How was Ananias a liar?

Question

Acts 5:7-10 (NIV):

"About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened.

Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?” “Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

At that moment she fell down at his feet and died."

In this passage above, we see that before pronouncing Sapphira's sin of telling a lie, Peter did a kind of test by asking her for how much she and her husband had sold the land. It was only after she stated that the sum of money laid at the apostle's feet was exactly the sum of money she and her husband had acquired (which was not true) that Peter declared her act of lying.

However, we don't read in the verses earlier that her husband Ananias had also been given such a test:

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.

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 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 just to human beings but to God!

When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died..” (Acts 5:1-5)

We don't have even a single word spoken by Ananias. If so, then how was it a lie? After all, Ananias could have said something like, "But I never said I brought ALL the money that I received, so I didn't lie."

One may say that that was an act of lying to the Holy Spirit, but then it is not clear why Ananius' wife, unlike her husband, was still "given a chance" later to lie, that is, before her sin of lying could be pronounced by Peter. Actually, I wonder what would have happened to her if she had said the truth instead, that is, something like "No, this is not the whole sum. We decided to put aside some for some other needs."

Unless the act of putting money at the apostles' feet explicitly meant putting ALL the money that you had (like in the previous chapter we read: "All the believers were one in heart and mind. NO ONE CLAIMED THAT ANY of their possessions was their own, but they shared EVERYTHING THEY HAD." Acts 4:32) I can't find any explanation to that.

And even then, though, I still don't get it when then Sapphira didn't die right away like her husband, but was given a chance to be exposed in her lies first.

Answer 1

In the tragic incident of Acts 5:1-10, only the highlights are recorded - some details are obviously missing. From the available facts we may reasonably deduce the following:

• Annanias and Sapphira had presumably decided to sell a piece of land and had promised to give the entire proceeds to the church. If they had decided to give (say) half the proceeds to the church and had done so, then, no trouble would have occurred. However, whatever the details, Annanias and Sapphira had decided to give less than the amount they had promised.
• Peter was a divinely appointed apostle who enjoyed the gift of inspiration. He was divinely revealed the details of the short-changing in the gift of Annanias and Sapphira.

Thus, Peter could correctly speak to reveal that Annias had purposed to break his promised gift to God without Ananias having to say anything. That is, the fact that Ananias had brought the total sum of money that was less than he had promised was a silent "lie" to God.

Answer 2

The fact that Ananias didn't say anything in defence, means that he has already lied about the full sum of money, as his wife did. He could simply say he was giving some portion of the property, but they lied and wanted to appear as charitable as the others. The verse 3-4 are clear that the lie is keeping some portion to himself. "Lie... to retain some portion".

Act 4:36 says, "Joseph, having a field, sold it, and brought the money and put it at the apostles' feet" 5:1-2 "But a certain man named Ananias, with Sappirah, his wife, sold a possession, and kept back part of the price, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part, and put it at the apostles' feet".

Verse 4 implies there was no rule that the donation should be the whole amount of what you sold or that anyone is compelled to sell anything; it was a voluntary donation. Thus, the sin was to lie about the amount of the proceeds. He must have stated this, otherwise, the accusation of lying does not fit in the context. The question to his wife also confirms that it was about the amount of proceeding. We should not expect to see minute details in the text according to today's standards of writing.