About Jesus   Steve Sweetman

Home Page     

This Section - Chapters 7 

Previous Section - Chapters 5 and 6

Next Section - Chapters 8

ch. 7:1-54    ch. 7:54 - 8:1   

Stephen’s Speech To The Sanhedrin (ch. 7:1 - 53)

Verse 1 says, “Then the high priests asked him, ‘are these charges true?”  

Stephen begins his defense by addressing those in the Sanhedrin as “men and fathers”.  He is quite respectful.  Yet he does not specifically respond to the   accusation by saying yes or no to it.  He is very much like Paul.  He starts from the beginning, with Abraham, and begins to build a case.  His defense begins with something the Sanhedrin itself would hold dear to their own hearts.  He speaks to these men as a fellow Jew.  The history and tradition of the fathers of Israel is extremely important to the Jewish leadership. 

In verse 2 Stephen reminded the Sanhedrin of the God of Glory speaking to "our father Abraham", as he put it.  By using the word "our', Stephen is associating himself with the Jewish leadership that is accusing him.   In one sense of the word he is saying, "I am one of you".   We have the same fathers.   

The event Stephen is speaking in verse 3 about is when God told Abraham to leave his homeland and go to a place where He would give him, that place being Canaan .   By this statement Stephen is honouring the God of Israel and the father of Israel , that is Abraham.  Surely those in attendance would be listening even more carefully with this introduction, possibly wondering where he might be going in his defense.  Right up front, Stephen is esteeming both the God of Israel and the father of Israel.  This is important because those who are opposing him believe that Stephen has forsaken the God of Israel, but that was not so, and Stephen was pointing this out.    

In verse 4 Stephen tells his listeners that once Abraham’s father died, he entered the land where the Sanhedrin, and the rest of the Jews were now living in.   One thing you might want to note is that God told Abraham to leave his homeland and go to Canaan , but Abraham did not really do as God said.  Yes, he left his homeland, but he did not go to Canaan right away. He stayed in Haran until his father died, and after that, he went to Canaan.  There's been much discussion just why Abraham did this.  Another thing you might find interesting is that once Abraham got to Canaan, he did not stay.  There was a famine in the land and so Abraham left for Egypt.  I guess Abraham could not trust God to keep him and his family through the famine.           

It is interesting to note, and I don’t have the answer, that the facts that Stephen has just brought forth are not as they are written in the book of Genesis.  There has been much said to try to reconcile the differences.  All that I can say is that Stephen is under the influence of the Holy Spirit at this point, and I'm sure what he says is correct.  I'm sure that this explanation is far from acceptable to the liberal theologian.

In respect to these differences, we could ask, how did Luke know for sure just what Stephen had said to the Sanhedrin.  It does not appear that Luke was present, although one of his best friends, namely Paul, might well have been present.   Then also we must take into consideration the inspiration of the Holy Spirit as Luke recorded these events.

Stephen goes on to say that even though God promised a certain piece of land to Abraham  and his descendents, Abraham himself did not inherit the promised land at that time.  In reality, they have never inherited the land as specified in Genesis 15, where God told Abraham that from the River of Egypt , right over to the Euphrates River, Abraham would possess all the land in between.  I believe this land will be given to Israel at the end of this age.

The important point to be made here, and Stephen makes the point,  is that Abraham had no children when God made the promise to give the land to him and his children.

In verse 6 Luke says that God told Abraham that his descendents would be slaves in a land that was not their own for 400 years.  Then after these 400 years God would punish those to whom Abraham’s descendents were enslaved to, which was Egypt. 

There's one thing to note here for those who don't believe that the land spoken of here is literal land.  It's clear that Stephen thought it was real land by the way he is speaking here.  He didn't think that this was a spiritual piece of land, or the Kingdom of God.  He specifically said this land was where the Jews were presently living in.   This should help prove the land that God promised Abraham and to subsequent generations is important.  Israel has never gotten this land, but they will at the end of this age.      

In verse 8 Luke continues by saying that after God spoke these promises He explained to Abraham the necessity of circumcision. Then finally Abraham had a son name Isaac.  Isaac in turn had a son name Jacob, who had 12 sons.  These 12 sons became fathers of the 12 tribes of Israel. 

All this was a history lesson which I am sure the Sanhedrin knew all about, nevertheless they continued to listen to Peter, maybe wondering where he was going with this history lesson.

Getting back to circumcision in verse 8, was meant to be a sign of God’s covenant.  It was never meant to make one part of the covenant. 

Concerning the confirmation ritual of the covenant found in Genesis 15 it is important to know, without going into all of the details, that God did not make a covenant between Himself and Abraham.  He actually made the covenant with Himself.  Abraham was asleep during the covenant ceremony.  Therefore, since God made the covenant with Himself, it did not depend on Abraham or any human ability to fulfill the promises made in the covenant.  What God had promised in the covenant would come true because in actual fact, He promised Himself that it would come true.  The promises did not depend on Israel 's faithfulness or unfaithfulness, but God's faithfulness alone.   

Circumcision was meant to be a sign, saying that you were part of God’s covenant.  Every male baby would go through this operation on the 8^th day of their life.

Now getting back to Stephen.  Remember that his accusers were charging him with blaspheming the Temple and the Law.  Here Stephen is pointing out his deep commitment to his Jewish heritage, so how could one call his actions blasphemy.

Verse 7 tells us that once the 400 years expired, God would punish the nation that enslaved Israel and at that point they would inherit the promised land.  It is interesting to note throughout the Old Testament, God sends Israel into slavery as a form of judgment against them.  Yet when the judgment is over, God punishes the nation that He used to judge Israel.  Babylon is a prime example of this.  

In verse 8  we see that after God gave Abraham this promise, Abraham was circumcised  as commanded.  Then when his son was finally born, he was circumcised as well, along with all the other hundreds of men that were under Abraham's authority.

Beginning in verse 9 Stephen shifts his history listen to the 12 patriarchs, and especially Joseph.  He tells the story of Joseph being sold as a slave to Pharaoh. Yet God gave Joseph much wisdom and Pharaoh took note of this and made him ruler of Egypt. 

The story goes on.  Jacob, Joseph’s father, sends his sons into Egypt to see if food could be found since they had a severe water shortage. After a couple of trips to Egypt finally Joseph reveals who he really is and gives shelter and food to his family.

In verse 15 Stephen says that  Jacob and the fathers of Israel died in that country.  Their bodies were brought back to Shechem where Abraham had purchases a burial plot for his family.

Stephen continues to tell the story of Israel ’s history by saying that a new leader of Egypt came along and “dealt treacherously” with God’s people.  Stephen therefore tells the story of Israel ’s escape from Egypt.  He tells the story of Moses, the man behind the Law.  The Law was commonly known as the Law of Moses, something extremely important to the Sanhedrin.  Here again, Stephen shows his respect for the Law of Moses and at the same time shows the Sanhedrin that he knows what he is talking about.

In verse 17 we see an interesting statement that Stephen makes.  This might actually be used for those who believe that Israel has no more historic and prophetic significance.  These people say that Israel got the promises in the Old Testament, never to get them again.  Stephen seems  to say that while Israel was in slavery to Egypt, God was ready to fulfill His promise that Israel 's numbers would be as the sand of the sea or stars in the sky.   I personally don't believe that has happened as yet.  Stephen seems to suggest that it might have happened already, but that's a bit vague as well in my mind.  I'm not quite sure he is actually saying that.  

In verse 18 we see the term "another king".  For some Bible teachers this is significant.   There are two Greek words that can be translated as "another".  One means, "another of the same kind".  The other means, "another of a different kind".  The Greek word used here means "another of a different 
kind".  

In Egyptian history, there is no record of Israel being in Egypt.  Some liberal scholars then say that the Biblical account is not accurate.  Yet in recent times archeologists have discovered a couple hundred year gap in Egyptian history when Egyptian records seemly were purposely destroyed.  History does tell us that for a period of time Semitic shepherd kings attacked and rule Egypt.  It was during this period that we have little record of.  Therefore, some say that when Stephen said "another king of a different kind" came to rule this was the first of the Semitic shepherd king.  He was therefore threatened by the large population of Jews in Egypt, roughly two million most likely.  He would have felt threatened because Jews were Semitic as well.         

In verse 20 Stephen speaks of Moses birth, his mother leaving him by the riverside, and his life in Pharaoh’s home.  He speaks of the time Moses killed an Egyptian and the time when he tried to reconcile two men of Israel in a dispute they had.  They told Moses, “who made you ruler and judge over us”? (ch. 7:27)  Little did these men know that God Himself did make Moses ruler and judge over them.  This is often the case in Jewish and Christian circles.  God raises up someone new, and the old guard rejects the new leader.  This is what was happening in Israel as Stephen was speaking.  God was in the process of raising up new leaders for Israel.  They were the apostles that Jesus appointed.  The Jewish leadership would not recognize these new leaders.

In verse 22 Stephen speaks of Moses being well educated in Egypt.  Egypt is often a symbol of the world in the Bible.  Moses was well educated in the ways of the world and God chose him to be one of the most important men in the Old Testament.  We cannot underestimate education, even if it's secular education.  

In verses 22 to 27 Stephen relates the incident where Moses rescued a fellow Israeli by killing an Egyptian who was trying to kill the Israeli.  Moses thought that people would then see that God was making him a leader among the Jews, but they didn't see this at all.  Again, that's often the case.  It doesn't matter what the new leader does in the eyes of the old folk.

In verses 27 to 29 we see that the Jews actually thought that Moses was against them.  This resulted in Moses leaving his people.  This too is often the case. In Christian circles, the older Christians often drive out the new, young enthusiastic Christians who are the next generation leaders.  I've seen if happen.

Beginning at verse 30 Stephen recounts the story of Moses meeting God at the burning bush.  Over and over again in Old Testament times God reaches down to speak in dramatic ways to certain people who He chooses to speak to.  Moses is yet another one of these men. This was an awesome event in the life of Moses.         

Stephen, in verse 37 quotes what Moses told Israel, “God will send you a prophet like me from among your own people”.  Stephen doesn’t say it here at this point in his talk, but the prophet that Moses spoke about was Jesus.

Yet Israel did not really listen to Moses as Stephen points out in verse 39.  “They rejected  him (Moses) and in their hearts turned back to Egypt”.  Many sermons have been preached on this phrase.  It is the tendency of man to always pull backwards to the life they once left for the sake of the gospel.  The world, as symbolized in Egypt is always very tempting for God's people.  It certainly is today in our modern church.  The church today in many respects looks more like an organization of the world than what it should be as seen in Biblical terms.   

In verse 39 and onward Israel told Aaron to make God’s for them to worship for they were tired of listening to Moses.  Israel preferred to create their own religion at that point, not unlike us today.  They made an idol and brought sacrifices to it instead of the living God.  As a result “God turned away and gave them over to the worship of heavenly bodies”.  What Stephen says here sounds very much like what Paul says in Romans 1 and 2.  God will give us over to the lifestyle we want to live if we continue to reject Him.  He will turn His back on those who refuse to listen to the truth.

What Stephen is projecting now in what he is saying is that Israel had become unfaithful to their God, even though they had every advantage.  The next advantage that Stephen mentions is the tabernacle and the ark of the covenant.  The ark was in the midst of Israel and although David wanted to build a permanent home for it, he didn’t get the chance.  Solomon was the one who built a solid structure for the ark. 

In verse 45 God promised Israel that He would send them into exile because of their idol worship.  In reality, Israel was following after the ways of the nations around them.  All cultures back then were polytheistic.  They believed in many gods.  The Jews were to believe in one God, but they gave up on Him to worship gods of their own making. Again, over the centuries, Christians have done the same.  In many respects, we're no different from Israel of old.  

It is interesting that in verse 47 Stephen points out that it was David's idea to build a permanent house, a permanent structure for the Lord, which took place in Solomon's time.  The tendency of man to build such a permanent structure is always with us, whether it be a building or a denomination.  The original intent might be noble, to glorify God, but usually it ends up glorifying the men or the organization who build the structure.    

In verse 48 Stephen makes a comment on the topic of the Temple.  For the most part so far in his sermon he has been commentary free, only stating the facts.  He now makes a comment by saying that “the Most High does not live in houses made by men”.  As usual he quotes from the Old Testament to back up his point, saying,  “Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool.  What kind of house will you build for me”. (Isa. 66:1-2) 

The history lesson has now come to an end.  Stephen now begins to direct specific comments to his audience.  In verse 51 he says, “you stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears.  You are just like your fathers. You always resist the Holy Spirit.”

Stephen had just shown the Sanhedrin that all through Jewish history their fathers wandered from the truth.  They could never continue to follow their God.  And now these men who sat before Stephen were no different than their forefathers, and Stephen in no uncertain words let them know just that.  The Sanhedrin “was resisting the Holy Spirit”.  Note that Stephen spoke of the Holy Spirit, not God or not even Jesus.  He is technically right, for it is the Holy Spirit who speaks to the hearts of men.  When you refuse to listen, you resist the Spirit of God.  The Jewish leadership at this time would certainly not believe that a man like Stephen would be speaking under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit’s presence in the believer’s lives is something new to them.  That is to say, an ordinary person could not have the Holy Spirit living inside of him.  The Day of Pentecost proves that not to be true.  This too would be a reason why Stephen would mention the Holy Spirit. 

Stephen goes on to say that the Jews killed the prophets of old, who prophesied about the “Righteous One”, and when He actually came to earth, the Jews killed Him as well. 

The last thing that Stephen said before his audience who could take no more was, “you who received the Law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it”. This was it, the end of Stephens message.  The Sanhedrin would not let him continue any farther.

The Stoning Of Stephen (ch. 7:54 – 8:1)

Verse 54 says that the Sanhedrin was “furious and gnashed their teeth at” Stephen.  This was not the first time we have seen the word “furious” used in connection with the Sanhedrin. 

Luke goes on to say, “but Stephen full of the Holy Spirit…”  Here is another time in the book of Acts where this expression is used, that is “being full of the Holy Spirit”.  As in every other case when this phrase is used, something dramatic happens.  This case is no exception.

Luke says that when Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit he looked up into Heaven and saw the glory of God and saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God.  Now this is miraculous. 

In verse 56 Stephen says, “Look, I see Heaven open and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God”.  I doubt if the Sanhedrin saw what Stephen saw, but I can say for sure that Stephen saw Jesus, and because Stephen uses the word “look”, I wonder if he thought that others saw what he saw. .  It appears that Jesus was getting ready to welcome him into His presence. 

This totally drove the Sanhedrin crazy.  They could not take this nonsense any longer.  “They covered their ears, and yelled at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, dragged him out of the city and began to stone him.”  The Sanhedrin, a highly respectable and educated group of men have now turned into an angry mob.

In verse 58 Luke says that “the witnesses laid their cloaks at the feet of a young man named Saul”.  This is probably in reference to the Old Testament Law that stated, if a man is accused of a crime, there needs to be 2 or 3 witnesses come forth with evidence.  If it is proved that the man is guilty, these witnesses are the first ones to start stoning the accused.  This might be the case here.

We now have the first mention of the Apostle Paul, or Saul as he was known at this point in time.  Soon his name will become the predominant name in the book of Acts, taking over from Peter. 

Verse 59 and 60 says, “while they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit’.  Then he fell on his knees and cried out, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them’. “

Stephen died in the presence of Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit. His graciousness can be seen in his prayer for his  killers.  

Does God always deliver people from bad situations into a place of safety?  Some people say that if you are living right nothing bad will come to you , and that God will deliver you at all times.  Well in one sense of the word God did not deliver Stephen.  He let him be killed.  Yet in another sense of the word God did deliver Stephen.  He delivered Stephen into the presence of Jesus.  I'd say that is quite a deliverance.