Troublemakers 滋事分子

As I was reading through Acts over the last few weeks, I was struck by the number of times during his missionary exploits that Paul was hounded by Jews who caused trouble in order to disrupt his public preaching. It seems that there was a love-hate relationship between the Jews and Paul. As Christians, we often see Paul’s preaching as focused on the resurrection of Jesus, But for the Jews, the real problem with Paul was that in their eyes he ‘subverted’ the Old Testament (OT) scriptures for his own use and it was the Scribes who were the ones who had authority and control over what the OT taught. It seems pretty clear that within a decade or so Christians were using the OT as ‘their’ scriptures and interpreting it to show that Jesus was the Messiah that it promised. After all, they had no other authoritative scriptures to use until much later. This is why the Romans often thought of Christianity as just another Jewish sect which was causing dispute and unrest. And so later on, ironically, it is Paul himself who is charged with being a ‘troublemaker, stirring up riots among Jews all over the world’ by the Jewish leaders in a court case before a Roman authority (Acts 24). Despite all their previous attempts to intimidate him, the Jewish leaders had failed to silence him.

In a recent court case in Shanghai, a similar charge of ‘picking quarrels and provoking trouble’ was levelled against citizen journalist Zhang Shan for reporting events in Wuhan during the COVID-19 outbreak. (‘Paying price for free speech’ Sunday Morning Post, Jan 3). Many things have changed dramatically over the last 2,000-odd years that separate these two court cases, but the similarities are striking. In both cases, the charge was actually a front for the real issue. However, the charge is intended to solve the real issue. The real issue is about maintaining control of the storyline and deterring others, and the penalty (if the charge is proven) will have precisely this effect by silencing the ‘troublemaker’.

In Shanghai, Zhang Shan was found guilty and sentenced to four years in prison during which her freedom to speak will be curtailed and her harsh treatment will be a significant deterrent to others, In Caesarea, Paul’s case was referred to Rome where eventually according to legend he was martyred, but not before he was able to exercise his freedom of speech to encourage many others to be strong in their faith and resist intimidation.

過往幾個星期，我在讀使徒行傳的時候，深受保羅在宣教旅程中被猶太人追擊的次數所震撼；他們一直找他麻煩，意圖擾亂他的公開宣講。保羅和猶太人之間似乎存在一種愛憎關係。作為基督徒的我們通常認為保羅宣講的焦點在於耶穌復活，但對猶太人而言，真正的問題在於保羅在他們眼中「顛覆」了舊約為己作用，況且當時只有文士有權威控制舊約的教導。顯然基督徒在那十多年來一直用舊約為「他們的」聖經，並加以詮釋以證明耶穌是那應許的彌賽亞。畢竟他們到很久以後才有其他具權威的經典。因此羅馬人常常以為基督教只是猶太教另一個引發爭議和動盪的分支。然後諷刺的是，保羅被猶太領袖在羅馬官員面前就一宗官司指控為「鼓動普天下眾猶太人生亂的」（徒 24）。儘管猶太領袖們早前嘗試施加各種威嚇，都無法把保羅滅聲。

最近上海一宗官司有類似的指控，公民記者張展被控「尋釁滋事」，因為她在新冠疫情爆發期間報導武漢發生的事件。(‘Paying price for free speech’ Sunday Morning Post, Jan 3) 兩宗跨越二千多年世事變遷的官司，竟然驚人地相似。兩宗案件的指控其實只是真正問題的片面。但指控的目標是要解決真正的問題。那真正的問題在於控制故事情節以及威懾他人，而那懲罰（假如指控證明屬實）就是將會達到令「滋事分子」滅聲的效果。

在上海，張展被判處入獄四年；期間她的言論自由將受到限制，她受到的嚴刑會對他人有顯著的威懾力。在凱撒利亞，保羅的案件轉交羅馬，即傳說中他殉道的地方；但在那之前他仍能行使他的言論自由，鼓勵許多人在信仰裏堅強和抵擋威嚇。