But being full of
the Holy Spirit, he [Stephen] gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of
God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; and he said, "Behold, I
see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of
God." (Acts 7:55-56 NASB)
Many critics (desperately, to be blunt) argue
that, when Acts 7:55-56 speaks of Jesus being on the "right hand" of
God the Father, such is a metaphor. In Lynn
Wilder vs. Latter-day Saint (and Biblical) Theology on Divine Embodiment I
refuted this. Indeed, in light of the use of Psa 110:1 (LXX: 109:1) and Dan 7:13
in the passage, and the fact that Luke is presenting a historical narrative and
reporting what Stephen saw in a vision of heaven, such a reading is
eisegetical, and the Latter-day Saint interpretation is sound.
On Acts 7:55-56 and the enthronement of
Jesus, Finnish scholar Timo Eskola wrote:
In verse 55 the writer explains the throne vision that he is going to
present next in the story. “But filled with the Holy
Spirit, he gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the
right hand of God.” his should be considered one of the most important statements
in the Christology of Acts. In this sentence Luke explains the relationship
between Jesus’ eschatological teachings and the exaltation Christology of the
early Church. The vision apparently makes the identification between Jesus and
Son of Man possible.
Luke parallels the
two main sentences in a way that cannot be misunderstood (Acts 7:55-56):
|
“I see . . .
|
the Son of Man
|
standing at the right hand of God”
|
|
“(he) saw . . .
|
Jesus
|
standing at the right hand of God”
|
In his gospel Luke has naturally prepared the way for such an
identification. For example in the prediction of Jesus’ suffering (Luke 9:22)
the resurrection of the Son of Man has been foretold, the reference being Ps.
110:1. In the eschatological speeches the parousia of the Son of Man is
naturally described as a future event (21:27). In these narratives, however,
enthronement is not the issue.
Another interesting detail in the Lukan gospel tradition is Jesus’
debate with the scribes over the Son of David. This is a story where the key is
a word-play on Psalm 110. With a riddle concerning the son of David Jesus
questioned the traditional Jewish concept of political messianism (Luke
21:40-44; and par., especially Mark 12:35-37). In Jewish eschatology the
Davidic messiah was expected to be an ideal king who would restore the Davidic
dynasty and destroy its enemies. The riddle was based on Psalm 110 where the
Davidide is raised on the throne of glory: “The Lord says to my lord, ‘Sit at
my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool’.” (110:1). The dynamic
of the word-play is based on the word ‘Lord’. “David thus calls him Lord; so
how can he be his son?” (Luke 20:44; cf. Mark 12:37). The point of Jesus’
speech is evident. The messiah cannot be merely a political earthly king. He
must be a heavenly ruler who shall also be David’s Lord, not his son and
subordinate. Therefore, in this story too the Son of Man is actually identified
with the son of David.
Finally in the Gospel of Luke there is a bridge that reaches up to the
speech of Stephen in the Acts. When Jesus is brought before the council for a
trial, his provocative answer to the chief priests summarizes his eschatological
proclamation (Luke 22:69). “But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at
the right hand of the power of God” (Fitzmyer, Acts, 392). This is an enthronement statement par excellence. The
Son of Man is enthroned “at the right hand” of God. For Luke, the awaited
enthronement is even nearer (“from now on”) than for Mark, who probably did not
alter the traditional narration (“You will see the Son of Man seated . . . “,
Mark 14:62).
For Luke, and apparently for his tradition as well, the enthronement of
the Son of Man takes place at the resurrection. This fact essentially alters
the traditional scholarly view of futurist eschatology. The same concept of
exaltation has already appeared to be the basic line of thought in several
speeches of the Acts. In Acts 2, naturally, Jesus has been made the Lord and
Messiah in the resurrection. In Acts 3 the reign of this Messiah is described.
He “must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration” (Acts
3:20-21). For Luke, the time of the “Church” is the time of Christ’s reign.
Therefore, in Stephen’s speech too the basic structure of early exaltation
Christology may be detected. As the new Moses the exalted Jesus is the leader
of Israel, a heavenly king. He is a universal ruler who has been enthroned on
the throne of Glory in his resurrection. As an enthroned leader Christ is
simultaneously the promised Davidide. Even though such identification of
different types may seem odd, we must note that early Jewish Christian thought
did not make scholarly distinctions between such definitions. Such Christology
appears to be associative. The writers freely combined suitable elements of
tradition, whenever it helped to reach the goal. For Luke and evidently for
several other early writers before him, the promised Davidide was actually the
Danielic Son of Man, who was expected to have a unique status in heaven. (Timo Eskola, Messiah and the Throne: Jewish Merkabah
Mysticism and Early Christian Exaltation Discourse [Studies in Jewish and
Christian Literature; Dallas: Fontes Press, 2019], 179-81)