I
want to quickly remind you as to what was going on at the start of our text for
today. I want to remind you of what
things looked like as we ended last Sunday.
Stephen, a newly appointed Deacon in the church, was standing trial
before the Sanhedrin. Some of the
priests had trumped up charges that Stephen had been “speaking blasphemous words
against Moses and God.” (Acts 6:11) after they were unable to successfully
dispute him as to the good works and signs that he was doing amongst the
people. They accused Stephen of having
said that Jesus was going to destroy the temple and the law. They asked him to defend himself against such
charges, but what they got instead really wasn’t a defense at all, it was
something entirely different.
Stephen’s
speech, with all due respect to figures like Moses, David, and other figures,
is really more of an Old Testament 101 than a defense against the accusations
made by the priests. There’s a video on
the internet that supposedly has the entirety of major Old Testament events
listed in chronological order that takes roughly about 10 minutes. Now, Stephen isn’t really concerned with the
major events per say, but with the major covenantal promise between God and His
people. He doesn’t start with any
information about the Garden of Eden (where God’s relationship with His people
began), but instead with Abraham.
There’s an important reason for doing so. You see, while we may call this Old Testament
101 (or at least a start to OT 101); this was really more of an account of
Jewish history. Stephen was simply
speaking about the history of Israel’s relationship with God.
He
walked through the history of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He spoke of circumcision as the sign of the
covenant between God and His people in the Old Testament. He spoke of the promise that God made to
Abraham about the giving of the land to him and his offspring despite Abraham
having no children and already being at an advanced age. He spoke about Joseph and how his brothers
sold him into slavery and how despite such evil occurring, God worked through these
heinous events to actually care for and provide for His children. He spoke of the days after Joseph had died,
when the Pharaoh in Egypt didn’t know Joseph and he looked upon the Hebrews
more with disgust than anything else. He
spoke of Moses (the very one who he was accused of blaspheming against) and how
Moses (directed and led by God) delivered Israel from the hands of slavery, out
of the land of Egypt. Stephen spoke of
the forty years in the wilderness and God’s coming to dwell with Israel at
Mount Sinai. He spoke of the rebellion
of Israel and the worship of the golden calf.
This
is where Stephen really started to press home his primary point. Nothing that he said in his speech was out of
line with what had actually taken place.
However, we all know that sometimes when we present the facts to someone
in a very plain manner; it can tend to rub them the wrong way. Stephen spoke about how Israel had rebelled
against God in their worship of the golden calf. After speaking very briefly about the
leadership of Israel under Joshua, David, and Solomon, he spoke about how God
had continuously sent prophets to teach them about things like the need for
repentance, coming judgments, and most notably the coming Messiah. Yet, almost every time the prophets were
rejected. Then, when God did send the
long awaited Messiah, he too was rejected by the Jews.
During
the midst of his speech, Stephen was also pointing out that one of the charges
against him was something that by Jewish traditions shouldn’t even be an
offense. You see, Stephen’s giving the
history of Israel and their relationship to God also pointed out that it wasn’t
as if the temple was absolutely necessary for the worship of God, at least not
the grand temple that they somewhat worshipped.
As Stephen spoke about the time of Israel in the wilderness, he spoke
about the tabernacle (the portable “temple” that the Hebrews took with them as
they traveled). He spoke about how God was
very much present within that place of worship.
We know from history that David designed the temple and that his son
Solomon was king for the construction and completion of it, but it’s
interesting that Stephen chose to say of that temple, “Yet the Most High does not dwell
in houses made by hands.” Our
first thought in reading those words is to somewhat balk at them. After all, the temple was blessed by God at
the time of Solomon’s having it constructed, and it was a point of emphasis for
the prophets that it be reconstructed after Israel had returned from
exile. Even during Stephen’s time, the
temple served as a central place for daily living in the community. So what could Stephen possibly have meant
when he said that God does dwell in the temple?
Well,
remember that one of the charges that Stephen was facing was that he was saying
that Jesus was going to destroy the temple and the law? What Stephen was saying in his speech was
that “Yes, that’s exactly what Jesus has already done, but just not in the ways
that you’re thinking.” That’s why I say
that this really isn’t a defense because a defense would refute the
charges. Stephen is saying that the
charges are exactly right, just that their understanding of them was off. Jesus didn’t destroy the temple, in fact, he
was the temple. He was the very place
where God dwelt with man; it was in him that man was and is able to come to its
greatest understanding of God. And as
for the law, Jesus didn’t destroy the law and customs of Israel, but fulfilled
them. He lived a life of complete
perfection, in complete obedience to God’s will. They weren’t left destroyed, but were
completed. Those ceremonial and cleaning
laws of the Old Testament were rendered obsolete by the once-for-all sacrifice
of Jesus. Yes, the social laws are still
in play, but those aren’t the things that Stephen or Peter or John or any of
the others who proclaimed Christ as the Messiah were speaking about. The laws and customs that they spoke most
against were those cleansing rituals and the Pharisaic laws that had come about
as a corruption of God’s initial laws.
Stephen was pointing out that Israel had in the past, and was continuing
to turn away from God, even when He provided for them a means by which they
might be saved.
Now,
as we would expect, Stephen’s words didn’t sit well with the Sanhedrin. They responded by stoning him. Now, I’m not going to go into any detail
about this, but I want you to notice who is mentioned briefly in verse 58. “Then they cast him out of the city and
stoned him. And the witnesses laid down
their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul.” Now, Saul would later come to be Paul, the
Great Apostle. The witnessing of
Stephen’s stoning on Saul’s behalf we will see had a profound effect of Paul’s
faith later on down the road. But for
our text today, we see Stephen offer up a few final words, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” Both of these phrases sound very similar to
those uttered by Jesus as he breathed his last upon the cross.
Now
the question is put to us, as we continue our look at Acts as a study of the
early church, what lesson from the early church are we to have in mind as we
seek to be a more biblical example of the church today? Well, there are two things that I think we
can take from Stephen’s example. The
first is that Stephen knew the story of the Church; he knew the history of
Scripture. The only way in which we can
truly understand what it is we believe is to have an understanding of what has
happened to get us to this point. If we
only want to know about the now and how we are to currently act, then we’re
missing the foundation, and without a foundation there is no chance for any
long-term stability or lasting faith. If
we only know about the now, then we are actually missing out on the whole of
what Jesus did. When we read the New
Testament and the gospel accounts in particular, we stand amazed at Christ’s
work. However, when we read about what
he had to do and what he had to fulfill from the Old Testament, our amazement
grows exponentially. The second thing
that I think is really important to note from Stephen’s speech is that he was
unashamed. He was completely unashamed
of the gospel that he was presenting and he was completely unashamed and
unapologetic about doing so in front of a group of folks who were hostile to
his message. He knew full well that they
literally held his life in their hands, and yet he delivered his speech
anyway. We need that faith; we need that
courage; we need that sense of being unashamed of the gospel message even in
the midst of a group or situation that is hostile towards it. Stephen is known as the first martyr of the
Church. He’s by no means the last or
possibly even the most famous. However,
there is something special when you’re the first. You’re the one to which all others look to
for advice, leadership, guidance, and even comparison. Now, hopefully none of us will be added to
the list of martyrs in the traditional sense, the sense in which we give up our
lives for the gospel. However, I do hope
that we all experience martyrdom in a much smaller sense, the sense of
unashamedly proclaiming our faith without any regard or really even care for
what or who is around us. After all the
Greek word that we get the modern term martyr from is actually a term that
means witness. In being a martyr, we are
simply to be witnesses for the gospel and see what happens. If the response by those around us is hatred,
so be it; because we are not to worry about our own selves, but are to “seek
first the kingdom of God and his righteousness.” (Matthew 6:33). May each one of us be given the strength of
Stephen in our moments where we are presented with an opportunity to share the
good news of Jesus Christ. Glory be to
God; in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment