historical perspectives: from the hasmoneans to bar kokhba in light ...

COMMUNITY OF GOODS 157
her husband, here in the sale of the land and, in the next verse, in
keeping back part of the sum realized by the sale. Her collaboration
was not simply moral but also legal, and necessarily so, as she
would have had a vested interest in her husband's property, part of
which would have been secured to her by her marriage contract. 19
V. 2 contains the heart of the problem: "Ananias—with the consent
also of his wife—embezzled some of the price and bringing a part
laid it at the feet of the apostles." The Greek word translated here
as "embezzled," which is repeated by Peter in v. 3, is
In hellenistic Greek the word occurs "not infrequently" and
implies: a) that the theft was secret, b) that the object stolen was
part of a larger sum, and c) usually, that the property stolen had
been entrusted to the thief for safe-keeping and good management,
so, typically, the property of a minor embezzled by a guardian, royal
funds embezzled by ministers or agents, public funds by state officials,
sacred vessels by the high priest, public trust funds by the trustees,
the spoils of war. 20
All commentators point out that the same word is used also in
LXXJosh. 7:1-26 of Achan, who took some of the spoils of Jericho
that had been vowed to the Lord, that is to destruction, and so
brought a curse upon the Israelites that was lifted only when the
culprit was discovered and stoned to death. The parallel between
Ananias and Achan is, however, far from perfect. Not only is Ananias
punished directly by God, but, even more important, the two crimes
are not at all the same. Achan took something of what had never
been his, and which already belonged to the Lord. On the other
hand, as Peter makes clear in v. 4, the land belonged to Ananias,
and even after he had sold it, the money obtained was still his. How
can he be said to have "embezzled" part of the price?
Peter in VV. 3-4 accuses Ananias of "deceiving the Holy Spirit"
and of "lying not to men but to God"; in v. 8 he asks Sapphira if
she and her husband had received "this amount" for the land, and
on receiving an affirmative answer, accuses them of "putting the
Spirit of the Lord to the test." Commentators therefore generally
infer—for it is never clearly stated—that the crime of Ananias and
19 Thus J. D. M. Derrett, "Ananias, Sapphira and the Right of Property," in his
Studies in the New Testament, vol. 2 (Leiden: Brill, 1977), 193-201, esp. 195f.; see also
I. R. Reimer, Women in the Acts of the Apostles: A Feminist Liberation Perspective (Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1995), 1-29.
20 Lake and Cadbury, Beginnings of Christianity, 4.50, with references.