Over the last few weeks, we: met Stephen, a Greek speaking Christian, chosen by the church to assist the apostles by ensuring that the daily food distribution was handled appropriately and fairly. learned that Stephen did not just stay waiting tables, but began to preach the Good News of Jesus to Greek speaking Jews living in Jerusalem found that Stephen ran into opposition as he was charged with: speaking against the Temple speaking against Moses and the Law

Stephen’s Overview of the Life of Moses Moses was born during a time when the Egyptian pharaoh had ordered the murder of all newborn Hebrew boys. Fearing a revolt, the Pharaoh had oppressed the people of Israel with forced labour. Stephen affirmed that Moses was “no ordinary child”. Stephen mentions that Moses was raised in the courts of Pharaoh, privy to the education of the Egyptians, becoming “powerful in speech and action”.

“By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin.” (Hebrews 11:24-26) Moses’ choice was more than just a choice to “visit” his people; it was a choice to abandon his rightful place of authority and identify with his people, even to the extent of experiencing the same mistreatment they were experiencing.

Moses intervened in a conflict, killing an Egyptian who had been savagely mistreating an Israelite slave. The Israelites failed to recognize that God was at work through Moses for their salvation and they rejected him. Moses was called by God to return to the ones who had rejected him, to lead them out of captivity. Empowered by God, Moses was sent, not to intervene in a simple squabble, but as the ruler and deliverer of God’s people, according to Stephen. Stephen mentions that Moses was gifted to perform “wonders and signs” as a witness to God’s presence with him as he led out the people of Israel from Egypt.

God indicates that He had “heard their groaning and [has] come down to set them free”. (Acts 7:34) God “coming down” to set his people free took the form of the sending of Moses. If Moses is sent as a representative of God, empowered as “God come down”, then a rejection of Moses would in effect be a rejection of God himself, correct?

Stephen next mentions that Moses “received living words to pass on to us” – a very interesting way to refer to the Law given to Moses on Mount Sinai. Charged with speaking against the Law, Stephen affirms the Law as the very words of God. It was as the Law was given to Moses that he spoke these words of prophecy: “God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your own people” (Acts 7:37). Stephen’s point? One cannot accept the Law, without accepting this prophecy of One to come. Reject the prophecy and one rejects the Law.

Though Moses was a possessor of the living words of God, the Israelites refused to obey him, desiring to worship idols of their own making instead. And so, God turned away from His people, allowing them to follow their rebellious hearts all the way to their eventual exile at the hands of Babylon. Stephen points out that just as the Temple was ordained to pass away in favour of something better, so too were Moses and the Law he mediated to the people of Israel. Just as the voice of God was heard through the words of Moses, so too would the word of God be heard through this coming prophet.

The Sanhedrin viewed themselves as faithful adherents to the Law, part of an unbroken chain of Law-observance. Stephen reminds the Sanhedrin that they are actually linked to a long line of “God-rejectors”, a chain of idol creators. Stephen’s words were aimed at moving the members of the Sanhedrin to repentance and eventual acceptance of Christ. Stephen calls the members of the Sanhedrin “stiff-necked people”, an allusion to God’s charge against the people of Israel for the construction of the golden calf in Exodus.

The members of the Sanhedrin were a people who had also rejected the prophets who heralded the coming Messiah and had most of these men murdered! Jesus had broached this subject with the teachers of the law. “You say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets” (Matthew 23:30-31). How could they claim succession from their ancestors, yet claim they would have acted differently towards they prophets? Their actions towards Jesus confirm their connection to these disobedient murderers.

The similarities between Moses and Jesus are eerie: both escaped a decree of infanticide both spent their childhood in Egypt both are called rulers and deliverers of the people of Israel both performed wonders both possessed God’s word to His people both left places of privilege to identify with those oppressed in slavery.

Both Moses and Jesus were rejected by the people they had come to save. “He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him”. (John 1:11) Stephen’s question seems to be how can the Sanhedrin so exalt Moses, yet soundly reject Jesus? Rather than argue that he didn’t speak against the Temple, Moses or the Law, Stephen exalts Christ to his rightful place of precedence. In a sense, Stephen flips the charges back against the Sanhedrin.

The Good News: Jesus Christ was sent of God to earth to die on a cross for the forgiveness of sin and subsequently raised to live by God to provide a way into eternal relationship with the God of the universe. The early church existed as witnesses of this and, by the Holy Spirit, we too are witnesses to this reality. There are but two responses to the message of Jesus Christ – we can reject it, as did the Pharisees or we can accept it. Rejecting Jesus leaves us resistant to the Holy Spirit and with hearts and ears that are unresponsive to and unaware of the work of God in their midst. Have I fully received Jesus, becoming one born of God or have I rejected Him, expecting my righteous behaviour to put me in favour with God?

The people of Israel had permitted even their worship of God to become influenced by paganism. Paganism very simply is the worship of idols of our own making - the Temple and the Law had become their idols of worship, rather than the God who stood behind both of these things. Have we allowed idolatry to sneak into our Christianity? Have we allowed things to take the rightful place of Jesus Christ as our object of worship? Does the God who stands behind all of these other things remain our sole object of worship?