What happened to Ananias and Sapphira after death?

I wonder if they were Malformed Christians. Remember this is the time of evangelistic explosion upon the Earth when all souls were of salvation interest. I do not believe God would have instantly condemned struggling weak or nonbelievers wanting to join the church but afraid to give their all..., if that was the case with them. it is more consistent that the apostles would have sought to straighten them out for the sake of their redemption. However, if they were compromised believers, and the ultimate recognition of their sin in the manifest presence of God struck their conscience and killed them, likely that was the penalty paid: death! To go to hell also would have been a double penalty. This could have happened with them, but somehow i think their death was the payment required at that moment. Lying to the Holy Spirit is not the same as blasphemy which is to attribute evil to the Spirit, saying bad things ABOUT Him rather than lying TO Him.

They were both Spirit-filled believers (Acts 4:31). Peter declared war on all forms of Judaism (Acts 3:11-26), declaring at the entrance to the temple that only Messianic Judaism had the true interpretation of the OT scrolls with Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. He declared Jesus was the only NAME by which people can be saved. To the Jewish leaders (Sanhedrin), Yahweh YHVH was the only NAME. So Peter is attributing divinity to Jesus (blasphemy in their minds). This is reminiscent of Jn 10 where on Chanukah (Feast of Dedication) Jesus declares the same thing. Peter further promised to disobey them about preaching what they considered to be blasphemy and heresy. The early group of believers now had targets on their backs and had to group together in survival mode and pool their resources. Ananias and Sapphira would not have joined this rebel resistance group if they were not believers. However, Satan put doubts and fear in their hearts so they kept some money aside for plan B, just in case the trouble became too much to bear. But they had already said they were committed to pooling all their resources (Acts 4:32). So, by withholding they were lying about their full commitment. God showed all He wanted only fully committed believers, not double-minded, lukewarm believers so he took them home. So a little leaven wouldn't spoil the whole lump with the severe persecution to follow by the hands of the Apostle Paul and others until Acts 9. God also took believers home in 1Cor 11 for unworthy practice of the Lords Supper. The slaying showed God's hand was truly on this Messianic Jewish resistance movement and after Acts 10 the Gentiles even became partakers of the rich olive tree (Rom 11).

By the way, adding to my previous comment, the reason they had to join together was not to start a new economic system (communism). It was because under the Roman occupation, Judaism had great freedom as long as there were no revolts or public riots. So as long as the Messianic Jewish resistance movement kept together in a large group, the soldiers of the Sanhedrin had to be careful not to cause a riot. So it was a tactical move. And because of the Holy Spirit they had great love for God and one another and pooled and shared their resources to survive. Later they became a charity case and Paul (now a believer instead of a persecutor) and others kept having to take up collections for them (2Cor 9 for example).

Sadly, virtually every Christian commentary ignores the seriousness of this early resistance movement to all other forms of Judaism. They also ignore the fact these were all Jews, so it was becoming like a civil war of brother against brother (Lk 14:26) and a rebellion against the God-ordained religious authorities (see Mt 23:2). The early Jewish believers were sacrificing all for the sake of their beliefs that their rabbis are wrong about Jesus. So, because of the sad commentaries, I give much grace and understanding to those who differ with me.

In chapter 4 it talks about believers selling property and giving the money to the Apostles. Starting in chapter 5 it says there was a man. When the Bible refers to fellow Christians, it usually calls them fellow believers, brothers, friends. Here it states a man which leads me to believe they were not Christians

In Mark 3:28 Jesus stated that those who lie to the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven and their punishment will be eternal condemnation. It states in Acts that both Ananias and Sapphira both lied to the Holy Spirit. If scripture is our guide, then they are both condemned.

No real believer is or will be happy to hear that a fellow believer is in hell. But note Acts 5:3 "But Peter said, Ananias, Satan has filled your heart..." Dont know if Heaven has room for a Satan filled heart that died without the opportunity to REPENT.

What's key is that they 'gave up the Ghost and died'. That's a slam dunk for me. The scripture 'you cannot serve both God & mammon' - Matt 6:24 - also rings true here. They loved money more than The Lord and so served their true master.

I'm inclined to say that they are lost. It seems Sapphira had the chance to repent when asked if she had 'sold it for so much' (as the implication is that it was her husband's idea 'and she was privy to it'). She lied and so she received the same fate as her husband and so was buried in the ground next to him...

I think we must take Ananias and Sapphira to have been believers. We are told in Acts 4:32-34 that the believers who had lands or houses sold them. Then we have two instances of specific individuals who did so. We know that Barnabas was a believer, but he is introduced as a Levite and Cypriot, neither of which designation carries any connotation of faith in Christ. So I don't see why the introduction of Ananias as Ἀνὴρ τις, 'a certain man', should make us think that he is not a believer, since believers are often referred to as 'men' in Acts, using the same Greek word ἀνὴρ. We must take him as the second example given of the believers who were selling possessions.

I really appreciate all the comments above on this subject. There are only 2 answers - either Ananias/Sapphira were believers, or they were non-believers. If there were believers, then even though they suffered sudden death, they were saved. If they were non-believers, they were not saved.
Personally, I know of many sincere christians who lied, who failed to give their great wealth to the church, who played church politics, and did harm to the church. But they were sincere believers. They were also not perfect. They gave in to temptations and sinned now and then. Christ had died for their sins. I believe they will go to heaven despite being sinners. Ananias and Sapphira were sinners. I am too.

The two were believers and i presumed they were saved.

1. They belong to the church with right doctrine
2. They sold their property
3. They will not be disciplined if they were unbelievers nothing to lose.
4. They lied and not blasphemed as contemplated in Mark 3:28-29
5. The filing of the heart in Acts 5:3 is nothing but similar to the heart of peter in Mark 8:33 when Peter was called "Get thee behind me, satan...
6. Death is just a mean to be transported to the next life and it doesn't invalidates salvation. Romans 8:38/I Cor. 15:15-16
7. We all know that there are sins that leads to death I Cor 11:30 and James 1:15
8. This is just a case similar in the old testament of sudden death in the wilderness during Moses' timeline.