Released From The Cult

Acts 6:8-7:60

There are three questions I want to try to answer from this text.

The first comes from verse 14.  They accuse Stephen of saying, “This Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place [i.e., the temple in Jerusalem], and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.”  My first question is: Did Jesus say this?  Did Jesus say that he would destroy the temple?

The second question is: Did Stephen mean what Jesus meant?  We will see that there is a difference in the way they talked about the destruction of the temple?  Why the difference?

Third, why did Luke say in verse 13 that the people set up false witnesses to say that Stephen said these things?  If Stephen, and Jesus, really said that Jesus would destroy the temple and change the customs of Moses, how were the witnesses false?

Do These Issues Matter to Us?

Before we tackle those three questions, there is one other, just by way of introduction, namely, Does any of this matter?  Should you care about what’s going on here?

Ok, the temple seems like a long time ago.  Whether it was destroyed doesn’t really seem to relate to my life, to my job, or my marriage, or my kids, or my health, or my money, or my struggles.

I will let you answer that, but as you think about it, consider these three things.

Stephen died for the truth that he spoke about on this day.  In fact he chose to go on speaking this truth when he knew that it could cost him his life.

He saw it in their eyes and in the grinding of their teeth.  He could have kept quite when they arrested him and asked him to give an account.  He didn’t have to say those most provocative things anybody could ever say in that context at the end of his speech.

Yet he chose to cop the consequences rather than not speak about Jesus’ destruction of the temple and his changing the customs of Moses.  Verse 10 says that Stephen spoke with wisdom and with the Spirit so he was no fool to choose to die for this truth.

We would be the fools to say ho-hum about this matter and tune out.  It is at least 10,000 times more important for your life than any World Cup.

The Jewish leaders killed for this truth.  They saw it as so threatening that, out of rage, they thought it was better to kill a good man than to let this truth about the destruction of the temple be spread.

The third signal that this is very vital for us is that when Luke recorded Stephen’s defence in chapter 7, he gives it more space than any other speech or message in the whole book of Acts.  Longer than any of Peter’s sermons.  Longer than any of Paul’s sermons.

Luke judged this issue big.

Why?

It is because in the end it’s not about the temple so much,  it’s about, “who is Jesus”.

Jesus is bigger than you imagine.  He’s bigger than anybody imagined.

Question 1: Did Jesus Really Say These Things?

Did Jesus say that he was going to destroy the temple?

The Gospel Accounts

The Gospels tell us that, at Jesus’ trial, false witnesses came forward and said, “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.’”  When the high priest asked him to make an answer to the charge, Jesus said nothing.

Matthew (27:40) and Mark (15:29) also tell us that the crowds who passed by the cross while Jesus was dying, mocked Jesus by saying, “You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself!  If you are the Son of God, come down from this cross.”

Most importantly, John 2:19 tells us about one situation when Jesus actually spoke words like these. He had just driven the corrupt money-lenders out of the temple, and the Jews asked him, “What sign have you to show us for doing this?”

Jesus answered, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

They come back at him, “It has taken 46 years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” Then John comments, “But he spoke of the temple of his body” (John 2:21).

Here Jesus says, “You destroy the temple, and I will build it again in three days.

Since we know that destroying the temple referred to his death and we also know (from John 10:18) that he was laying down his own life voluntarily, it is very likely that he would also say, “I will destroy this temple, and in three days build it again”—which is what he was accused of saying.

What Jesus Meant

Now what did Jesus mean?  Did he simply mean that he would die and then rise again—his body would be destroyed and then raised up in three days?

If that’s all that he meant, then why did he refer to himself as the temple?  Or worse, why would he say words like this when he was standing in the temple itself, knowing that most people would take him to refer to the temple building and all that goes on there?

I think the answer is that both for those who had ears to hear, and for those who thought this through after his resurrection (like Stephen did!), Jesus meant: When I die, the temple dies.  When I am destroyed, the temple is destroyed.

When Jesus offered himself and his own blood once for all to make an eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:12, 25–28; 10:10–12), all the animal sacrifices of the temple were “destroyed.”

When Jesus became our one and only high priest who has interceded for us and lives forever (Hebrews 7:25), the temple priesthood was “destroyed.”

If that’s true, where do you go then to see God’s glory?  Where do you now go to enjoy fellowship with God?

It’s not the temple anymore.  You go to Jesus.

Peter says, “God raised him from the dead and gave him glory” (1 Peter 1:21).  James (2:1) calls him, “the Lord of glory.”  The temple is no longer the place where you go to see the glory of God.  Jesus is the place.

The answer to the first question then, is Yes, Jesus said that he would destroy the temple.

Question 2: Did Stephen Mean What Jesus Meant?

Now the second question is: Did Stephen mean what Jesus meant when he carried this teaching on into the early church?

The reason I ask this is because verse 14 seems to imply that Stephen was saying that the destruction is still future, but Jesus had said the destruction would happen immediately and the rebuilding would take place in three days.  Verse 14: "We have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place."  Stephen is saying that it will happen.  Jesus said it’s done in three days.

How do we understand this?  It’s not difficult.

What Jesus meant was that the basis of the Old Testament sacrificial, priestly, worship system, which focused on the temple, was destroyed when he died—destroyed the way a shadow is destroyed when the reality lies down on it and takes its place.  Jesus removed the whole basis of the temple system by laying himself down as the reality that all the shadows were representing.  In that sense the destruction was complete in three days, and he rose as the new temple for all who belong to him.

What Stephen had to deal with was that the dismantling of the old temple system did not happen overnight.  It was happening gradually.

This puts a whole new slant on Acts 6:7 from last week’s text, where it says, “and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith.”

What that really means is: a lot of priests came to believe that they were out of a job.  A great many priests came to believe that Jesus is the one and only high priest now, and will never die, and all Christians are priests in his service.

Some heard that and were excited about that.  (And I imagine no more having to scoop up animal poop from the temple floor was a bonus).

Others heard that and were threatened by that.  You could get yourself killed saying things like this.

So what Stephen meant when he said that Jesus “will destroy” the temple, is that, just as Jesus took away the basis of the old system, so now he will go on to dismantle its practices until it is no more. Stephen and Jesus are in perfect harmony on this great issue.  The temple is done for.  Jesus has destroyed it and will destroy it until it is clear to all that he alone is the one and only sacrifice for sins, the one and only high priest to God, and the one and only dwelling place of the fullness of the glory of God.

Question 3: Why, Then, Were There False Witnesses?

Finally, I ask: What was the point of the false witnesses then?

I ask this because Luke says in verse 13 that the people set up false witnesses to say that Stephen said these things: “And they set up false witnesses who said, ‘This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the law’.”

If Stephen, and Jesus, did in fact say that Jesus would destroy the temple and change the customs of Moses, in what sense were the witnesses false?

What Luke Meant by False Witnesses

What did Luke mean when he said that?

What he meant was that the witnesses were putting a false twist to a true statement.  It is true that Stephen was saying that Jesus would destroy the temple and change some of the customs of Moses. It is not true however, that this was “against this holy place and the law,” or, as verse 11 says, and that this was “blasphemous words against Moses and God.”

What the false witnesses did not grasp at all was that the kind of destroying that Jesus was doing was a fulfilling of everything that God and Moses promised in the law—the forgiveness of sins, a personal priestly advocate with God, the presence and accessibility of his glory.  Stephen was not against Moses and God.  He was not against the temple and the customs.  He was for their fulfilment in Jesus the Messiah.

This is the way it was always meant to be.  In fact it never really was about the temple and being able to say, ‘Well, we’ve got this special holy place where we can meet God and you don’t.’

This is one of the themes Stephen picks up in his defence speech.

He was accused of being against this holy place, and so he says, ‘OK, you want to talk about places.  Let’s talk about places.’

Look at verse 2.  “Brothers and fathers, hear me.  The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham.”

Where?  Where did Abraham see God’s glory?  In the temple?  In a holy place?

No.  When he was in pagan Mesopotamia.  That’s how it all began.

Or what about Joseph, v9?  Sold by his jealous brothers into Egypt.  Surely he’s out of God’s reach there.  Actually, “God was with him.”

Or even Moses.  Where was he when an angel appeared to him, v30?

In the wilderness, in Midian, in a bush.

Moses went on, v36, “performing wonders and signs”.

Where?

In Egypt.  At the Red Sea.  In the wilderness, for forty years.

Stephen is emphasising all these different places.  You can’t contain God to a place, or to certain religious rituals!

Even when the temple was built, it still should’ve been known, v48, that “the most high does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says,

Heaven is my throne,
    and the earth is my footstool.
What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord,
    or what is the place of my rest?
⁵⁰ Did not my hand make all these things?

You stiff-necked people… and so on and so on.

It was never about the temple, and having holy places and holy customs.

They want to try and contain God, but Jesus comes and explodes that whole idea.

So when Jesus came he destroyed the temple.

He doesn’t destroy the temple because he didn’t like the temple, or out of hatred for the temple or because it really was a blessing for millions of people over many generations.

How Jesus "Destroyed" the Temple

Jesus destroyed the temple the way the day your son comes home from war destroys the need to write letters.  He destroyed the temple the way the rising sun destroys the need for streetlights and headlights.  He destroyed the temple the way a descending reality destroys its shadow.

If you stand under one of these lights…

If the Messiah is coming down from heaven, with forgiveness and advocacy and glory, and the light of God shining upon him, then the first thing that will be seen is his shadow on the earth.  And so it was in the sacrifices and priestly service of the old temple.  As the reality gets closer the shadow becomes smaller, and when the reality lands on its shadow, it swallows it up entirely and it is no more.

That does not mean that the reality was against the shadow, or that it blasphemed the shadow.  

It was destroyed because the reality had come and the shadow was gone and that’s only threatening when you don’t want the reality, when you love to play in the shadows.

Jesus has come and he says, ‘I’m here.  It’s all about me now, because in fact, it always has been.’

Even Moses said in v37, “God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers.”

He’s talking about Jesus.  It’s always been about Jesus.

Which means a few things:

You can’t contain Jesus.  He just won’t let you.

In what ways might you try to contain Jesus?

You try to contain Jesus when you say things like:

“Well, I just like to think of Jesus as…” and fill in the blanks yourself.

“I just like to think of Jesus as a good teacher, a great bloke, a wonderful moral example.”

Sorry, Jesus doesn’t allow for that.  You can’t put a box around Jesus.  You can’t compare Jesus to anybody else.

If ever, while you’re having thoughts about Jesus, start to think to yourself, “Yeah, I think I’ve this Jesus sorted out,” you need to think again.

“By far the most disturbing thing about Jesus of Nazareth is that he does not fit into any pigeon-hole.  Everything about him is unique.  He is quite literally incomparable.  You can call him a madman if you like, but if that was so, he was quite exceptionally mad, for he claimed to be God in the flesh.  You can call him a fraud if you like, but if that was so, he was that best con-man who ever lived, because he rose from the dead before many witnesses.  Whatever he was, he was not like anybody else.”

You try to contain Jesus when you say things like:

“Well, I just like to not think about Jesus.”

Who do you think you are?

Well, who do we think Jesus is?

If the apostolic message is true, it is the most important thing that has ever happened in the history of the world.  If it is false, it is the most outrageous lie ever perpetrated on the general public.

You can’t adopt a non-committal position.  The claims of Jesus demand a verdict.

You try to contain Jesus when you say things like:

“Christianity is really only for people who look like this or sound like that.”  And usually the “this” or the “that” is “like us”.  “Christianity is really just for the nice people.”  Jesus won’t be contained to this sort of person or that sort of people.  He won’t be contained to our view on who we think should be in or who we think should be out.

That’s what these Jews were trying to do, but they were so out of kilter with the purposes of God it wasn’t funny.

It’s no coincidence that it’s not until after Stephen’s speech here, saying that God won’t be contained to holy places and rituals anymore, that the gospel of Jesus gets out of Jerusalem.  Even for the disciples this is something they needed to learn.

I expect we’ll see more of that in due course.

For now, if our view of Christianity isn’t multi-ethnic, then perhaps our view of Jesus is too small.

“Son of Man”, v 56…

You try to contain Jesus when you say things like:

 “The only real way to do church is like this.”

Even in the New Testament there’s a warning against those who have the form of religion but don’t know anything about the glory of Jesus.

It’s not about the forms.

Don’t raise the forms to a level they shouldn’t be.  Even our forms here.  The way we dress, the style of music, our order of service.  Our building.

We don’t need a new home base.

The moment we start thinking, “Well God will only bless us, God will only do this or that, when we’re in the new building”, we’re containing Jesus – in our thoughts at least.

Now, we think, quite confidently, that the new home base we really help us to declare and display the glory of Jesus more than we do now, and so we go for it.

A new building however, is not going to be a magic bullet to fix all our problems.  Or in itself grant us blessings.

Don’t get hung up on the forms.

You try to contain Jesus when you say things like:

“Jesus doesn’t impact my whole life.”

“Yeah, how I spend part of my time, or how I spend part of my money.  Part of what I do in my job, or my marriage, or with my kids, or my health, or in my struggles…”

Jesus is too big to say those sorts of things.

He is the reality to which everything else points.

Which is good news, because today we have the reality.  Jesus Christ has come into the world to forgive sins once and for all, to be our go-between forever and ever, and to reveal the glory of God.

This is what Stephen died for.  May God help us to see it the way he saw it, and cherish Jesus our new temple more than anything in the world.