Mark Bradford's Bible Blog

¹And Saul was there, giving approval to his death.

This is one of my pet peeves in the Bible. This verse obviously belongs at the end of chapter 7, not here. The original writings in both the Old and New Testaments were not divided into chapters and verses like our Bible is today. Those divisions were added much later, in the 13th, 15th, and 16th centuries A.D. I quote here from gotquestions.org:

The chapter divisions commonly used today were developed by Stephen Langton, an Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton put the modern chapter divisions into place in around A.D. 1227. The Wycliffe English Bible of 1382 was the first Bible to use this chapter pattern. Since the Wycliffe Bible, nearly all Bible translations have followed Langton’s chapter divisions.

The Hebrew Old Testament was divided into verses by a Jewish rabbi by the name of Nathan in A.D. 1448. Robert Estienne, who was also known as Stephanus, was the first to divide the New Testament into standard numbered verses, in 1555. Stephanus essentially used Nathan’s verse divisions for the Old Testament. Since that time, beginning with the Geneva Bible, the chapter and verse divisions employed by Stephanus have been accepted into nearly all the Bible versions.

So I guess we have Langton to blame for this. But that’s not why we’re here. Luke puts Stephen’s martyrdom together with his introduction of Saul of Tarsus on purpose. Luke was Paul’s companion, and heard from Paul (many times, I’m sure) what an impression Stephen made on him when he was still called Saul, and was a member of the Sanhedrin. The word that’s translated approval in the NIV is the Greek word suneudokeo, which implies enthusiastic approval, or “to be pleased with”. In the Amplified Bible, verse one reads:

¹AND SAUL was [not only] consenting to [Stephen's] death [he was ^[a]pleased and ^[b]entirely approving].

Saul didn’t just assent to the persecution of Christians, he was enthusiastic about it. He believed he was doing God’s work, fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy in John 16:2, when Jesus said that the time was coming “when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God.” We sometimes hear today that it doesn’t really matter what you believe, as long as you’re sincere. Saul was sincere, enthusiastic, committed, and completely wrong. It does matter what we believe.

The Church Persecuted and Scattered

On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. ²Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. ³But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.

Stephen’s execution was a key turning point in the life of the early church and the life of Saul. It triggered the persecution of Christians in earnest. What had started as harassment became an all-out campaign of extermination. This persecution drove the church, with the exception of the apostles, out of Jerusalem and into Judea and Samaria. The next part of Jesus’ command in 1:8 was coming to fruition. They had been his witnesses in Jerusalem, and now they would be his witnesses in Judea and Samaria. The ends of the earth would soon follow. It’s admirable that the apostles stayed, in spite of the danger. Eventually, they would leave Jerusalem as well, but perhaps at this time they felt that it would show weakness and fear to leave, so they stayed.

Another example of bravery in the face of persecution is in verse 2; Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. Under Jewish law, victims of execution were to receive no funeral honors. No lamentation or other sign of mourning was allowed. But the believers in Jerusalem who loved Stephen braved persecution in order to give Stephen a proper burial and mourn for him.

I read a quote by Augustine today that shed a light on the death of Stephen that I had not thought of before. Stephen was the first Christian to die a righteous death. The first apostle to die was Judas, a traitor. The first members of the early church to die were Ananias and Sapphira, and they were hypocrites. In Stephen, we get our first glimpse of how a genuine believer dies.

The picture of Saul’s persecution of the church in verse 3 reveals a level of malice that I attribute to guilt. Nothing inspires anger and spite like guilt. Have you ever noticed how spiteful a non-believer can be when God is working on them? I believe that witnessing how Stephen conducted himself in his trial and death had a profound effect upon Saul. I don’t think that Saul was 100% evil when he persecuted the church they way he did, and that he suddenly turned on a dime after his Damascus Road experience. I think that the Holy Spirit was working on him from the trial of Stephen on, and that he fought the conviction of the Holy Spirit on his heart until Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus. That was when God, in effect, hit him with over the head a 2X4. I can’t prove this scripturally, but Luke put the trial and stoning of Stephen together with Saul’s persecution of the church for a reason. I think he made that connection because of his time with Paul.

I say all of that to say this. If you are angry at Christianity, at the church, or at God, consider the reasons why. Maybe someone in the church hurt you. God help us, but many times, when someone is hostile to the faith, that is the reason why. But the source of your anger may also be guilt. God may be working on you, and he wants to show himself to you. He probably won’t do it in as dramatic a way as he did with Saul, but he is calling your name. To those believers who have loved ones who are hostile to Christianity, I say this. Hostility is actually preferable to indifference. Those who are indifferent are the most difficult to reach. They feel no need in themselves. Those who are hostile at least feel something, and can still be reached. They are the ones who, when God gets a hold of them, can be radically saved the way Saul was.

Mark Bible Acts, Saul of Tarsus, Stephen

The Stoning of Stephen

⁵⁴When they heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him. ⁵⁵But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. ⁵⁶“Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”

Stephen’s testimony to the Sanhedrin infuriated them, and instigated a case of mob stoning, which was illegal, both under Roman law and Jewish law. Stephen, in his final moments, is again described as being full of the Holy Spirit. He had been chosen for service by the church because he was filled with the Spirit (6:3-5), and he performed miracles because he was “full of God’s grace and power.” (6:8) God may have granted Stephen this vision of Heaven because he was the first Christian martyr, but I believe that Stephen saw God with Jesus at his right hand because he was about to die as he had lived, filled with the Holy Spirit. Throughout the ages since then, many saints have had visions of Jesus welcoming them just before their death. Stephen may have been the first to see this vision, but those who walk in the power of the Spirit (Luke 4:14), as they are about to depart from this world, often get to see the sight they have longed to see for so long; the face of their Savior, just before they meet him face to face.

What has always struck me about this story are the similarities between the trials and executions of Jesus and Stephen. Jesus was accused of saying he would destroy the temple (Mark 14:58). Stephen was accused of saying that Jesus would destroy the temple (6:13-14). When Jesus was asked by the Sanhedrin if he was the Christ, he answered, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (Mark 14:62) That statement enraged the council and ensured Jesus’ conviction (Mark 14:63). When Stephen was asked to answer the charges against him, he echoed Jesus’ words in describing the vision he saw. Jesus had told the Sanhedrin that he would be at God’s right hand, and now Stephen witnesses it. I’m sure that many on the council remembered Jesus’ words at his trial, which Stephen could not have heard, and made the connection.

⁵⁷At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, ⁵⁸dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. Meanwhile, the witnesses laid their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul.

They covered their ears and yelled at the top of their voices. If you don’t want to hear the truth, cover your ears and shout it down. These men were priests and teachers of the law. Their whole way of life depended on keeping the system they were defending in place. One saying I’ve heard a lot lately is, “It’s impossible to convince someone of something when their livelihood depends on their not being convinced.” Trials are supposed to be dispassionate and impartial, a presentation of evidence culminating in a verdict. Like the laws in civilized nations today, Jewish law had many protections for the rights of the accused, but all of those protections went out the window here. There was no verdict. The law which these men supposedly regarded so highly was ignored, and mob rule took over.

They dragged him out of the city to stone him. Jewish law had specific instructions regarding stoning, all of which were ignored here. Mob stoning like this was strictly prohibited. Jesus himself escaped a case of mob stoning in his hometown of Nazareth (Luke 4:28-29), and prevented another one in the case of the woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11).

Here we see the first appearance of Saul of Tarsus, who became the Apostle Paul. He was a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin, and he witnessed and approved of the stoning of Stephen. But this event would mark him for the rest of his life, and led to the turning point of his conversion.

⁵⁹While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” ⁶⁰Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep.

Earlier I pointed out similarities between Jesus’ trial and Stephen’s. Here are two striking similarities in the way they died. Jesus, at his death, said, “”Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46) Stephen was not present at the crucifixion of Jesus, as far as we know. But his words as he was being stoned echo his Lord’s; “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Jesus, as he was crucified, prayed that God would forgive those who crucified him (Luke 23:34). In that same spirit, as he died, Stephen prayed, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” He lived to be like Jesus, and in his death, Stephen was like Jesus. I keep pointing out in this blog how the whole idea of being a disciple is to become like your master. Stephen was a disciple of Jesus, and became like his Master.

Some say that Stephen’s prayer was granted in the conversion of Saul, that God intervened in Saul’s life and changed him into the greatest evangelist in the history of Christianity because Stephen prayed that God would not hold this sin against them. I’m not sure about that, but I think it’s possible that the attitude of forgiveness in Stephen, even as he was unjustly murdered, had an effect on Saul. How could Stephen not cry out in fear, or rage, or pain in that moment? These Christians were different than other troublemakers the leadership had seen. Maybe there was something to this Jesus after all.

Mark Bible Acts, Saul of Tarsus, Stephen, stoning

Stephen’s Speech to the Sanhedrin

¹Then the high priest asked him, “Are these charges true?”

²To this he replied: “Brothers and fathers, listen to me! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was still in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran. ³‘Leave your country and your people,’ God said, ‘and go to the land I will show you.’^[a]

⁴“So he left the land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. After the death of his father, God sent him to this land where you are now living. ⁵He gave him no inheritance here, not even a foot of ground. But God promised him that he and his descendants after him would possess the land, even though at that time Abraham had no child. ⁶God spoke to him in this way: ‘Your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years. ⁷But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves,’ God said, ‘and afterward they will come out of that country and worship me in this place.’^{[b] 8}Then he gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision. And Abraham became the father of Isaac and circumcised him eight days after his birth. Later Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob became the father of the twelve patriarchs.

I have to make an admission here. The Book of Acts has never been one of my favorite books of the Bible, and this chapter is an example of why that is. Too many long sermons repeating stories that are told elsewhere in the scriptures. Why did Stephen preach this sermon to the Sanhedrin? It’s definitely not a defense. The council was never going to let him go after hearing this. I think it’s possible that Stephen was repeating what he had been saying on the streets, as if to say, “Do you want to know what I’ve been teaching? Here it is.”

The high priest who asked, “Are these charges true?” was probably Caiaphas, the same high priest who tried Jesus. He remained in office until 36 A.D. His question is very hypocritical. He had paid the witnesses to lie, and now he asks if the charges are true.

Stephen proceeds to give them a history lesson with a particular emphasis. It’s not as if the men of the Sanhedrin didn’t know the history of the patriarchs, Joseph, and Moses, but Stephen’s emphasis in this sermon seems to be how God needed no temple to be present on earth, and that Israel had repeatedly rejected God’s messengers, culminating in their rejection of Jesus. He starts with Abraham, and ends with the building of the temple by Solomon.

Remember that Stephen had been accused of speaking against the temple and against Moses (6:13-14). It might not seem like he is answering their charges, but this sermon does exactly that. Stephen says in verse 6 that God spoke to Abraham. He needed no temple to be in God’s presence. There was no temple at that time.

⁹“Because the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, they sold him as a slave into Egypt. But God was with him ¹⁰and rescued him from all his troubles. He gave Joseph wisdom and enabled him to gain the goodwill of Pharaoh king of Egypt; so he made him ruler over Egypt and all his palace.

¹¹“Then a famine struck all Egypt and Canaan, bringing great suffering, and our fathers could not find food. ¹²When Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our fathers on their first visit. ¹³On their second visit, Joseph told his brothers who he was, and Pharaoh learned about Joseph’s family. ¹⁴After this, Joseph sent for his father Jacob and his whole family, seventy-five in all. ¹⁵Then Jacob went down to Egypt, where he and our fathers died. ¹⁶Their bodies were brought back to Shechem and placed in the tomb that Abraham had bought from the sons of Hamor at Shechem for a certain sum of money.

Stephen then skips ahead to Joseph. Joseph also was blessed and guided by God without the benefit of a temple. Here Stephen begins to address his other theme, Israel’s rejection of those whom God sent. Joseph was rejected by his brothers, the patriarchs, the fathers of the 12 tribes of Israel. He went on to be, in a material sense, the nation’s savior. It was because of Joseph that Israel survived in Egypt. In spite of their rejection, God was with him, and he saved his people. In that way, Joseph was a precursor to Christ.

¹⁷“As the time drew near for God to fulfill his promise to Abraham, the number of our people in Egypt greatly increased. ¹⁸Then another king, who knew nothing about Joseph, became ruler of Egypt. ¹⁹He dealt treacherously with our people and oppressed our forefathers by forcing them to throw out their newborn babies so that they would die.

²⁰“At that time Moses was born, and he was no ordinary child.^[c]For three months he was cared for in his father’s house. ²¹When he was placed outside, Pharaoh’s daughter took him and brought him up as her own son. ²²Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in speech and action.

²³“When Moses was forty years old, he decided to visit his fellow Israelites. ²⁴He saw one of them being mistreated by an Egyptian, so he went to his defense and avenged him by killing the Egyptian. ²⁵Moses thought that his own people would realize that God was using him to rescue them, but they did not. ²⁶The next day Moses came upon two Israelites who were fighting. He tried to reconcile them by saying, ‘Men, you are brothers; why do you want to hurt each other?’

²⁷“But the man who was mistreating the other pushed Moses aside and said, ‘Who made you ruler and judge over us? ²⁸Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?’^{[d] 29}When Moses heard this, he fled to Midian, where he settled as a foreigner and had two sons.

³⁰“After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai. ³¹When he saw this, he was amazed at the sight. As he went over to look more closely, he heard the Lord’s voice: ³²‘I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.’^[e] Moses trembled with fear and did not dare to look.

³³“Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off your sandals; the place where you are standing is holy ground. ³⁴I have indeed seen the oppression of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groaning and have come down to set them free. Now come, I will send you back to Egypt.’^[f]

³⁵“This is the same Moses whom they had rejected with the words, ‘Who made you ruler and judge?’ He was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the bush. ³⁶He led them out of Egypt and did wonders and miraculous signs in Egypt, at the Red Sea^[g] and for forty years in the desert.

³⁷“This is that Moses who told the Israelites, ‘God will send you a prophet like me from your own people.’^{[h] 38}He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us.

³⁹“But our fathers refused to obey him. Instead, they rejected him and in their hearts turned back to Egypt. ⁴⁰They told Aaron, ‘Make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who led us out of Egypt—we don’t know what has happened to him!’^{[i] 41}That was the time they made an idol in the form of a calf. They brought sacrifices to it and held a celebration in honor of what their hands had made. ⁴²But God turned away and gave them over to the worship of the heavenly bodies. This agrees with what is written in the book of the prophets:
” ‘Did you bring me sacrifices and offerings
forty years in the desert, O house of Israel?
⁴³You have lifted up the shrine of Molech
and the star of your god Rephan,
the idols you made to worship.
Therefore I will send you into exile’^[j] beyond Babylon.

In this long passage, Stephen tells the well known story of Moses, who spoke with God face to face, but with no temple, and who also was a precursor to Jesus. Moses was rejected by his own people more than once, and went on to lead them out of bondage. Moses was rejected in Egypt after he killed the Egyptian, and was rejected again while on Mt. Sinai receiving the law that these council members claimed to revere so much. Twice Stephen quotes the Israelites’ question to Moses, “Who made you ruler and judge?” This must have reminded the council of how they had questioned Jesus in much the same way, asking, “By what authority are you doing these things?”. and “who gave you authority to do this?” (Mark 11:28) Stephen was tying Israel’s rejection of those God chose in the nation’s past with the religious leaders’ rejection of Jesus. I’m sure at this point that many of the men of the Sanhedrin knew where Stephen was going with this, and were starting to get very angry. Stephen made his point clearer in verse 37 by bringing home the same point Peter had in his sermon in the temple courts (3:22-23), that Moses had foretold that God would send a prophet like him, and when he did, Israel had better listen to him. That prophet, of course, was Jesus.

⁴⁴“Our forefathers had the tabernacle of the Testimony with them in the desert. It had been made as God directed Moses, according to the pattern he had seen. ⁴⁵Having received the tabernacle, our fathers under Joshua brought it with them when they took the land from the nations God drove out before them. It remained in the land until the time of David, ⁴⁶who enjoyed God’s favor and asked that he might provide a dwelling place for the God of Jacob.^{[k] 47}But it was Solomon who built the house for him.

⁴⁸“However, the Most High does not live in houses made by men. 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 where will my resting place be?
⁵⁰Has not my hand made all these things?’^[l]

The temple, in Jesus’ time, was an object of near idolatry to Israel. Like Israel with the golden calf, they worshiped what their hands had made. As Stephen begins his conclusion, he talks about the tabernacle and then the temple. But then he immediately reminds them of what God said in Isaiah 66:1-2, that God needed no temple made by human hands. He then concludes this sermon with statements sure to infuriate the council.

⁵¹“You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! ⁵²Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— ⁵³you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it.”

The use of the term “stiff-necked” was packed with meaning. God called Israel “stiff-necked” 18 times in the Old Testament. By calling the council this, Stephen was saying that they were just like their ancestors. God also said that Israel had “uncircumcised hearts” 4 times in the Old Testament. Same message, only this time, God’s message (and Stephen’s) was that Israel was, in their hearts, no better than Gentiles. Then Stephen spells it out in the same verse; You are just like your fathers.

To understand the council’s emotional reaction in the next passage, imagine that someone told the history of America, and only emphasized slavery, the genocide of the native tribes, Japanese internment camps in World War II, the use of the atomic bomb, segregation and lynching. Would that make you angry? Though all Americans are aware of these things (or should be), you never hear about those aspects of our history in a patriotic program. And they certainly don’t tell the whole story. Likewise, Israel had had many periods where they did obey God and prospered. After their initial rejections of Moses, Israel did come to recognize that God was with him and did possess the Promised Land under the leadership of Moses and Joshua. I’m sure that Jews of the First Century preferred to think about the positive aspects of their history, like Americans do today. But Stephen forced them to face what their ancestors had done in their rejections of Joseph, Moses, and the other prophets. In verse 52, Stephen tells them that their ancestors had killed the prophets who foretold the coming of Jesus, and just like their ancestors, they had killed the one that those prophets had foretold.

As I said earlier, this was not a defense. Stephen had to know that there would be no acquittal following this testimony. But Stephen wasn’t concerned about his safety. He was only concerned about telling the Gospel. He was the first of many who to this day face martyrdom because they won’t back down from their testimony for Jesus.

Mark Bible Acts, sanhedrin, Stephen

Stephen Is Arrested

⁸ Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed amazing miracles and signs among the people. (NLB)

We don’t know how much time passed between Stephen’s “ordination” by the apostles to administrate the food program in the early church and this event, but I can’t help but think that Stephen’s willingness to take on this ministry had something to do with the power and wisdom he received to work miracles and witness as he did. Stephen is most known as the first Christian martyr, but equally significant is the fact that he is the first person in the early church, other than the apostles, who is recorded as having performed “great miracles and signs.” Many attribute this to the apostles’ “laying on of hands.” (6:6) That may well be, but I think Stephen’s willingness to take on a necessary but unglamorous ministry had a lot to do with it also. He was faithful with little, and God entrusted him with much (Matthew 25:21).

⁹ But one day some men from the Synagogue of Freed Slaves, as it was called, started to debate with him. They were Jews from Cyrene, Alexandria, Cilicia, and the province of Asia. ¹⁰ None of them could stand against the wisdom and the Spirit with which Stephen spoke. ¹¹ So they persuaded some men to lie about Stephen, saying, “We heard him blaspheme Moses, and even God.” (NLB)

The use of the singular form of the word synagogue in the Greek indicates that this group was from one particular synagogue. It was a group of former slaves from various regions. Apparently this synagogue was formed specifically for this group. In my last post, I talked about the division in Jerusalem between Hebrews and Hellenists, those who adhered to Jewish traditions and spoke Aramaic, and those who came from other areas, embraced Greek culture, and spoke Greek. The group who argued with Stephen here must have been Hellenists, coming from those areas. It’s ironic that Stephen’s opposition came from the same group he had been appointed to minister to. The food program was intended to make sure that the needy among the Hellenist Christians had their needs met, and that the Hebrews’ needy were not shown favoritism. Though these were not Christians who accused Stephen, they may have had friends and relatives who had converted, and had been part of that controversy. Maybe part of this conflict stems from that.

Some scholars also note that one of the regions named is Cilicia, where Saul of Tarsus came from (Acts 21:39). For that reason some believe that this may have been Saul’s home synagogue. As a member of the Sanhedrin and a Pharisee, being from the same area as some of the accusers, he may have had a role in this whole episode. He’s probably the one who told Luke this story. His observation and approval of Stephen’s stoning in the next chapter is probably no coincidence.

In their debate with Stephen, his accusers could not stand against the wisdom and Spirit with which he spoke. Stephen’s wisdom, Spirit, and willingness to serve all came from the same place; his love for Jesus. He was chosen for service because he was known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom (6:3). His wisdom and Spirit only increased after the apostles laid hands on him and he served in the ministry to the widows and orphans. If we have the level of spiritual commitment that Stephen had, and if we are willing to serve like he was, God will grant us his wisdom and fill us with his Spirit. The word in verse 11 that the NLB translates persuaded and that the NIV translates induced is translated suborned in the KJV. Suborned means bribed, or otherwise induced. Suborned testimony is false testimony.

¹² This roused the people, the elders, and the teachers of religious law. So they arrested Stephen and brought him before the high council.^[b]

¹³ The lying witnesses said, “This man is always speaking against the holy Temple and against the law of Moses. ¹⁴ We have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth^[c] will destroy the Temple and change the customs Moses handed down to us.”

¹⁵ At this point everyone in the high council stared at Stephen, because his face became as bright as an angel’s. (NLB)

Until now, the apostles had been held in high regard by all the people, and so the persecution thus far had been relatively mild. The only way that those who opposed the church could justify killing followers of Jesus was by turning public opinion against them. It’s the same thing they did to Jesus, and they used the same method, false testimony. As is the case with the worst of lies, they contain a grain of truth. Jesus never said that he would destroy the temple, though he was accused of saying he would (Mark 14:58), but he did predict that the temple would be destroyed (Mark 13:2). Jesus was misquoted, and so was Stephen. As for changing the customs of Moses, that much was true. Christianity did do that, at least for those who converted. Stephen must have taught that Jesus was greater than Moses or the temple, and that sacrifices for sin were no longer necessary because of the sacrifice of Jesus. That would have been enough for them to twist his words and accuse him of blasphemy the way they did with Jesus. Again, the early Christians were being treated the way Jesus was treated, which caused them to rejoice (5:41).

Luke says in verse 15 that Stephen’s face became as bright as an angel’s (NLB). Other translations say they saw his face as the face of an angel (NIV) or that his face had the appearance of the face of an angel (Amplified). The Spirit and wisdom that was with Stephen leading up to this point sustained him in this trial. That same Spirit will also sustain us in our trials if we will be faithful like Stephen was. Saul of Tarsus, Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and Gamaliel were all there to witness this, and I imagine that they all told Luke about Stephen’s appearance when he interviewed them for this book. The impression that the look on Stephen’s face made on them just before he was stoned must have burned in their memory. Paul never forgot it, and testified to it later (Acts 22:20). What Saul of Tarsus meant for evil, God used for good, which Paul the Apostle understood later.

Mark Bible Acts, laying on of hands, Stephen

The Choosing of the Seven

¹In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food.

This account tells us of the first examples of lay leadership in the early church. Jews residing in Jerusalem at that time were divided into 2 groups, Grecian Jews and Hebraic Jews, or Hebrews and Hellenists. Hebrews spoke Aramaic, embraced Jewish culture and customs, and tended to be from Judea. Hellenists spoke Greek, embraced Greek culture and customs, and were more likely to be from the larger Roman empire. They were all Jews living in Jerusalem, but came from different cultures and had different traditions. The two groups distrusted one another. David Guzik, in his commentary, says, “Hebrews tended to regard Hellenists as unspiritual compromisers with Greek culture, and Hellenists regarded Hebrews as holier-than-thou traditionalists.” It seems this distrust had extended itself into the early church. Even after we become believers, unfortunately, we often bring our own prejudices into the church with us. This was the first case of division in the early church, but as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, God made sure that the church came through it without damage.

The complaint that the Hellenists had seems to be valid. Food was already being distributed to widows, but apparently in an unorganized way. The Hebrews were probably in the majority, and unorganized volunteers would naturally make sure that widows they knew personally got taken care of first. Luke had already pointed out that “they gave to anyone as he had need” (2:45), and that “There were no needy persons among them.” (4:34) Their hearts were in the right place, but without organization some may have fallen through the cracks. It’s possible that the Grecian Jews’ complaint was about a perceived slight rather than an actual one. But when someone, especially in the body of believers, believes that they have been wronged, it does no good for the person accused of the slight to try to prove their innocence. It really doesn’t matter if the slight was intended. What matters is how the aggrieved party feels. If the insult is real to them, then it’s real. Harmony in the church is more important than proving you’re right.

²So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. ³Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them ⁴and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.”

The apostles knew that it would be impossible for them to do what Jesus had called them to do and also administrate the food program to the widows and orphans. Many pastors, out of sheer necessity, especially in small churches, are forced to do many duties which should be done by volunteers in the church. This only reduces the amount of time that they can devote to study, prayer, sermon preparation, and ministry. I’ve often heard that the church is like a football game. There are thousands in the stands in desperate need of exercise and 22 on the field in desperate need of rest. If you think all the church needs from you is your attendance and money, think again. Giving of your time and talents to the church is part of your stewardship.

The method used to choose the seven “deacons”, as some call them, is interesting to me. They were nominated by the church body, and “ordained” for this duty by the apostles. They didn’t volunteer. In my church, when a ministry like this is set up, people are asked to pray about whether God is leading them to participate in the ministry, and to volunteer if they feel led to. In this case it seems assumed that those nominated would agree to serve. I have been nominated several times for election to my church’s board, but have refused to have my name on the ballot each time, because board meetings tend to conflict with music rehearsal times, and I feel called to music ministry, and have no interest in church government. But none of these men said “I don’t feel called to this ministry”, or “I’m not gifted in that area.” They looked on what some might have considered a menial duty as an important ministry, which it was. It was the church being the church. Caring for widows and orphans was high on Jesus’ priority list, no less important than preaching the gospel. After all, how did Jesus say that people would know we are his disciples? By seeing how we love one another (John 13:35).

The criteria they used for choosing the Seven, as they came to be known (Acts 21:8), was exactly right, and it’s the same criteria we should use for lay leadership today. They nominated those who were known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. This was a practical ministry, and they needed those who were both spiritual and practical. That can be a hard combination to find! Have you ever met someone who is, as the saying goes, “so spiritual that they’re no earthly good?” A ministry like this needs those who are good with organization and detail, in addition to being people of God.

⁵This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism. ⁶They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.

Everyone agreed that this was the right course of action. The apostles needed to devote themselves to preaching and prayer, and at the same time, others needed to make sure that the needs of the needy among them were met. Of those named here, Stephen is the most famous, being the first Christian martyr. His story immediately follows this one. Philip also plays a significant role in the coming chapters. His evangelism in Samaria results in the episode with Simon the sorcerer (8:4-25, blog), and he is the one who witnesses to the Ethiopian eunuch (8:26-40, blog). He became known as Philip the Evangelist (Acts 21:8). Of the others, not much is known. Those who give of themselves in ministries like this may never become “celebrities” in the church, but as Jesus said, “whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:43-45)

Many point out the fact that all of the names listed are Greek names, indicating that all of the Seven were Hellenists. This is seen by some as an attempt to mollify the Hellenists in the church by choosing leadership from their own number. That may be, but it’s also possible that all of the names are in Greek simply because Luke wrote the Book of Acts in Greek. It was written to a largely Gentile readership, so it’s natural that Luke would give the Greek versions of their names. We don’t know for sure how many of the Seven were Hebrews and how many were Hellenists.

⁷So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.

As they obeyed God and devoted themselves to ministry, the word of God spread. A church full of people who are willing to serve others will always grow. The church in Jerusalem got past this possible source of division and went on to greater victories. Luke says that even “a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.” This may well have been the final straw for the temple leadership that led to the persecution that followed. It was one thing for this new sect to appeal to the common folk, but when priests started converting to faith in Jesus, that could not be tolerated.

Mark Bible Acts, early church, laying on of hands, Philip, Stephen