Go and read it again at Acts 5: 11. Ananias and Sapphira drop dead at Peter's feet for "playing false to God/holy spirit" by not giving all of the money to Peter that they got from a field they sold.
Ananias and Sapphira were Christians. They wanted to help the poor and so sold one of their possessions, a field, and gave most of the money to Peter. Perhaps they told a wee fib by pretending that the money they gave was the whole sale price, while secretly holding some of it back.
Is that a sin worthy of instant death? Good grief. For this they were killed by God (Jesus or an angel, doesn't matter).
Can you imagine Jesus Christ doing this if he was the one that Ananias and Sapphira gave the money to? Remember, the apostle Peter was a very sinful man, so sinful that he even bold-face lied about knowing Jesus before the cock crowed thrice. Was Peter in any position to judge and condemn Ananias and Saphira, and to such an extent that they were instantly killed??
Even worse, Jehovah's Witnesses and Christians in general believe that up until Christ's death, God apparently did all sorts of amazing miracles, such as turning the nile into blood, causing manna to fall from heaven, and parting the red sea, etc, etc. Then Christ came along and did all sorts of amazing, positive miracles that helped people. He never used his miraculous powers to kill or harm anyone. Then Jesus died and was resurrected, and things radically changed so that for the next 2,000 years there have been no miracles, but until the death of the last apostle some positive miracles kept occuring, such as healing and speaking in tongues. These positive miracles happened basically to prove the credentials of Christianity and to show that God had transferred his favour from his former chosen people the Jews to the Christian congregation. Right?
Then from the death of the last apostle, Jehovah disappeared. Poof, no more interventions in human affairs. No more miracles, PERIOD! Not a trace. Not even the slightest evidence he hears prayers. Apparently this is because Jesus death and resurrection was the ultimate miracle, and since God couldn't top that why keep performing miracles?
Or if God does hear prayers and intervenes in Christians lives and minds by giving them holy spirit in answer to their prayers, He at the same time ignores the prayers of the suffering and dying. He intervenes in human affairs to give the holy spirit to some Christians on one hand but ignores the prayers of millions of suffering and dying persons on the other hand. Go figure.
As the Dalai Lama said, if there is a God it appears he has gone to the other end of the universe. He seems to have checked out, left the building.
But the killing of Ananias and Saphira by God is a different kind of miracle following Jesus death. It is the ONLY miracle and intervention in human affairs post-resurrection in scripture that is grossly negative, where God exercises divine judgement and punishes someone to the point of death.
This is completely at odds with the Issue of Universal Sovereignty as taught by Jehovah's Witnesses.
Post-resurrection of Jesus, why would God murder Ananias and Saphira, two otherwise faithful Christians, but never lift a finger to kill any other person on the planet for much worse sins?
Now ask yoursef what seems more reasonable to believe? That the account of Ananias and Sapphira as recorded in Acts 5 is the absolutely truth and is historically what actually happened; or that it is an embellishment, a story that was created and circulated verbally that eventually got recorded by Luke to scare Christians back then into making sure they obeyed the apostles directions to give up all their money, or suffer the terrible wrath of God?
What is the more likely scenario to you?
We know from the gospel accounts that there is no way that Jesus would have killed Ananias and Saphira for such a relatively minor sin, while at the same time standing by and doing absolutely nothing to prevent all manner of horror and violence committed by and against Christians. Such a thing would be grossly immoral. It would make the concept of morals meaningless, as if they are not objectively and independently real, since they can be flouted and abused willy nilly by God just because he is God. We cannot accept such a thing.
Therefore, we must conclude that the account of Ananias and Sapphira must be fictitious (as are numerous other fictitious accounts of grossly immoral actions by God in the Bible). It is clearly a story that was made up to put the fear of God in Christians who might tell lies about their donations, that made its way into the Bible. It categorically proves that the Bible is not inerrant.
There is an excellent Youtube clip that goes into this by the way, if someone can be so good as to post it on this thread as I don't know how.