Acts 7:55-60; Extreme Sermon Feedback

"But filled with the Holy Spirit, he gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,” he said, “I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” 57 But they covered their ears, and with a loud shout all rushed together against him. 58 Then they dragged him out of the city and began to stone him; and the witnesses laid their coats at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 While they were stoning Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died."

I. Introduction

The martyrdom of Stephen (Acts 7) serves as the occasion for Luke to finish his treatment of the growth of the early Church in Jerusalem. Henceforth, the Apostles will be spread out "to all Judea" and then "Samaria" and, finally, "to the ends of the earth" (cf. Acts 1:8). Acts 7 therefore serves as a sort of literary flaming sword to separate the subsequent age of the Church from the idyllic existence in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem we had the Apostles standing as a united force; there we had the community sharing all things in common; there we had wonders performed and disciples seemingly without number being added to the early Church; there we had the origin of the deaconate. But after Stephen is killed, the disciples are scattered. After Stephen's death, in addition, the ministry in Jerusalem will not be mentioned again--even though we know of the existence of the Jerusalem Church. The Scriptures said, with respect to Christ, "Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered" (Zech. 13:7), but that prophecy could just as easily be applied to Stephen. He was "struck," and all the rest were "scattered" (cf. Acts 8:1).

My tongue-in-cheek title for this essay reflects my assessment of Stephen's "over-the-top" presentation of the Gospel in Acts 7. It really is unprecedented among all the speeches in Acts. The lectionary-makers for today didn't really want you to get into the speech itself; all they focus on is Stephen's martyrdom and his seeing the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God. But you, as well as others, surely are asking the question of why the mob seemed to descend irrationally on Stephen and even grind their teeth against him (7:54). So, this essay will briefly explore three themes: (1) Stephen's extreme message; (2) Their extreme reaction; (3) the extreme transition for the Church. There is, in fact, nothing ho-hum or "normal" about this scene. It is one for the ages.

II. Stephen's Extreme Sermon

Stephen's is the fourth of the evangelistic sermons/speeches delivered in the first seven chapters of Acts, but it is the first given by a "non-Apostle." The earlier ones were of varying length (from about 30 verses to 10), but were gentle on the ears (i.e., were not highly critical of listeners) and usually received thunderously positive reactions. This one, however, is different in every way. First, this is by far the longest of the speeches--reaching to more than 50 verses. Second, this speech spends considerable time rehearsing themes from Israel's early history that none of the others mention (Abraham; Moses and the tabernacle; Joshua's leading the people into the Promised Land). Finally, this speech upbraids the people in language much stronger than the others. In a word, the people always reject the messengers and prophets of God. One example is in v. 35:

"It was this Moses whom they rejected when they said, 'Who made you ruler and a judge?'"

Another is in v. 51:

"You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you are forever opposing the Holy Spirit, just as your ancestors used to do."

Obviously, Stephen hadn't taken part in preaching clinics in our major seminaries today. If he had, he would have learned that you aren't supposed to insult your listeners, unless you intend to provoke a negative reaction. But provoke them he did. Indeed, he didn't relent. Not only did he tell the people that they opposed the Holy Spirit, he went one step further (v. 52):

"Which of the prophets did your ancestors not persecute? They killed those who foretold the coming of the Righteous One, and now you have become his betrayers and murderers."

III. Extreme Reaction

Well, what can you expect? When Jesus told his hearers in Luke 4 that they had, as it were, rejected the prophets, they rose up and wanted to throw him off the cliff (Luke 4:29-30); why would it be any different for his follower? They couldn't stand to hear themselves abused yet further, and so they covered their ears, dragged him out of the city, and stoned him to death. Can we blame them? Perhaps your reaction might be, "Well, Stephen was correct" or, if not willing to excuse him completely, you might say, "Well, at least they could have left quietly..." But I think his words are calculated to be provocative. He wants to show that the history of the chosen people has been characterized not simply by disobedience but by betrayal and rejection of the most precious gifts of God. He is trying to say that their behavior in rejecting Jesus (and the earliest Christians didn't seem to have any trouble pointing to the Jewish leaders as the instigators of the crucifixion) was symptomatic of their behavior from the earliest days as a people. It really is theological "trash talk" he is giving them. So, Stephen's extreme interpretation of their past is met by an extreme reaction; they want to get rid of him.

Though their reaction seems to be over-the-top to me, it is fully explicable. Stephen had brought most of it on himself.

IV. Extreme Transition

The transitional thought in the story, as mentioned above, is that the stoning of Stephen paved the way for the Gospel to spread to Judea, Samaria and the ends of the earth. What appeared at first to be a signal defeat for the earliest Christians was transformed into the means by which the Gospel spread even further into the ancient world. But, there is another "transitional" element in this passage--the witnesses, as they were called, laid their garments at the feet of a man named Saul as they stoned Stephen. In other words, we are led to the person who would become the major character in the rest of Acts through this oblique reference at the end of ch. 7. Saul was obviously complicit in Stephen's death, and would become a chief persecutor in the next chapter. Indeed, when Paul tells his own story in his Epistles, he often regrets his earlier engagement as a persecutor of the early Church. Here, he is sort of a passive participant in the martyrdom. Yet, he is in agreement with their aims. By placing Saul/Paul in the vicinity of Stephen's death, and by placing the scattering of all directly at the conclusion of this story (Acts 8:1), Luke is foreshadowing two significant transitions in his narrative.

Conclusion

In one of Jesus' enigmatic sentences, he said:

"from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence (other translations read 'has been coming violently'), and the violent take it by force," Matt. 11:12.

Perhaps this stoning of Stephen may be one of the ways that the kingdom suffered violence. If so, it became the occasion, in Luke's narrative, for people violently (i.e., eagerly, with great passion) to take it by force (by coming to faith). Such is the ambiguous story of our first days--the first days of the Christian Church.

3441