A Question for Non-Sacramental Christians

I'm lost. I have no clue what the relevance of these passages are for the sacraments.

Pavel Mosko said:

That's fine. Do you have any answers?

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone in the Ananias and Saphira story violating God's commands other than Ananias and Saphira. They made a vow and then did not fulfill it.

Pavel Mosko said:

Jesus said in the sermon of the mount that giving, especially giving to the poor is best done "in secret". So why did the early Christians in the book of Acts violate this clear scripture?

Click to expand...

I don't believe the Sermon is a rule book set in stone as the law of Moses was. Ours is a covenant of the spirit, not the letter (2Cor 3). The Sermon's whole purpose is to get to the intentions of the heart, where it all begins. The laying of gifts at the Apostles' feet was an act of love, and the violation of that spirit of love, so present in the early church, was exactly why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives, while others who did the same thing but with a pure heart were both blessed and a blessing to others for doing so.

Pavel Mosko said:

begin

Click to expand...

<PM>This question is for nonsacramental Protestant Christians who think sacraments are "unbiblical".
Matthew 6
3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
Acts 4
34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.
36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.
My Question is "Why did this whole situation, that led up to the famous Ananias and Sapphira incident take place? Jesus said in the sermon of the mount that giving, especially giving to the poor is best done "in secret". So why did the early Christians in the book of Acts violate this clear scripture?
As Christian Sacramentalist, I got clear reasons why this happened, but this situation always perplexed me as a nondenominational, non-sacramental Charismatic Protestant, so I'm sharing it with you!<PM>

end

Click to expand...

Which "early Christians" violated clear scripture and how did they do it?
God killed Ananias and Sapphira not other Christians. Evidently Ananias and/or Sapphira told the others that they gave everything when they had not. They were not required to but they did.

"My Question is "Why did this whole situation, that led up to the famous Ananias and Sapphira incident take place? Jesus said in the sermon of the mount that giving, especially giving to the poor is best done "in secret". So why did the early Christians in the book of Acts violate this clear scripture?"

They lied about the money. They didn't make a private donation. Also, Jesus was talking about people who try to do good works for show. I'm a bit mystified how you concluded that one was a contradiction to the other.

Pavel Mosko said:

Yes, yes I know that lieing to the HS is going to kill you. But that doesn't explain why you would toss a money bag at the apostles feet in full view of everybody as opposed to waiting when you could be alone in with the apostle and make an anonymous donation!

Click to expand...

I don't see why bringing money to the apostles should be in conflict with giving secretly. It's not like they could get on the internet and do an anonymous online donation in those days.

Pavel Mosko said:

But that doesn't explain why you would toss a money bag at the apostles feet in full view of everybody as opposed to waiting when you could be alone in with the apostle and make an anonymous donation!

Click to expand...

I didn't. Ananias and Sapphira did, and they were killed by God. Now, why is this a problem?

You'd have to explain to me what this has to do with "sacraments" unless you are referring to "giving alms" (which I'm not sure how many churches still call it that)?

Most mainline protestant denominations (if they even call them "sacraments") only recognize baptism and communion as such; so, I'm not sure what you're asking?

I think I have missed something in the connection. Are you asking why A and S did their offering in public?

Please cut to the chase, Arch-Dude.

Pavel Mosko said:

In this case Sacramental is a paradigm, that temple worship still exists as a kind of model, or type of worship even though we don't actually slaughter animals etc. and the Jewish temple was destroyed in AD 70.

It's a personal theory of mine listening to Bible gateway the audio of the passage of Jesus pointing out the widow giving her two mites into the temple box that there was a liturgical custom like that among the apostles. However if a person gave an offering that was bigger than your typical offering, that probably would not fit into such a container, and putting it at an apostles feet for safe keeping would make complete sense! But barring that kind of idea, I really don't have any other explanation for why such a situation would emerge, because I can think of a ton of ways to give a large donation that are much much more private than tossing it at an apostles feet.

Click to expand...

So your question is really about a theory of a carry over from the Old Testament and why did these people do this publicly?

Your "answer" might be in what happened to them. We know they dropped dead for lying to the apostles. Could their transgression have been more obvious in they're making their offering so public? It was all wrong from the get go and that was made very public to the rest of the church when they did drop dead.

i am not a protestant but also not into rituals though most of what i seen in orthodox i would refrain for calling sin i just see no fruit in it thus in my eyes it seems to appease the flesh and nothing more (i mean no offence just being honest in my understanding as i feel you will be )

To me i understand it to be simple

Why is it not a contradiction

The apostle were those who had reputable relationship with the Word of God

Paul made it quite clear upon his death wolves would enter to turn if possible the elect from the truth

Why no one heeded this i don't know

If i must be labeled anything but Christian then born again Christian for to me when i read Paul's words on not saying you are of this or that (for we are not to divide Christ we are to be Christians following Christ doctrine not the doctrine made by men who say they know the way when Christ already told us the way)

Pavel Mosko said:

This question is for nonsacramental Protestant Christians who think sacraments are "unbiblical".


Matthew 6
3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Acts 4
34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.
36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.


My Question is "Why did this whole situation, that led up to the famous Ananias and Sapphira incident take place? Jesus said in the sermon of the mount that giving, especially giving to the poor is best done "in secret". So why did the early Christians in the book of Acts violate this clear scripture?


(I know that lieing to the HS is going to kill you. But that doesn't explain why you would toss a money bag at the apostles feet in full view of everybody as opposed to waiting when you could be alone in with the apostle and make an anonymous donation!)



As Christian Sacramentalist, I got clear reasons why this happened, but this situation always perplexed me as a nondenominational, non-sacramental Charismatic Protestant, so I'm sharing it with you!

Click to expand...

Pavel Mosko said:

why you would toss a money bag at the apostles feet in full view of everybody as opposed to waiting when you could be alone in with the apostle and make an anonymous donation!)

Click to expand...

One thing is they were not directly giving to the needy.

Another thing is the intention. Jesus means to give without trying to get praise for it. Do not do it to be seen.

Of course, if you are seen, this is not in secret. Jesus says to give in secret, that your Father may reward you openly. Well, how might He reward us openly? - - - by having us give openly so people see our good work and glorify God . . . by giving us more opportunities to give, but including when it is not in secret.

It may not be an absolute rule, which must be done, all the time.

After all, Jesus did not criticize the widow who in view of others put her last two mites in the collection container. Yet, He criticizes ones who make a show of giving.

Years ago, while I was having problems about if Jesus is our Lord and Savior and if I needed to follow Him, I decided He is the best, in any case; so I was going to at least do things He says to do. Well, this brought me to how I was to give to the poor, in secret so they themselves did not know it was me, and how would I do it so my left hand did not know what my right hand was doing?

Put five and ten and twenty dollar bills in pens, wrapped around the ink tubes. Then offer a pen to someone who seems to be poor, not knowing which size bill was in each pen > how would you like a pen? Thank you. As the person is walking away, say look inside the pen; there is a food coupon in it. Oh, thank you. I do not know how much each pen has, since I mixed up different size bills; so my left and right hands don't know how much I am giving. And they do not get a very good chance to see who I am, because I let them get away some distance before I call for them to open the pen and find the coupon.

A police officer saw me give more than one pen to a guy who looked more needy than the others. He stopped me and wanted to know what I gave to the guy. He seemed to have an issue that I had given it to a minority person. It might have been then when I remembered how Jesus wants us to confess Him before men; so I said Jesus wants us to love all people So, I confessed Jesus plus how He wants us to love.

And then I was encouraged, that may be Jesus was letting me know He was not done with me. And I could see He was not trying to tie me up with certain set rules.

The man who signed off on building the Poseidon nuke?

Also like i said im not protastant nor want to be for i see no denomination that speaks the whole truth

Pavel Mosko said:

And to that I would respond with the story of how the Ukraine and Russia weres evangelized.

Shopping for a Church
Vladimir apparently wanted to unite the people under one religion, so around 988 he sent envoys to examine the major religions. The options? Islam, Judaism, the Catholic Christianity of Western Europe, and the Orthodox Christianity of Eastern Europe (though as yet, there was no official break between the Orthodox and Catholic Christians).

The story of Vladimir’s choosing Orthodox Christianity is part legend, part fact. According to the tradition, Vladimir didn’t like the dietary restrictions of Islam and Judaism. Catholic Christianity was all right, but what impressed the grand prince was the dazzling worship his ambassadors described seeing in the great Cathedral of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople: “We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for surely there is no such splendor or beauty anywhere upon earth. ...

How Christianity Came to Ukraine and Russia


You know Protestant evangelists give glowing "praise reports", for successes that are much, much, smaller than evangelizing an entire enormous geographical region.

Click to expand...