Baidarka

mike decock “Just speculating off the top of my head:

1) They were cast out of the group and declared "dead", even though they were physically still alive.
2) They both died sometime later but the length of time got shortened as the story was retold.

Personally, I think something along the lines of the 1st scenario is most likely, assuming there is a historical root, that is.”

Why would you think such silly things? Why are you trying to protect Rock?
Acts clearly states that A&S died in Church (Synagogue) in front of the congregation. I think that Peter (Rock) fed them poison Communion wafers.

Doctor X

Methinks it is just a "just so story" as in the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" or "The Presidented Who Did Not Inhale" [Stop that.--Ed.]

If one wants to apply "logic" to it, then the two would have blown up or whathaveyou the minute they committed the sin. However, we need the "public demonstration." The killings are separate to reenforce the message.

"Don't rat on your old man, or Keyser Soze will get you!"

--J.D.

Picture

Excommunication is not that far fetched. Oh, and by the way, Communion water wasn't addopted until the Catholics decided they knew how to do it all... (yes, I am anti-catholic)

mike_decock

I'm not trying to protect Rock-Head. I'm simply speculating on possibilities. There's simply not enough evidence to make a claim for any one of them, IMO.

Acts also has some goofy tale about tongues of fire falling on people's heads. You're free to think what you want, I simply choose not to take a stance without evidence.

Is your theory that Peter snuffed them out more plausible or offer more explanatory power than any other theory or is your belief motivated by your dislike of Peter?

-Mike...

Baidarka

Mike---“I'm not trying to protect Rock-Head. I'm simply speculating on possibilities. There's simply not enough evidence to make a claim for any one of them, IMO.”

Of course I invited you to speculate and your suggestions are probably more plausible then my extravagant ideas

Mike---“Acts also has some goofy tale about tongues of fire falling on people's heads. You're free to think what you want, I simply choose not to take a stance without evidence.”

Of course it is impossible to trust any thing in such a fanciful text.

Mike---“Is your theory that Peter snuffed them out more plausible or offer more explanatory power than any other theory or is your belief motivated by your dislike of Peter?”

It is not so much a dislike of Peter. It is more like reading the line about Lot’s daughters getting him drunk and taking advantage of him and thinking “this story is arse backwards.
The story of A&S is so close to contemporary cult stories that I have read and heard that it just seems probable to me that the early Christian cult were probably the Moonies or Scientologists of their time, robbing families of their children and children of their inheritance and futures.
So many intelligent people think that the pure and good early Christian faith was somehow corrupted. So many theories start with a good Jesus whose message was distorted by Paul or John or some later editor of the text.
My contention is that the smarmy televangelists of today are the purest representation of the true Christian tradition. Reverend Ike and Jim Baker are just like Peter and Paul or even Jesus himself.
The success of the cult is proof of that its founders were realists and not delusional and that they were therefore evil.

Lanakila

As an atheist who rejects supernatural events as described in the Bible, I find Mikes suggestions to be not only valid, but likely. The books in the Bible weren't written immediately after the fact, and the stories contained in them likely got more supernatural as they got told and retold. Not only that, since fear is the basis of the religions of Christianity and Judiaism the description of the death of Annanias and Saphira contained within helped keep the new believers in line.

the_quark

Honestly, I'd find the explanation "many or all of the characters in the story and the story itself were made up; it's a parable with no basis in fact" to be simpler, less work and more likely.

In my mind this is like debating who the prodigal son was in history, or something. We don't even have historical evidence these people existed, I think it's a bit much to be spending much time speculating on who murdered them.

TQ

Love Fountain

Hi Lanakila,

Interesting assessment. Do you know that almost everywhere in the English Bibles that say fear is mistranslated and should read revere? Yet not many people who follow the institutions of men ever read further than the translation or listening to the doctrines of men who teach what they are told to teach by other men to find this out. Sometimes I don't really think those who are filling their pockets and controlling people through fear realize that they are who the figures of Annanias and Saphira represent in reality because they have chosen to give fear and take and not love unconditionally as the books clearly state over and over. Dictators dictate, but neighbors, friends and family are to love each other as themselves.

Happy New Year,
Love Fountain

Lanakila

Its not a mistranslation. Read the OT that God is to be feared, and for a damn good reason. Since the NT God is the same God, (supposedly) and God kills people for lying, he is to be feared. All your justifying it by calling it reverence aside, its worship me or go to hell. That isn't unconditional by any stretch of the imagination. I revered, and feared,that God while trying to accept his supposed unconditional love. It caused me to have cognasant disonance. (it didn't make sense) A loving God would never create hell. The concept of hell destroys the concept of a loving merciful God.

Love Fountain

Sounds like some rather unpleasant experiences you've had? I am sorry for your pain. The Father of love didn't create a concept of hell, just like he never intended you to be in the body you are in that scars and is decaying. Yet the consequences of a thought have led to the actions and consequences of now. Yet that shall stop one day and then shall love prevail and no longer be miscontrued as fear for those who taught fear will have to go back and correct all those they taught fear and teach the love that was always intended to be.

Hell in the OT was a garbage dump outside of the city where they burned garbage and dumped children killed in child sacrifice during Molech worship. The concept of eternal torment came in the NT as a means to control people through the man made institution of religion. There is no fear in love for perfect love casts out all fear. People fear the unknown, people revere the known. Yet if you'd like to accept that it's not a mistranslation, who am I to tell you otherwise? Life has been given to love. There is love and there is nothingness.

For God is the parent and we are the children, yet what good parent says bow down a worship me to their children? Not a God I know nor any good parent I have met. Only those who take, and take and take just like it says they would as they condemn everyone who doesn't follow them. With all my heart I wish you peace and love.

Happy New Year,
Love Fountain