The scattering of the Hellenist
Christians into Samaria and Judea allows for a reset of the Jesus model amid
his followers by renewing his practices and strategies amid them. Stephen and
Philip were the initial Hellenist Christian witnesses/prophets that moved the
gospel forward. Stephen challenged second-Temple Judaism and the
Temple-theology that was prevalent in Judaic society. In doing so Stephen went
directly against the highest held traditions of the Jewish leadership in
Jerusalem. He elevates the practices and strategies of Jesus by following a
similar agenda through the use of social space to effectively communicate the
Gospel. Wright explains,
He takes to a
new level the charge which Peter and the others have been laying, all through,
against the Jewish leaders of the day. It isn’t just that they rejected God’s
Messiah, the Righteous One, and handed him over to be killed by the pagans. In
doing so, they were simply acting out, at long range, the pattern of rebellious
behaviour set by their ancestors. Instead of the recounting of Israel’s history
becoming a ‘story of salvation’, as so often, it turns out to be a ‘story of
rebellion’. Stephen is claiming the high moral ground. He stands with Abraham,
with Moses, with David and Solomon, and with the prophets, while the present
Jewish leadership are standing with Joseph’s brothers, with the Israelites who
rejected Moses, and with those who helped Aaron build and worship the golden
calf.[1]
Stephen appears to demonstrate a clear familiarity with
Jesus’ interactions with the various leaders within the Judaic culture through
the transference of power in social space. In the previous blogs it was
demonstrated that Jesus used social space at the dinner given in his honor by
Simon the Leper in order to transfer social power between Simon and the
disreputable woman. Stephen follows a similar pattern that emulates this
descriptive Christology of the Gospels. He appears to become the teacher to the
Sanhedrin. The altercation unfortunately led to his martyrdom.
Philip on the other hand went to
the Samaritans. The pattern is similar to Jesus’ various trips through
Samaritan territory.[2]
Philip, the Hellenist Christian, crosses a cultural barrier to engage the
Samaritans. The practice and strategy of cross-cultural engagement was endorsed
by Jesus at the announcement of his mission in synagogue Galilee. The
cross-cultural engagement deviates from Judaic norms of the separation of ethos/races.
This cross-cultural action of engaging the Samaritans is the precursor of the
mission to the Gentiles. The Samaritans where considered a peripheral and
marginalized people. Philip breaks a long held cultural barrier. Flemming
writes about Philip’s practice and strategy of bridging this threshold,
First, he
preaches to a group of people who were social, political and religious rivals
of the Jews, the Samaritans (Acts 8:4-25). For Luke they were not Jews in the
strict sense, although they remained on the fringes of Judaism. Rather, the
Samaritans ‘stood as a halfway house between the Jewish and Gentile world’s
leading to a transition to the Gentile mission.[3]
Philip uses the cultural relevance of the relationship
between the Jews and the Samaritans as a way to break the ethnic barrier in
order to share the Gospel. Philip’s practices and strategies are in direct
continuity with the way of Jesus by engaging marginalized people. Philip’s
venture into the Samaritan communities serves as a trajectory of moving the
gospel into multicultural expressions beyond the Judaic context. Johnson and
Harrington elaborate,
The Samaritans
are not Gentiles. Indeed they lay claim – not without some justice – to being
an ancient and deeply traditional form of the religion of Israel. In their
eyes, it was the Judeans who were the interlopers and innovators. But in the
eyes of contemporary Judeans, they were at best among the ‘lost sheep’ of
Israel. The evangelization of them by Philip therefore continues the work of
Jesus in reaching out to the marginal and outcast among the people and inviting
them to a full participation in the restored people of God forming around the
Prophet whom God raised up.[4]
The implication of this quote is that God is actively in
pursuit of other people groups through the spreading of the Gospel by the
Hellenists. The text indicates that the practices and strategies of the
Hellenist Christians follow in continuity with those of Jesus. The emphasis of
the narrative/story clearly engages the Hellenists as the candidates to
overcome the barriers of cross-cultural missions. The ability is due to the
familiarity the Hellenists possess in the arena of engaging multiple cultures
in the Diaspora. As the Hellenists travel to the surrounding territories God
prepares the Jerusalem church for development of the Gentile mission through
Peter’s visions and encounter with the household of Cornelius.
[1] Wright,
119.
[2]
Matthew 19:1-2, Mark 10:1, Luke 9:51, John 4:1-42.
[3] Flemming,
Contextualization in the New Testament, 33–34. P.U. Maynard-Reid, “Samaria,” in Ralph
P. Martin and Peter H. Davids, Dictionary of the Later New Testament &
Its Developments (InterVarsity Press, 1997), 1076.
[4] Johnson and Harrington, The Acts of
the Apostles, Acts 8:4–25.
No comments:
Post a Comment