archangel01,
But Peter said, ?Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.? Then Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last. So great fear came upon all those who heard these things. (Acts 5:3-5 NKJV)
This verse is often used in support of the Trinity doctrine. They say that the Holy Spirit, to whom Ananias has ?played false,? is here unmistakably designated as being ?God,? as if it were another person of God. The apostle Peter did say that the Holy Spirit was lied to, but the words ?Holy Spirit? are used in connection with human beings and it is such men that are literally being identified as ?Holy Spirit.? Trinitarians do not tolerate any expression that human beings make up the ?Holy Spirit? but this is exactly what is being taught by Peter. The verses therefor teach that lying to such men is the same as lying to God. Does such wording prove that the ?Holy Spirit? is ?God Almighty?? Do the verses actually say and teach that, or did some Trinitarian reason it out? The answer to these questions can be found just a few verses further when the issue raised here is once again discussed with Sapphira.
Now it was about three hours later when his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. And Peter answered her, ?Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?? Then Peter said to her, ?How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.? (Acts 5:7-9, NKJV)
Now we know from scripture that Peter, when referring to the holy spirit, meant the ?Spirit of the Lord? and not the ?Spirit is the Lord,? as if Spirit is God in its own right and has no other application. There is a vast difference in meaning between being ?God? and being ?of the Lord,? or in using such words as a designation of authority given by Our Lord himself. The spirit of the Lord means truth and honesty, Godly devotion, all the things that Jesus stood for, not lies and deceit or the manipulation of the Faith for personal gain. Such thoughts apply to Biblical interpretation as well. If we consider verses 3 and 4 again we will see that when Ananias lied at the feet of the apostles, who were specifically appointed by holy spirit (Acts 2:4) to serve as a foundation for the Faith in a God-given capacity transmitted to them by God in our Lord?s name (Luke 22:29,30; John 14:26), then such an act was the equivalent of lying to God himself. Ananias was not simply lying to men as Peter stated, but he was lying to God. If the Faith could be so corrupted at such an early stage of its development, and the men specifically responsible for it so easily deceived, then what was there to prevent it from being completely taken over by Satan? In verse 3, the Holy Spirit is directly equated to such men as Peter, the apostles, and the disciples present (verse 4), with one exception. Lying to such men in the Faith, or Holy Spirit as the apostles are called in this Scripture, is not considered a minor transgression easily overlooked. It is properly viewed as lying to God, evoking dire consequences and in this case death. Ananias and Sapphira could be judged as a result. The account of Ananias and Sapphira therefore was not written to identify for us the nature of God or some part of him. It does not identify another person in his make-up ignored in more appropriate verses of Scripture. What it does do is establish a precedent for the kind of judgment that awaits all those who have tampered with or corrupted the Faith.
Joseph
