Acts Seven
1 And the high priest said, “Are these things so?” 2 And Stephen said: “Brothers and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran, 3 and said to him, ‘Go out from your land and from your kindred and go into the land that I will show you.’ 4 Then he went out from the land of the Chaldeans and lived in Haran. And after his father died, God removed him from there into this land in which you are now living. 5 Yet he gave him no inheritance in it, not even a foot’s length, but promised to give it to him as a possession and to his offspring after him, though he had no child. 6 And God spoke to this effect—that his offspring offspring would be sojourners in a land belonging to others, who would enslave them and afflict them four hundred years. 7 ‘But I will judge the nation that they serve,’ said God, ‘and after that they shall come out and worship me in this place.’ 8 And he gave him the covenant of circumcision. And so Abraham became the father of Isaac, and circumcised him on the eighth day, and Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob of the twelve patriarchs. 9 “And the patriarchs, jealous of Joseph, sold him into Egypt; but God was with him 10 and rescued him out of all his afflictions and gave him favor and wisdom before Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who made him ruler over Egypt and over all his household. 11 Now there came a famine throughout all Egypt and Canaan, and great affliction, and our fathers could find no food. 12 But when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent out our fathers on their first visit. 13 And on the second visit Joseph made himself known to his brothers, and Joseph’s family became known to Pharaoh. 14 And Joseph sent and summoned Jacob his father and all his kindred, seventy-five persons in all. 15 And Jacob went down into Egypt, and he died, he and our fathers, 16 and they were carried back to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought for a sum of silver from the sons of Hamor in Shechem. 17 “But as the time of the promise drew near, which God had granted to Abraham, the people increased and multiplied in Egypt 18 until there arose over Egypt another king who did not know Joseph. 19 He dealt shrewdly with our race and forced our fathers to expose their infants, so that they would not be kept alive. 20 At this time Moses was born; and he was beautiful in God’s sight. And he was brought up for three months in his father’s house, 21 and when he was exposed, Pharaoh’s daughter adopted him and brought him up as her own son. 22 And Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds. 23 “When he was forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brothers, the children of Israel. 24 And seeing one of them being wronged, he defended the oppressed man and avenged him by striking down the Egyptian. 25 He supposed that his brothers would understand that God was giving them salvation by his hand, but they did not understand. 26 And on the following day he appeared to them as they were quarreling and tried to reconcile them, saying, ‘Men, you are brothers. Why do you wrong each other?’ 27 But the man who was wronging his neighbor thrust him aside, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? 28 Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?’ 29 At this retort Moses fled and became an exile in the land of Midian, where he became the father of two sons. 30 “Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush. 31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight, and as he drew near to look, there came the voice of the Lord: 32 ‘I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob.’ And Moses trembled and did not dare to look. 33 Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground. 34 I have surely seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt, and have heard their groaning, and I have come down to deliver them. And now come, I will send you to Egypt.’ 35 “This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’—this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush. 36 This man led them out, performing wonders and signs in Egypt and at the Red Sea and in the wilderness for forty years. 37 This is the Moses who said to the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers.’ 38 This is the one who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the angel who spoke to him at Mount Sinai, and with our fathers. He received living oracles to give to us. 39 Our fathers refused to obey him, but thrust him aside, and in their hearts they turned to Egypt, 40 saying to Aaron, ‘Make for us gods who will go before us. As for this Moses who led us out from the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.’ 41 And they made a calf in those days, and offered a sacrifice to the idol and were rejoicing in the works of their hands. 42 But God turned away and gave them over to worship the host of heaven, as it is written in the book of the prophets: “‘Did you bring to me slain beasts and sacrifices, during the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel? 43 You took up the tent of Moloch and the star of your god Rephan, the images that you made to worship; and I will send you into exile beyond Babylon.’ 44 “Our fathers had the tent of witness in the wilderness, just as he who spoke to Moses directed him to make it, according to the pattern that he had seen. 45 Our fathers in turn brought it in with Joshua when they dispossessed the nations that God drove out before our fathers. So it was until the days of David, 46 who found favor in the sight of God and asked to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. 47 But it was Solomon who built a house for him. 48 Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, 49 “‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? 50 Did not my hand make all these things?’ 51 “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you. 52 Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One, whom you have now betrayed and murdered, 53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not keep it.” 54 Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” 57 But they cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears and rushed together at him. 58 Then 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. 59 And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep. (Acts 7, ESV Bible)
1 And the high priest said, “Are these things so?” (Acts 7:1, ESV Bible)
Are These Charges True?
Stephen stood trial before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. He listened while false witnesses came forward and testified against him. He recognized some of them from the study halls in the Synagogue of the Freedmen. They said, "We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God" (Acts 6:I1). They said, "This man incessantly speaks against this holy place and the Torah; for we have heard him say that this Nazarene, Yeshua, will destroy this place and alter the customs which Moses handed down to us" (Acts 6:13-14).
The charges were serious, and the trial had ramifications for the entire Yeshua sect. As a community leader over the assembly of Yeshua's disciples, Stephen represented the beliefs of the whole community. If the court found him guilty of blasphemy or apostasy, they might turn against the whole sect. The accusations against Stephen can be summarized in four statements:
Speaks against the Temple
Speaks against the Torah
Yeshua the Nazarene will destroy the Temple
Yeshua the Nazarene will change the customs handed down from
Moses
When the witnesses had all been heard and cross-examined, the high priest turned to address Stephen. He demanded, "Are these things so?" Believers in Yeshua today should ask the same question.
Moses, God, the Temple, the Torah, and the customs handed down from Moses are fundamental to Judaism. The witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the pillars on which Judaism stands. If the charges were true, Stephen was an apostate.
Of course, the allegations were not true, but was there any basis at all to the charges? Stephen could not have spoken "against the Temple" since his Master revered the Temple and his fellow disciples assembled within it daily, but he might have warned about its impending destruction. False witnesses had also tried to peg Yeshua with the charge of trying to destroy the Temple. In the trial of Yeshua, they said, "We heard Him say, I will destroy this temple made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands" (Mark 14:58).
The witnesses accused Stephen of teaching against Torah and teaching that Yeshua would change the "customs which Moses handed down to us." The "customs" handed down refers to Torah observance, aspects of Jewish tradition, and the Oral Law. Stephen could not have spoken "against the Torah" or even "the customs," since his Master taught, "I have not come to abolish the Torah," and enjoined His disciples to keep even the least of the commandments. On the other hand, Yeshua of Nazareth had contradicted certain interpretations, such as the prohibition against healing on the Sabbath. Some of those controversial issues might have been misconstrued by Stephen's opponents. In any case, the witnesses who testified against Stephen were false witnesses, intentionally twisting the truth and lying to get Stephen convicted. Luke explicitly says "they put forward false witnesses" (6:13) who had been "secretly induced" (6:11) to speak against Stephen.
Replacement theology's interpretations of the trial of Stephen often fail to point out that both the witnesses and the charges against Stephen were false. Commentators regard it as an ironic twist that the so-called "false charges" were actually true. Numerous Christian commentaries insist that contrary to what Luke tells us, the witnesses were not really false, nor were their allegations really lies. From replacement theology's point of view, Stephen must have taught against the Temple with its obsolete sacrifices, against the Torah with its canceled ceremonial laws, and against the customs, i.e., the traditions of men.
Luke consistently emphasizes the falsehood of the witnesses and testimonies against Stephen, as well as the deceitful actions of the synagogue members who instigated these accusations. Despite Luke's careful depiction of the entire trial as fraudulent, most New Testament teachers somehow conclude that the charges against Stephen were valid. Ironically, they side with the prosecution and condemn Stephen guilty as charged. Traditional Christian interpretation reads the trial of Stephen as if he really was teaching against the Torah and the Temple because traditional Christian doctrine teaches against the Torah and against the Temple. Replacement theology holds that Yeshua died to replace the Temple and that He came to cancel the ceremonies of the Torah. Therefore, the charges against Stephen read like a list of core distinctions between Judaism and Christianity.
Interpreting the trial of Stephen through the lens of replacement theology—which asserts that the church has replaced Israel in God's plan and that the Torah, Temple, and Jewish customs are obsolete—raises significant issues when evaluated against the text of Acts 6–7. This approach is problematic. Luke explicitly states that the witnesses were false and that they were "secretly induced" to accuse Stephen (Acts 6:11–13). To argue that the charges were "actually true" requires dismissing or reinterpreting Luke's clear assertion. This undermines the integrity of the text and introduces an interpretive bias. Starting with a replacement theology framework imposes assumptions onto the text, leading to interpretations that reflect the commentator’s theological agenda rather than the narrative’s intent. Good interpretation starts with the text itself, seeking to understand it in its historical, cultural, and literary context. Replacement theology, in this case, starts with a theological framework and forces the text to conform to it, resulting in a distorted reading.
To read later Christian theology onto the Yeshua movement in the book of Acts creates an anachronism. Stephen was part of a movement of Jews inspired by a rabbi whom they believed to have risen from the dead and to be returning as Messiah. They called Jews to "repent," which meant "Return to obedience to God." That was a pro-Torah, pro-Moses, and ultimately, pro-Temple message. The devout Torah observance of the apostolic community testifies to their pro-Torah theology. The Nazarene sect of first-century Judaism to which Stephen belonged worshiped and assembled in the Jerusalem Temple. It is hardly possible to have a more pro-Temple stance than to use it as a place of congregation and worship on a daily basis. Luke was clear on the matter. He wanted his readers to know that the accusations were false and slanderous.
The argument presented above by FFOZ is a circumstantial defense argument that relies on intertextual consistency and character-based reasoning. It assumes that Stephen, as a disciple of Jesus, would align with the teachings and practices of his Master (Jesus), as recorded elsewhere in Scripture. This is a theological deductive argument based on established principles or known claims about Jesus’ teaching and its presumed influence on His disciples. It also falls under apologetics because it defends Stephen against allegations by appealing to a broader understanding of his faith context.
There is also an argument for direct testimonial evidence. Luke explicitly describes the witnesses as "false" and notes that they were "secretly induced" to testify against Stephen. This is direct evidence within the narrative that the accusations were fabricated. While the circumstantial argument appeals to the consistency of Stephen’s faith and Jesus’ teachings, this textual evidence directly calls into question the legitimacy of the accusations by labeling the witnesses as false.
When you combine Luke’s testimonial account with the earlier circumstantial argument (Stephen would align with Jesus' teachings), it becomes a cumulative argument. The circumstantial evidence shows that Stephen was unlikely to contradict Torah based on his alignment with Jesus' teachings. Luke’s direct testimony confirms that the accusations were not based on truth but were intentionally fabricated. It assumes Luke’s account is historically accurate and free of bias. Skeptics could argue that Luke, as a defender of the early Christian movement, might portray Stephen’s accusers as false to protect his reputation. These arguments make a strong argument against Replacement Theologies claim that Stephen was actually teaching against the Torah and the Temple.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
2 And Stephen said: “Brothers and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran, (Acts 7:2, ESV Bible)
Overview of Stephen’s Sermon
When Caiaphas asks Stephen, "Are these charges true," he, in effect, asks, "Are you and your sect speaking against Moses, against the Torah, and against the Temple?"
Stephen responds with a lengthy discourse surveying and reviewing the story of the Tanach. He offers a pro-Temple, pro-Torah apologetic, which, in essence, affirms his orthodoxy within normative Judaism. He retells the Bible stories that establish the authority of Moses and the Torah, and he tells the story of the origin of the Temple. He goes on to make a case for Yeshua, declaring Him to be the "prophet like Moses," who, like Moses himself, suffered His people's rejection. In the same way, he draws in the Temple theme as he points out that Israel's historical compromises with paganism contrasted against the sanctity of the true Temple. By the end of his defense, he turns the tables around. The accused becomes the accuser. He claims that just as the nation of Israel historically rejected Moses, broke the Torah, and compromised with idolatry, the Jewish leadership has committed a similar crime by rejecting the appointed Messiah. He concludes with the provocative words:
You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did. Which one of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? They killed those who had previously announced the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become; you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it. (Acts 7:51-53)
In summary, Stephen refuted the charges against him by affirming his orthodoxy within Judaism, but then he accused Jerusalem's religious leaders of speaking against God, Torah, and the Temple by rejecting and killing Yeshua. Nevertheless, traditional Christian interpretation reads Stephen's speech as an affirmation of the charges against him, as if he intended to confirm that he taught against the Torah, the Temple, and customs.
A careful reading of the sermon reveals that Stephen's speech is critical of neither the Torah nor the Temple. On the contrary, Stephen referred to the Torah as "living oracles" delivered by angels. He presented Moses as the righteous prophet. He condemned Israel's disobedience to the Torah. He cited the Torah positively (some ten times) as he built his case that Israel had a long-standing history of rejecting God's prophets and law. He indicted his accusers and judges for failing to keep the Torah.
The following outline highlights Stephen's points of defense and argument:
~ Patriarchal Narratives (7:2-8)
Temple rooted in patriarchal promises
Promise of Messiah implicit in patriarchal promises
~ Joseph Narrative (7:9-16)
Joseph rejected and unrecognized
Joseph exalted
Tombs of the fathers in Hebron and Shechem
~ Moses Narrative (7:17-38)
High view of Moses
Moses' attempt at redeeming Israel unrecognized
Messiah is a prophet like Moses
Moses' Torah equals Words of Life
Israel historically rejected Moses
~ Israel's Rebellion (7:39-43)
Rejection of Moses (Torah) led to idolatry
Idolatry led to exile
~ Tabernacle and Temple (7:44-50)
The Tabernacle was ordained at Sinai
The Jerusalem Temple stands in continuity with the Tabernacle
God is not contained in the Temple
~ The Accused becomes the Accuser (7:51-53)
By rejecting Messiah, the Jewish leadership has broken
Torah
Stephen's speech contains numerous allusions to the Torah and Prophets. Occasionally, he quotes the Scriptures directly. When he does so, he employs the Septuagint, the Bible of his native tongue. In many instances Stephen makes statements that seem to disagree with the Tanach. In some cases the disagreement arises from the Septuagint version. In other cases, it is not clear whether Stephen follows some other unknown version of the Scripture or simply paraphrases as he incorporates elements from midrash, Targum, and Jewish tradition. See Chronicles of the Apostles for a fuller treatment of the difficulties in the text.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
The Call of Abraham
With the story of Abraham's journey to the holy land, Stephen began his refutation of the charge that "this man speaks incessantly against this holy place" (Acts 6:13). He identified the land of Israel, where the sages and legislators of the Sanhedrin were living, as the land to which God led Abraham. The expression, "this country in which you are now living" (Acts 7:4) might imply that Stephen himself was a Diaspora Jew who had immigrated to Judea. He used the story of Abraham's call to Canaan to affirm his loyalty to the Holy Land and, ultimately, the Temple.
The LORD led Abraham to Canaan, "but He gave him no inheritance in it, not even a foot of ground" (Acts 7:5). Instead, the LORD made a promise to Abraham regarding his future seed. The apostles interpreted God's "promise" about the "seed of Abraham" as prophetic of the Messiah (e.g., Luke I:73; Acts 13:32; Romans 4:13-16; Galatians 3:14-18). The apostles found significance in the fact that Abraham "died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance" he made it clear that he was "seeking a country" and heavenly city (Hebrews 11:13-15). In apostolic interpretation, the ultimate seed of Abraham is the Messiah (Galatians 3:16). The apostles taught that the final fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham will occur through the Messiah in the Messianic Era. The heavenly city that Abraham sought was Messianic Jerusalem.
Stephen's accusers claimed that he spoke against the "holy place." Stephen validates the holy place with a promise to Abraham, "They will come out of that country and worship Me in this place" (Acts 7:7, emphasis mine). God promised Abraham his seed would worship (sacrifice) at the Temple. Stephen's interpretation of the text refuted the anti-Temple allegation.
With a similar maneuver, Stephen refuted the charge of teaching against the Torah and its customs by affirming the Torah's validity in the Abrahamic narrative. He notes that the covenant of circumcision was divinely ordained and that Abraham received the promised son, Isaac, only after receiving circumcision.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
9 “And the patriarchs, jealous of Joseph, sold him into Egypt; but God was with him (Acts 7:9, ESV Bible)
Rejection of Joseph
In retelling the Joseph narrative, Stephen began to build his theme of Israel's rejection of righteous leaders. He reminded the Sanhedrin how Joseph's brothers envied him and sold him into Egypt. The court probably understood that Stephen was comparing Joseph to the Nazarene. In the past, the "fathers" of the nation rejected and mistreated the one who turned out to be the savior of the nation. Now, the "fathers" of the nation treated the promised Messiah in the same manner. God "rescued Joseph from all his afflictions and granted him favor and wisdom" (Acts 7:10). He highly exalted him as governor over Egypt. Stephen subtly suggested that the chief priests and sages had made the same mistake and committed the same sin as Joseph's brothers, but despite that, God had highly exalted Yeshua.
The first time the brothers went to Egypt, they did not recognize Joseph. "On the second visit Joseph made himself known to his brothers" (Acts 7:13). Stephen hinted that the rejected and unrecognized Messiah would visit a second time and make Himself known.
When something that happened earlier is predictive of something in the future, it is often referred to as typology or a type-antitype relationship in theological and literary contexts. This concept involves an event, person, or institution in the past (the "type") serving as a foreshadowing or prefiguration of a future event, person, or institution (the "antitype").
Joseph’s story presents a powerful analogy. Despite being rejected and betrayed by his brothers, Joseph ultimately showed them mercy, forgave them, and provided for them (Genesis 45:5–7). This typology aligns well with the idea of God’s covenant faithfulness to Israel and His enduring mercy. The Jewish people are the recipients of an eternal covenant with God (Genesis 17:7, Romans 11:28–29). Their temporary rejection of Jesus as Messiah does not nullify God’s promises to them. Paul explicitly affirms this in Romans 11, describing Israel’s rejection as partial and temporary, leading to eventual restoration: "And so all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:26).
The Jewish people’s faithfulness to the Torah and their covenantal relationship with God could be viewed as faithfulness to the "light" they have received, even if they have not yet recognized Jesus as the Messiah. Acts 17:30 speaks of God overlooking ignorance in certain times, focusing instead on genuine pursuit of Him.
Typological arguments show the interconnectedness of Scripture, emphasizing God's consistent plan across time. Typology is widely used within the Bible itself (e.g., Paul uses Adam as a "type" of Christ in Romans 5:14; Hebrews interprets the Tabernacle as a shadow of heavenly realities).
Typology relies on the assumption that past events were divinely intended to prefigure future ones. If the audience does not accept this assumption, the argument loses its persuasive power. Typological arguments are very strong when used within a community that values Scripture and sees it as a unified narrative.
Typological arguments are strong within a theological framework or among audiences that share a belief in the divine inspiration and unity of Scripture. However, their effectiveness diminishes in more critical or secular settings, where they may be perceived as subjective or speculative. For believers and those open to theological reasoning, typology is a powerful tool to demonstrate continuity, purpose, and hope within God's redemptive plan.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
20 At this time Moses was born; and he was beautiful in God’s sight. And he was brought up for three months in his father’s house, (Acts 7:20, ESV Bible)
Moses, Exceedingly Beautiful
Bearing in mind that Stephen was accused of speaking against Moses, the reader should pay careful attention to how he speaks of Moses. In Acts 7:20, he says, "At this time Moses was born; and he was lovely in the sight of God." By referring to Moses in this language, Stephen may have had in mind a tradition about the birth of Moses common among the sages that describes the baby Moses as unusually beautiful and surrounded by a divine radiance. The tradition is based on the mother of Moses assessing the child as "good" and hiding him away: "The woman conceived and bore a son; and when she saw that he was good, she hid him for three months" (Exodus 2:2).
Several other midrashic legends inform Stephen's telling of the life of Moses. He describes Moses as "a man of power in words and deeds." Contrary to Stephen's telling of the story, the biblical narratives depict Moses as a man slow of speech who fled for his life after one failed attempt to help his people. The rabbinic versions of the story, however, depict Moses as a heroic and powerful man even prior to his flight from Egypt. Stephen conveyed the high rabbinic view of Moses as he asserted his orthodoxy and denied the charges of speaking against Moses and the Torah. His description of Moses alludes to Yeshua, of whom people said, "He was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people" (Luke 24:I9).
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
28 Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?’ 29 At this retort Moses fled and became an exile in the land of Midian, where he became the father of two sons. (Acts 28-29, ESV Bible)
The Rejected Redeemer
As Stephen retold the Moses story, he introduced a secondary theme. More than just affirming his own orthodoxy and high view of Moses and Torah, Stephen began to point out that Moses (who, like Messiah, "was sent as ruler and judge" over Israel) was rejected by his kinsmen. Stephen interpreted the prophecy of Moses, "God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brethren," as a prophecy of Messiah (Acts 7:37; Deuteronomy 18:18). By citing the prophecy, Stephen reminded the Sanhedrin that Moses set the pattern for Messiah. Just as they had rejected the Messiah, Israel also rejected Moses when they said, "Who made you a ruler and judge over us?"
Stephen told the story about how Moses attempted to redeem Israel by killing the Egyptian assailant. Stephen explained, "He supposed that his brethren understood that God was granting them deliverance through him, but they did not understand" (Acts 7:25). Likewise, the men of the Sanhedrin had failed to understand the redemptive mission of the Messiah. According to apostolic interpretation of the story, when Moses left Pharaoh's palace and tried to redeem the Hebrews, he endured "the reproach of Messiah" (Hebrews I1:26), meaning he was rejected by his own.
Stephen retold the theophany at Mount Sinai. He emphasized that the LORD's appearance in the burning bush hallowed the ground on which Moses stood. This language affirmed the Torah's teaching about holy places and further distanced himself from the charge of speaking "against this holy place and the Torah" (Acts 6:13).
Stephen emphasized that God selected Moses, the same man whom Israel had already disowned, saying, "Who made you a ruler and a judge?" God chose and sent the rejected deliverer to bring about Israel's great redemption. With these words, Stephen implied that God would send the rejected Yeshua to bring about the final redemption.
The apostles often invoked the prophecy about the LORD sending Israel a prophet like Moses. The life and service of Moses provide a prototype that the ultimate Messiah-the second Moses-will fulfill. The sages sometimes speak of Moses and Messiah respectively as the first redeemer and the last redeemer. The idea of Moses as the "first redeemer" and the Messiah as the "last redeemer" is an example of typology within Jewish thought
Stephen reminded the Sanhedrin that the prophecy of the coming prophet like Moses includes the commandment to heed that prophet: "Listen to him." The generation of Yeshua had failed to heed the prophet like Moses. The connection establishes Moses as a type of the Messiah, with both serving as agents of redemption, albeit in different contexts (historical vs. eschatological).
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
38 This is the one who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the angel who spoke to him at Mount Sinai, and with our fathers. He received living oracles to give to us. (Acts 7:38, ESV Bible)
The Giving of the Torah
Stephen stood accused of speaking "blasphemous words against Moses,' speaking incessantly against the Torah, and teaching that Yeshua will change the customs handed down from Moses. Stephen refuted the charges in his retelling of the story of the giving of the Torah. He maintained that Moses received the Torah directly from the Angel of the LORD (that is, from God) when he was with the assembly (ekklesia) in the wilderness. He presented a high view of the Torah of Moses, saying, "He received living oracles to pass on to you." The Midrash Rabbah also refers to the Torah as "words of life," and Simon Peter once declared of Yeshua, "You have the words of eternal life."
Stephen reminded the Sanhedrin that Moses' generation rejected the "words of life." He said, "Our fathers were unwilling to be obedient to him, but repudiated him and in their hearts turned back to Egypt" (Acts 7:39). Just as Moses' generation rejected the Torah and repudiated their redeemer, the generation of Yeshua refused His words of life and repudiated Him.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
44 “Our fathers had the tent of witness in the wilderness, just as he who spoke to Moses directed him to make it, according to the pattern that he had seen. (Acts 7:44, ESV Bible)
Idolatry and Exile
Stephen began to recite Israel's long struggle with idolatry. Beginning with the sin of the golden calf, Israel repeatedly broke the Torah and worshiped images and false gods. By narrating Israel's painful history with idolatry, Stephen further advanced his argument that the nation had a proven track record of making the wrong choices in the past. He contended that the rejection of Yeshua was yet another wrong choice in a series of wrong choices. Stephen used Israel's idolatry to signify the nation's general rebellion against Torah. He quoted the Septuagint version of a passage from Amos 5:25-27 about Israel going into exile as a punishment for worshiping Assyrian gods.
The Greek version of the Amos passage provided Stephen with the opportunity to contrast Israel's idolatry against the true worship of God that the Torah prescribed by means of a wordplay. The Greek of Amos 5:26 described Israel's idolatry as "the tabernacle of Molech." Stephen contrasts the "tabernacle of Molech" against "the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness." He presents the two tabernacles as opposites and sets them in antithesis. The tabernacle of Molech represents Israel's idolatry and rejection of Moses; the tabernacle of the wilderness represents Torah and the worship of God.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
45 Our fathers in turn brought it in with Joshua when they dispossessed the nations that God drove out before our fathers. So it was until the days of David, 46 who found favor in the sight of God and asked to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. 47 But it was Solomon who built a house for him. (Acts 7:45-47, ESV Bible)
From Tabernacle to Temple
Stephen told about how the children of Israel carried the Tabernacle into the land of Canaan. He told the story of David seeking to build a permanent Sanctuary, and how Solomon built the Temple in Jerusalem. He said that the house of David earned the privilege of building the Temple because "David found favor in God's sight."
Replacement theology interpretations assume that Stephen really was speaking incessantly against the Temple and teaching that Yeshua would destroy the holy Sanctuary. Interpreters following those assumptions try to find evidence for Stephen's anti-Temple attitude in his speech before the Sanhedrin. Some teachers accomplish this by contrasting the Tabernacle in the wilderness (given by God) against the Temple in Jerusalem (built by Solomon), supposing that the Tabernacle had God's favor and blessing but that the Jerusalem Temple was the work of man and somehow outside of God's will.
Stephen did not present any such dichotomy. He simply retold the story of the transition from portable tent to permanent structure, demonstrating that the Temple in Jerusalem stands in continuity with the Tabernacle that God directed Moses to make "according to the pattern which he had seen" (Acts 7:44). Human hands made both the Tabernacle and the Temple.
A second line of argument for replacement theology notes that Stephen concluded his discussion of the Temple by quoting Isaiah 66:1-2, a prophecy in which the LORD declares that His dwelling place is in heaven, not in a house built by human hands. After establishing the biblical validity and historical origin of the Temple in Jerusalem, did Stephen dismiss the Temple as irrelevant by an appeal to God's transcendence? Many interpreters claim that Stephen quoted the Isaiah prophecy to prove that the Temple in Jerusalem was extraneous. On the contrary, Stephen was not overturning a supposed Jewish theology that imagined God as finite and contained within the Jerusalem Temple. Judaism understood God's transcendence. Both the Pharisees and the Sadducees believed that God transcends the universe and that all things were made by Him. God's transcendence has been part of the Jerusalem Temple tradition since Solomon first built the Temple. When Solomon dedicated the Temple, he prayed, "Will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain You, how much less this house which I have built!" (I Kings 8:27). Stephen's appeal to God's transcendence followed conventional Jewish theology about the Temple.
Judaism never imagined God confined within the Temple. Jewish thought considered the Temple in Jerusalem to be a reflection of the heavenly Temple-the true dwelling place of God, not made with hands. Stephen's conclusion alludes to the same concept and points toward an apostolic theology about the earthly Temple reflecting the heavenly:
When the Messiah appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation. (Hebrews 9:11)
[The Messiah] has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. (Hebrews 9:24 ESV)
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
51 “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you. 52 Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One, whom you have now betrayed and murdered, 53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not keep it.” (Acts 7:51-53, ESV Bible)
Turning the Tables
Stephen concluded the refutation of the charges leveled against him. His discourse affirmed his high view of Moses, Torah, and Temple. Throughout the recitation, he hinted toward an analogy between the historical rejection of Moses and the current rejection of Yeshua. After concluding his defense, he made the implications explicit.
With flashing eyes and a frightening, angelic countenance, Stephen turned on the venerable men of the court like a prophet of old and soundly rebuked them: "You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did." The terms "stiff-necked" and "uncircumcised in heart" are metaphorical idioms used in the Torah and other parts of the Bible to describe spiritual and moral stubbornness, as well as a resistance to aligning one's will with God’s commands.
Stephen railed, "Which one of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? They killed those who had previously announced the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become." By speaking in the second person, Stephen distanced himself from the court. The prophets of old had suffered persecution from the political leadership of their day. Stephen saw the men of the Sanhedrin as the natural heirs to that tradition, especially the corrupt, Sadducean priestly aristocracy that had conspired against Yeshua, condemned Him, and handed Him over to Pilate.
Stephen added one final ironic rebuke. He said, "You who received the Torah as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it!" Far from conceding that he taught against the Torah or the customs of Moses, Stephen accused the religious and political leadership of breaking the Torah. Stephen argued that they had violated the Torah by betraying and murdering an innocent, righteous man. Moreover, Stephen considered them to be in violation of the commandment to listen to the prophet like Moses. From Stephen's perspective, the leadership of Judea treated the divine Torah with contempt.
Stephen's inflammatory invective echoed a prophecy that Yeshua had delivered against Jerusalem's religious leadership in the last days before His suffering:
Behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. (Matthew 23:34-36)
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55-56, ESV Bible)
A Vision of the Glory
Stephen aimed his attack specifically at the Sadducees, such as Caiaphas, the high priest, but he offended Pharisee and Sadducee alike with his impudence. Nevertheless, he had spoken no blasphemy. The court had no grounds for charges against him unless they accepted the testimony of the false witnesses. The men of the Sanhedrin could do nothing but gnash their teeth at the angel-faced, sharp-tongued defendant. "The wicked will see it and be vexed, he will gnash his teeth" (Psalm I12:10).
The men of the court shouted threats against him. Stephen lifted his eyes heavenward and beheld a vision of the throne. He seemed to see the heavens open, and there was something resembling a throne. As the appearance of the rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the appearance of the surrounding radiance. Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. Then Stephen saw one like a Son of Man beside the throne. The man's eyes seemed to meet Stephen's. In prophetic ecstasy, Stephen announced the vision to the court: "Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!" (Acts 7:56). Until that moment, Stephen had not provided the court with a basis for condemning him. When he claimed to see Yeshua at the right hand of the Almighty, the court reacted explosively.
A few years earlier, a nearly identical expression about the Son of Man at the right hand of the Almighty clinched the blasphemy verdict in the trial of Yeshua. Yeshua Himself once stood before Caiaphas' court and declared, "You shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven" (Mark 14:62). Caiaphas responded immediately to those words by rending his garments and calling for a vote to condemn the Master for blasphemy.
In the days of the apostles, the word blasphemy (blasphemia, Blaoqnuía) had a broad range of meaning, including any abusive language, railing, or slander, but a formal charge of blasphemy ordinarily entailed deliberate defaming of God. Stephen uttered no blasphemy, but his enemies understood him to be claiming that Yeshua had position and privilege on a par with God. They regarded such language as demeaning the holiness and grandeur of God. Even Rabbi Akiva found himself rebuked and accused of blasphemy when he made a similar statement about Messiah sitting at the right hand of God (b.Sanhedrin 38b).
The men of the Sanhedrin covered their ears to shield them from hearing further blasphemies. They rushed at Stephen and hustled him out of the court. The trial was over. If Pharisees like Rabban Gamliel or believers on the council like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea tried to voice objections, they were outnumbered and overruled.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.
58 Then 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. (Acts 7:58, ESV Bible)
The Stoning
The Torah mandates stoning the blasphemer: "The one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him" (Leviticus 24:16). Luke's account of the stoning of Stephen creates the impression that the court abandoned all procedure and immediately dragged the victim out to his death. It sounds as if the court reacted like an unruly, angry mob. Flaring tempers and sudden flashes of violence and bloodshed were not uncommon in first-century Jerusalem. It is possible that, under the murderous Sadducean leadership, the Sanhedrin abandoned all proper procedure.
On the other hand, it may be that Luke's condensed narrative abbreviates a longer process. More plausibly, after Stephen had been removed and things had quieted down, Caiaphas called for an official vote, and the secretaries recorded the results and filed the proper paperwork. Since Rome had stripped the Sanhedrin of the right to the death penalty, the court needed Pilate to notarize their decision and approve the execution. Stephen may have spent a night in jail before they led him out of the city to the place of stoning.
The Mishnah describes the procedure for stoning in some detail (m.Sanhedrin 6). If things were conducted according to the rules, the men of the court and the witnesses led Stephen out through the city gates to the place of stoning. A herald walked ahead of him, announcing, "Stephen, the son of So-and-so, is going forth to be stoned because he committed the sin of blasphemy, and these are the witnesses against him." When they came within ten cubits of the place where the stoning was to occur, they stopped the procession and gave Stephen an opportunity to confess to the sin of blasphemy and ask God's pardon. One who knew that he had been perjured against said, "Let my death atone for my sins, except for this sin for which I did not commit."
Four cubits from the place of stoning, they stripped him of his garments. Then they led him to the top of a ten-foot precipice. In keeping with the Torah's prescribed procedure, the witnesses were to begin the execution by throwing Stephen down and casting the first stones: "The hand of the witnesses shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. So you shall purge the evil from your midst" (Deuteronomy 17:7). On that day, the witnesses who had testified against Stephen laid their cloaks at the feet of one of the men who had initiated the allegations against Stephen and arranged the entire affair.
Saul of Tarsus, the coat check man, watched with satisfaction. Years later, he must have related the whole story to Luke, his traveling companion and colleague in faith. Luke points out, "Saul was in hearty agreement with putting him to death" (Acts 8:1). Saul confessed, "I also was standing by approving, and watching out for the coats of those who were slaying him" (Acts 22:20).
Luke uses the trial of Stephen as a literary device to set the stage for the story of Saul's own future. Measure for measure, Saul would one day face the Sanhedrin like Stephen did, accused by false witnesses lodging the same allegations.
Stephen cried out, "Master, Yeshua, receive my spirit." The stoning commenced. One of the witnesses pushed him violently over the precipice. Before he could rise, a second witness cast the first stone by dropping a heavy boulder on his chest. With his last breath, Stephen prayed, "LORD, do not hold this sin against them." Then the stones began to fall, and Stephen slept.
The stoning of Stephen, when examined through the lens of the Torah and justice, raises significant questions about the application of the death penalty, the possibility of mercy, and the weight of human fallibility in exercising such authority. The Torah sets a high standard for holiness, and violations of this standard, such as blasphemy, were seen as direct affronts to God's authority and the covenant. Deuteronomy 17:6 requires the testimony of at least two or three witnesses to convict someone of a capital crime. A single witness was insufficient. False witnesses, if proven, were to receive the same punishment they sought for the accused (Deuteronomy 19:16–19). These safeguards highlight the Torah's concern for justice and the prevention of wrongful convictions.
If Stephen’s accusations were false, as the text claims, then his stoning was not in alignment with the Torah's requirements for justice. The mob’s action bypassed proper judicial procedures, suggesting this was more an act of mob violence than a lawful application of the Torah. If Jesus is the Messiah, as Stephen claimed, then his condemnation for blasphemy was a tragic misunderstanding of God's will. This highlights the danger of human fallibility in interpreting and enforcing divine law.
Rabbinic tradition often leans toward extreme caution in capital cases. The Mishnah (Makkot 1:10) famously states: "A Sanhedrin that executes one person in seven years is considered destructive. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says: [Even] one in seventy years." Jewish law places a high burden of proof on the accusers, and doubt often leads to leniency. This reflects the Torah's implicit recognition of human error and the potential for wrongful judgment. Exodus 34:6–7 describes God as "compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness." The Torah calls Israel to emulate these attributes, suggesting that mercy can and should temper strict justice.
The Torah provides both justice and mercy, and its judicial safeguards emphasize the importance of fairness and humility. The story of Stephen’s stoning illustrates the tragic consequences of injustice and the critical need for restraint when exercising the authority to judge others. Mercy, repentance, and the recognition of human fallibility are essential elements in any system that seeks to reflect God's justice. In the end, the responsibility to wield such authority demands utmost caution, humility, and a deep trust in God's ultimate justice.
References
This lesson is adapted from Daniel Lancaster's teachings in The Sent Ones, as presented by First Fruits of Zion for the Torah Club.