Luke’s ambivalent attitude toward Jerusalem and the temple remains a thorny issue in Lukan scholarship. This article reviews the history of scholarship according to two models of replacement versus continuity, which often operate in a dyadic paradigm. Sojan geography is suggested as a way of breaking through the deadlock this paradigm has created, as it attends to “thirding” that encompasses the two sides of ambivalence. In utilizing Sojan geography, a modified rubric derived from Prinsloo’s model is introduced as a remedy to Sleeman’s primarily synchronic approach. A test of this modified model is conducted on the spatiality of Jerusalem in Acts 7. This examination elucidates the complex ambivalence of Jerusalem without having to reduce one aspect over the other. Especially, Stephen’s retold history shows the trialectic structure of “lived space” in Abraham’s relation to the land, which becomes a model of the Jerusalem temple as a “lived space” for his offspring.