Acts (Written)

Gracie Loretta Williams York

Wednesday, 9 February 2022

But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. Acts 5:1

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

Acts 5 now records a rather negative incident in the development of the early church. It is an event that somewhat contrasts that of the account of Barnabas. Introducing such a negative incident at an early point like this was also not uncommon to the giving of the Mosaic Covenant. Two specific instances, that of a Sabbath breaker and that of a blasphemer, are recorded (see Leviticus 24:10-23 and Numbers 15:32-36).

Even before looking into the coming account, it should be remembered that it is descriptive in nature. It prescribes nothing concerning the handling of such matters. Further, what occurs is obviously not normative. We cannot expect that the same outcome will occur every time a comparable event happens.

One of the most common questions concerning the two that are about to be introduced is, “Were these saved believers?” Although it is impossible to say because the Lord alone reads the hearts of man. The answer leans very heavily in the direction of “Yes, they were saved believers.” The account would have little reason to be included otherwise. Instead of the outcome, one would think the matter would have been handled in a different way.

The point isn’t that unbelievers had wormed their way into the church, but that the heart of man, which is desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17:9), can work against the purposes of the church when it is not focused on what is right and proper. The epistles are well marked with such people or with warnings of such attitudes. Their words refer to, or serve as warnings to, saved believers who walk in the flesh and not in the Spirit.

With that, the verse and the chapter begin with, “But a certain man.” The Greek word de is a conjunction that is added to statements opposed to a preceding statement. It can be translated as “and,” “but,” “now,” and so on. Regardless of the translation, it is a way of setting this account as a contrast to the previous one. Of this certain man, it says he was “named Ananias.”

This is a transliteration of a common Hebrew name, Khananyah. That comes from khanan, meaning to show favor, or be gracious, and Yah, which is a contracted form of Yehovah, the Lord. Thus, the name means, “Yah has been gracious.” He is noted along “with Sapphira his wife.”

Her name is derived from the Hebrew word sappir, a sapphire. That is derived from saphar, to count or recount. The reason for this may be that the sapphire is an especially hard stone that may have been used to scratch other substances. As such, a tally could be made when counting. As she is the wife of Ananias, the account demonstrates that deceit of the heart can be something that spreads to others. It is not something isolated when it has its influencing effects. As such, it says that they, husband and wife, together “sold a possession.”

The word signifies something belonging to the individual, as if landed property, a personal possession, and so on. It will be noted as land in verses 3 and 7. The point is that it was under their authority, and they had the right to do with it whatever they wished. In this case, they wished to sell it, and so that is what they did.

Life application: Whether Ananias and Sapphira were saved or not can be argued over until the second coming, but what should not be at all debatable is whether this account is to be taken in a prescriptive manner or not. If it were, the number of dead bodies of those in the church would fill every generation, even to overflowing. In fact, the church would never get anywhere if the Spirit took out every person whose heart went astray.

The point isn’t that we can expect to keel over if we have deceit well up in our hearts. Rather, the point is that the Lord is aware of our hearts. He knows the motives behind our actions, and He is there with His people in their struggles of this life. David was guilty of no less a crime than what these two will be seen to have done. He coveted another man’s wife, he took her, and he then had that man killed to cover over his actions.

The Bible doesn’t hide the faults and failings of the people it highlights. Rather, it highlights those faults and failings along with them. In this, we should see our own shortcomings and recalibrate our lives and actions to work in accord with, not opposed to, the will of the Lord. Accepting the premise that these two were probably saved brings the account into a much more personal nature for those who are willing to admit their own failings.

Heavenly Father, Your word is like a mirror on our own lives. The faults and failings of each of us are highlighted through those we read about, because they share in the same human limitations that we do. Thank You that we can see our own weaknesses, and then see how to rise above them by applying the lessons You have provided. And above all, thank You for the grace and mercy we receive, even when we fail You. Amen.

Sgt York’s best Friend.

Tuesday, 8 February 2022

having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet. Acts 4:37

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

This is now the final verse of Chapter 4. The previous verse introduced Joses, also named Barnabas. It noted he was a Levite from Cyprus. Of him, it next says, “having land, sold it.” The word translated as “land” signifies a field, particularly a field that produces a crop.

Of this event, Bengel notes, “This must have been outside of the land of Israel, in which the Levites had no portion.” This is incorrect. He is basing this on this provision of the law –

“The priests, the Levites—all the tribe of Levi—shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and His portion. ² Therefore they shall have no inheritance among their brethren; the Lord is their inheritance, as He said to them.” Deuteronomy 18:1, 2

This is stated several times and in various ways within the law. Its meaning is not that Levites would own no property within Israel, but that the tribe of Levi would have no allocation of land within Israel. The land was divided up among the other tribes, and then Levitical cities were interspersed throughout those divisions.

However, the provisions of the law allowed for anyone to buy and sell the land. It was just not to pass between tribes permanently. An example of those of Levi (specifically the priests) owning their own land is found in Jeremiah –

“And Jeremiah said, ‘The word of the Lord came to me, saying, ⁷ ‘Behold, Hanamel the son of Shallum your uncle will come to you, saying, “Buy my field which is in Anathoth, for the right of redemption is yours to buy it.”’ ⁸ Then Hanamel my uncle’s son came to me in the court of the prison according to the word of the Lord, and said to me, ‘Please buy my field that is in Anathoth, which is in the country of Benjamin; for the right of inheritance is yours, and the redemption yours; buy it for yourself.’ Then I knew that this was the word of the Lord.” Jeremiah 32:6-8

Anathoth was one of the Levitical cities of Israel. There were such provisions found for buying and selling land and houses, but the main point was that the borders of each tribe were to remain fixed, not transferring between tribes based on inheritances and the like. As for the land sold by Barnabas, it next says, “and brought the money.”

It was his right to own the land, it was his right to sell the land, and when it was sold, it was his right to do as he wished with it. There is nothing compulsory in this event. This is a completely voluntary occurrence in all ways. With this being the case, it tells what he chose to do with it, saying, “and laid it at the apostles’ feet.”

This is in accord with what is said in verses 34 and 35. It appears that Barnabas was chosen as an example simply because his life will be highlighted in Acts as the church expands and moves into Gentile areas. He will become a traveling companion of Paul, and together they will set out with the message of hope that began in Israel and then spread outward from there. This account is a way of introducing him into the ongoing narrative.

Life application: As far as giving within the church, there is very little to prescribe what should be given or how it should be given. The two main verses that are to be considered are –

“So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver.” 2 Corinthians 9:7

“Let him who is taught the word share in all good things with him who teaches.” Galatians 6:6

That is pretty much it. There are no other prescriptions that apply to all of the church concerning the matter. If you have been told, or if you are being told, that you should tithe, you are being misled in doctrine. Tithing is a precept of the Mosaic Law. It is not mentioned as a precept under the New Covenant. To mandate tithing would actually violate Paul’s prescription of 2 Corinthians 9:7.

In the church, you are admonished to give cheerfully – without consideration of amount. There is freedom in the church, not the bondage of the law.

Thank You for the freedoms we possess in Christ, O God. You allow us to come to You without the heavy and burdensome constraints of the law. In this, we can worship You freely and with a grateful heart for all You have done for us. You have blessed us with every spiritual blessing in Christ. Praise God for this pure state of fellowship and reconciliation. Amen.

Priorities and memories at the house of Sgt. York.

Monday, 7 February 2022

And Joses, who was also named Barnabas by the apostles (which is translated Son of Encouragement), a Levite of the country of Cyprus, Acts 4:36

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The previous paragraph revealed the state of the people and how they were supported from within as people gave of their own possessions to meet the needs of the community. With that stated, the words of Luke now introduce a new and significant character into the ongoing narrative. The way he will do this is by tying what this person does in with these same previously noted actions of the people. That begins now with the words, “And Joses.”

The name Joses is a variant of Joseph. In many Greek manuscripts, it reads Joseph as the name. The name Joseph is derived from the Hebrew name Yoseph, or “He shall add,” or “He increases.” From there, and which is not uncommon, a second name is provided for him. This is recorded by Luke next, saying, “who was also named Barnabas.”

The name literally indicates “Son of Prophecy,” coming from bar, an Aramaic term signifying “son,” and nevi, the Hebrew word for a prophet. This name was given to him “by the apostles.”

The reason for calling him Barnabas isn’t clear when it is translated as “Son of Prophecy,” but Luke next provides an explanation saying, “which is translated Son of Encouragement.” The reason for the name is given in its explanation. The name defines the person. That will then be more fully revealed as the account progresses and as this person’s character becomes more evident.

The difference in the name from its original meaning (Son of Prophecy) still requires an explanation. Albert Barnes gives a suitable one concerning it, saying –

“The Greek word which is used to interpret this παράκλησις paraklēsis, translated ‘consolation,’ means properly 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.”

What may be the case is that Barnabas was well schooled in the prophets and was able to “encourage” or “comfort” others with his knowledge of these scriptures by directing them to Jesus, the fulfillment of them all. This may be how the two thoughts harmonize, but this is only speculation.

Concerning a reason for Luke’s explaining the name, it may be as simple as that his addressee, Theophilus (see Acts 1:1), was unschooled in Hebrew. For this, or some other reason, Luke felt it necessary to provide this additional note. Of Barnabas, Luke next notes that he was “a Levite.”

As this is the case, he was a member of the tribe set apart to the Lord for religious instruction. It is the tribe from which the priests (descended from Aaron) are from, but they were their own class within the tribe. As he is not noted as a priest, it means he was not of the line of Aaron. However, the other Levites were the ones designated to assist the priests in the service of the temple, and they performed other religious duties between the priests and the people.

Finally, Luke notes Barnabas was “of the country of Cyprus.” Again, Albert Barnes suitably explains the meaning and importance of including this –

“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; Acts 15:39. The island is near to Cicilia, and is not far from the Jewish coast. … Barnabas afterward became, with Paul, a distinguished preacher to the Gentiles. It is worthy of remark, that ‘both’ were born in pagan countries, though by descent Jews; and as they were trained in pagan lands, they were better suited for their special work.”

Life application: Luke’s inclusion of an explanation of the meaning of the name Barnabas is not without importance. Among Christians, there are innumerable claims concerning the origin of various things, the reliability of certain manuscripts over others, which Bible version is the “best,” and so on.

A little bit of logic is often all that is necessary to dispel many of the falsities that arise. One is that of what original language certain things were penned in. For example, there are several views concerning what language the New Testament was originally penned in. Some say Hebrew, others Aramaic, others Greek, and so on.

Quite often, there is absolutely no proof for a particular claim. Pride has a way of stepping in and forcing out any other option. Adherents condemn any other option as heretical, and they claim that they have the true “key” to enlightenment. Yes, it is ridiculous, but it is as common as leaves on a tree.

As far as the original language of Acts, Luke’s words of this verse clearly indicate that Greek is the original language. For him to translate the name as he did, by default, means that he is explaining to his recipient something that required an understanding in Greek. If the words are a part of the inspired text, as anyone who holds to the inspiration of Scripture will agree they are, then it means that the translation itself is inspired – in whatever translation was used. In this case, it is Greek.

This is true with all four of the gospels as well. Each of them has a similar note which logically brings the scholar to an understanding that the original language of them was Greek.

When presented with claims concerning things like this, think things through. It is not hard to find out when such a doctrine is based on a false claim.

Heavenly Father, help us to not get misdirected by aberrant doctrines and by things that only distract us from a sound and proper analysis of Your word. May we stay focused on what is important and be diligent in our study of that. Be with us in this, O God. Amen.

Sgt York’s military dress, Bible, and etc.

Sunday, 6 February 2022

and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need. Acts 4:35

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The previous verse showed the state of life among the disciples when there was the practice of selling lands or houses and bringing the proceeds of such things that were sold. This verse now will tell what becomes of that money, saying, “and laid them.”

The verb is imperfect and should read, “and were laying them.” Luke is giving the account as if it is ongoing. One can think of people, from time to time, coming forward and laying these things down. It is not just, “Oh, this happened and then it was done.” It is more like, “Well, from time to time they were coming, and they were laying them down.”

The word “them” is inserted for clarity, but it is an acceptable insertion that speaks of the proceeds themselves. One would assume this was in the common currency and minted, for the most part, in silver. Other metals were used, but silver was the standard at the time. So, one can think of a bag of silver – of whatever amount – being brought forward as an offering. In this manner, they are laid “at the apostles’ feet.”

The meaning of this is symbolic and figurative, but it probably still literally happened. One can think of royal subjects coming forward to make an offering to a king, of devotees coming forward to make an offering to a priest, of students making an offering to a teacher, or of a diplomatic procession coming forward to offer to a greater nation’s representative.

Each is coming to offer something to one in a higher position, and they will place the offering before the receiver, on the ground at his feet. In the case of the king or teacher, he is the final recipient. However, for the priest or the ambassador, they simply receive the offering on behalf of the one they represent. Thus, this is an offering to the Lord through their apostles, or “sent ones.”

The meaning of the act is that of authority. The place where the foot is represents that which is under the authority of the person. This is seen in Exodus 4 when Zipporah circumcised her son and touched the foreskin to the feet of the one standing there –

“and Zipporah takes a flint, and cuts off the foreskin of her son, and causes [it] to touch his feet, and says, ‘You [are] surely a bridegroom of blood to me.’” Exodus 4:25 (LST)

Although many translations insert Moses’s name, saying, “Moses’ feet,” this is not what is being conveyed. Rather, it was to the Lord’s feet that it was taken, demonstrating His authority over the matter. To get a fuller understanding of such symbology, a short (but limited) study will help you to see this. See Deuteronomy 11:24, Psalm 110:1, 2, and Revelation 10:2. Scripture, however, has a multitude of such examples.

With this beautiful imagery understood, it next says, “and they distributed to each as anyone had need.”

The authority of the proceeds was transferred from the previous owner to those who are the Lord’s designated representatives. From there, they were allowed to do with it as they saw fit. As needs arose, they would be evaluated and tended to.

Life application: Acts 4:34 and 4:35 are a good set of verses to, once again, highlight the need to understand proper context, and to remember and consider whether a verse is descriptive or prescriptive. For example, the same people who demand that you must be baptized in order to be saved and receive the Spirit would never say, “You must sell everything you have and put it at the feet of Mr. XYZ.”

And yet, we are dealing with the same group of people (Israel without a single Gentile yet introduced), the same context (early church as it develops and without any New Testament epistles), and the same figure of authority who has led to this point (Peter). The disconnect in thinking is astonishing.

When someone tells you that you must do some particular thing described in Acts, be ready to explain to him why his thinking is flawed. Explain what determining the context first means, and then explain why what is being claimed is based on a descriptive passage where nothing is prescribed.

If that person is still adamant about his stand, ignore him. Almost nobody lives in a communal society today, and of them, it is surely not the habit of the people to sell their possessions and lay them at the feet of the leader. If that is going on, you can bet it is an abusive cult that has swallowed up those who are involved in it.

Rather than everyone relying on everyone else to survive, we are to work with our hands, tend to those things the epistles tell us to, and live out our lives in anticipation of the life that is truly life, and which still lies ahead of us now.

Lord God, help us to think clearly concerning Your word. Give us instructors who will lead us in sound instruction, who will make us hungry for You and Your word, and who will not lead us down strange paths that do nothing to solidify our walk with You. To Your glory. Amen.

The burial of Sgt. York. Rest well. Jesus will be back for you in due time.

Saturday, 5 February 2022

Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, Acts 4:34

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The past couple of verses have shown the state of how the believer’s lives were in the Jerusalem community that had arisen. The description now continues with, “Nor was there anyone among them who lacked.”

The meaning is that there were no unfulfilled needs. Everyone had food enough, and all their other needs were met. This would have been a great time of abundance, and it would have been even overflowing because the apostles were there to tell of all that happened over the years of Jesus’ ministry.

Nothing is said of the people maintaining employment. If that had ended, which in many cases seems likely – because Israel was mostly an agrarian society where livelihood came from working one’s own field, this model would eventually become unsustainable. This begins to be seen in the next words, “for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them.”

The verbs should read that they “were selling them.” Also, the word “all” is incorrect. The Greek word, hosos, is indefinite. It signifies something closer to “those that” without specifically meaning “each and every.” This will be seen in the next chapter where Peter will say, “While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control?” (Acts 5:4).

To say “all” implies that this was an absolute, but such was not the case. To understand the laws concerning the land and its use, one would need to especially study Leviticus – Deuteronomy from the books of Moses. There, the parceling out of the land, the selling of land and houses, and so on, are all minutely detailed.

The land was never actually owned by the people, but they were the Lord’s stewards of it. Hence, certain intervals of time were set up for people to sell their land, and then it was automatically reacquired by that person or family upon the coming of the year of Jubilee.

The rest of Scripture is mostly silent on whether these practices from the law were actually followed at any time in Israel’s history. However, these were precepts of the law. As such, there was a possible remedy for the eventually financial train wreck that lay ahead, at least temporarily. Once the land was reacquired, it could be worked, rented, or even sold again.

In such a state, impending financial troubles could be pushed further down the line. But as the number of new people joined the movement, the more tenuous the ability to make ends meet for the whole would be.

The book of Acts doesn’t go into any detail concerning the employment of the people, or much of the other information needed to know exactly how they managed. And so, lining their situation up with the precepts of the law is difficult. For now, Luke next refers to what happened to the money once land or house was sold with the words, “and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold.”

Again, the verbs need to be corrected to read, “and were bringing the proceeds of that which is sold.” Luke is writing the account as if he is sitting there watching it happen. Thus, he was probably carefully writing down the words of someone like Peter who described to him what had taken place.

The money from the sales was being brought forth for use by the whole.

Life application: A model like this could only sustain itself if there was a way to place such money in a type of bank or other interest-bearing entity, and to allow it to grow along with the use of it. The larger the number of people who joined such a community, the more mouths there would be to feed.

Unless people were productively working, the dependence upon the top to take care of every need would become unsupportable. Communist countries have tried this, even while making their people work, and it has never succeeded. In a perfect society, without all of the problems of this fallen world, a perfect community could be realized, but people get sick, people get old, things get broken, and money is used up.

For today’s world, we have been given instructions directly from the word –

“For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. ¹¹ For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies. ¹² Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread.” 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12

Voting for people who promise you ease while you sit around waiting on the Lord will not help anyone except those who are voted in. They will get fat off of what they have robbed from you. The Lord will be back in due time. Until then, do not vote for those on the left. They will promise ease and fairness, but only corruption of individuals and of the society will result.

Get up, get to work, and don’t expect others to carry your weight.

Lord God and Heavenly Father, how good it is that You tend to our needs. And surely one of the ways which You do this is to give us hands and feet to work for ourselves in the fields of life. We can earn as much as we are willing to expend our time earning. For those who are incapable of working, help us to be gracious and helpful according to our ability to do so. May our lives be productive and may our sharing for the needy be pleasing to You. Amen.