is real, but it is not enough. It keeps the council from committing murder, which is good. It does not lead Gamaliel to commit to Christ, which is the invitation the gospel extends.
The apostles’ joy after being flogged (v.41) is perhaps the most counter-cultural moment in the chapter. They have been beaten by the highest court in their nation for doing what God told them to do, and they walk away rejoicing. This is not masochism or performance; it is the deep conviction that suffering for Jesus’s sake is a privilege. The logic comes from Jesus himself: “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you ... on account of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great” (Matthew 5:11–12). The apostles are living the Beatitudes.