Acts 5 starts innocently enough. Barnabus's and others generosity spills over to a married couple, Ananias and Sapphira. Read Acts 5:1-2 and compare it to 4:36-37. What are the similarities and what is the difference between Barnabus and Ananias and Sapphira?

It seems to me that this is a crucial point to understand this narrative. Explore why Barnabus and A and S engage in such activity? Are they coerced? Are they told that it is essential? What would be the results within the gathering of these messianic Jews for one who sold property and gave it to the Apostles? What does it say about Barnabus that he gave it all to the Apostles for distribution, but that A and S held some back? Must they give it all? Why would they hold some back? What would be the benefits of this to them? Have they been told that they can't hold any back?

Verses 3-4 depict Ananias bringing the funding from his sale to Peter and Peter's response. If you notice, Ananias never speaks in the whole passage. Why does Peter ask everything in the form of questions until the very end? What offends Peter about Ananias? Where did the sin take place in Ananias? What was the behavioral consequence of this sin? Since Ananias never really says anything, how is it that he has "lied"? Why is lying such a grave sin amidst those gathered in the name of the Messiah by the Spirit?

Verses 5-6 give the result of the encounter. Is the death ascribed to the Spirit or Peter? What does this tell you? What has happened to Ananias? Why would he die?

Verses 7-11 tell the followup story with Sapphira -- v. 7 gives the interval of 3 hours. Notice the difference here in Peter's questioning and the fact that Sapphira has a voice here Ananias did not. In v. 8, what is Peter giving her the opportunity to do? How is it that A and S "tempted the Holy Spirit of the Lord" by their conspiracy? Why is Peter more harsh to her than to Ananias (note v. 9)?

Verses 10-11 give the results of this encounter. Again, is the agency of Saphira's death given? Why is it that "great fear fell upon the whole church"? Is this fear a good thing or a bad thing? What does it tell you that this story belongs at the origins of our story as a congregation? What is the appropriate role of fear within the church?

Why does membership in a congregation, even in engaging in its good works, bear with it a potential for danger? What is the importance of the proper inner virtue for engaging in the acts and works of the congregation in participating in the kingdom of God through acts of mercy such as Ananias and Saphira did? What can acts of mercy shield one from and become a pretense for? Finally, why is honesty in these transactions so important for the witness of the ccongregation?

Finally, discuss the implications of the fact that not all those embedded within the central life and mission of the church had the right motives/inner virtues and this affected the visible witness of the church, especially to those within. What does it tell you about the church that such an event happened even in its very origins? Does this discredit what God has done in gathering these people together as witnesses to the kingdom? Are the other members of the community the focus of the commitment of those whom God has gathered? What is, and what must be, to sustain the on-going participation with such a group?

Enjoy the discussion!!