Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the word.
\nActs 6:3\u20134<\/p>\n
The story of Stephen has two main divisions: the appointment of deacons and the witness of Stephen.<\/p>\n
I. THE APPOINTMENT OF DEACONS\u2014ACTS 6:1\u20137<\/p>\n
A. The Timing and the Occasion\u2014Acts 6:1<\/p>\n
Now in these days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.<\/p>\n
1. The Growth of the Church<\/p>\n
These verses record the selection of the first deacons in the Church, with verse 1 providing the timing and the occasion. The timing was: in these days, meaning in those days following the second persecution of the Church, detailed in chapter 5.<\/p>\n
The occasion was: when the number of the disciples was multiplying. The number of disciples was multiplying because of the ministry of the apostles in Acts 5:42: And every day, in the temple and at home, they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ.<\/p>\n
2. The New Testament Terms for Believers<\/p>\n
The term used for believers in verse 1 is disciples. In the synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the word disciples is used one hundred sixty times; in the Gospel of John, it is used seventy-eight times; and in the Book of Acts, it is used twenty-eight times. However, not once is it used in the rest of the New Testament. It is found only in the historical books of the New Testament and was one of several early names for believers.<\/p>\n
Later, this term gave way to two other terms: \u201csaints\u201d and \u201cbrethren.\u201d These became the more common terms and are used in the Epistles and in the Book of Revelation. Not even the word \u201cChristian\u201d is a very common term. In fact, in all the New Testament, it is used only three times. The terms \u201csaints\u201d and \u201cbrethren\u201d are used in the majority of cases.<\/p>\n
3. The Internal Problems of the Church<\/p>\n
a. The Murmuring<\/p>\n
As the Church grew, there arose a murmuring within it. This is the second difficulty in the history of the Church. While the first internal problem was with Ananias and Sapphira, the second internal problem was a conflict between two groups within the Church.<\/p>\n
The Greek word for murmuring means \u201cwhispering.\u201d It is a word that emphasizes a smoldering discontent, which, if it was not handled, could very easily split the Church. What was happening was a constant, secret whispering and grumbling that buzzed away until it was finally heard.<\/p>\n
b. The Source of the Murmuring<\/p>\n
The grumbling came from the Grecian Jews. The Greek term used here simply means \u201cto speak Greek.\u201d In other words, these were Hellenic or Hellenistic Jews, who were Greek by language and culture. They were born outside the Land but had moved into the Land of Israel. These are the Diaspora Jews, Jews from the Dispersion who had migrated back into the Land of Israel. It was among them that this smoldering discontent and murmuring arose, and it rose against the Hebrews. The Hebrews were Jews who were born in the Land and spoke Hebrew. They may have spoken Aramaic as well, but definitely Hebrew.<\/p>\n
c. The Reason for the Murmuring<\/p>\n
The reason this murmuring arose from the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews was because the Diaspora widows were neglected. Under the Law of Moses, widows were under special protection (Deut. 14:29; 24:19; 26:12). Under Pharisaic rule, widows were often ignored (Mk. 12:38\u201340). Widows became a special concern of the Jerusalem Church, as we know from the pastor of that church, who wrote James 1:27.<\/p>\n
However, while the church was deeply concerned about taking care of its widows, there seems to have been a prejudice in favor of the locally born, Hebrew speaking widows, over the Greek speaking widows who had immigrated into the country. They felt neglected and overlooked in the daily ministration. This refers to the common fund that was distributed, which is spoken of in Acts 2:43\u201345 and 4:32\u201335.<\/p>\n
So the second internal problem was caused by the problem of money and women, and the previous one was caused by an ethical, moral issue. The purpose of Acts 6:1\u20137 is to show the apostolic connection between Stephen and the apostles, which came as a result of trying to solve this particular problem.<\/p>\n
B. The Advice of the Apostles\u2014Acts 6:2\u20134<\/p>\n
And the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not fit that we should forsake the word of God, and serve tables. Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the word.<\/p>\n
1. The Need for Deacons<\/p>\n
In verse 2, the congregation was convened by the twelve who called the multitude of the disciples together. The apostles or the twelve, were serving as elders, while the multitude was the membership of the whole church.<\/p>\n
Verse 2 also spells out the reason deacons were needed. The apostles pointed out: It is not fit, meaning \u201cit is not pleasing\u201d that these apostles, who were serving as elders, should forsake or leave behind the teaching of the word of God, and serve tables. The primary function of an elder is to deal with the Word of God, not to leave the Word of God to serve tables. Thus, the need for deacons arose to handle the physical needs of the church.<\/p>\n
2. The Qualifications for Deacons<\/p>\n
In verse 3, the five qualifications for deacons are spelled out: first: brethren, from among you, they had to be believers; secondly: men, they had to be male, for the Greek word for men means \u201cmen in contradistinction to women\u201d; thirdly: of good report, they had to be reputable, having clear, ethical qualifications; fourthly: full of the Spirit, they had to be spiritual; and fifth: [full] of wisdom, they had to be wise. This is a necessary, practical aspect, because they would need wisdom to manage this distribution equitably.<\/p>\n
Seven were to be selected, with the appointment being made by the apostles. While the congregation may nominate people, the actual appointment was made by the apostles, functioning as elders. Those whom they appoint will function in this business of distributing physical aid.<\/p>\n
3. The Responsibility of the Apostles<\/p>\n
The apostolic responsibility is spelled out in verse 4a: But we will continue stedfastly in prayer. It is we, in contrast to seven men, because apostles, functioning as elders, have a different responsibility. Their responsibility is in the area of praying for the church in verse 4b: and in the ministry of the word. The physical needs of the church are to be handled by the deacons, not by the elders.<\/p>\n
C. The Appointment of the First Deacons\u2014Acts 6:5\u20136<\/p>\n
And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus a proselyte of Antioch; whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands upon them.<\/p>\n
1. The Response<\/p>\n
The response begins in verse 5a: the saying pleased the whole multitude. The advice of the apostles was pleasing to the whole congregation; this was a peaceful way to resolve the problem of the bickering widows.<\/p>\n
2. The Selection<\/p>\n
Verse 5b records who was selected. The first one to be selected was Stephen. The purpose of this first section of Scripture was to show the link between Stephen and the apostles. The text states two things about Stephen: first, he was a man full of faith, meaning he was controlled by faith; and secondly, he was a man [full] of the Holy Spirit; meaning he was controlled by the Holy Spirit, which made him a spiritual man. Stephen received the most detailed description of the seven because of his role in the next section of Scripture, Acts 6:8\u20138:4.<\/p>\n
The second one to be selected was Philip. This is not Philip the Apostle, but another Philip, who is mentioned second because of the role he will play in Acts 8:5\u201340. The other five do not play a role in the Book of Acts, so they are mentioned quickly: Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus. Nicolaus is described as a proselyte of Antioch, meaning he was a Gentile from Antioch who had previously converted to Judaism, but now he had become a believer in Yeshua (Jesus) the Messiah. He is mentioned with this detail to point out a contrast: while the others were all born Jews, this one was a Gentile who was a convert to Judaism. Luke also related something about Nicolaus that he did not about the others: Nicolaus was from Antioch. Luke mentioned this fact because of the role Antioch will also play later in the Book of Acts.<\/p>\n
These are the first seven deacons. Of course, the one we are concerned with is Stephen. Three observations can be made about these seven men: first, all seven had Greek names, showing that all seven were Jews from the Diaspora who had immigrated to the Land of Israel; secondly, being Diaspora Jews showed that they cannot be accused of favoritism toward the Hebrew widows at the expense of the Grecian widows; and thirdly, it again showed that the murmuring came from the Diaspora widows.<\/p>\n
3. The Appointment<\/p>\n
The appointment of the men came in verse 6. In the presentation, the seven were set before the apostles. The seven men were only nominated by the congregation, not appointed by the congregation. The Bible does not teach a congregational form of government, but an elder rule form of government. The seven were brought before the apostles, who were functioning as elders.<\/p>\n
The appointment came by the laying on of hands after they had prayed. Deacons are to be appointed to their office the same way elders are: by the laying on of hands. This has Old Testament background. This was the means by which Joshua was appointed by Moses (Num. 27:22\u201323). Members of the Sanhedrin were appointed to their office by the laying on of hands. Even so, deacons are appointed by the laying on of hands. The actual appointment was done by the apostles, who, functioning as elders, were the authority in this particular local congregation.<\/p>\n
D. The Results of the Appointment\u2014Acts 6:7<\/p>\n
And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.<\/p>\n
There are four results recorded with the appointment of deacons in verse 7. The first result is that the word of God increased. The Greek means \u201cit kept on growing,\u201d all the more so now that the apostles were free from the daily ministration of serving tables. Now they were able to devote themselves to prayer and to the Word, resulting in the increase of the number of disciples.<\/p>\n
The second result is that peace was restored in the congregation. Since the church was no longer facing a possible division, it would allow the church to grow even further.<\/p>\n
The third result is that: the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly. The local congregation of Jerusalem kept on being multiplied.<\/p>\n
And the fourth result is that Luke mentioned a new element not mentioned previously in the Book of Acts: a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. The Greek has an Imperfect Active, which emphasizes repetition: one after the other, priests were coming to the faith. Because these were priests, it means that most of these, if not all, were Sadducees. The faith is the system of the faith in the gospel or the body of apostolic doctrine. So peace was restored, and the church was able to move on.<\/p>\n
II. THE WITNESS OF STEPHEN\u2014ACTS 6:8\u20138:4<\/p>\n
A. The Arrest of Stephen\u2014Acts 6:8\u20137:1<\/p>\n
1. The Character and Ministry of Stephen\u2014Acts 6:8<\/p>\n
And Stephen, full of grace and power, wrought great wonders and signs among the people.<\/p>\n
Stephen\u2019s character was twofold: first, he was full of grace; and secondly, he was [full] of power. As to his ministry, he wrought great wonders and signs; he kept on doing signs and wonders.<\/p>\n
This ability of Stephen to perform signs and wonders came only after his appointment by the apostles and through apostolic authority. It is simply not true that all believers were doing these kinds of signs and wonders throughout the Book of Acts. In every case where miracles were performed in the Book of Acts, they were done either by an apostle or by an apostolic legate, a person who was appointed by the laying on of hands of an apostle. Stephen was the first non-apostle to perform miracles in the Book of Acts, but he was not able to do these things before the laying on of hands by the apostles. Now, with the laying on of hands, he was officially an apostolic legate.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, he was doing this among the people. In other words, although he was appointed to do the ministry of serving tables, he did not limit his ministry to serving tables. It is permitted for deacons to preach, and it is because of his actions in this context, that Stephen will end up being the first one to qualify for the martyr\u2019s crown.<\/p>\n
Since the main purpose of the Book of Acts is to tell the story of Peter and Paul, Stephen is the link between these two key apostles: he was appointed by Peter, but Paul will be consenting to his death.<\/p>\n
2. The Disputations Against Stephen\u2014Acts 6:9\u201310<\/p>\n
But there arose certain of them that were of the synagogue called the synagogue of the Libertines, and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to withstand the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spake.<\/p>\n
Verse 9 gives the source of the attacks: there arose certain of them among certain synagogues. According to Jewish sources, Jerusalem had four hundred eighty different synagogues at this time. Some of these synagogues were built by Jewish people coming from various parts of the Diaspora.<\/p>\n
Several of these synagogues are named. First, there was the synagogue of the Libertines, a word that means \u201cfreedmen.\u201d These were Jews who were once slaves of Rome or sons of Jewish slaves of Rome, but now had been freed. They came from Rome and built their own synagogue. Second, there was the synagogue of the Cyrenians, Jews from North Africa. Third, there was the synagogue of the Alexandrians, Jews from Egypt. Fourth, there was the synagogue of Cilicia, Jews who came from Asia Minor or present-day Turkey. The Province of Cilicia included the city of Tarsus, so these were people who came from the same province as Paul. This may very well mean that this synagogue of the Cilicians was Paul\u2019s own synagogue. That may also mean that he would have been involved in the disputations with Stephen and would have been among those who lost his arguments with Stephen. Finally, he mentions the synagogue of Asia, meaning other parts of Asia Minor.<\/p>\n
These were all Jews from the Diaspora: disputing with Stephen, who was himself a Jewish man from the Diaspora.<\/p>\n
Verse 10 points out that they failed because they were not able to withstand either the wisdom of Stephen or the Spirit by which he spake. He kept on speaking and they kept on disputing, but they were unable to counteract what he was saying. It was this disputation that would lead to the third persecution of the Church.<\/p>\n
3. The Third Persecution of the Church\u2014Acts 6:11<\/p>\n
The third persecution began with the conspiracy recorded in verse 11: Then they suborned men, who said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God.<\/p>\n
The conspiracy was shown in that bribery was paid: they suborned men. The Greek means \u201cto put under, like a carpet\u201d or \u201cto bring men under their control.\u201d This could be done in one of two ways: either by the power of suggestion or by the power of money. In this case, it was the power of money; they paid certain people to become false witnesses in a court of law against Stephen.<\/p>\n
The false witnesses issued the charge: We have heard him speak blasphemous words. They claimed that Stephen spoke blasphemy in two ways: first, against Moses, because Stephen implied the Law had come to an end; and secondly, against God, because he implied that he was against Temple worship. However, by Jewish law, one is not guilty of blasphemy unless one has pronounced the name of God. They did not accuse Stephen of pronouncing God\u2019s name, but they did say he spoke against Moses and against the Temple.<\/p>\n
4. The Arrest of Stephen\u2014Acts 6:12<\/p>\n
And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and seized him, and brought him into the council.<\/p>\n
The instigators stirred up the people. The Greek word means, \u201cto throw into confusion.\u201d They began shaking up the people like an earthquake, causing confusion. This time it was not the Sadducees, but the elders, and the scribes, who were the Pharisees. While the first and second persecutions of the Church were instigated by the Sadducees, this third persecution was instigated by the Pharisees. These came upon him, meaning they rushed at him. They seized him as if caught in a pursuit, and they brought him into the council of the Sanhedrin. He was brought for trial before the Sanhedrin for charges of blasphemy and disrespect of the Temple.<\/p>\n
5. The Report of the False Witnesses\u2014Acts 6:13\u201314<\/p>\n
and set up false witnesses, who said, This man ceases not to speak words against this holy place, and the law: for we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered unto us.<\/p>\n
They set up false witnesses, spelling out two charges. The first charge was: This man ceases not to speak words against this holy place. In other words, Stephen was accused of preaching judgment against the Temple. Because he knew of the Messiah\u2019s prophecy that the Temple was destined for destruction, indeed, he probably was preaching judgment against the Temple. And he also knew that his preaching against the Temple would anger the Sadducees.<\/p>\n
The second charge was that they claimed he ceases not to speak words against \u2026 the law, meaning the Law of Moses. Because he was preaching grace, this would anger the Pharisees. They phrased the false accusations in such a way that would anger both the Sadducees and the Pharisees. But again, in this case, the third persecution was instigated by the Pharisees.<\/p>\n
To substantiate their charges, they then made two statements. First they claimed: we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, meaning \u201cHe will destroy this Temple.\u201d Probably all Stephen was doing was repeating the prophecy of Yeshua that the Temple was destined for destruction as a judgment for the unpardonable sin. Because he was repeating the prophecy of Jesus, they claimed he was being disrespectful to the Temple. This would anger the Sadducees. But secondly, they claimed that they heard him say that Jesus will change the customs which Moses delivered unto us. This probably included a charge of blasphemy against both the Torah, which is the Law of Moses, and against the Mishnah, which is the body of Jewish tradition. Stephen was probably saying that the Law had come to an end with the death of the Messiah, and that Pharisaic or Rabbinic Judaism was superseded by the new faith. This would anger the Pharisees. The accusation is now very clear: Stephen was saying things against something that would anger the Sadducees, and against something that would anger the Pharisees.<\/p>\n
6. The Face of Stephen\u2014Acts 6:15<\/p>\n
And all that sat in the council, fastening their eyes on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.<\/p>\n
Most people, when they are being charged by false witnesses, show some kind of emotional expression on their faces, either anger or discontent. Verse 15 describes the state of Stephen while these false accusations were being brought forward by the false witnesses: all that sat in the council [the Sanhedrin], fastening their eyes on him. They began staring at Stephen as these accusations were being hurled, perhaps to further intimidate him. But as they began to look on his face intently, his face became like the face of an angel. In other words, his face began to glow with the Shechinah Glory.<\/p>\n
7. The Questioning by the High Priest\u2014Acts 7:1<\/p>\n
And the high priest said, Are these things so?<\/p>\n
The examination proper began when the high priest asked: Are these things so? Literally, the Greek says, \u201cDo these things hold thus?\u201d In other words, \u201cDo you plead guilty or not guilty?\u201d By so doing, Stephen is given an opportunity to answer the charges. This statement gives the introduction to the longest single sermon in the Book of Acts.<\/p>\n
B. Some Observations on Stephen\u2019s Sermon<\/p>\n
1. Concerning the Third Persecution of the Church<\/p>\n
Before dealing with Stephen\u2019s sermon, four observations concerning the third persecution of the Church should be noted: first, the issue is no longer merely resurrection of the dead, for this time the opposition came from the Pharisees; secondly, the persecution began with Stephen, but it was not confined to him; thirdly, the death of Stephen made him the first martyr for his faith in the Messiahship of Yeshua; and fourthly, it resulted in the dispersion of the Church of Jerusalem which, in turn, played a major role in the advancement of the gospel.<\/p>\n
2. Concerning Stephen\u2019s Sermon<\/p>\n
Before expounding Stephen\u2019s sermon, some observations should be made. In this section, Luke records what Stephen actually said to the Sanhedrin. It was based upon the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, not upon the Hebrew Masoretic text, which came a thousand years later.<\/p>\n
In Stephen\u2019s sermon, there is a telescoping of two events into one picture. As critics have pointed out, sometimes there are discrepancies between what Stephen said and what is found in the Old Testament. These will be dealt with as we proceed, but it must be kept in mind that Luke is simply stating what Stephen said; he is not necessarily validating the truth of everything Stephen said.<\/p>\n
When the Bible records direct discourses like this, the Bible does not say the discourse itself was inspired, only the recording of that discourse was inspired. Luke\u2019s inspiration guarantees that this is really what Stephen said to the Sanhedrin, word for word. It may not necessarily indicate the correctness of what he said. The Bible often records lies that people told. Inspiration does not guarantee the validity of those lies; it only guarantees that it really did happen, because the Bible says it happened.<\/p>\n
C. The Defense of Stephen\u2014Acts 7:2\u201353<\/p>\n
1. The Patriarchs\u2014Acts 7:2\u201316<\/p>\n
As Stephen began his defense, he recounted briefly the story of Abraham.<\/p>\n
a. The Story of Abraham\u2014Acts 7:2\u20138<\/p>\n
(1) The Call of Abraham\u2014Acts 7:2\u20133<\/p>\n
And he said, Brethren and fathers, hearken: The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, and said unto him, Get you out of your land, and from your kindred, and come into the land which I shall show you.<\/p>\n
Stephen begins with the call of Abraham. In verse 2, it was the God of glory, the God of the Shechinah Glory, who appeared unto our father Abraham when he was still in Mesopotamia, before he even moved to the next city, Haran. Stephen\u2019s point was: the Shechinah Glory, the divine presence of God, was not restricted to the Land of Israel or the Temple. The Shechinah Glory appeared even before there was a Tabernacle or a Temple.<\/p>\n
The content of the call is a quotation of Genesis 12:1 in verse 3: Get you out of your land, and from your kindred, and come into the land which I shall show you.<\/p>\n
(2) The Journey\u2014Acts 7:4<\/p>\n
Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Haran: and from thence, when his father was dead, God removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.<\/p>\n
There appears to be a discrepancy here between what Stephen said about the death of Abraham\u2019s father and what is stated by Genesis 11:32. But again, Luke is not saying that Stephen\u2019s sermon is inspired, only that Luke\u2019s recording of this sermon is inspired. The point is that Luke accurately, without error, recorded what Stephen said. The New Testament does not affirm the truth of what Stephen said; it only affirms that Luke recorded what Stephen really said. The very fact that Luke did not try to reconcile what Stephen said with Genesis 11:32 shows the accuracy of this account.<\/p>\n
Keep in mind that Stephen was under tremendous pressure in a \u201ckangaroo court\u201d that was ready to kill him, and he might have made some factual mistakes. But that does not rule out Verbal Inspiration of Scripture. In this kind of situation, the Scripture affirms the truth of what Luke recorded. It does not affirm the truth of what Stephen said, but it does affirm that Stephen did say what Luke recorded.<\/p>\n
(3) The Promise of the Land\u2014Acts 7:5<\/p>\n
and he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: and he promised that he would give it to him in possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.<\/p>\n
Stephen reminded them of the promise of the Land that, although Abraham did not own the Land, God promised that he would some day.<\/p>\n
(4) The Prophecy of Egyptian Bondage\u2014Acts 7:6\u20137<\/p>\n
And God spoke on this wise, that his seed should sojourn in a strange land, and that they should bring them into bondage, and treat them ill, four hundred years. And the nation to which they shall be in bondage will I judge, said God: and after that shall they come forth, and serve me in this place.<\/p>\n
In verse 6, instead of giving Abraham ownership of the Land in his lifetime, God gave him a prophecy of the Egyptian bondage, and told him that his seed would be strangers and be in bondage four hundred years. This is a quotation of Genesis 15:13\u201314. Exodus 12:40 states that they were in Egypt for four hundred thirty years and this is the same figure given by Paul in Galatians 3:17. Genesis and Paul give the exact figure, while Stephen simply gave a \u201cround number.\u201d<\/p>\n
In verse 7, Stephen states that God promised that He will some day judge the nation that enslaved the Jewish people, and that the Jews would eventually return and worship God in this place, meaning Mount Sinai according to Exodus 3:12. Stephen applies this phrase to the Land of Israel.<\/p>\n
(5) The Covenant of Circumcision\u2014Acts 7:8<\/p>\n
And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob the twelve patriarchs.<\/p>\n
Stephen pointed out that God also gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision, a quotation of Genesis 17:9\u201314. In passing, Stephen quickly went over the stories of Isaac and Jacob, for he wants to move on quickly to the story of Joseph.<\/p>\n
b. The Story of Joseph\u2014Acts 7:9\u201316<\/p>\n
(1) The Selling of Joseph\u2014Acts 7:9\u201310<\/p>\n
And the patriarchs, moved with jealousy against Joseph, sold him into Egypt: and God was with him, and delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him favor and wisdom before Pharaoh king of Egypt; and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house.<\/p>\n
Verse 9 is based on a quotation of Genesis 37:25\u201336 where the \u201crejected one\u201d became the \u201cexalted one\u201d because God was with him. God did exalt him in due course in verse 10. The point Stephen was making was that God\u2019s revelation to Joseph also came to him outside the Land. Furthermore, he was rejected by his own brethren, though God later exalted him.<\/p>\n
(2) The Famine and its Results Summarized\u2014Acts 7:11\u201313<\/p>\n
Now there came a famine over all Egypt and Canaan, and great affliction: and our fathers found no sustenance. But when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent forth our fathers the first time. And at the second time Joseph was made known to his brethren; and Joseph\u2019s race became manifest unto Pharaoh.<\/p>\n
In verse 11, there was a famine [that came] over all Egypt and Canaan, so that the Patriarchs had to go down to the land of Egypt in verses 12\u201313. The first trip, in verse 12, and the second trip, in verse 13, showed that the rejected one became the savior of the rejecters. He implied that the same thing was true with the Messiah.<\/p>\n
(3) The Migration to Egypt\u2014Acts 7:14\u201316<\/p>\n
And Joseph sent, and called to him Jacob his father, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls. And Jacob went down into Egypt; and he died, himself and our fathers; and they were carried over unto Shechem, and laid in the tomb that Abraham bought for a price in silver of the sons of Hamor in Shechem.<\/p>\n
Verses 14\u201315 state that the Patriarchs and Joseph eventually died in Egypt. Stephen then mentions their burial in verse 16.<\/p>\n
2. The Patriarchs Summarized<\/p>\n
To summarize what Stephen said about the Patriarchs, three things should be noted: first, God began the Jewish nation with a covenant; secondly, God\u2019s revelation came outside the Land, as well as inside the Land; and thirdly, God used a rejected one to save the rejecters. What was true of Joseph is true of the Messiah.<\/p>\n
3. Possible Solutions to the Discrepancies of Stephen<\/p>\n
Before leaving this section, there are a couple of discrepancies between what Stephen said and the Genesis record that should be dealt with briefly. In Acts 7:16, Stephen states: they were carried over unto Shechem, and laid in the tomb that Abraham bought for a price in silver from the sons of Hamor in Shechem.<\/p>\n
That statement contains two problems. The first problem was the location of the tomb or burial cave: Hebron or Shechem. According to Genesis, the burial cave was in Hebron, not in Shechem; while Joseph was buried in Shechem, Jacob was buried in Hebron. The second problem was the identity of the seller of the cave: the Hittites or Hamor. According to Genesis, Abraham bought the cave from the Hittites, and it was Jacob who bought the field from Hamor.<\/p>\n
One solution is to again remember that what is recorded here is what Stephen actually said to the Sanhedrin. Neither Luke nor Acts nor the New Testament affirms the truth of what Stephen said. It only affirms the fact that Stephen really did say it. In the context of direct quotations like this, the New Testament simply affirms that these people really did say what was recorded of them. In this sermon, Stephen may have made some factual mistakes under pressure, but Luke did record accurately what Stephen said. Luke recorded even the mistakes of Stephen without correcting them, because to do so would mean that he was playing around with what actually happened.<\/p>\n
A second way of resolving the problem is to point out that sometimes things are \u201ctelescoped\u201d in Scripture, and that is the situation here; the two transactions are being telescoped into one picture. Because Stephen was under pressure, he did not have a lot of time. So the transaction of Abraham with the Hittites and the transaction of Jacob with Hamor of Shechem are telescoped into one picture. Also, the two burials are telescoped into one picture for the same reason: the burial of Jacob in Hebron and the burial of Joseph in Shechem, just as earlier in this sermon, the two calls of Abraham were telescoped into one picture. So this can be resolved in one of these two ways.<\/p>\n
4. The Story of Moses\u2014Acts 7:17\u201343<\/p>\n
The second part of Stephen\u2019s defense recounts the story of Moses.<\/p>\n
a. The Egyptian Bondage\u2014Acts 7:17\u201319<\/p>\n
But as the time of the promise drew nigh which God vouchsafed unto Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt, till there arose another king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph. The same dealt craftily with our race, and ill treated our fathers, that they should cast out their babes to the end they might not live.<\/p>\n
Stephen begins with the divine timing in verse 17: But as the time of the promise drew nigh, referring to the period of time that the Jews would be in bondage. As that time began to close, God\u2019s working began as well. In verse 18, there arose a new Pharaoh who did not recognize the authority or the contributions of Joseph. He \u201cdid not know Joseph\u201d in the sense that he did not recognize any obligation to Joseph\u2019s past help to the people of Egypt. Instead, he oppressed the people of Joseph, the Jewish people, in verse 19: The same dealt craftily with our race, and issued a decree of death that they should cast out their babes into the water, and so commit infanticide.<\/p>\n
b. The Early Life of Moses\u2014Acts 7:20\u201322<\/p>\n
At which season Moses was born, and was exceeding fair; and he was nourished three months in his father\u2019s house: and when he was cast out, Pharaoh\u2019s daughter took him up, and nourished him for her own son. And Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians; and he was mighty in his words and works.<\/p>\n
It was at this crucial point that Moses was born in the plan of God in verse 20. The parents of Moses recognized that God was going to use their son in some unique way. For that reason they were willing to risk their lives for three months by hiding the baby before they put him in an ark upon the river. In verse 21, Pharaoh\u2019s daughter found the child, adopted him, and made Moses legally her son. Verse 22 states: Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, which included science, astronomy, medicine, and mathematics, and he was mighty in his words and works.<\/p>\n
c. A Crucial Decision\u2014Acts 7:23<\/p>\n
But when he was well nigh forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel.<\/p>\n
The timing was: when he was \u2026 forty years old. The Greek word for the phrase: it came into his heart means \u201cit came from the lower depths of his nature.\u201d He planned to visit his brethren in order to be able to see for himself the state of the children of Israel. The purpose of this visit was to identify himself with the Jews, and no longer with the Egyptians.<\/p>\n
d. Israel\u2019s First Rejection of Moses\u2014Acts 7:24\u201329<\/p>\n
And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended him, and avenged him that was oppressed, smiting the Egyptian: and he supposed that his brethren understood that God by his hand was giving them deliverance; but they understood not. And the day following he appeared unto them as they strove, and would have set them at one again, saying, Sirs, ye are brethren; why do ye wrong one to another? But he that did his neighbor wrong thrust him away, saying, Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? Would you kill me, as you killed the Egyptian yesterday? And Moses fled at this saying, and became a sojourner in the land of Midian, where he begat two sons.<\/p>\n
In verses 24\u201328, Moses came to redeem them from slavery, but they did not understand him and rejected him. Because of that rejection, Moses fled down to the land of Midian where he spent the next forty years and begat two sons in verse 29.<\/p>\n
e. The Call of Moses, the Exodus, and the Giving of the Law\u2014Acts 7:30\u201338<\/p>\n
And when forty years were fulfilled, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush. And when Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold, there came a voice of the Lord, I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. And Moses trembled, and durst not behold. And the Lord said unto him, Loose the shoes from your feet: for the place whereon you stand is holy ground. I have surely seen the affliction of my people that is in Egypt, and have heard their groaning, and I am come down to deliver them: and now come, I will send you into Egypt. This Moses whom they refused, saying, Who made you a ruler and a judge? him has God sent to be both a ruler and a deliverer with the hand of the angel that appeared to him in the bush. This man led them forth, having wrought wonders and signs in Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the wilderness forty years. This is that Moses, who said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall God raise up unto you from among your brethren, like unto me. This is he that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel that spoke to him in the Mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received living oracles to give unto us.<\/p>\n
The \u201cburning bush\u201d experience came in verses 30\u201334. It was this experience that called him into the office of Israel\u2019s redeemer. In this way, the rejected one became the savior of the rejecters in verse 35; he was the one who led the people out of Egypt in the Exodus in verse 36. It was Moses who made a prophecy that some day God would raise up another prophet \u201clike unto Moses\u201d in verse 37. Through Moses, God gave the Jewish people the Law, which contained His divine words in verse 38.<\/p>\n
f. The Second Rejection of Moses\u2014Acts 7:39\u201343<\/p>\n
to whom our fathers would not be obedient, but thrust him from them, and turned back in their hearts unto Egypt, saying unto Aaron, Make us gods that shall go before us: for as for this Moses, who led us forth out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him. And they made a calf in those days, and brought a sacrifice unto the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their hands. But God turned, and gave them up to serve the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, Did ye offer unto me slain beasts and sacrifices Forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel? And ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, And the star of the god Rephan, The figures which ye made to worship them: And I will carry you away beyond Babylon.<\/p>\n
They turned their backs on Moses in their desire to go back into Egypt in verses 39\u201341 and by desiring Aaron to build them a golden calf to worship. This led to Israel\u2019s idolatry in verses 42\u201343. Idolatry began early in Jewish history; it began in the Wilderness Wanderings, while Moses was on top of Mount Sinai receiving the Mosaic Law.<\/p>\n
g. The Story of Moses Summarized<\/p>\n
To summarize Stephen\u2019s defense in dealing with the story of Moses, six points can be made. First, God began fulfilling the Abrahamic Covenant by delivering Israel out of the Land of Egypt. Secondly, in spite of her deliverance, Israel proved disobedient. Thirdly, God\u2019s revelation and great works recorded in the Book of Exodus were done outside the Land. So, God\u2019s working is not limited to within the borders of the Land of Israel, but extends beyond that, for in their early history, the Jewish people saw great works of God outside the Land. Fourthly, the rejected one, Moses, became the savior of the rejecters. Fifth, however, Israel was consistently guilty of idolatry and consistently rejected what God had revealed through His prophet. And sixth, through Moses there was the promise of a future prophet, a prophet like unto Moses. The Sanhedrin was guilty of rejecting that prophet like unto Moses, which Stephen implied was Jesus of Nazareth.<\/p>\n
5. A Habitation for God\u2019s Presence\u2014Acts 7:44\u201350<\/p>\n
In the third part of his defense, Stephen moved on from Moses to the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n
a. The Tabernacle from Moses to David\u2014Acts 7:44\u201346<\/p>\n
Our fathers had the tabernacle of the testimony in the wilderness, even as he appointed who spoke unto Moses, that he should make it according to the figure that he had seen. Which also our fathers, in their turn, brought in with Joshua when they entered on the possession of the nations, that God thrust out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David; who found favor in the sight of God, and asked to find a habitation for the God of Jacob.<\/p>\n
In verse 44, Moses built the Tabernacle, beginning with its construction in the wilderness. The point Stephen made by emphasizing the wilderness is that this, too, was outside the Land. Throughout his sermon, Stephen has been trying to make the point that God\u2019s presence, God\u2019s blessings, and God\u2019s work cannot be limited to the borders of the Land. Even the Tabernacle was built outside the Land. Furthermore, Moses built it according to the [pattern] that he had seen. What he built was merely a copy of something already in existence in Heaven; the earthly Tabernacle was a copy of the heavenly one.<\/p>\n
In verses 45\u201346, Stephen then summarized the history of the Tabernacle from Joshua to David: Which also our fathers, in their turn, brought in with Joshua when they entered on the possession of the nations in verse 45. The possession here has to do with the possession that used to belong to the seven Canaanite nations, but now has been transferred by God to the people of Israel. The seven Canaanite nations were thrust out before the face of our fathers.<\/p>\n
The Tabernacle was brought into the Land under Joshua, and it remained in tabernacle form unto the days of David. David found favor in the sight of God, and he asked God if he could build a more permanent habitation for God in verse 46. David wanted to replace the Tabernacle, which was a flimsy, tent like structure, with a more solid, permanent structure, the Temple. The transition from the Tabernacle to the Temple began with David.<\/p>\n
b. The Building of the Temple\u2014Acts 7:47<\/p>\n
However, David was not allowed to build the Temple; it was Solomon who finally built the Temple for the God of Israel in verse 47: But Solomon built him a house.<\/p>\n
In the history of Israel in the Land, there was a movement from the Tabernacle over to the Temple; a transition that began with David and finally culminated with Solomon.<\/p>\n
c. God\u2019s True Dwelling Place\u2014Acts 7:48\u201350<\/p>\n
Stephen went on to point out exactly where God really does dwell in verses 48\u201350: Howbeit the Most High dwells not in houses made with hands; as says the prophet, The heaven is my throne, And the earth the footstool of my feet: What manner of house will ye build me? says the Lord: Or what is the place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?<\/p>\n
In contrast to what David and Solomon planned, verse 48a states that God\u2019s habitation cannot be limited to any structure made by hands; the Most High God does not dwell in houses made with hands. Stephen was not saying, of course, that God\u2019s presence was not in the Tabernacle or in the Temple. He knows from the Old Testament that God\u2019s visible presence was indeed in both the Temple and the Tabernacle. What he was trying to say was that because of God\u2019s immensity, because of God\u2019s greatness, while God did have an appearance of dwelling in the Tabernacle and later in the Temple, the Most High, however, is not confined to any building, neither the little Tabernacle nor the great Temple.<\/p>\n
To prove his particular point, Stephen quotes Isaiah 66:1\u20132 by way of an application in verses 48b\u201350, because the literal meaning of Isaiah 66:1\u20132 refers to the Tribulation Temple. The Tribulation Temple will be the only one of the four Temples in biblical history or prophecy that God does not ordain. God did ordain the Solomonic Temple, the Second Temple, and He will ordain the Millennial Temple, since He himself will build it. But He will not ordain the Tribulation Temple of Isaiah 66:1\u20132. Again, the literal meaning has to do with the Tribulation Temple, which Stephen applies to the Temple of his day, the Second Temple or the Herodian Temple.<\/p>\n
The point of the quotation is that God cannot be limited, and God\u2019s dwelling cannot be limited to any building made by hands.<\/p>\n
d. The Summary<\/p>\n
The third part of Stephen\u2019s defense can be summarized in four basic points.<\/p>\n
First, the Tabernacle was built outside the Land; this means that the divine presence, the Shechinah Glory, was not confined to the Land. God was able to work even outside the borders of the Land, including His divine presence.<\/p>\n
Secondly, although God commanded the building of the Tabernacle, and allowed the building of the Temple, it was not for the purpose of confining God\u2019s presence or God\u2019s work. It was this point that the leadership of Israel had failed to understand. They tried to limit God\u2019s presence and God\u2019s work within the confines of the Land and the Temple; that simply cannot be. Although God commanded the building of both the Tabernacle and the Temple, it was not for the purpose of confining His presence.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, God was still free to work and to appear anywhere. The point Stephen was leading to is that God will be working outside the confines of the Temple and outside the confines of the Land with this new faith.<\/p>\n
So, fourthly, he emphasized the universality of the new faith; it is to be applied both to those inside and outside the Land. Stephen, who was a Hellenistic Jew, was able to see the logical implications of the new faith, which even the apostles were not yet able to see. In fact, it is not until chapter 10 that Peter even said it.<\/p>\n
6. Stephen\u2019s Accusation Against the Sanhedrin\u2014Acts 7:51\u201353<\/p>\n
In the fourth part of Stephen\u2019s defense, the accused becomes the accuser. Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Spirit: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute? and they killed them that showed before of the coming of the Righteous One; of whom ye have now become betrayers and murderers; ye who received the law as it was ordained by angels, and kept it not.<\/p>\n
a. Their Resistance to the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n
In verse 51, Stephen\u2019s basic charge was that this generation has done the same as the previous generations. This generation has also resisted the Holy Spirit. He labeled them with two epitaphs.<\/p>\n
First, he called them stiffnecked, a Greek word that literally means \u201ca hard neck,\u201d based upon what was already said in the Old Testament (Ex. 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Deut. 9:6).<\/p>\n
Secondly, he called them uncircumcised in heart; this, too, was based upon something God said about Israel in the Old Testament (Lev. 26:41; Deut. 10:16; Jer. 4:4; 9:26; Ezek. 44:7). Both the Law and the Prophets labeled Israel as being uncircumcised in heart. They were also stiffnecked and uncircumcised [in] ears (Jer. 6:10). As a result, they always resisted the Holy Spirit. They are resisting the Holy Spirit now, even as their fathers did (Is. 63:10). Their resistance of the Holy Spirit was evidenced by their role in the death of the Messiah.<\/p>\n
b. Their Rejection of the Messiah<\/p>\n
In verse 52, he pointed out that this generation was guilty of killing the prophet like unto Moses. He asked them the question: Which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute? It was obvious that all of the prophets were persecuted by their fathers. In the Old Testament, this is brought out by 2 Chronicles 36:15\u201316; in the New Testament it is brought out in Matthew 23:29\u201336 and Luke 11:47\u201351.<\/p>\n
Their fathers were responsible for persecuting and killing those prophets who had spoken before of the coming of the Righteous One, this same Messiah of whom they have now become betrayers. This is the same Greek word used of Judas Iscariot. They have not only become His betrayers, they have also become His murderers.<\/p>\n
c. Their Disobedience to the Law<\/p>\n
In verse 53, Stephen pointed out that this generation was without excuse for two reasons. First, they had received the law; being the very ones who received the law, they should have known better. Secondly, what made this even worse was the fact that this Law was ordained by angels.<\/p>\n
There are certain truths which are not found in the Old Testament, but were maintained by Jewish tradition. While many things in Jewish tradition are not biblically correct, a few things are, and these things are reaffirmed by the New Testament. Here is one example: there is no place in the Law that says it was given to Moses by God through angels, but rabbinic tradition said that was true; three time this is reaffirmed by the New Testament: Acts 7:53; Galatians 3:19; and Hebrews 2:2.<\/p>\n
The Law, therefore, was given by God to Moses by means of angels, yet Stephen declares that this generation kept it not. That was the indictment: they did not keep the very Law that was ordained by angels, and the evidence of their failure to keep the Law was their rejection of the Messiahship of Yeshua.<\/p>\n
d. Summary<\/p>\n
To summarize the fourth part of his defense, Stephen declared three things. First, this generation has done as their fathers did, and they are guilty of the same sin: resisting the Holy Spirit. Secondly, this was a denunciation from the mouth of Stephen of that generation for being guilty of rejecting the Messiahship of Yeshua. In the context of Matthew 12, it meant they were guilty of the unpardonable sin. And thirdly, there was no offer of salvation from the mouth of Stephen, only a declaration of disobedience.<\/p>\n
D. An Evaluation of Stephen\u2019s Defense<\/p>\n
This concludes Stephen\u2019s sermon. Before moving on, an evaluation is in order. Five observations can be made.<\/p>\n
The first observation is that there was a telescoping of several Old Testament events. Because of the pressure of time, because Stephen had a very hostile audience, and because he knew he would only be allowed to speak for so long, Stephen telescoped three events: first, he telescoped the two calls of Abraham; secondly, he telescoped the two purchases, the one in Hebron by Abraham, and the one in Shechem by Jacob; and thirdly, he telescoped the two burials, the burial of Jacob in Hebron, and the burial of Joseph in Shechem.<\/p>\n
The second observation is to note that Jesus was not prominent in the whole sermon of Stephen; in fact, He was only introduced for the first time in verse 52, and even then He was not mentioned by name. This was probably because Stephen did have more to say, as will be seen later, but he was interrupted. It should be noted, however, that at the point that Stephen\u2019s sermon came to an end, Yeshua was not prominent.<\/p>\n
The third observation is to point out there was no mention of the resurrection. It was this issue that earlier aroused the Sadducees. But this time the persecution came from the Pharisees, so there is no need to make the resurrection of the dead an issue, since the Pharisees were willing to accept the concept of a resurrection.<\/p>\n
The fourth observation is to note that Stephen did not answer the charges made against him; he was far more interested in presenting the truth than to answer the charges.<\/p>\n
The fifth observation is that Stephen made five points in his declarations: first, there was both progress and change in God\u2019s program; secondly, God\u2019s blessing was not limited to the Land of Israel or to the Temple Compound; thirdly, Israel had consistently rejected God\u2019s plan and His messengers throughout Jewish history; fourthly, the rejected one often became the savior of the rejecters; and fifth, his implication was that the same was true of the Messiah; He was rejected by Israel, but He is yet to become the Savior of His rejecters.<\/p>\n
E. The Stoning of Stephen\u2014Acts 7:54\u201360<\/p>\n
1. The Reaction of the Sanhedrin\u2014Acts 7:54<\/p>\n
Now when they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.<\/p>\n
The reaction of the Sanhedrin was that while they were hearing the very things Stephen was saying, they were [suddenly] cut to the heart. Luke again uses the very strong Greek word that means \u201cto be sawn asunder,\u201d like being cut in two with a saw.<\/p>\n
As a result, they gnashed on him with their teeth. The Greek word used here is more picturesque, meaning \u201cto bite with loud noises,\u201d \u201cto grind with the teeth,\u201d \u201cto gnash with the teeth.\u201d They began to gnash their teeth at him and to come at him like \u201ca pack of hungry wolves.\u201d Stephen\u2019s sermon resulted in mob action.<\/p>\n
2. Stephen\u2019s Dying Vision\u2014Acts 7:55\u201356<\/p>\n
But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.<\/p>\n
The vision itself is in verse 55: But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, meaning he was, at that point, especially under the control of the Holy Spirit: looked up stedfastly into heaven. While everybody else was staring at him, Stephen was looking up. While they were gnashing their teeth at him, making loud noises with their teeth, he himself was in perfect peace. At that moment he was seeing the glory of God, the Shechinah Glory.<\/p>\n
Stephen saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God. Jesus is seen here as standing at the right hand of God. This was viewed prophetically in Psalm 110:1. The New Testament emphasizes constantly that Yeshua is now sitting on the right hand of God: in Mark 16:19; Acts 2:34; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; and 1 Peter 3:22. The only time Yeshua was ever viewed as standing on the right hand of God is in this verse and again in verse 56.<\/p>\n
When the Bible views Jesus as sitting at the right hand of God the Father, it emphasizes that His work of providing salvation and sacrifice is a finished work. However, when the Bible views Him as standing, it views Him as still working in the area of sustaining the saints. His work of sustaining the saints still continues; Yeshua now stands up to receive the soul of a saint. Normally, Jesus is sitting, but as Stephen was about to die, Yeshua stood up to receive the soul of Stephen to be with Him in Heaven.<\/p>\n
In light of the fact that Stephen now saw the Shechinah Glory, he made the declaration found in verse 56: Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God. Stephen made the very same claim that Yeshua made at His trial in Matthew 26:64: I see the heavens opened. Stephen referred to Yeshua by the title Son of Man; this is the last time in the New Testament that this Messianic title is used. It was used frequently throughout the Gospels, but it will not be used again after Acts 7:56. From now on He is referred to only as the \u201cSon of God.\u201d Also, this is the only time the term Son of Man is used of Jesus by someone other than Himself.<\/p>\n
3. The Death of Stephen\u2014Acts 7:57\u201360<\/p>\n
But they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and rushed upon him with one accord; and they cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul. And they stoned Stephen, calling upon the Lord, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.<\/p>\n
a. The Response of the Mob<\/p>\n
Verses 57\u201360 describe the death of the witness, beginning with the mob response in verse 57: But they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears. They began to hold their ears with their hands, and they rushed upon him again. The Greek word means \u201cto rush impetuously.\u201d This is the same word that was used in Luke 8:33 concerning the swine that were demon possessed rushing into the water. They all rushed at him impetuously with one accord or in unison. There was no vote by the Sanhedrin, it was purely mob rule.<\/p>\n
The stoning then began in verse 58a. Because executions were always done outside the city, they cast him out of the city and there they stoned him. The Greek tense means that at this point they \u201cbegan stoning him.\u201d<\/p>\n
b. The Role of the False Witnesses<\/p>\n
The role of the false witnesses in the stoning of Stephen is also recorded in verse 58b: the [false] witnesses probably cast the first stones and thus gave this execution a sense of legality by being there. The two or three witnesses, at whose testimony someone was being condemned to death, had to be the ones to cast the first stone (Deut. 13:9\u201310; 17:6\u20137).<\/p>\n
Furthermore, to make it easier to cast the first stone, they laid down their garment at the feet of a young man named Saul. With that seemingly passing statement, we are introduced to Saul, who is later known by his Roman name, Paul.<\/p>\n
Stephen is the link between Peter and Paul. Again, the main purpose of the Book of Acts is to give the story of Peter and Paul. The first part of the book deals primarily with Peter, with only an incidental mention of Paul, and the second part of the book deals primarily with Paul, with only an incidental mention of Peter. With the laying on of hands of Peter, Stephen became a deacon, and the clothing of the false witnesses was laid at the feet of Paul. At this point, Paul was a young man, a Greek word used of anyone up to the age of forty.<\/p>\n
c. Stephen\u2019s Response to the Stoning<\/p>\n
Verse 59 describes Stephen\u2019s response to the stoning itself. As they kept on stoning Stephen, he kept on calling upon the Lord, and said: Lord Jesus. This statement raises a question: Can we address our prayers to the Messiah? The answer is \u201cno, we are to address our prayers to God the Father.\u201d This is the consistent teaching of Scripture. With every example of prayer we have in Scripture, no prayer is addressed to God the Son, and no prayer is addressed to God the Holy Spirit; every prayer is addressed to God the Father. Some use this verse to try to prove that one can pray to the Son.<\/p>\n
But in this case, it is not really a prayer, he is actually seeing Jesus standing at the right hand of God. This is not a prayer to the unseen God, but it is a direct address to the visible Yeshua. This verse cannot be used to justify prayer to Jesus, because that is not biblically correct. In addressing Jesus, Stephen was actually seeing Him and addressed Him directly. The request was: receive my spirit. In the Greek, there is a sense of urgency, meaning \u201creceive it now!\u201d No temporary holding pattern, no soul sleeping, just receive it now! This is very similar to what Yeshua Himself said to God the Father in Luke 23:46, when Jesus committed His spirit to God the Father. Stephen committed his spirit to God the Son.<\/p>\n
d. The Moment of Stephen\u2019s Death<\/p>\n
Then in verse 60, Luke records the actual death of Stephen, which came in three stages. First: he kneeled down; he placed his knees on the ground. This is a special Greek idiom that is used five times by Luke, once in his Gospel, in Luke 22:41, and four times in the Book of Acts: 7:60; 9:40; 20:36; and 21:5. Outside of Luke\u2019s writings it is used only once, in Mark 15:19. The picture is that, at his own choosing, Stephen placed his knees on the ground: he kneeled down.<\/p>\n
Secondly, he \u2026 cried with a loud voice, [and said] Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. Literally, he said \u201cplace not to them\u201d or \u201cagainst them\u201d this sin. Here again, there is a similarity with the Messiah\u2019s own words when He was being crucified in Luke 23:34.<\/p>\n
Then the third stage was: he fell asleep. The word \u201csleep\u201d does not refer to the soul, but to the body; whenever the word \u201csleep\u201d is used as a euphemism for death, it is used only of believers, never of unbelievers. The reason is to show God\u2019s viewpoint of the death of a believer: death is only a temporary suspension of physical activity, not spirit or soul activity. In literal sleep, there is a temporary suspension of physical activity until one awakens, but the mind keeps operating and the internal organs keep operating. Similarly, when the word sleep is used of death, it does not refer to the spirit, soul or the immaterial part of man, but it refers to the body. Sleep, in the sense of death, means there is a temporary suspension of physical activity until one wakes up in the resurrection, but there is no suspension of the spirit or soul activity.<\/p>\n
In this context, Stephen asked Yeshua to receive his spirit right then and there, not some time later at some \u201csoul resurrection.\u201d Soul sleeping is not a biblical teaching.<\/p>\n
e. A Question Raised by the Death of Stephen<\/p>\n
This incident raises one question: How could the Sanhedrin get away with the stoning of Stephen since the right of capital punishment was taken away from them by the Roman senate? As we know from the Gospel of John, the Sanhedrin did not have that right.<\/p>\n
One explanation is that, while it is true that the Roman senate did take away the right of capital punishment from the Jews, there was one exception. According to Josephus, the Sanhedrin was allowed to carry out capital punishment in one area, and that had to do with offenses against the sanctity of the Temple. Basically, the charge against Stephen had to do with a violation of the sanctity of the Temple.<\/p>\n
A second explanation is that this event may have occurred in the year A.D. 36. In that year, Vitellus became the new imperial legate of the Province of Syria, which included Judaea. He deposed Pontius Pilate from his procuratorship in A.D. 36; so there was a hiatus or a break between the deposing of Pilate and the arrival of the new procurator. It could very well be that this event occurred between the departure of Pilate and the arrival of the new procurator, and so they were able to get away with it for that reason.<\/p>\n
f. The Rejection of the Second Sign of Jonah<\/p>\n
There is one more thing about this event that must not be missed: the stoning of Stephen marked the rejection of the second sign of Jonah. The Book of Acts is a continuation of the story of the Gospels. When Yeshua was rejected in Matthew 12, at that point, they committed the unpardonable sin. At that point, Yeshua declared that He would give the nation no more signs but one: the sign of Jonah, which is the sign of the Resurrection.<\/p>\n
That sign was to come to Israel on three occasions: first, at the resurrection of Lazarus, which was rejected by the Sanhedrin in John 11; secondly, at the Resurrection of Jesus; and thirdly, at the resurrection of the two witnesses in Revelation 11. The second sign of Jonah, the Resurrection of Jesus, was rejected in this chapter with the stoning of Stephen.<\/p>\n
For the first time, it included a persecution against the new Body by both Pharisees and Sadducees. It was an offical act by the Sanhedrin. The stoning of Stephen marks the official, legal rejection of the second sign of Jonah, the Resurrection of Jesus. That is why, only after this event, the gospel goes out to the non Jewish world for the first time. In chapter 8, it will go out to the Samaritans; in chapter 10, it will go out to the Gentiles.<\/p>\n
F. The Third Persecution of the Church\u2014Acts 8:1\u20134<\/p>\n
1. The Results of the Stoning of Stephen\u2014Acts 8:1<\/p>\n
And Saul was consenting unto his death. And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church which was in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.<\/p>\n
a. The Role of Saul<\/p>\n
The third persecution of the Church resulted from the stoning of Stephen. The account begins by relating the role of Saul, who was later called Paul in verse 1a: Saul was consenting unto his death. The word consenting does not mean that he voted for it, rather, it means, \u201che took pleasure in it.\u201d The emphasis is on the pleasure Paul felt in his role, something that Paul himself confesses in Acts 22:20. Paul approved of what was taking place.<\/p>\n
This verse does not mean that Saul was a member of the Sanhedrin. Sanhedrin trials were public; Saul was present and approved the action which the Sanhedrin took. In fact, he may have been one of those who lost the argument with Stephen, when Stephen preached in a synagogue comprised of his countrymen.<\/p>\n
b. The Scattering of the Believers<\/p>\n
Verse 1b describes the third persecution of the Church: And there arose on that day; that is, on that definite day, the day that Stephen died, the third persecution of the Church began in Jerusalem. This was a great persecution. The first two persecutions came from the Sadducees alone; but this one came from both the Sadducees and the Pharisees. That is why it was a great persecution against the church which was in Jerusalem. The Church in Jerusalem was the object of the persecution.<\/p>\n
As a result: they were all scattered abroad, meaning they were scattered like grain. This is a Greek word used for the scattering of seed. At the time of the scattering, this seed was also sown, because, where seed is scattered, some of that seed is also sown. This is the Greek word for the Diaspora. The point is that now the Jewish believers in the Messiahship of Yeshua in Jerusalem became the Dispersion of Messianic evangelism and discipleship. Just as the word \u201cdispersion\u201d is used in Jewish literature of Jews outside the Land in general, here it is being used specifically of Jewish believers before the judgment against the city in A.D. 70.<\/p>\n
This scattering of the Jewish believers away from the apostles created the need for the first writings of the New Testament. The reason that the first written Gospel was the Gospel of Matthew is because the first need would arise among Jewish believers. The Gospel of Matthew was written to give Jewish believers an authoritative writing to fall back on. Until this Dispersion, they could ask an apostle if they had a question. Now that they were away from the apostles, they did not have access to them; as a result, they needed an authoritative writing. Thus, Book of Matthew was written for them.<\/p>\n
Some of the Epistles were written as a result of this dispersion: Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, and Jude. They were scattered throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria. In the year A.D. 66, the first Jewish revolt against Rome broke out and the Jewish believers also fled these areas. This was the beginning of the judgment for the unpardonable sin. Because there were still some of the flock left in Jerusalem, the apostles did not flee, rather, they stayed to shepherd the flock. Their apostolic power probably kept them from being persecuted at this point. Later they will be, but at this point, there was still some fear of the apostles.<\/p>\n
2. The Burial of Stephen\u2014Acts 8:2<\/p>\n
And devout men buried Stephen, and made great lamentation over him.<\/p>\n
Verse 2 records the burial of Stephen. In the New Testament, the Greek word for devout is used four times only by Luke: in Luke 2:25 of Simeon; in Acts 2:5 of the Jews in Jerusalem; in Acts 8:2 of those who buried Stephen; and in Acts 22:12 of Ananias. It is a word that is used of devout Jews, but not necessarily believers in the Messiah. In this context, it appears that these were devout Jews who were not believers and did not agree with the Sanhedrin\u2019s verdict. They are called devout men to distinguish them from the believers and also to distinguish them from the members of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n
These devout men buried Stephen. The Greek word for \u201cburying\u201d includes all the normal funeral arrangements; Luke states that they made great lamentation over him. This is a Greek word that means \u201cto beat the breast.\u201d According to Jewish law of that day, a criminal who died a criminal\u2019s death as Stephen did was to be buried without a public lamentation. However, contrary to that law, Stephen received a funeral tribute.<\/p>\n
3. Saul\u2019s Persecution of the Church\u2014Acts 8:3<\/p>\n
But Saul laid waste the church, entering into every house, and dragging men and women committed them to prison.<\/p>\n
Verse 3 tells about Saul\u2019s war against the Church: But Saul laid waste the church. The Greek word for laid waste means, \u201cto keep on trying to destroy.\u201d He tried to destroy it, to defile it, to ruin it, to devastate it, but he could not. In the Septuagint version of Psalm 79:7, the word is used of a wild boar laying waste a vineyard. In using that term, Luke was describing Saul as being a wild animal, a wild boar trying to destroy God\u2019s vineyard.<\/p>\n
Saul was a Pharisee, again showing that the Pharisees had now joined the Sadducees, making this kind of a persecution fully possible. Gamaliel\u2019s advice, given in chapter 5, was no longer relevant.<\/p>\n
Saul entered into every house, referring to \u201chouse churches\u201d since there was no such thing as a church building in those days. They entered into houses that were having local church meetings. These local church meetings were divided into \u201ccells, organized under apostolic authority. In order to devastate the Church, Saul had to make these raids on homes when one segment of the congregation was meeting.<\/p>\n
He dragged out both men and women, again showing that these were church meetings, and that both men and women were present. The fact that women were included in the persecution is a new element at this point. Saul committed them to prison. The Greek tense means that \u201che kept on committing them to prison,\u201d something he admits in Acts 22:5.<\/p>\n
4. The Ministry of the Dispersed\u2014Acts 8:4<\/p>\n
They therefore that were scattered abroad went about preaching the word.<\/p>\n
In verse 4, Luke records the ministry of those who were dispersed in verse 1. Those who were scattered abroad now went out to the Diaspora, spreading and teaching the Word of God. This sets the stage for the eventual salvation of the Samaritans in chapter 8.<\/p>\n
They went about preaching the gospel of the Word. The Greek word for preaching means they were \u201cgospelizing\u201d the Word. The persecution dispersed the believers, but did not silence them; they used the forced dispersion to spread the gospel further. More details are found in Acts 11:19. The result of the death of Stephen was not the silencing of the gospel, but the spreading of the gospel even further than it was before.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the word. Acts 6:3\u20134 The story of Stephen has two main divisions: the appointment of deacons … <\/p>\n