They Became Enraged
“Are these things so?” the high
priest asks Stephen as he stands before the council. The question refers to the
charges that have been brought against Stephen. He stands accused of blasphemy
against Moses and God. This gives the opening for Stephen’s speech. It is the
longest speech in the book of Acts, indicating its importance to the narrative.
His response veers far and wide
of the direct question he was asked. Rather than give a direct answer, he
launches into a brief history of Israel. It is interesting to pay attention to
the people and events Stephen finds worth including, and the ways in which he
presents them.
He begins in the conventional
place – with Abraham. The story of Abraham is where the story of Israel begins,
where we see the covenant between Israel and God beginning. God called Abraham
out, to be separated from his kin and embark on a lifelong journey of trust.
God promised Abraham more descendants than there are stars in the sky, even
while he and Sarah remained childless well beyond the normal childbearing years.
God promised Abraham and his descendants a land that would be their own, even
while he was a wandering Aramean. Stephen summarizes how God initiated and
formed a relationship with Abraham – a covenant.
From here he moves on to Joseph,
the great-grandson of Abraham. The story of Joseph is the longest story in
Genesis. It is a story about seeing how God works surprisingly through very
trying circumstances. In Joseph’s narrative, the invisible hand of God works
through all the trials and afflictions of Joseph’s life, for a purpose that is
greater than his single life. The reason for including Joseph in this
chronology may be to highlight the fact that he was rejected by his family,
that is, Israel, and yet became the savior of Israel. Joseph is followed by
Moses, to whom Stephen devotes considerably more time. Perhaps to refute the
specific charge that he has blasphemed Moses.
In his telling of Moses’ story,
Stephen takes some interesting angles, which actually seem to be at odds with
the Old Testament narratives. He says the Israelites’ ancestors abandoned their
infants, but the story in Exodus says that Pharaoh gave orders to kill all the
Hebrew male children. Moses was not abandoned, as Stephen says, but put into
the basket in order to save him. The story is told in Exodus 1:22-2:10.
Stephen goes on to say that
Moses fled Egypt for fear of his kinsmen, but the Exodus narrative makes clear
he fled from the wrath of Pharaoh (Exodus 2:15). Stephen follows this with a
synopsis of the reign of King David, focusing on his thwarted desire to build a
temple for the Lord. As told in 2 Samuel, once David was secure in his reign he
wanted to build a temple for God. But his prophet, Nathan, discouraged him,
saying it was not the time and he was not the man to do it (2 Samuel 7). It was
David’s son, Solomon, who built the temple in Jerusalem.
Stephen seems to indicate that
Solomon’s success in building the temple is an act of disobedience. This is a
bit confusing. The Old Testament scriptures would not agree that building the
temple was inappropriate. But the prophets of the Old Testament spoke often
against the tendency for Israel’s worship to be inauthentic. The same can
easily be said about the church today. Building churches is not sinful. But
worshiping those buildings or our practices in lieu of worshiping God is
sinful.
There is a pattern that becomes
clear in Stephen’s speech that repeatedly puts the people of Israel at odds
with the ones God sent to deliver them. Jesus, Stephen is saying, is in the
line of these deliverers. And Israel’s treatment of Jesus is in line with their
ancestors’ treatment of the prophets who came before. Israel, Stephen is
arguing, has a long history of rejecting God’s purpose.
The pitch rises until it becomes
unbearable and chaos breaks out. An angry mob assaults Stephen, taking him
outside the city to stone him to death. Here we are introduced, very curiously,
to a man named Saul. We know nothing about him – except that he approves of
this mob violence against the apostle. Luke introduces Saul in a way that will
doubtlessly arouse the reader’s curiosity. We will soon hear much more about
him. But in this chapter, Stephen holds center stage, and he represents the
decision to stand with Christ in the face of great adversity.
In his book, The Cost of
Discipleship, Dietrich Bonhoeffer writes that the notion of suffering and
rejection no longer makes sense to the church in a world where there no longer
seems to be any real difference between an ordinary life and a life committed
to Christ. And yet, to be a follower of Jesus is, as he says himself, to take
up one’s own cross (Luke 9:23). It is not suffering for the sake of suffering;
rather, it is suffering to bear witness to truth – a truth the world rejects.
It is a decision every Christian
has to make. As Bonhoeffer writes, “The time is short. Eternity is long. It is
the time of decision.”[1]
The question raised by Bonhoeffer (who risked and lost his own life in the
resistance against Hitler) and by Stephen is this: Is there something in life
worth dying for?
Questions for Reflection:
·
Luke uses vivid language to
describe the crowd’s reaction to Stephen. There is intensity in the description
of Stephen’s heavenly vision and the people covering their ears to block him
out. Why are they so afraid? Why are they so angry? Do you ever see such anger
and fear working together this way?
·
As Stephen is being attacked he
utters two phrases (in vv. 59-60) that are familiar to readers of the gospels
(see Luke 23:34,46). What do these two simple prayers mean to you?
·
This chapter raises the question
for all Christians: Is there something in life worth dying for? What do you
think?
Comments
Post a Comment