Sacred Spaces

Before the trial of Stephen, the disciples worshipped with the rest of the Jews in the temple, the most sacred place in the world of first-century Judaism. Even Jewish priests were joining the Church. What harmony there was, though, after the first Easter, didn’t last long. The fragility of that peace is not surprising. Jesus’ teaching radically redefined the three symbols which set the Jews apart from their pagan neighbors and occupiers: the temple, the Torah and the promised land. These were central to Jewish cultural identity. All three were also the subject of Stephen’s legal defense to the Jewish ruling council in chapter seven. This was the flashpoint which precipitated the first full-scale persecution of the Church in Jerusalem.

Stephen’s speech is both peculiar and fascinating. He has just been chosen by the people as one of the first deacons, and is clearly a force to be reckoned with. Such was Stephen’s “grace and power” that Luke says those in the synagogues who opposed him were no match for his wisdom. Unable to match wits, his opponents trumped up charges that Stephen was profaning the law of Moses and the temple. The stakes were high: Stephen certainly knew that this was the one offense for which the Romans allowed the Jews to use capital punishment.

Given Luke’s setting of the context, the reader expects a clear and unequivocal rejection of the charges. What we read next, though, appears to modern eyes as a long and confusing retelling of Israel’s history. No wonder some have thought that Stephen wasn’t even answering the charges! George Bernard Shaw—granted, not known for exegesis—called Stephen a “tactless and conceited bore” for repeating history the council already knew. More scholarly commentators have struggled to find relevance in his speech.

Other commentators, though, have seen a great deal of cleverness in his response. What the modern reader may not know is that retelling portions of Israel’s history to make a point can also be found in Psalms 78, 105 and 106 and 1 Sam 12:7-12. As commentator Don Carson points out, this method allowed Stephen to build upon the common ground of their history. He needed considerable skill and subtlety to bridge the tremendous distance between his view and theirs. Yet Stephen doesn’t pull any punches. As we will see, his goal wasn’t to save himself, but to save them.

Since we are dealing with history, let’s look for patterns, especially those related to the charges against Stephen. If you haven’t read it recently, take a glance now in Acts 7. Three patriarchs are described: Abraham, Joseph and Moses. Perhaps the first pattern you will notice is that Stephen is keen on geography. Location after location is mentioned, as if this were an ancient near-east travelogue. Stephen deliberately mentions places outside the temple and holy land where God manifests himself: his revelation to Abraham in Mesopotamia, his giving Joseph wisdom is Egypt, and speaking to Moses out of the burning bush in the desert (a “holy place”, the same phrase his opponents use of the temple in 6:13). This is not a God confined to the temple.

Then Stephen’s history turns to Israel’s treatment of two of their leaders. He recalls how both Joseph and Moses (twice) are rejected by the same people God calls them to deliver. In Moses’ case, this rejection involves the golden calf, which Stephen ties to a passage from Amos condemning Israel for its idolatry—a passage in which Yahweh spurns Israel’s offerings and assemblies, because they lack justice. Stephen uses this prophetic word about offerings to further address the temple. He compares the temple with the tabernacle, pointing out that the latter was built according to God’s instruction, while even Solomon admitted that God does not need a house (Acts 7:48 calling to mind 1 Kings 8:27-30, where Solomon says just this). These words would have stung and angered the council, and probably called to mind passages like Jeremiah 7, where Israel is condemned for putting trust in the temple for safety, rather than in God.

Finally, having plotted the trajectory of Israel’s history through Moses, he follows it straight to his listeners, accusing them of killing the prophets and resisting the Spirit. Craig Keener says of this, “Jewish tradition had heightened Israel’s responsibility for the death of the prophets beyond what was found in the Old Testament, so Stephen’s hearers could not deny his charge.” This is when the members of the council started grinding their teeth and reaching for stones. Stephen surely knew that they would fulfill his accusation that very day.

Stephen does answer the charges: If he’s accused of profaning the temple, they were guilty of believing God was confined to the temple. They say he’s speaking against Moses, yet they are acting precisely in the pattern of those who rejected Moses himself. And in doing so, they have killed the Righteous One predicted by the prophets (v. 52), the very Prophet whom Moses himself foretold (v. 33).

At the core of Stephen’s speech is the temple and the concept of holy places. Most of us are comfortable with the knowledge that God’s presence is confined neither to temple nor church building. For those who experienced it, the burning of our congregation’s last church building drove this truth home. God, we know, is everywhere; with the rending of the temple curtain, no location is elevated above another. In some sense this is a negative conclusion: If Israel once thought of the temple as holy, now no specific place is holy. Seen this way, it may appear that we have lost something with the new covenant.

No place is holier than another—is this really what Stephen’s saying? If anything, his history shows that a holy place is wherever God chooses to act or to manifest himself, whether that be the mobile tabernacle or the desert or Egypt. Consider the words of Jesus regarding the temple, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days” (Jn 2:19). While John attests that he was referring to his resurrection, through the lens of Paul’s letters we also rightly see that the Body of Christ, his Church, is also God’s temple (Eph 2:21; 1 Cor 3:16-17).

We read in the Old Testament that to go to Solomon’s temple was to visit a place of tremendous holiness. They entered his gates with thanksgiving and his courts with praise, mindful of the might and majesty all around them in the very house of God. One of the most heartbreaking passages in scripture describes the departure of God’s awesome presence from the temple, in Ezek 10.

Because of Christ’s sacrifice, God’s Spirit, in all his power and mercy, dwells with his people wherever we gather. That may be in a church building or a home-church meeting in someone’s basement or with believers serving the homeless in a soup kitchen. What an incredible change! Let us approach our church—and our community—with the same excitement and expectation the Jews did the temple, not because he has chosen to dwell within our building, but because he has chosen to dwell among us.

~Tim Collins