Thoughts on getting stoned

One more day
I leave tomorrow! Yippieee! Of course, the way I've cleverly designed my travel arrangements I'll be traveling pretty much all day tomorrow (fly out of St. Louis at 11:50am and into Islip at 5:25pm, shuttle every half hour to train station, train to Manhattan which I must get to before 7:14pm, subway to friend's house and hopefully arrive about 9:30pm). Then Friday I'll go to JFK and fly to Istanbul! Hooray!! Blogging will be sketchy over these two travel days so you just might get to hear from my sister!

Getting in the mind of Paul
I've been thinking a lot about Paul for the paper I have to write and last night I started thinking about the fact that he stood and held the cloaks for those who were stoning Stephen. Traditionally, we've believed that he held the cloaks because he was too young to be a participant; however, modern scholarship suggests that by holding the cloaks Paul was the instigator and the one giving official sanction to this action (backed up by Acts 7:60). Thinking around that, two things hit me: 1.) Paul earnestly believed he was doing God's work and 2.) God did not choose to save Stephen and shock Paul into conversion in one fell swoop.

Point One
Stoning is a gory and violent process. They are just literally throwing rocks at someone until he is dead. While they are doing this, Stephen is receiving visions from heaven and calling out that this sin not be held against those stoning him. What kind of a person do you have to be to go through with this action in these kind of circumstances? Paul gives us a semi-answer in asserting his zealousness for the law. There is no question that he loved God with a deep conviction. This conviction is what sustained him through this kind of violence. The problem was that he didn't know who God was or what God was about. Wow. That hit home with me. How many times have I zealously or earnestly gone about something that I felt was completely because of God only to have totally missed the boat and actually done harm to those who were truly serving the king of kings? Then, before I went and jumped off a cliff, I remembered the rest of Paul's story which is all about redemption. Even these sins are washed clean in the blood of Jesus.

Point Two
This was more from looking at things from Stephen's perspective. Paul is converted by a bright light and a voice. If I were Stephen, I can well imagine wondering why this bright light and voice couldn't have shone up a few chapters earlier at say, I don't know, my stoning?!? I can hear myself telling God how much more powerful it would be if the rocks bounced off like superman with bullets. I might even remind God about how He had done it this way in the past with Daniel in the lions' den or the fiery furnace. Remember that? Hey, what's more is if this super-miracle took place at the stoning--more people than just Paul could be converted! Then--STOP! How much do these questions sound like Judas claiming that money could have been better used for the poor or Saul from Kings when he claims that he did not obey so that he could make a better sacrifice? I guess the point is that we trust God even when the zealots throw stones and we give Him glory by praying for those who spitefully use us. Ouch. But there it is, Stephen is there speaking to the audience who is best suited to understanding what He has to say and they kill him. Would he do it again? I think he would because he recognizes that it's not about him. How else could he be forgiving them as they do this? What a model of compassionate love this experience would have been to Paul once he did get the revelation. Indeed, it's much more powerful than if Stephen had grown bitter and threw verbal stones back even if he would have been right in what he said.

To "koine" a phrase:
Because it's needed in so many situations let's borrow from Stephen in Acts 7:60 (kurie mai staisais autois tautain tain amart-ian). Loose translation: "Lord, do not hold this sin to them."

Questions, comments, concerns? Please feel free to E-mail me!