The Angelic Face of My Doom

And Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people. But some men from what was called the Synagogue of the Freedmen, including both Cyrenians and Alexandrians, and some from Cilicia and Asia, rose up and argued with Stephen. But they were unable to cope with the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking. Then they secretly induced men to say, "We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God." And they stirred up the people, the elders and the scribes, and they came up to him and dragged him away and brought him before the Council. They put forward false witnesses who said, "This man incessantly speaks against this holy place and the Law; for we have heard him say that this Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place and alter the customs which Moses handed down to us." And fixing their gaze on him, all who were sitting in the Council saw his face like the face of an angel. (Acts 6:8-15 NASB)

 In working through this passage, Stephen's opponents confuse me.  Who are they exactly?  The way the text is grammatically constructed, they are either a group called Freedmen made up of people from Northern Africa and Asia Minor, or they are a group of Freedmen and others from these two regions.  The other thing is the four areas mentioned aren't really close to each other.  Two are from North Africa, and two are from Asia Minor.  It seems an oddly selective group, unless they all have previous slavery in common.  It's possible that Luke just figures his readers will just figure it out.

The other interesting thing about this group is their decision to argue with Stephen.  Why would they take it on themselves if other groups in the city seemed to think so highly of the new group?  The answer may lie in the regions they are from.  Alexandria in particular was regarded as one of the great centers for learning in the whole known world.  This was especially true for Jews for whom there had been for hundreds of years a very respected school there.  It later became a center for Christian learning, and an entire school of early theological thought development is ascribed to the city/region.  Those of that region could have been a source of conflict with this emerging group with Judaism.

That they were slaves actually makes little difference since slaves were often very well educated and used as tutors for the rich.  And in those days it was more an economically defined group rather than racial.  So, this group of former slaves from dispersed regions outside of Judea confront Stephen.  Stephen could very well have been from regions outside Judea as well, adding additional fuel to any such discussion.  But the confrontation failed to overcome Stephen in wisdom of their argument or their spirit with which it was presented.  They were well and good trounced in this public forum.  So they resort to plan B.

Another odd thing about this group is their ability to get the people going on false pretenses.  The two points they bring up that gets the mob rolling are blasphemy against Moses and God.  Once in the court setting, they are more specific about the temple and the law of Moses (or traditions of Moses once it gets right down to it).  While the text implication that they are deceptive (bribing and false witnesses), the argument actually sounds somewhat similar to things of which Jesus was accused, and things He actually taught.

Jesus did prophecy that Jerusalem would be destroyed and how.  He warned His disciples to immediately flee the city when they saw certain things happen signalling its immanent destruction.  He also spoke against the traditions of the elders while on the other hand saying He came to fulfill the law.  So, the confusing false accusation is one that would be difficult to disentangle from what he may have been truly saying, which also may have earned him the punishment coming in the next chapter.  It's one of those situations where, sure he's being lied about, but here the truth wouldn't really help him be acquitted. In that situation, under that stress, and faced with this mob and political power, Stephen looks like an angel; a messenger straight from heaven.  Not what one might expect in someone in that situation.

So, at this point in the story (not venturing into his speech in the next chapter), what is my take-away?  Stephen represents for me an example of someone willing and ready to go to whatever social extreme for his Master.  What I mean by "social extreme" is that he is willing to sacrifice the popularity enjoyed by the Jerusalem church in obedience to his Master.  It's not just his popularity with the people, but after this the whole church is persecuted.  There is no question in his demeanor or attitude, he doesn't back down or soften the message given to him by the Spirit of his Master.  This is the same quality in the apostles in the previous chapter.  They are ready to be completely shut down and killed rather than back off of the message to which they testify.  And they don't consider sacrifice of the whole congregation for this truth a problem. 

What would that mean for the pool of those who claim to believe in Jesus as Savior in the United States of America?  That would be truly shocking to this modern country.  No one does that. I worry about what my decisions might mean for my family, what my obedience might cost others around me.  Stephen and the apostles don't balk at such a cost.  I am worried about what others might think of me if I take a stand on a the uncomfortable truths of Scripture, the uncomfortable character of my Master, and these don't.  I am sad to say, that I am fairly namby pamby when it comes to these things, when compared to Stephen and his church leaders.  I may seem different from a lot of believers in this country, but I don't compare well to believers in other countries.  This church I am a part of (nation-wide group of believers) is sadly weak when it comes to standing for the things of our Master in the public arena.  Some even opt out of that arena altogether.

I see now that I can't.  I have a responsibility to unashamedly obey and stand for the truth of Who Jesus is, and what He is about.  He is about saving a world, including my community.  I should be about that too.  And I should be about these things regardless of the cost.  That's the hard part, or rather hardest part.  It's not like I would do it anyway, I haven't so far and the cost would be negligible.  I hate that!  I can't just write about being sold out to my Master, I have to sell everything within me and have nothing left but Him. 

As I work through my job today, I must sell off what is within me, leaving nothing but my Master dealing with the issues in my job.  As I deal with my daughter, I must sell off what is within me, leaving nothing but my Master dealing with a volatile teenager.  As I interact with my wife, I must sell off all that is within me, any resentments and judgments, and leave nothing but my Master dealing with the woman who has exceeded my dreams.  I need to sell off all that is within me, the fears and selfishness, and leave nothing but my Master to function in my church.  I admit that I must free myself of myself and freely allow my Master to use me to reach into the lives of those around me; on my street, and within my neighborhood.

This is not an easy thing to imagine, let alone accomplish.  This isn't something I can sell on eBay or in a yard sale (what do you think I could get for an addiction?  What's the going rate on selfishness?).  I know that my Master is my only customer for these wares.  He is the only One interested in purchasing such garbage.  But I also know that He uses startling payment, impressive value.  Will I take His immensely precious pearls in exchange for the refuse I hold so dear?  By the way, this is essentially the definition of "Sanctification", in case you were wondering.  And this is a lot less "friendly" than the sterile definition I find in theological dictionaries.  Deep breath.  Well, let's see how far I can go in my spiritual "yard sale" today.