At the end of Acts
7, Luke notes the presence of a young man guarding the clothes of those
involved in the stoning of Stephen, giving his approval to their murderous
action (8:1). Saul. He seems to have been one of an elite band of ruthless,
religious police charged with harassing and uncovering Christians hiding from
persecution and then sending them to prison (v3), a satanic pattern of
hostility and oppression against believers that has been frequently repeated in
countless cultures and circumstances down the centuries. At a human level, it
is impossible to know the unsettling impact that Stephen's dying prayer of
forgiveness (7: 59-60) and his vision of glory (7:55-56) had upon Saul's young
life. Could it be that the eventual conversion of Saul (chapter 9) was in
answer to a dying man's prayer? Only eternity will reveal.

One of the
difficulties in applying the teaching in the Book of Acts, is in knowing what
is merely 'descriptive' of the Church then and what is 'prescriptive' for the
Church now. For example, here in chapter 8, when we read that the first
Christians healed and performed miraculous signs (8:6-7; see also 2:43; 3:6-8;
4:30), and that the Holy Spirit was given after the Samaritans' conversion to
Christ through the laying on of hands (8: 14-17) - are we simply reading what
Luke said happened at that time as historical, one-off, unrepeatable events, or
are we - as present-day believers - expected to follow their example and
imitate what they did? It's a big
question over which individual Christians and church denominations seriously
disagree, and this is not the place to sort it out. However, it seems to me, that the
"miraculous signs" function here as they did in John's Gospel, to
demonstrate that the Apostles were true servants of God's Kingdom just as
clearly as Jesus' miracles demonstrated Him to be God's Son. After all, it was
the same Jesus at work in and through the Apostles (see Acts 1:1-2). That's
what Simon had totally misunderstood (12, 18-24): he saw the miracles simply as spectacular
show-stoppers and the power of the Holy Spirit to be used for personal
purposes. How wrong and how self-centred he was.
And as to the
Apostles travelling to Samaria to bestow the Spirit upon the believers
(vv14-17)? Well, as Jews and Samaritans (their semi-Jewish cousins) were
naturally poles apart relationally (see John 4:9), had God sent the Spirit upon
the Samaritans without comment, a deep division between converted Jewish
Christians and converted Samaritan Christians might well have persisted. But now the Apostles can clearly see that
these Samaritans are true Christ-centred believers, and should not to be
regarded as different from the Jewish believers. Neither race nor ethnicity is
a barrier to hearing and responding to the Gospel, and so the Samaritan
Christians experience a mini-Pentecost of their own. So, I think, this is an important, but only
'descriptive' passage of something that happened, and not to be copied.

And Saul (chapter
9)? His conversion to Christ is
initially seen in his submission to Jesus' unchallengeable authority: notice how Saul calls Him 'Lord' (v5) and
responds to Him with total surrender.
The heavenly vision of the resurrected Jesus commissions Saul as a true
Apostle (all Apostles were witness to Jesus resurrection), it inspires his
preaching (v20,22) and it motivates and sustains him in his pioneering Gospel
outreach to the Gentiles (v15). Lastly, Jesus informs Saul that his Christian
life and ministry will be noted for the suffering that he will endure
throughout (v16). Those who believe in
and follow the suffering Christ may themselves expect to suffer in measure like
Him (v4; see 1 Peter 4:12-16). And that's prescriptive too.
No comments:
Post a Comment