In this passage, we have the account of the first martyr of the Christian church. It is a deeply moving scene with Stephen making his defence and then being stoned. But as well as being moving, it is also a scene that raises important issues. One of the most important questions we can ask is, Why was Stephen killed? What drove his accusers to such depths?
Some see Stephen as being partly to blame for his own demise, that he handled the situation badly. If he hadn't been so OTT about his religion, if he had been a bit more flexible then this wouldn't have happened. And, to justify that view, they might point to the subsequent outbreak of violence against the church at large: look what trouble Stephen's lack of judgement brought on his fellow believers.
Those are significant issues, not just in terms of life then but in terms of the church today. Do we need to be careful what we say? Careless talk costs lives, we're told. Although we live in a society where violence against the church is not common, it is, on the whole, hostile to the claims of the Christian faith. So these questions are urgent for us too.
In considering the issues, we're going to look at how Stephen handled the situation and then how Luke portrays him.
1. Stephen's Speech
Having been introduced to Stephen is 6:5, we learn more of him in 6:8-10. Here was a man not only equipped to serve the church in a practical way but one able to defend the faith with power and conviction. The Lord was with him in such a way that his opponents "could not stand up against his wisdom" (v.10).
And so a plot is hatched against him, whereby false witnesses bring charges against him, relating to the law and the temple. Stephen is before the Sanhedrin on these charges and in ch.7 makes his reply. His speech is the longest in a book full of speeches. We need to notice the main points in what he says.
For a large part of his speech, Stephen rehearses the history of the people of Israel, in particular God's dealings with Abraham and Moses, his words through the prophets and the history of the temple. To us it can seem a rather strange way to speak: why go on at length about a subject that doesn't seem to be the real issue?
Stephen is doing at least two things: he is gaining their empathy; this is common ground, they share the same history and the same basic understanding of God. He is starting where they are. But he is also preparing the ground for his charges against them by drawing parallels between their actions and the sins of the people in the past.
In terms of his charges against them, there are two in essence, one more indirect, the other much more 'in your face'.
i) False worship - The people in the past had corrupted the true worship of God by asking Aaron to make them gods of gold, and had turned aside to worship "the heavenly bodies" (vv.39-42). Just as they had engaged in false worship through the veneration of what God had made, so had the people of Stephen's day.
They tried to confine God to the temple he had given. They wanted to box him in and to give to the temple a kind of magic quality that suggested that God can be manipulated and used to human ends. And this Stephen roundly opposes: "the Most High does not live in houses built be men" (v.48).
Does this seem a slight point to make? Idolatry, in whatever guise it comes, is repugnant to the one true God. Stephen's accusation that they have taken something good and God-given and made an idol of it is universally true. Notice how Paul makes the same point to the people of Athens in Acts 17:24.
Whatever the idol, be it a relationship or career or something else, it must be challenged. Men and women everywhere have a duty to repent and to serve the living and true God. As his people, we ought to have a burning desire to see his honour upheld and real worship being given to him. We should not take this issue lightly.
Was Stephen a bit OTT in accusing them of false worship? Can't we make allowances for how people live in ignorance? Paul's words in Athens are again helpful: "In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent" - and that is the message we have been entrusted with and are commanded to preach, however harsh the response we get.
ii) Rejection of the Messiah - The second accusation Stephen makes concerns the way they have disregarded God's word to them and have rejected the Messiah.
Here is where his history lesson really hits home. Israel's past was littered with examples of people refusing to listen to what God was saying to them through the prophets. And it was full of those same prophets being treated badly, even killed. He holds up to their attention the examples of Joseph and Moses in particular, as well as unnamed prophets who their fathers persecuted and killed.
But Moses has spoken of another prophet who was to come, the supreme revelation of God. That promise was fulfilled in the coming of Jesus. And what had they done with him? They had killed him. They had played the part of Joseph's brothers; they had acted just like the people of old.
It is at this point that Stephen speaks with utter clarity about them: they are "stiff-necked people with uncircumcised hearts and ears...who have received the law...but have not obeyed it". Could any accusation be more devastating to such a crowd? They were claiming to be the preservers of the law but Stephen shows they have broken the law!
Stephen is very clear about their sin in rejecting the Messiah. People need to be faced with their sin (hearts), the fact of Jesus and the seriousness of rejecting him. Stephen doesn't spare them; in the right way, with humility, neither should we.
2. Stephen: Following the Master
We have seen why Stephen was martyred in terms of the charges he made and his hearers' response to them. But he also draws a bigger picture that explains why he is persecuted. That picture shows Stephen standing in the long line of faithful witnesses who have been persecuted (face shining like Moses'). But what is really emphasised is the similarity of his case and that of Jesus. The list of details is striking (read them).
So is Luke suggesting that Jesus just another prophet whose place has now been taken by Stephen and his like? No. He consistently shows that Jesus is unique. He is the pinnacle (notice how Stephen commits his spirit to Jesus as he dies).
But because Stephen and the early church are proclaiming Jesus, they will be treated as he was. And that same truth echoes down the long centuries since then. We are called to be faithful witnesses to Jesus, as the early church was. To be such will inevitably mean persecution in one form or another.
But the darkness of persecution is not without its light. This scene ends with a brief glimpse of a character (Saul) whose own life will be changed by the God who is Lord of all. The last word always belongs to the Lord.
