It was an exciting new movement and they wanted to be a part, but it was risky. The leadership was questionable, following could be dangerous, and--at some point--they may have to run. "Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. With his wife's full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles' feet." Acts 5:1-2 We find this passage of scripture at a time where the brand new Church is beginning to build. A newly repented Peter and the apostles, fresh from the Day of Pentecost, are re-invigorated and ready to begin their ministries to preach Christ to the world. If we look back at Acts 4:32, we see: "All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions were his own, but they shared everything they had." This was a new Church, yes, but their hearts were driven by the Lord. They were very clear on their mission and that unity was paramount. "Then Peter said, 'Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you have received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God. Wow. That passage is heavy. At first reading it may seem very heavy-handed. And to be honest, it feels a bit unfair and perhaps, disjointed. Does the punishment fit the crime? And what are the implications of not giving all our money to the Church? Perhaps we can gain some insight from looking at 1 Samuel 16:7b: "People look at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart." Could it be that while man would look at Ananias & Sapphira's decision as merely a lapse in good judgment, the Lord saw into their innermost parts, their deepest thoughts? Could it be that He saw that they were only half-heartedly committed at best, or--worse--not committed at all? Could it be that He saw that when the going got rough for the Church {and OH! Was it ever about to get rough}, Ananias and Sapphira would flee, taking with them the money they'd secretly squirreled away, leaving the others in the lurch? This may not be the case, but we do know that the Lord requires us to be all in or all out (Revelation 3:16). We know that He requires believers to be ready to go the distance, no matter how difficult (Matthew 16:24). Could it be that truly following after the Lord requires sacrifice and selflessness and Ananias and Sapphira's actions showed neither? Jesus Himself said this: "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God." Matthew 19:24 Could it be that when we're rich {whether it's with money, talents, or resources} we're stingy because we're looking out for "number one" instead of looking toward "The One"? Could it be that we only "half commit" because we're keeping one foot in the world and one foot in the Kingdom? Could it be that we keep a "fail-safe" in place for when things get rough? And where would we be if Christ was only half-committed? God requires total obedience; a complete giving over of selves when we commit to Him (Romans 12:1). The truth is, we don't fully know or understand why God chose to deal with Ananias and Sapphira the way He did. What we do know is that they can be an example to us as to being upfront and honest with The Holy Spirit. Allow their mistake to be wisdom gleaned as to commitment. To end, I'm including the video of Steven Curtis Chapman's song "Burn The Ships". I {Mandy} think it ties in very well with the theme of committing fully and never looking back. **Today we observe Memorial Day and honor those who gave all. We at Deliberate Women honor and remember those in our Armed Forces who committed whole-heartedly and gave the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
FREE Download!Archives
October 2017
|