THE SPEECH 0F SAINT STEPHEN, the FIRST Christian MARTYR JERUSALEM, PALESTINE, 37 a D

THE SPEECH 0F SAINT STEPHEN, THE FIRST CHRISTiAN MARTYR JERUSALEM, PALESTINE, 37 A D.

Thesis for the Degree of M. A MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ROBERT BRUCE OLDHAM 1989

awe, 33 b 1.5 .PV ﬁ“lﬁ.‘.t'ww \d RETURNING MATERIALS: MSU P1ace in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES wiII

be charged if 550E is returned after the date stamped below.

as: 3%“ v W 4,9,7 . xx”. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING - MICHIGAN 48823

DEPARTMENT OF SPEECH AND THEATRE 0 149 AUDITORIUM

Nbvember 17, 1969

Dean Jack Bain College of Communication Arts

Dear Dean Bain:

This letter will certify that all requirements for the M. A. degree in Speech and Theatre have been met by MR. ROBERT OLDHAM. A copy of his thesis accompanies this statement of certification.

Sincerely,

K;%§EEmemedhd<

91-.

a-n-.»

«av-nun .9..-

THE SPEECH 0F SAINT STEPHEN,

THE FIRST CHRISTIAN MARTXR

JERUSAW, PALESTJNE: 37 AOD.

Robert Bruce Oldham

A THESIS

Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Speech

1969 Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Speech, College of

Communication Arts, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree.

Kenneth G. Hance Tirector Omsk

Guidance Committee: Kenneth G. Hance , Chairman

David 0. Ralph

Gordon Thomas ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank those who have given of themselves to make these academic labors an experience of pleasure and profit:

My advisor, Dr. Kenneth G. Hence, whose patience and encouragement inspired me to complete this study;

Dr..David 0. Ralph, who introduced me to methods of speech criticism that helped me immensely with this project;

Dr. Gordon Thomas, who helped me realize the power of persuasive speaking; My wife, Virginia, and my children, Mary and John, whose patient endurance of my long hours and limited time for family engagements made the completion of this thesis possible.

ii TABLE OF CCN TEN TS

Chapter Page L mmwmnm ...;...... 1 II. STRUCTURE mm DEVELOHvIEhT OF STEPHEN'S SPEECH ...... 16

III. STEPHEI; STORED mp BELIEVERS SCATTERED...... 7b Iv.on;CI.Usm\s...... 82 APPENDIX 88 BIBLIOGRAPHY93 CHAPTER I

INTRCDUCTIQ‘

"Brothers and Fathers! Listen to Me!"

With this brief introductory appeal the story of Saint Stephen, the

first Christian martyr} begins as he stands to speak in defense of his life before the stately Sanhedrin in the year 37 A.D.~2 Dual charges of

speaking in opposition to the Temple and to the Law of Moses had been placed against Stephen for statements he had made in public debate in

several synagogues in Jerusalem. . The Outcome of that infamous hearing

was the death by stoning of one who has been called the “greatest figure

in primitive Christianity prior to Paul3 the Apostle with the exception

of Jesus of Nazareth, and one who is considered the "central figure be-

tween Jesus and Paul.“

Stephen's speech, the only one by him appearing in the New Testa-

ment or in traditional writings, is recorded in the seventh chapter of

the book of Acts. It is the longest public address included in that

book, and it is appraised by many scholars as one of the greatest

lDonald Attwater, Mart s From EE- Stephen 333 John Tung mew York: Sheed and Ward, 1957), p. I.

2W.H.C. Frend, Mom And Persecution In The Earl Church: A Stui Of A Conflict rom Maccabees Io Donatus New York: Eniversity 553 3,1937), p. m.

3"Stephen," Encyclopedia Britannica, 1965, XXI, 238.

1‘James Hastings, The Greater Men And Women Of The Bible (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916), p. 834.

1 speeches in history and “one of the most valuable documents of early

Christian literature."5 It may possibly be "the very earliest piece

. . . which has survived."6

Even though this speech is brief, requiring approximately 1350 words arranged in some fifty-eight sentences, its content includes a broad historical survey of the practice of Jewish worship from the time of Abraham to the days of Solomon. "Orators down the centuries have taken it as a model of argument and eloquence."7

Stephen was the "first to set forth decidedly and forcibly the in- consistency of Christianity with lifeless Judaism."8 For this he had to pay with his life. But the impact of his message "had momentous results for the whole later history of tin 'church,"9 and "it influenced the entire career of Saul of Tarsus,“10 who later became Paul, the greatest of the Apostles.

Although the ancestry of this "forerunner of the Apostle Paul"ll is

SJules Lebreton, The History 9; The Primitive Church (New York: Macmillan, 191:2), p. 1797

6Ernest F. Scott, The Varieties 93 New Testament Religion (New York: Charles Scribner'E—Sons, I955), p.12 . 7Heien Walker Homan, Letters _'I_?_o_ _'_I_h_e Martyrs (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1951), p. 1 .

8Adolph Schlatter, The Church In The New Testament Period, trans. by Paul Levertoff (New m. MEcmilEn‘C'Smpany, 1955) , p. 2'73.

9Scott, New Testament Reli ion, p. 95.

10Canon Farrar, The Life 9}: St. Paul (Philadelphia: Henry Neil Publisher, 1895). p788. ""

11Marcel Simon, Stephen, Saint, Martyr. _S_§. Stephen And The Hellen- ists _I_n_ The; Primitive Church (New York: Longman's Cream-T3537,- p. 5. unknown, he gained considerable prominence in the first century church following his election as one of the seven men mentioned in the sixth chapter of Acts, who were later referred to as the first church deacons.

It seems that with the growth of membership in the early church in

Jerusalem, tension developed between two groups within tre church, the

Hellenists and the Hebrews. The Hellenists were foreign-born, Greek- speaking Jews who had moved to the holy city. The Hebrews were native- bom, Hebrew-speaking members. The Hellenistsinstigated a quarrel with their fellow Hebrew members charging that their widows had been overlooked in the daily distribution of food and financial aid. This disa- greement precipitated such a crisis that the Apostles urged tin congregation to name seven godly men who could relieve them of this burdensome task which had caused them to "neglect the preaching of God's word"

(Acts 6:2) and at the same time had brought them much criticism. The congregation wisely followed the recommendation of the Apostles and chose seven Greek-speaking members to serve as assistants to the

Apostles. Among those elected by popular vote and first named in the group was Stephen.

His selection was based on such outstanding traits that he was spoken of as a "man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, . . . richly blessed of God and full of power“ (Acts 6:5, 8). With his help the seven must have solved the difficult problem which had divided the small

Christian community, for we hear nothing more about it. While it is true that Stephen was named one of the seven whose responsibility it was to distribute church food and funds to the poorer widows of the congregation, he gained much more attention before Jewish assemblies, called h

synagogues, as a ”superlative speaker and debater."l2

On at least three annual occasions Jews from many parts of the

Roman world went to Jerusalem to observe major festivals initiated by

Moses, who, as God's spokesman, commanded that they be kept by the Jews

perpetually (Exodus 23:1b-l7 and Leviticus 23:2-8). To accommodate

those visiting worshippers from near and far, the Jerusalem Jews had

erected synagogues where family members and friends could meet together

while in the holy city.

The Jewish synagogue, dating back to the Babylonian Captivity some-

time around 587 B.C., had become the place of assembly, worship, and the

reading and emlanation of the Law, for Jews outside of Palestine and for

those in Palestine who were unable to attend the Temple services. It was

also the center of Jewish community life wherever Jews lived. In large

cities, such as Alexandria and Rome and Jerusalem, there were many syna-

gogues where the people often grouped themselves according to their craft,

their language, or their nationality. Each national group had its own

synagogue in Jerusalem somewhat as different national groups have their

own individual churches in America. Some scholars say that in this city

alone there were more than 1480 different synagogues.l3 Others hold this

to be an exaggeration.

It was in some of those synagogues that Stephen found a “golden

12Johannes Munck, The Acts 93 The Apostles, trans. by Johannes Munck (Garden City: Doubleday ard Company, Inc., 1967), p. 55.

13 J. R. Dummelow, ed., The One Volume Bible Commentary (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1965), 5732.5.— opportunity‘m4 to present his claims about Jesus of Nazareth. Whenever possible he talked at length with those Jews who did not believe in

Jesus as the divine Son of God. Certain Jewish "defenders of tradition"15 were greatly disturbed by his call to faith in Jesus as Lord. In at least two of those synagogues Stephen encountered keen opposition and even open hostility. One was the synagogue of the North.African Jews from Libya, with its capital Cyrene, and Egypt, with its capital Alexp andria. Brilliant men suchtas.Apollos,‘who‘was both learned and eloquent in the Scriptures (Acts 18:2h), were in attendance there. The other synagogue was made up of Jews from the provinces of Asia and Cilicia and included a man named Saul, who had come from Cilicia's capital city of

Tarsus, and who doubtless heard Stephen's arguments and took part in some of the discussions (Acts 7:58). Very probably Stephen attempted to convince every Jew who would give him a hearing, incluiing Saul, that

Jesus was the long anticipated Messiah.

These discussions, which in reality were debates, focused on the

Scriptures and their fulfillment in the life of Jesus Christ, and it is probable that some of them continued for several days. But in the end the opponents of Stephen "could not resist him“ (Acts 6:10), since his wisdom was a gift from God and lay in a greater insight into the relative

"nature and value of the externals of Israel's religion, particularly those connected with the Temple."16 He proved by such irresistible

1r lbDavid Smith, The Life ﬂ letters 93‘ _S_t_..____ Paul (New York: Harper and Brothers, 191”: P. 39.

15Earl Perry,1 These F__i___rst Call____e_<_i_ Him Master (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1968), p.1

16"Stephen," Britannica, p. 238.

arguments that Jesus was the Christ, and delivered himself with so much

clarity and force that they had no reason to object to what he said.

"Though they were not convinced, yet they were confounded . . . since

they could neither support their own arguments nor answer his.":L7

No one could deny Stephen's high moral character and his remarkable

competence in speaking, qualities Aristotle said were vital. As a re-

sult of the witnessing of Stephen, and others of the seven along with the

Apostles, "the word of God continued to spread" and “the number of the

disciples in Jerusalem grew larger, and a great number of priests ac-

cepted the faith" (Acts 6:7). The spiritual power of this early church deacon showed itself in mighty deeds as well as words (Acts 6:5 ,8) and he

soon became a "marked man in Jerusalenﬂl8

Stephen had been echoing Jesus' teaching to tie effect that a new

era had broken upon the world: that neither in Samaria nor in Jerusalem,

neither to the Temple nor to any other specified place, could the worship

of God be limited. It was and is a matter of Spirit and truth (John ’4:

21-21:). One can easily see that this meant to the Jews an end to the

rigid demands of the Temple services and the resulting lucrative trade

it included in money changing and in the sale of suitable animal sacri-

fices. But it did not necessarily follow that worship in the Temple and

in the synagogues would end. For there, too, men could worship God.

Stephen's skill in debate was so formidable that he Mucw his opponents

17Matthew Henry, Matthew Hen 's Commenta On The Whole Bible. Volume 33, Acts _‘I_‘_o_ ReveEtIon (New Yo~r : em g-H._R§vmompany, n.d.), p. 75. 18 "Stephen," Britannica, p. 238 to “enraged silence."l9

His enemies were quick to twist his words to mean that Jesus would

"tear down the Temple and change all the customs which [had] come down

. . . from Moses“ (Acts 6:110. What Stephen had probably said was that the Law would pass away as having been fulfilled in Christ, and that if the Jews persistently refused to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah, their city and Temple would be destroyed as Jesus had prophesied (Matthew 210.20

There was only one thing to do as the Jews saw it; they would have to silence Stephen and all of his kind. The end would justify the means.

It is difficult for us to imagine the chaos, the conflicting reports, and the false accusations that filled the place dedicated to the procla- mation of truth and righteousness.

Failing to vanquish Stephen in honest and open debate, his opponents, who now had become his enemies, changed tactics. They shifted from sharing ideas in open discussion to such underworld methods as trickery, bribery, lying, and incitement of mob action. They hired false witnesses and brought Stephen before the Sanhedrin, charging him with "always talking against our sacred Temple and tie Law of Moses“

(Acts 6:13). Like the false witnesses in Jesus' trial, these witnesses maintained that he had quoted Jesus as saying that He would destroy the

Temple and change the rules that Moses had given them. Thus we see that the same accusations were brought against Stephen as had been brought against Jesus. The "Temple and the Law" --the Temple and the Mosaic

l9.1ohn D. Davis, The Westminster Dictionary 9; _‘1‘_1_l_e_ Bible (Phila- delphia: The Westminster Press, 19%.), p. 19.

2C)Dummelow, Bible Commentary, p. 826. order-- rested on the authority of God and Moses. To question or to try to change any part of tie Temple and its ritual or to imply that Jesus would "tear down the Temple and change all the customs which [had] come down . . . from Moses“ (Acts 6:114) was blasphemy according to the Jews.

The Sanhedrin had stood as the supreme judicial body in the Jewish state from some time in the third century B.C. until its destruction by the Romans in 70 A.D. This august body of men dealt with the adminis- tration of justice in civil, political, and religious matters. It was composed of some seventy or seventy-W0 members who sat in a semi-circle with scribes at either extreme of the arc and with the priests as pre- siding officers sitting in the center of the arc. Membership was based on age and wealth, but all were chosen from among full blooded Israel- ites, who held their posts for life. Its jurisdiction included only

Judea, where its decisions were final in all cases involving the inv- terpretation of the Law. In all criminal cases the approval of the

Roman governor had to be obtained.21

When the charges had been presented against Stephen, members of the

Sanhedrin looked upon him and saw that "his face looked like the face of an angel" (Acts 6:15) as they awaited his reply to the question of the

High Priest, "Is this really so?“ (Acts 7:1). That is, are these charges true --are you guilty or not guilty?

In answer to this pointed question, Stephen stepped forward and with the “logical force and concentrated fire of a great orator ard practiced

2J'Everett F. Harrison, ed., Baker's Dictionary _(_J_i_‘ Theolog (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960), p. 5'71. 9 controversialist"22 he began to lay the facts, fully and clearly, before the court not as a "Galilean peasant, but as a most persuasive dispu- tent."23 "Although he did not follow the rules of logic taught by Aris- totle, nor the methods of eloquence derived from the tradition of Cicero and Quintilian,"2h we shall see that Stephen did employ parallels, analo- gies, and mystical interpretations in his remarkable refutation of the charges of blasphemy placed against him. He showed such logic of a well trained mind that some historians tell us that he was a pupil of the most famous teacher of his time, "a wise and gentle Pharisee named

Ge.mal:l.e1."2S In answer to the question of the High Priest, Stephen entered upon his defense with the "reverential preface which became a loyal Jew in addressing the highest court."26

"Brothers and Fathers! Listen to Me!" (Acts 7:2).

The address of this bold witness for the truth was most probably delivered under the inspiration of the moment, a fact that may explain some of the minor historical discrepancies that appear in the text of the Speech. By far the larger portion of the text (Acts 7:2-50) is a review of the history of the Israelites from the calling of Abraham to the giving of the Law to Moses, and from this period to the building of the Temple by Solomon. In reference to this Temple, Stephen quoted a

22Farrar, _§_t_. Paul, p. 90.

23Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The S readin Flame (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 19%), p. 92.

2"tl-Iastings, _T_h_e_ Greater Men, p. 81;.

stoman, Letters 29, p. S. 26Smith, gt. Paul, p. hi. 10

passage from the noted Old Testament prophet Isaiah (66:1) which struck

against the superstitution of the Jews, who imagined that the Most High

God could be limited to a building put together by the hands of men.

Stephen sought not only to show his belief in the Old Testament through

his survey of sacred history, but more importantly to demonstrate the

fearful manner in which the Jews had abused the grace of God. He took

great pains to hold up the past to the view of his accusers so that they

might see, "as if in a mirror,"27 the manner in which they had treated

the Messiah and His followers.

The speech seems to have been developed under four main headings:

Abraham's divine call to leave his own country for another one God would

show him (Acts 7:2-8); Joseph's divine appointment as a saviour of his

people from the famine in Canaan (Acts 7:9-19): Moses' divine selection

as a ruler and saviour of the people when they were in Egyptian bondage

and wandering in the wilderness (Acts 7:20-16); and David's and Solomon's

efforts to establish a permanent place of worship (Acts 7:h6-h7).

Throughout the entire speech there are two underlying arguments. The

first seeks to prove that the ancestors of Stephen's listeners had

always had a rebellious attitude toward God's Law resulting in their re-

jection and unmerciful treatment of God's messengers. The second argument endeavored to prove that the house of worship had never been con-

fined to one locality, but instead, had been designated by God in the

various places where tie people had lived. These two parallel arguments were intended to refute the dual charges made by the council against

Stephen «that he had he had spoken against their respected ancestor

27Schlatter, 3312 Church, p 279. 11

Moses, and that he had spoken against the Temple by suggesting that it would not always remain at its present location.

Stephen's speech was essentially an inductive sermon in which he re-

lied heavily upon personal proof to gain acceptance in the minds of his

audience. Quotations from a source commonly known and accepted by his

hearers, the Old Testament, were carefully woven into his extended, yet

familiar, narration in an effort to strengthen his own credibility. The

examples Stephen used and the lofty way he referred to the ancestors of

his listeners were intended to soften their hostile attituies. Stephen

followed the process of inductive reasoning showing a cause-to-effect re-

1ationship throughout the whole message. He utilized eight rhetorical

questions which required the individuals in his audience to answer them

in their own minds in support of his arguments. His second argument was

sumnarized in the words, “The Most High does not live in houses built by men (Acts 7:148); and the first argument was climaxed in the charge, “You are just like your ancestors . . . they killed God's messengers, who long ago announced the coming of his righteous Servant. And now you have betrayed and mindered Him (Acts 7:51-53). The first argument was to prove

Stephal innocent of speaking against the Temple or against the Law of

Moses; the second convicted Stephen's Judges of opposing the will of God.

Two Biblical texts were chosen for the analysis of Stephen's speech. The Authorized King James Version published in 1611 was selected as one of the texts because it is the most widely read version of the Bible at this time, and it is the oldest English translation available to the average reader. At the time of its publication it represented the very 12

best English efforts at Bible revision and translation. The second

text chosen was the popular Good News For Modern Man published in

1966. Already this version has gained phenomenal acceptance by the

Bible reading public.

As a distinctly new translation, it does not conform to traditional vocabulary or style, but seeks to express the meaning of the Greek text in words and forms accepted as standards by people everywhere who employ English as a means of communication. . . . It attempts to follow, in this century, the example set by the authors of the'New Testament books who, for the most part, wrote in the standard, or common, form of 286 Greek language used throughout the Roman Empire.

These two texts of Saint Stephen's speech, as recorded in Acts

7:2-60, have been arranged in vertical columns and are included in

the Appendix. Each text has been compared with the other text, and

the differences have been indicated by means of typographical devices. The text used throughout the main body of this study is from

Good News For Modern Man. Old Testament quotations are taken from the King James Version.

Sources

Portions of the following books were read for biographical material on Saint Stephen: Donald Attwater, Martyrs From St. Stephen

12p John Tung; L. W. Barnard, Saint Stephen And Early Alexandrian

Christianity; John W. Brush, Who's Who In Church History; Antonio

Gallonio, Torture Of The Christian Martyrs; Mary Jane Haley, Bible

Personalities; James Hastings, The Greater Men And Women 9; The

28600d News For Modern Man, p. iv. 13

Bible; Helen Walker Homan, Letters 1‘9 The Martyrs; J. Stephen

Jones, The First Martyr; William Sanford LaSor, Great m- alities _O_f_ The New Testament; John T. McNeill, Makers 93 T22

Christian Tradition; Elgin S. Moyer, Great Leaders Of The

Christian Church; Earl Perry, These First Called Him Master;

'William.M. Ramsey, The Christ 9; The Earliest Christians; Paul S.

Reese, Men Of Action In The Book Of Acts; Holmes Rolston, Person- alities Around Paul; and L. T. Townsend, The Martypdomigf Stephen.

Additional sources were consulted to gain a better understanding of the historical background of the life and ministry of Stephen including: E. M. Blaiklock, 229 Apps Of The Apostles, Ag Historical

Commeppapy; Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The Spreading Flame; Henry J.

Cadbury, The Book Of Acts In Histogy; Morton Scott Enslin, Christian —-———n——~~ Beginnings; F. J. Foakes Jackson, The Beginnings Of Christianipy;

Kenneth Scott Latourette, A Histopy Q; Christianipy; Hugh J. Lawlor,

Ecclesiastical Histopy And Martyrs Q: Palestine; and Jules Lebreton,

The History 9; The Primitive Church.

Several works were studies to gain insight into the relationship between the martyrdom of Stephen and the life and ministry of the

Apostle Paul: A. Powell Davis, The First Christians, A_Study pf SE.

Paul And Christian Origins; Canon Farrar, The Life Of St. Paul; N.

~*—* L. Knox, EE' Paul And The Church Of Jerusalem; A. T. Robertson,

Epochs In The Life Of Paul; Daniel Rops, Saint Paul, Apostle Of

Nations; James Stalker, The Life 9}: Paul; and Justo Pere de Urbel,

Saint Paul, The Apostle _(_)_f_ The Gentiles.

A number of books and comentaries furnished help in the examination of the text and context of Stephen's speech including the following: Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The; Speeches in The A33 Of The

Apostles; George Arthur Buttrick, editor, The Interpreter's Bible,

M I}; Francis Davidson, editor, The Egg Bible Commentary; J.

R. Dummelow, editor, The __O_n_e_ Volume Commentary; Charles R. Erdman,

Commentaries _O_n New Testament Books, Volume V: The Acts; Donald A.

Knox, A New Testament Commentary, Volume II: The Acts 93 The Apostles;

G. Campbell Morgan, The Acts 93 The Apostles; Roberson Nicoll, editor,

The Expositor's Bible, Volume I: The Acts _O_f_ The Apostles; J. T.

Townsend, The Speeches In Acts; and Edward Zeller, The Contents Andi

And Origin _O__f The Acts 93 The Apostles.

Valuable information was also gleaned from the following standard research tools: John D. Davis, The Westminster Dictionag 93 The Bible;

Vergilius Ferm, editor, An Encyclopedia 2;: Religion; Everett Harrison,

editor, Baker's Dictionary (it: Theologz; Emil G. Kraeling, Rand McNally

Bible Atlas; and Robert Young, Analytical Concordance T3 '_I‘_h_e Bible.

Several different English translations and versions of the text were studied in order to better grasp the meaning of words and phrases used in the speech as found in Good News For Modern Man, the basic text.

Some of these were J. B. Phillips, The New Testament In Modern English; 15

The Revised Standard Version Of The Hely Bible; The New English Bible;

Charles B. Williams, The New Testament; and Kenneth S. Wuest, Acts

Through Ephesians, An Expanded Translation.

Methodology

The basic methodology employed in this study is that represented

by the term "rhetorical criticism." This includes a consideration of

the speaker, the occasion, the audience, the verbal message, and the

effect or outcome of the interaction between the speaker and his audi-

ence.

The verbal message, as noted later, is that which appears in the

Holy Bible, the seventh chapter of Acts, verses 2-56. Even though this

text is, obviously, not derived from a voice recording made at the time

of delivery, and even though the precise process of recording is un-

known, it remains as the standard and generallyarecognized statement of

Saint Stephen's plea before the Sanhedrin. In the absence of any other

text, it is the best available document for purposes of study.

Further, in the absence of explicit evidence concerning Stephen's motivation for certain procedures and practices, the present researcher

has made conclusions regarding these matters on the basis of his best

interpretation of extant data. CHAPTER II

STRIETURE AND DEVEIDH’IENT OF STEPHEN'S SPEECH

We have observed in our introductory chapter that "Stephen, a man richly blessed by God and full of power," was said to have "performed great miracles and wonders among the people" (Acts 6:8). As a result of his unusual effectiveness as a speaker in presenting his claims concerning Jesus of Nazareth, "some men opposed him . . . am started argu- ing with him. But the Spirit [6r God] gave Stephen such wisdom that when he spoke they could not resist him" nor defeat him (Acts 6:9nlO).

So infuriated were his opponents that "they paid some men to say,

'We have heard him speaking against Moses and against Godl'" (Acts 6:11).

How much those men were paid to circulate this false accusation we are not told. But we are told that ”they stirred up the people, the elders, and the teachers of the Law" (Acts 6:12). With rising hostility "they came to Stephen, seized him, and took him before the council" which was the Sanhedrin. "Then they brought in some men to tell lies about him"

(Acts 6:13). It did not seem to matter to them that they were standing before the Supreme Court of the Jews, where truth and justice were supposed to prevail. Their only concern was in having the accused man,

Stephan, adjtﬂged guilty as charged and condemned to death.

'This man,‘ they said, 'is always talking against our sacred Temple and tie Law of Moses. For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will tear down the Temple and change all the customs which have come down to us from Mosesl' (Acts 6:13-1h).

l6 17

In the previous paragraphs we have seen that the false witnesses at

first accused Stephen of "speaking against Moses and against God ," but

later, when appearing before the Sanhedrin, they charged him with

speaking against the "Temple and the Law of Moses" (Acts 6:11, 13). Were

these charges the same? Probably so inasmuch as the false witnesses

went on to state fully their accusation that they had "heard him say that . . . Jesus of Nazareth . . . [would] tear down the Temple and change

all the customs which . . . [had] come down . . . from Moses!“ (Acts

6:111).

Undoubtedly those views had already been disputed between the Jews

and Stephen and were very likely based upon the prophecy uttered by

Jesus, as recorded in Matthew 2h, regarding the destruction of tie Temple.

Actually, Stephen had no more said that Jesus would tear down the Temple

than had Jesus himself said this. Jesus had said that "not a single stone . . . [would] be left in its place; everyone of them . . .[would] be thrown down" (Matthew 214:2). Notice in this passage that Jesus did

not say that he would destroy the Temple, but that it would come down.

Later history proved this prophecy to be true when the Romans, in the

year 70 A.D., 29 completely razed the Temple. In the Gospel according

to John, chapter 2 verse 19, it is reported that Jesus had said, "Tear down this house of God and in three days I will build it again." The

Jews assumed that Jesus had been speaking of the Temple at that time for

they asked him, “are you going to build it again in three days? . . . It

has taken forty-six years to build this Temple" (John 2:20). But we are

29Vergilius Perm, ed., An Ehc clo is 93 Religion (New York: The Philosophical Library, 1916')? p. . 18

told that "the temple Jesus spoke of was his body‘| which, "when he was

raised from death, . . . his disciples remembered that he had said this"

(John 2 :21-22) .

The falsehood of the testimony given against Stephen lay in the

charge that this prophecy implied that God was about to desert his people

and contradict and renounce his promise to them of redemption through

the Messiah. Stephen, on the other hand, had doubtless maintained that,

according to the prediction of Jesus of Nazareth, the final deliverance

of the Jews would take place sometime after the destruction of the

Temple. As he spoke, he probably had in mind the further words of Jesus

concerning the redemption of the Jews which is recorded in Matthew 21;:

29-31.

Soon after the trouble of those days the sun will grow dark, the moon will no longer shine, the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers in space will be driven from their course. Then the sigi of the Son of man will appear in the sky; then all the tribes of earth will weep, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. The great trumpet will sound, and he will send out his angels to the four corners of the (earth, and they will gather his chosen people from one end of tie world to the other.

As Stephen understood it, this prophecy undoubtedly pointed to the approaching judgment, the destruction of God's house, the dispersion of

God's peeple into a foreigl land, and then a final re-gathering of God's people at the sound of the great trumpet. This divine judgment, which

Stephen saw like a dark thunder-cloud hovering over Jerusalem and its

inhabitants, he announced. And it is easy to see the bitter hate which was excited against him in the entire population of this condemned city. 19

When he was accused of propagating this prophecy, he could neither deny nor soften it and still be a faithful witness for his Lord. He had no choice but to prove that he had not spoken against the Temple nor the

Law of Moses. Such a task would not be easy. It would demand his best, and Stephen was determined to do his best as he presented to the San- hedrin the history of the past, with which they were quite familiar, and held it up so that they might see the similarities to the present. He hoped thereby to exalt Jesus, whom they had persecuted and crucified.

Before moving on it might be well for us to take special note of

the term "Son of man" as it appears in tie foregoing prophecy quoted from

Matthew. We shall find this mentioned later in the climactic conclusion of Stephen's speech. When he referred to the "Son of man standing at the right side of God" (Acts 7:56), we are told that his audience "with a loui cry . . . stopped up their ears, and all rushed together at him at once" and that “they threw him out of the city and stoned him" (Acts

7:57-58). But we shall examine this more closely when we reach that point in our study.

Stephen had been accused of speaking against the Temple, against

Moses, and against God. To those charges he responded, but he followed a more natural. order than that in which they seem to have been made.

Since Moses and the Law were more important than tie Temple, and ante- dated it, he reversed their order in his speech. And since God was greater even than Moses, he began by speaking of "The God of Glory" (Acts 7:2). With consummate skill he sought to prove on the one hand, that he was not guilty of speaking against God, Moses, or the Temple, and on the other hand, that his accusers were guilty of disobeying God, refusing to 20 follow the Law of Moses, and of defaming the Temple. His efforts to prove himself not guilty did not seem further to excite his audience, but his countercharges infuriated them. Although they could not refute his accusations, they could destroy their accuser; and this they were determined to d0.

It seems that the enemies of Stephen had at least four objections underlying the charges they had brought against him to which he, addressed himself in his speech before the Sanhedrin. They objected to the implication that the delay suggested by the prediction of the destruction of the Temple was in keeping with God's plan of redemption for his people.

They further objected to the suggestion that God's true prophets were ever rejected or persecuted. Another objection had to do with the idea that the Jews had ever committed crimes so terrible as to bring about the destruction of their sacred Temple. Their final objection was that the

Temple was too sacred to be destroyed. Had these objections not been included in their charges against Stephm, they could not have regarded it as a detraction from God and Meses to predict the destruction of the

Temple ard the abolition of the customs of Moses.

For if it was not in keeping with God's purpose that long delays should take place before his promise was entirely fulfilled, then the intervention of a long period of waiting, such as suggested by the destruction of the Temple, would be no proof that the final redemption of the nation would not ultimately be fulfilled. If the true prophets of

God might be rejected and persecuted for delivering his messages, then the rejection of Joseph, Moses, Jesus, and Stephen was no proof that they were not God's true messengers. If God's chosen people might 21

commit such offenses as to warrant the judgment of God in terrible

severity, then it might certainly be possible that this generation had

comitted such crimes as to lead to the destruction of the Temple and

their dispersion in the world. And, finally, if it was not inconsistent

with God's purpose to use for other services places once set aside for

worship, then it was not impossible that tie Temple could be destroyed

and its site devoted to some other use. That these objections were in-

cluded in the accusations made against Stephen, and were probably the

views that had been discussed in the disputes between him and the Jews,

is clear from the fact that they are the objections he sought to over-

come in his address before the Sanhedrin.

We are told that "all those sitting in the Council fixed their eyes

on Stephen and saw that his face looked like the face of an angel" (Acts

6:15). Tie resemblance between Stephen and an angel was hardly in form

or expression, since this would imply an alteration of his features, but

in a supernatural irradiation of his countenance. It was a signal,

therefore, that he was like Moses, God's prophet, and this, in itself,

should have awed the Sanhedrin into the abandonment of their murderous

schemes. "And the High Priest asked Stephm, 'Is this really so?” (Acts 7:1). Did you predict the destruction of the Temple? Did you say

that Jesus of Nazareth would change our customs, abolish our religious

rites and Temple services? Did you speak those things against Moses and against de? It may be of interest to note here that a similar question was asked of Jesus in Matthew 26:22, "What is it which these witness against thee?" The previous question was addressed to Stephen and was a call on him to respond to those accusations made by the hired witnesses. 22

Stephen dared not simply state his belief. As their subsequent

corduct showed, they would have stopped their ears and hurried him to his

‘ death. Therefore, he had to meet them first on common ground in the Old

Testament, and show them that he had arrived at his new teaching through

the study of the Scriptures. He was facing the greatest and haughtiest

scholars of his nation, and was grappling with them from a book which

they knew by heart. He had to be accurate or suffer ridicule and, most

likely, interruption before he had finished.

The speech seems simple enough at first glance. It is merely a

popular historic account of early Jewish history. Closer inspection re-

veals that some events are omitted which are equal in importance to those

given. The lives of Isaac and Jacob, for example, are untouched, while

the story of Moses occupies about one—half of the entire message. This

suggests the theory that Stephen was not simply relating the history of

his nation, but, instead, that he was trying to show that a careful con-

sideration of some of its events gave ground for certain particular be-

liefs which he, no doubt, had avowed. Plainly, then, as we carefully

examine his words and phrases, we shall see his ideas unfold themselves

before us as they did before his audience nearly two thousand years ago.

Although he did not apply himself to a direct refutation of the crarges

made against him, he did meet them indirectly and prove them to be untrue.

A broad over-view of Stephen's address seems to reveal four themes

that he wanted to develop in his effort to overcome tie supposed ob- method of jections mentioned earlier as having been implied by his place in the fulfillment of God's presentation. First, long delays took 23

promises to the patriarchs and to the prophets; second, the patriarchs

and prophets with whom God had made the covenants were hated and perse-

cuted because they spoke for him; third, the people of God had committed

such offenses against God that theydeserved his judgment; and fourth,

places consecrated to God had no such sanctity as the Jews imagined, but might be deserted by him and appropriated to other purposes.

The first portion of Stephen's reply was directed toward the ob-

jection that such a delay as the destruction of the Temple would involve was inconsistent with God's promise of redeeming the Jews by the Messiah, and would prevent its fulfillment. And he met this objection by showing

that a delay of several centuries took place before even the great promise to Abraham, the father of the nation, of giving his descendants possession of the sacred land, was accomplished.

And Stephen answered: 'Brothers and fathers! Listen to me! The God of glory appeared to our ancestor Abraham while he was living in Mesopotamia, before he had gone to live in Haran, and said to him, 'Leave your family and country and go to the land that I will show you.‘ And so he left the land of Chaldea ard went to live in Harsh. After Abraham's father died, God made him move to this country, where you now live. God did not then give Abraham any part of it as his own, not even a square foot of ground; but God promised that he would give it to him, and that it would belong to him and his descendants after him. At the time God made this promise Abraham had no children. This is what God said to him: 'Your descendants will live in a foreign country, where tiny will be slaves and will be badly treated for four hundred hears, but I will pass judgment on the people that they will serve,‘ God said, 'and afterward they will come out of that country and will worship me in this place.‘ Then God gave to Abraham the ceremony of circumcision as a sign of the covenant. And Abraham circumcised Isaac a week after he was born; Isaac circumcised Jacob and Jacob circumcised the twelve patriarchs. (Acts 7:2-é). 2h

Stephen thus began his defense by appealing for a hearing before his

judges, whom he respectfully calls brothers and fathers. It is inter-

esting to note that Saul of Tarsus, a witness to the stoning of Stephen following the conclusion of this speech, and one who was later converted

to the same Christ whom Stephen defended in his speech, used this same opening appeal when speaking in defense of his life before many of these

same people in this very same city just a few years later (See Acts 22:1).

This opening appeal, "Brothers and fathers," is only one among several phrases used by Stephen in an effort to establish personal.identity with, and to alleviate the hostility of, his audience. Scattered throughout the speech we find such other phrases as “our ancestors," "our people,"

"fellow Israelites," and various pronouns substituted for these terms, used no less than forty-eight times. Even when he mentioned the refusal of the people to obey their ancestorﬁMoses, Stephen included himself as a part of the disobedielt group by saying “our ancestors“ and thus implying a shared guilt. Only when he reached his conclusion did he disassociate himself from his hearers by emphatically stating "you are just like your ancestors," and "you are the ones who received God's law, . . . yet you have not obeyed it" (Acts 7:51, 53). Stephen had been accused of speaking against God. Therefore, he showed that he was a.son of

Abraham by referring to him as "our'ancestor,“ and that he was a faithful worshipper of the God of Abraham, whom therefore he here calls the "God of glory" (Acts 7:2).

"The God of glory" is an unusually interesting phrase used by

Stephen to identify the God whose visible glory was seen by the patriarchs.

The word “glory“ means honor, majesty, and power. This phrase appears 25 only one other time in the Scriptures «in Psalms 29:3, where we read, “The God of glory thundereth." A similar phrase, "Lord of glory," is used once by the Apostle Paul in l Corinthians‘2:8, and once by the

Apostle James in chapter 2, verse 1, of his epistle. It is also worthy to note that Abraham was the first man to whom God is said to have appeared. However, Abraham was not the last of whom it is said that God or the Lord appeared. For we read that God appeared to Isaac (Genesis

26:2), to Jacob (Genesis 35:1), to Moses (Exodus 3:16), to the children of Israel (Leviticus 921;), to Solomon (1 Kings 3:5), to David (2 Chroni- cles 3:1), to Simon (Luke 21331;), to Mary Magdalene (Mark 16:9). to Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9:17), and finally, that he will appear unto all them who look for him (Hebrews 9:28).

The appearance of "The God of glory" to Abraham occurred "while he was living in Mesopotamia, before he had gone to live in Haran" (Acts

7:2). The name "Mesopotamia" came into prominent use about the tim of

Alexander the Great, and it means "land between the rivers." The Greek and Roman geographers used the term for the whole country between the

Euphrates and Tigris Rivers.30 Its modem name is Iraq. Haran, on the other hand, was a northern commercial city of Mesopotamia, located on the

Euphrates River and on one of the main trade routes between Babylonia and the Mediterranean Sea. It still retains the name Haran, but it is now only a small Arab village.31

When God appeared to Abraham "he said unto him, 'Leave your family

30Davis, The Westminster Dictionary, p. 392. 3lrbid., p. 226. 26

and country and go to the land that I will show you.‘ And so he left

the land of Chaldea and went to live in Haran" (Acts 733-14). Since God

made his appearance to Abraham a great way off in Mesopotamia, you must

not think, implied Stephen, that God's visits are confined to this land.

The land of Chaldea lay just south of Mesopotamia near tre Persian Gulf,

and it seems to have been the place of Abraham's birth and early life

(Genesis 11:28). Stephen's audience held their "holy land" in such high

esteem that it must have been very difficult for them to believe they had

not always been firmly rooted tiers. Stephen explodes that myth by saying

to them in substance, you need not be so proud of your place in this

"holy land," for you came originally out of Chaldea where your fathe rs

served other Gods. Stephen probably had Joshua 2hz2 in mind: "Your

fathers dwelt on the other side of tie flood [Euphrates River] in old

times, even Terah, tl'e fatter of Abraham, . . . and they served other

gods."

It was in Haran that Abraham's father, Terah, died at the age of 205 (Genesis 11:32), after which "God made him move to this country [Canaan] where you now live (Acts 7:hb). Further instructions had been given

Abraham of which we are told in Genesis 12:1, "The Iord had said unto

Abram,32 Get tree out of thy country, and from they kindred, and from

thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee." In obedience to

the command of God, Abraham left Haran, taking with him his wife “and all

their substance that trey had gathered, and the souls that they had

gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan“

32Abraham was first called Abram, but his name was changed by God according to Genesis 17:5. 27

(Genesis 12:h-5). With the command to go out, the history of God's

dealing with his people began. And it shows that God was not restricted

to any one country and people, but that his word and promise are the

essential matters.

“God did not then give Abraham any part of it [Canaan] as his own,

not even a square foot of ground; but God promised that he would give it

to him, and that it would belong to him and his descendants after him"

(Acts 7:5a). This promise is recorded in Genesis 17:8, where we read "I

will give unto thee [Abraham], and to thy seed after thee, . . . all the

lard of Canaan, for an everlasting possession." Tie geographical di-

mensions of this tremendous land area are given to us in Genesis 15:18,

were we find that it extended "from the river of Egypt [the Nile] unto

the great river, the river Euphrates." That this represents a consider-

able amount of land can be seen by consulting a modern atlas.

"At the time God made this promise Abraham had no children" (Acts

7:5b). As a matter of fact, it was several years after receiving God's

promise that Abraham's first child, Isaac, was born, and re was then 100

years old (Genesis 21:5). This proved to be quite a test of faith for

Abraham in tie promise of God, for we read that Abraham and his wife,

Sarah, laughed when God told them that they were to have a son (Genesis

17:17 and 18:12).

"This is what God said to him: 'Your descendants will live in a foreigr country, wrere they will be slaves and will be badly treated for four hundred years'" (Acts 7:6). Stephen here quoted almcst directly a prophecy'issued by God to Abraham which is recorded in Genesis 15:13. 28

It is subsequently fulfilled, as we shall see, during the lifetime of

Joseph three generations later. "'But I will pass jtdgment on the people that they will serve,‘ God said, 'and afterward they will come out of that country and will worship me in this place'“ (Acts 7:7). This, too, is i almost a direct quotation from Genesis 15:11; and is fulfilled, also, during the lifetime of Moses, approximately four hundred years later.

The foreign country referred to in this prophecy is, of course, Egypt, and the juigment Cod passed on the people consisted of the ten plagues enumerated and related in detail in Exodus 7-11. They included: (1) the waters of Egypt turned into blood (7:19-20), (2) the covering of the land of Egypt with frogs (8:5-7), (3) the changing of the dust of the land into lice (8:16-17), (’4) the sending of swarms of flies (8:21-2h), (5) the sending of a very grievous murrain on all the cattle, the horses, the asses, tie camels, the oxen, and the sheep (9:3-6), (6) the changing of the furnace ashes to germ laden dust that caused boils to break out on man and beast (9:10), (7) the raining of grievous hail, such as had never before been seen in Egypt (9:18), (8) the plague of locusts to cover the entire land (10:14-5). (9) the thick darkness that lasted three days (10:

21-22), and, finally, (10) the death of tie first born of all mankind and cattle among the Egyptians (11:)4-5). As a consequence of the ten plagues the Jewish people were finally permitted to leave the land of Egypt and head for the land promised to them during tie days of their greatly respected ancestor, abraham.

"Then God gave to Abraham the ceremony of circumcision as a sign of the covenant. And Abraham circumcised Isaac a week after he was born;

Isaac circumcised Jacob, and Jacob circumcised tie twelve patriarchs" 29

(Acts 7:8-9). ‘With this ceremony of circumcision the facts of Abraham's

life seem to be concluded so far as Stephen is concerned. He had no in-

heritance on which to rest a hope of possessing the land, and no reason

to expect the continuance of his family. He did have, however, the

promise of God, and this was not to be forgotten. To bind this promise

to Abraham and his

it and its obligations, God ordained circumcision; quite likely it was

one of the "customs which Moses delivered,“ against which Stephen was ac-

cused of speaking. Here we are taken back to Genesis, chapter 17, where

the covenant on the part of God is that he will be a God to Abraham and

to his descendants after him, which, however, is at once made concrete by

the promise of the land. The covenant on the part of Abraham and his

descendants is that they shall accept God and practice circumcision,

which is described furtl'er as a "token of a covenant betwixt" God and his people (Genesis 17:7-11).

Circumcision was a religious rite by which Abraham and his descen-

dants were initiated into the covenant relationship with God, and it was

the token of that covenant. As a rite, it was instituted by God and com-

manded upon Abraham. He was to be circumcised, and was to perform this

rite on all male children in his household, whether they were his own

children or slaves. It was the father‘s duty in successive generations

to carry on this rite, which consisted of removing the fereskin. If the

father could not do it, then the mother had to act in behalf of her husband (Exodus h:2h). The proper time for this operation came when the

boy was 8 days old. However, those who had been born before the rite was instituted had to be circumcised no matter what age they might be. 30

Abraham was circumcised when he was 99 years old (Genesis 17:11-17). The rite was observed all during the Egyptian bondage , but it was overlooked while tie Jews were in the wilderness. But we are told that prior to their entry into Canaan, Joshua circumcised all who had not been, using knives made of flint (Joshua 5:2-9).33

In the phrase, "covenant of circumcision," a definition seems to be intended, for the word "circumcision" alone would otherwise answer the purpose. Strictly speaking, in Genesis this rite is considered a God- given token, carrying with it the certainty of the fulfillment of the covenant by him. This is important, for in times of apostasy it would plainly stand simply as a protest against Israel's faithlessness, and a reminder that God would none the less be faithful still. Such seems to have been Stephen's conception. Circumcision thus loses the all-important place which it held in Jewish eyes, and becomes instead the token of that which was really all-important, tl'e covenant agreement that God would protect Israel and Israel would serve God.

It was under these conditions and with these conceptions, Stephen then adds, that God, true to tlre promise, gave Isaac to Abraham, who circumcised him, and Jacob to Isaac, who circumcised him, and the twelve patriarchs to Jacob, who circumcised them. The rite of circumcision was observed in the family of Abraham on down to Joseph who were all born under the covenant, and who practiced the same rite, and were by the ordinance of God, legal inheritors of the promised land with all the secular and spiritual advantages connected with it.

33oavis, 3133 Westminster Dictionary, p. 111. 31

Now the fact affirmed and unfolded in this portion of Stephen's message is simply this. The great promise to Abraham, the father of the chosen people, to give him the land of Canaan for a possession and to his descendants after him, was not fulfilled at all during his lifetime, nor in the life of his posterity for several generations. But instead, his descendants were left to dwell in a foreign land, and be reduced to bondage, and cruelly oppressed. God had, moreover, forewarned him of this delay, and given him the covenant of circumcision as a seal that his descendants were chosen of God to be his people, and should ultimately be put in possession of Canaan, according to his promise. The relevancy of this to the dispute between Stephen and' his accusers lay in its showing that the prediction by Christ, repeated by Stephen, that the Temple should be destroyed, was no proof, as Stephen's antagonists affirmed, that the great promise of a final redemption by tie Messiah would not at the appointed time be fulfilled. If Abraham‘s merit consisted entirely in his obedience to God's word, was not Stephen right then in believing

God? Was he speaking against God by believing the word of God as Abra- ham, their respected ancestor, had done? These questions are, of course, only implied in what Stephen had said. But they demanded an answer from his accusers, and the only answer they could possibly give, was "no!"

And to give that answer would be to admit their own guilt in falsely accusing him.

Stephen next shows that He great patriarchs and prophets, Joseph and Moses, with whom God renewed the covenant, and to whom he revealed the Law, and whom he made the chief instruments of the most distinguished blessings to his people, were hated, maligned, and persecuted, because 32 of their relationship to him, and because they had delivered the reve- lations of which they were made the channels.

The patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, and sold him as a slave in Egypt. But God was with him, and brought him safely through all his troubles. When Joseph appeared before Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, God gave him a pleasing manner and wisdom. Pharaoh made Joseph governor over the country and the royal household. Then trere was a famine which caused much suffering over all of Egypt and Canaan. Our ancestors could not find any food. So when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our ancestors on their first visit there. On the second visit Joseph made himself known to his brothers, and Pharaoh came to know about Joseph's family. 50 Joseph sent a message to his father Jacob, telling him and tie whole family to come to Egypt; there were seventy-five people in all. Then Jacob went down to Egypt, where he and our ancestors died. Their bodies were moved to Shechem, where they were buried in the grave which Abraham had bought from the tribe of Hamor for a sum of money. (Acts 7:9-16).

"The patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, and sold him as a slave in

Egypt. But God was with him, and brought him safely through all his troubles" (Acts 7:9). The "patriarchs," so called because each became the chief or head of his own respective family or tribe, were the twelve sons of Jacob. The reasons the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph are brought out quite clearly in the following quoted passages from Genesis:

Jacob loved Joseph more than all of his children, because he was the son of his old age. And when his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren, they hated him, and could not speak peaceably unto him (Genesis 27:3-h).

Another factor, and probably the determining cause for their treatment of him, was that he "dreamed a dream, and he told it [’39] his brethren: and they hated him yet the more“ (Genesis 37:5). The content of that dream is given as he related it to his brothers: "Behold, we were 33 birding sleeves in the field, and, 10, my sheaf arose, and also stood

upright; and, behold your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance to my sl'eaf" (Genesis 3737-8). That his brothers immediately caught the

significance of this dream we may be certain from the questions they asked him: “Shalt thou indeed reigl over us? or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us?“ (Genesis 37:8). We are told further that

they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words. And Joseph dreamed yet anotlrer dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, tie sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. And he told it to his father, and to his brethren; and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth? And his brethren envied him (Genesis 37:9-11).

The narrative continues as Joseph's brethren "went to feed their fatier's flock in Shechem" (Genesis 37:12) to whom Jacob sent Joseph to "see'whether it might be well with . . . [than], and well with the flocks" (Genesis 37:11:). Not finding his brothers, nor the flocks, in

Shechem, Joseph was directed by a "certain man" (Genesis 37:15) to Dothan, where he did find them. Both Shechem and Dothan were small villages near

Samaria, located near deep wells where abundant water could be found for the flocks, and were also on one of the main caravan routes that wound its way from Mesopotamia to Egypt.3h When Joseph's brotrers "saw him afar off, even before he came near unto them, they conspired against him to slay him" (Genesis 37:18), and thus thwart the fulfillment of his dreams. (his brother, Ruben, intervened and said, "Let us not kill him,"

Bl‘Davis, The Westminster Dictionary, p. 1112. 3h

but instead, he suggested, "cast him into this pit that is in the wilder-

ness," hoping "that he might rid him out of their hands, to deliver him

to his father again" (Genesis 37:21-22).

When Joseph was come unto his brethren . . . they cast him into a pit . . . and sat down to eat bread . . . and they lifted up their eyes and looked, and, behold, a company of Ishmeelites came from Gilead with their camels bearing spicery and balm and myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt (Genesis 37:23-25).

The Ishmeelites were descendants of Ishmael, the son of.Abraham by

his Egyptian maid, Hagar. Gilead was the mountainous country east of

the Jordan River. The spicery and myrrh were used for food seasoning,

and the balm was an ointment used for the healing of wounds.35

Judah, another brother of Joseph, said to his brothers,

that profit is it if we slay our brother? . . . Come, and let us sell him to the Ishmeelites, and let not our hand be upon him; for he is our brother and our flesh. And his brethren were content. Then there passed by Midianite merchantmen; and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmeelites for twenty pieces of silver: and they brought Joseph into Egypt (Genesis 37: 26-28).

The Midianite merchantmen were from the desert region south of

Canaan and east of the Gulf of Aqubah, the same area in which Moses later lived for forty years. It is interesting to note, also, that Moses' father-in-law, Jethro, was a‘Midianite (Exodus 3:1). As a part of the caravan of Ishmeelites, these Midianite merchantmen mOved on southwest and later sold Joseph "into Egypt unto Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh's

3SDavis,'_T_l_}§_'Westminster Dictionary, p. 58. 35 and captain of the guard" (Genesis 37:36). “But God was with him"

(Acts 7:9b),

and he was a prosperous man. . . . And his master saw that the Lord was with him, and that tie Iord made all that he did to prosper in his hand. And Joseph found grace in his sight, and he served him: and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he had he put into his hand. And it came to pass from the time that he had made him overseer in his house, and over all that he had, that the lord blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake: and the blessing of the lord was upon all that he had in the house, and in the field. And he left all that he had in Joseph's hand. . . . And Joseph was a goodly person, and well favoured (Genesis 39:2-6).

While serving in Potipher's house, Joseph was unsuccessfully seduced by Potipher's wife, who later falsely accused him to her husband saying,

Joseph "came unto me to mock me" (Genesis 39:17). As a result of this false accusation

Joseph's master took him, and put him into tie prison, a place where tre king's prisoners were bound. But the Lord was with Joseph, and showed him mercy, and gave him favour in the sight of the keeper of the prison. And the keeper of the prison committed to Joseph's hand all the prisoners that were in tie prison; and whatsoever they did there, . . . because the Lord was with him, and that which he did, the lord made it to prosper (Genesis 39:20-23).

Joseph was in prison for two full years (Genesis 141:1) during which time he gained the reputation of being an interpreter of dreams as a result of his successfully revealing to the kings butler and baker, his fellow prisoners, the true meaning of their dreams.

Sometime near the end of Joseph's two years in prison, the Egyptian

King Pharaoh, a dynastic name like Caesar, dreamed that he saw seven fat cows being eaten up by seven lean cows. When he dreamed a second tine of 36 seven full ears of corn being devoured by seven lean ears, he was most troubled as to the meaning of both¢ireams. He called for his magicians and wise men to interpret these dreams, but they could not. Only then did the chief butler, who had been in prison with Joseph, remember Joseph, his fellow prisoner, who could interpret dreams. He told Pharaoh about

Joseph.and his unique powers, and the king immediately sent for him.

"When Joseph appeared before Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, God gave him a pleasing manner and wisdom" (Acts 7:10). Joseph informed the ruler of Egypt that “God shall give Pharaoh an answer" (Genesis hlxl6).

Joseph said unto Pharaoh, the dream of Pharaoh is one: God hath shewed Pharaoh what he is about to do . . . Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt. And there shall arise after them seven years of famine. And all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt ard the famine shall consume the land (Genesis hl:29-30).

Joseph suggested that Pharaoh "look out a man discreet and wise, and set hhm over the land of Egypt" (Genesis h1:33). "And Pharaoh sari unto

Joseph, Forasmuch as de hath shewed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art" (Genesis h1:39) and so "Pharaoh made Joseph governor over the country and the royal household" (Acts 7:10) when he was just “thirty years old" (Genesis h1:10).

The next seven years were "plenteous years" as predicted by Joseph, in which he had a fifth part of "all the food" gathered and “laid up in the cities“ (Genesis hlzh7, h8). Then the years of plenty ended and the

"seven years of dearth began to come . . . and the dearth was in all lands. . . . And the famine was over all the face of the earth" (Genesis h1:53-56). "This famine caused much suffering over all of Egypt and 37

Canaan [and] our ancestors could find no food" (Acts 7:11).

And when all the land of Egypt was famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for bread: and Pharaoh said unto all the Egyptians, Go unto Joseph; what he saith to you, do. . . . And Joseph opened all the storehouses, and sold unto the Egyptians; . . . and all countries came unto Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn (Genesis hl:SS-57).

"So when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our ancestors on their first visit there" (Acts 7:12). On their first visit

to Egypt only ten of the eleven brothers of Joseph left Canaan, his

youngest brother, Benjamin, remaining at home with his father Jacob (Genesis 142:3). Arriving in Emt, they were ushered in to see Joseph whom they knew not, althouth he imediately recognized them (Genesis L2: 7). When they had obtained corn, they returned to the land of Canaan,

leaving Simeon behind in Egypt.

In time Jacob's family had consumed the grain they had brought from Egypt, and Jacob sent his sons after more. “On the secord visit Joseph made himself known to his brothers" (Acts 7:13) and told them to "be not

grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither: for God sent me before you to preserve . . . you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance" (Genesis 15:5, 7). . He further told

them that "it was not you that sent me hither, but God: and he hath made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house, and a ruler throughout all the land of Egypt" (Genesis 15:8). "80 Joseph sent [the following7 message to his father Jacob telling him and the whole family to come to Egypt. ’Ihere were seventy-five people in all" (Acts 7:13-lh). 38

Thus saith thy son Joseph, God hath made me lord of all Egypt: come down unto me, tarry not: And thou shalt dwell in the land of Goshen, and thou shalt be near unto me, thou, and thy children, ard thy children's children, and thy ﬂocks, and thy herds, and all that thou hast: And there will I nourish thee; for yet there are five years of famine; lest thou, and thy household, and all that thou hast, come to poverty“ (Genesis 145:9-11).

The Egyptian Pharaoh heard that Joseph's brothers had come to Egypt, and it pleased Pharaoh well, and his servants. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Say unto thy brethren, this do ye: lade your beasts, and go, get you unto the lard of Canaan; and take your father and your households, and come unto me; and I will give you the good of the land of Egypt, and ye shall eat the fat of the land. Now thou art commanded, this do ye: take you wagons out of the land of Egypt for your little ones, and for your wives, and bring your father, and come. Am regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours. And the children of Israel [Jacob] did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to tlre commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way. . . . And they went up out of Egypt, and came unto the land of Canaan unto Jacob their father, and told him, saying, Joseph is yet alive, and he is governor over all the land of Egypt. . . . And they told him all the words of Joseph, . . . and when he saw the wagons which Joseph had sent to carry him, the Spirit of Jacob their father revived . . . and [he] said, . . . I will go and see him before I die (Genesis 16:16-28).

"Then Jacob went down to Egypt where he and our ancestors died“

(Acts 7:15). Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years before he died at the age of one hundred forty-seven years (Genesis b7:28). Later, “Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old" (Genesis 50:26), and subsequently, "all his brethren, and all that generation died" (Exodus 1:6).

"Their bodies were moved to Shechem, where they were buried in the grave

which Abraham had bought from tie tribe of Hamor for a sum of money“

(Acts 7:16). 39

There seems to be some confusion as to the burying places of the various patriarchs. We are informed in Genesis 50:13 that Jacob's "sons carried him into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burrying place of Ephron the Hittite" and in Joshua 2h:32 that “the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem, in the parcel of ground which Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor." But in Stephen's reference to the burial of the ancestors he has them all buried in "Shechem . . . in the grave which

Abraham bought from the tribe of Hamor“ (Acts 7:16). While it is true that Joseph was buried in Shechem, it was in tin parcel of ground Jacob, not Abraham, bought from Hamor. Jacob, his father, was buried in the cave

Abraham had bought from Ephron. We are not told specifically just where the other patriarchs were buried.

A solution to this apparent conﬂict lies in the likelihood that

Stephen, speaking under the inspiration of the moment as mentioned in the first chapter of this study, used the name Abraham when he meant to say

Jacob. If this name change were made, the text of Stephen's speech would then read "their bodies were moved to Shechem, where they were buried in the grave which [Jacob] had bought from the tribe of Hamor for a sum of money" (Acts 7:16). ‘Ihe only other detail to clear up would then be to assume that Stephen was not including Jacob in his reference to "their bodies“; and it is entirely possible that he was speaking only of the sons of Jacob, since Jacob had died and was buried many years earlier. ho

Stephen's purpose in introducing Joseph was to show how this prophet

of God was persecuted by his brothers and sold into slavery because he

dared to voice what God had revealed to him in a dream --a dream that

depicted the subordination of his father and mother and brethren to him.

His prophecy proved to be true as we have seen in the story of God's

great use of him in Egypt during the long famine in which he preserved

his en tire family from death by starvation by supplying the with food.

This sojourn in Egypt was a fulfillment of the prophecy which had been

foretold to Abraham as an interline in the outcome of God's promise to

give his descendants the lani of Canaan. In Stephen's mind, Jesus, like

Joseph, though refused by his own people at first, will one day, even as

Joseph was, be the means of their salvation. This Stephen will affirm

more positively in the conclusion of his speech.

At this point Stephen turned his attention to the history of Moses,

the ancient Law-giver, to whom he devoted approximately one-half of his

entire Speech. It seems obvious that he sought to prove that he had not

. spoken against Moses but for him. As we shall see, Stephen left little

doubt in the minds of his hearers about his own high esteem for their

supposed highly honored ancestor. In fact, he proved unquestionably that

he believed what Moses had to say even more than they did.

When the time drew near for God to keep the promise he had made to Abraham, the number of our people in Egypt had grown much larger. At last a different king, who had not known Joseph, began to rule in Egypt. He tricked our people and was cruel to our ancestors, forcing them to put their babies out of their homes, so that they would die. It was at this time that Moses was born, a very beautiful child. He was brought up at home for three months, and when he was put out of his home the daughter of Pharaoh adopted him and brought him up as her own son. He was taught all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and became a great man in words and deeds. bl

When Moses was forty years old he decided to visit his fellow Israelites. He saw one of them being mistreated by an Egyptian; so he went to his help and took revenge on the Egyptian by killing him. (He thought that his own people would understand that God was goin to use him to set them free; but they did not understand. The next day he saw two Israelites fighting, and he tried to make peace between them. ‘Listen, men,‘ he said, 'you are brothers; why do you mistreat each other?‘ But the one who was mistreating the other pushed Moses aside. 'Who made you ruler and judge over us?‘ he asked. 'Do you want to kill me, just as you killed that Egyptian yesterday?‘ When Moses heard this he fled from Egypt and started living in the land of Midian. There he had two sons.

After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai. Moses was amazed by what he saw, and went near the bush to look at it closely. But he heard the Lord's voice: 'I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob.‘ Moses trembled with fear and dared not look. And the Lord said to him: 'Take your sandals off, for the place where you are standing is holy ground. I have looked and seen the cruel suffering of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groans, and I have come down to save them. Come now, I will send you to Egypt-t

This is that Moses who was rejected by the people of Israel. 'Who made you ruler and judge over us?‘ they asked. He is the one whom God sent as ruler and savior, with the help of the angel he saw in the burning bush. He led the people out of Egypt, performing miracles and wonders in Egypt and the Red Sea, and in the desert for forty years. He is the Moses who said to the people of Israel, 'God will send you a prophet, just as he sent me, who will be of your own people.‘ He is the one who was with the people of Israel assembled in the desert; he was there with our ancestors and with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai; he received God's living messages to pass on to us.

But our ancestors refused to obey him; they pushed him aside and wished that they could go back to Egypt. 50 they said to Aaron: 'Make us some gods who will go in front of us. We do not know what has happened to that Moses who brought us out of Egypt.‘ (Acts 7:17-h0).

"When the time drew near for God to keep the promise he had made to

Abraham, the number of our people in Egypt had grown much larger" (Acts

7:17) because the descendants of Jacob "were fruitful, and increased h2

abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was

filled with them" (Exodus 1:7).

"At last a different king, who had not known Joseph, began to rule

in Egypt“ (Acts 7:18). This different king was probably Ramesses Miamun,

or his son Amehophis,36 who did not remember or else choose to acknowledge

the obligation under which the whole land of Egypt was laid to this emi-

nent prime minister who had served as one of his predecessors. "He

tricked our people and was cruel to our ancestors, forcing them to put

their babies out of their homes, so that they would die“ (Acts 7:19).

This king had said:

Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them out of the land (Exodus 1:9-10)e

In order to retard their growth the king of Egypt had Spoken to the

Hebrew midwives, and said:

When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him; but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives feared God, and did not as tie king of Egypt canmandedthem, but saved the men children alive. . . . And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive“ (Exodus 1:15-22).

"It was at this time that Moses was born, a very beautiful child"

(Acts 7:20a). We know very little of the parents of Moses other than that "a man of the house of Levi“ whose name was Amram, "took to wife a daugter of Levi" whose name was Jocobed, to whom was born Moses (Exodus

36li‘erm, An Encyclopedia, p. 293. 1:3

2:1 with Numbers 26:59). "He was brought up at home for three months"

(Acts 7:20b) by his mother, "who hid him" when she saw that he was a

"goodly child," not "beautiful child" as Stephen has it (Exodus 2:1).

'When she could no lon er hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes [papyru§§, and daubed it with Slime and with pitch, and put the child therein; and she laid it in the flags by the river's brink. And his sister [Miriam7 (Num- bers 26:50) stood afar off, to wit [See7 what would be done to him. And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to wash herself at the river; and her maidens walked along by the river's side; and when she saw the ark among the flags, she sent her maid to fetch it. And when she opened it, she saw the child; and, behold, the babe wept. And she had compassion on him, and sahi, This is one of the Hebrew's children. Then said his sister to Pharaoh's daughter, Shall I go and call to thee a nurse of the Hebrew women, that She may nurse the child for thee? And Pharaoh's daughter said to her, Go. And the maid went and called the child's mother. And Pharaoh's daughter said unto her, Take this child away, and nurse it for me, and I will give thee thy wages. And the woman took the child, and nursed it. And the child grew, and She brought him unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because Icirew him out of the water (Emus 232-10).

"He was taught all the wisdom of the Egyptians" (Acts 2:22), who

were, at that time, the most intelligent and best instructed people in

the universe, if we take the ancient Jewish historian Philo's word for

it.37 Philo, whose writings appeared around 50 B.C., also said that

Moses was taught arithmetic, astronomy, geometry, medicine, music, poetry,

philosophy, and the knowledge of hieroglyphics which is an ancient

Egyptian system of writing, mainly ideographic. 38 And Moses "became a

great man in words and deeds" (Acts 7:22). This may refer to the doctrines

37Adam Clarke, The New Testament or Our Lord And Saviour Jesus Christ. Volume I,‘Matthew TE Acts GNEShville:IAbingdon‘Cdkesbury,Press, n.d.), p.29b.

38Fem, £11. Enc ’Clo edia, p0 3350 hh

he taught and the miracles he wrought while in Egypt and in the wilder-

{1888.

"When Moses was forty years old he decided to visit his fellow

Israelites. He saw one of them being mistreated by an Egyptian" (Acts

7:21;), who was most probably one of the task-masters mentioned in Exodus

1:11, "so he went to his help and took revenge on the Egyptian by killing

him" (Acts 7:214) and immediately burrying "him in the sand" (Exodus 2:12).

"He thought that his own people would understand that God was going to

use him to set them free; but they did not understand" (Acts 7:25).

Stephen used this as another example of the slowness of the Jews to

apprehend and respond to the divine purpose in choosing them. He may

have imagined that, Since he had received a divine appointment, they, too, had been made aware of his coming. And the act of justice which he

had done in behalf of one of his oppressed countrymen would be sufficient

proof to Show them that he was now ready to enter his office. But were

they willing to cooperate?

The next day he saw two Israelites fighting, and he tried to make peace between them. 'Listen, men ,' he said, 'you are brothers; why do you mistreat each other?‘ But the one who was mistreating the other pushed Moses aside. 'Who made you a ruler and nge over us?‘ he asked. 'Do you want to kill me, just as you killed that Egyptian yesterday? (Acts 7:26-28).

"When Moses heard this" (Acts 7:29) he “feared, and said, 'Surely this thing is known" (Exodus 2:114). No doubt Moses learned that "when

Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses" (Exodus 2:15) and so

"he fled from Egypt arri started living in the land of Midian" (Acts 7:29).

The descendants of Midian, fourth son of Abraham and Keturah (Genesis 15

25:2 with 1 Chronicles 1:32), occupied at that time a considerable terri-

tory, extending along a great part of the eastern frontier of Palestine,

and along the eastern shore of the Red Sea for three hundred miles. From

its northern extremity and stretching deep into the interior it was

traversed by two chains of mountains that run parallel to the coast. It is still called by the Arabs the "land of Midian."39 It was there that

Moses "had two sons" (Acts 7:29).

When Moses reached the land of Midian he sat down by a well. Now the Priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father's flock. And We shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock. And when they came to Ruel their father [who is also called Jethro in Exodus 3:17, he said, How is it that ye are come so soon today? And they said, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds, and also drew water enough for us, and watered the flock. And he said unto his daughters, And where is he? why is it that ye have left the man? call him, that he may eat bread. And Moses was content to dwell with the man: and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter. And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom (Exodus 2:15-22).

Later she bare him another son whose name was Eliezer (Exodus 18:14).

And it came to pass in process of time, that the king of Egypt died; and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, . . . and they cried, and their cry came up unto God. . . . And God heard their groaning, and . . . remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God had respect unto them (Exodus 2:23-25).

"Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro, his father-in-law, the Priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb (Exodus 3:1). Horeb lay in the peninsula of Sinai. "After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to

Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai"

(Acts 7:30). It must be assumed that Moses spent those forty years

39Clarke, Matthew 19 Acts, p. 295. to

following the flocks of his father-in-law, for the record reports

nothing more.

And Moses "looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the

bush was not consumed (Exodus 3:2). "Moses was amazed by what he saw,

and went near the bush to look at it closely" (Acts 7:31) to "see this

great sight, why the bush is not burnt" (Exodus 3:3). "But he heard the

Lord's voice" (Acts 7:31) for, "when the Lord saw that he turned aside to

see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I" (Exodus 3:10. And the Lord said,

'I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob.‘ Moses trembled with fear and dared not look. And the lord said to him: 'Take your sandals off, for the place where you are standing is holy ground. I have looked and seen the cruel suffering of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groans, and I have come down to save them. Come now, I will send you to Egypt' (Acts 7:32-3h)

"to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey" (Exodus 3:8).

To put off one's shoes is an Oriental mode of expressing reverence.

This expression is used only one other time in the Scriptures ”when the

Lord commanded Joshua to remove his shoes (Joshua 5:15).

And Moses said unto God, Who Am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt? And he /God/ said, Certainly I will. be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee; When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. And Moses said unto God, Behold, When I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto ’47

Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The Iord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my me- morial unto all generations. Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt: And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites, . . . unto a land flowing with milk and honey. And they shall hearken to thy foice: and thou shalt come, thou and the elders of Israel, unto the king of Egypt, and ye shall say unto him, The Lord God of the Hebrews hath met with us; and now let us go, we beseech thee, three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God. And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand. And I will stretch out my hand, and smite Egypt with all my wonders which I will do in the midst thereof: and after that he will let you go. . . . And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Iord hath not appeared unto thee. . . . O my lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast Spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a Slow tongue. . . . And the Iord said unto him, . . . Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. And Moses went and returned to Jethro his father-in-law, and said unto him, Let me go, I pray thee, and return unto my brethren which are in Egypt, and see whether they be yet alive. And Jethro said unto Moses, Go in peace. And the Lord said unto Moses in Midian, Go, return unto Egypt: for all the men are dead which sought thy life. And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon an ass, and he returned to the land Of Egypt! 0

And the Lord said to Aaron [Moses' elder brother (Exodus 7:7 with Numbers 26:59”, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God. . . . And Moses told Aaron all the words of the Iord who had sent him, and all the signs which he had commanded him. And Moses and Aaron went and gathered together all the elders of tie children of Israel; and Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed: and when they heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel, and that he had looked upon their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped. And afterward Moses and Aaron went in, and told Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord Cod of h8

Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a feast unto me in the wilderness. And Pharaoh said, Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice to let Israel go? I know not the Iord, neither will I let Israel go (Exodus 3:11-5:2).

Sometime later, after the ten plagues referred to in the first

chapter of this study had been visited upon Pharaoh and the Egyptians,

the king called for Moses ard Aaron by night, and said,

Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the Iord, as ye have said. Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; . . . and it came to pass the selfsame day, that the Lord did bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt (Exodus 12:31-32, 51).

This is the Moses who was rejected by the people of Israel. 'Who made you ruler and judge over us?‘ they asked. He is the one whom God sent as ruler and savior, with tie help of the angel he saw in the burning bush. He led the people out of Egypt, performing miracles and wonders in Egypt and the Red Sea, and in the desert for forty years (Acts 7:35-36).

The miracles and wonders performed in Egypt and the M sea included:

(1) dividing the waters of the Red Sea so that the Israelites could cross over safely and escape tl'e Egyptian soldiers who pursued them (Exodus 1h: 21), (2) sweetening the bitter drinking water in the desert wilderness (Exodus 15:23), and (3) supplying quails and mana (bread) to feed the hungry multitude in the wilderness (Exodus 16:13-1h), which now numbered some 600,000 men, plus the women and children (Exodus 12:37).

Thus, the very person whom they had rejected, and in effect, delivered up into the hands of Pharaoh that he might be Slain, was the person by whom they were redeemed from the Egyptian bondage. And he, against whom Stephen had been accused of speaking, had been treated with gross indignity by the ancestors of the very Jews who sat before him there E9

in the Sanhedrin 0

Stephen had, with great oratorical skill, gained the rapt attention

of his accusers by an expert recital of God's marvellous revelation of

himself to Moses. He now made ready to take them off their guard with

an oblique reference to Jesus of Nazareth, whom he will later boldly name

in the conclusion of his speech.

"He is the Moses who Said to the people of Israel, 'God will send

you a prophet, just as he sent me, who will be of your own people'" (Acts

7:37). Stephen here quoted Deuteronomy 18:15, 18; and interestingly

enough, it is the same reference that the Apostle Peter used in his

message in the Temple, the record of which we find in Acts 3:22. This

very Moses, so highly esteemed and honored, had thus announced tint very

prophet, Jesus, whom these, Stephen's listeners, had so recently put to

death.

"He is the one who was with the people of Israel assembled in the desert; he was there with our ancestors and with the angel who spoke to

him on Mount Sinai; he received God's living messages to pass on to us" (Acts 7:37-38). Stephen was again talking about Moses' ministry as a messenger of God. Here, undoubtedly, the reference is to the giving of

the Law to Moses on Mount Sinai which we find reported in Exodus 19.

On the third month, when the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day they came into the wilderness of Sinai . . . and there Israel camped before the mount. And Moses went up unto God, and the Iord called unto him out of tie mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel; Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself. Now, therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then 50

ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt Speak unto the children of Israel. And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the Lord commanded him. And all the people answered together, and said, All that tie Lord hath Spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the Lord. And the Lord said unto Moses, Io, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and believe thee for ever. And Moses told the words of the people unto the Lord. And the Lord said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their clothes, and be ready against the third day: for tie third day the Iord will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai. . . . And Moses went down from the mount unto the people, and sanctified the people; and they washed their clothes. And he said unto the people, Be ready against the third day. . . . And it came to pass on the thild day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloui upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled. And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the nether part of tie mount. And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Iord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trmnpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice (Exodus 19:1-25).

These living messages were recorded by God on two tables of stone which were placed in the tabernacle where all of Israel would be reminded of God's covenant with his people (Exodus 2h:12, 3b,:29, Deuteronomy 10:

14-5). They are the Ten Commandments given in Exodus 20:2-17.

I am the Iord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generations of them that hate me; And Shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. 51

Thou shalt not take the name of the lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will. not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Iord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Iord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

"But our ancestors refused to obey him; they pushed him aside and wished that they could go back to Egypt" (Acts 7:39). Stephen here showed that the deepest dishonor done to Moses came from the nation that now professed the greatest jealousy for his honor. "And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses . . . in the wilderness" and they said to him, "would to God we had died by the hand of the Iord in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 16:2-3).

"So they said to Aaron: 'Make us some gods who will go in front of us. We do not know what has happened to that Moses who brought us out of

Egypt' " (Acts 7:140).

Let us now review what Stephen told his hostile audience about their greatly respected ancestor Moses against whom he had been charged with speaking. Moses had been born at the time God had chosen for the release of his people from their bondage in Egypt. The four hundred years God had predicted to Abraham were now over. The people had grown into a great multituie and were ready for God to weld them into a nation under 52

the leadership of a man of his own choosing, Moses. He recognized the

mission for which God had prepared him, and supposed that his brothers

also did. But to his great disappointment he found that they did not

understand that God had chosen him to lead them. Instead of demon-

strating a willingness and readiness to follow him they rejected him com-

pletely. He was so despondent that he fled into the wilderness where he married and settled down for life in Midian. Little did he know that he

would spend forty years wandering over an area through which he would

later, forty years later, lead God's people en route to the promised

lard .

Even when he was called of God the second time from a burning bush,

he was sure his rebellious kindred would not hear nor heed his counsel.

But be obeyed God, nevertheless, and returned to Egypt to lead the en-

slaved Israelites out of bondage. Throughout the succeeding forty years,

as Moses sought to fulfil God's mission for him, his own people, ancestors

of those sitting before Stephen in the Sanhedrin, murmured and spoke

against Moses to a far greater degree than had he. And even when Moses

had withdrawn to be alone with God in behalf of his people, they had immediately demanded other gods to lead them, thus demonstrating their re-

jection of Moses and the Iord God of heaven, whom he served. At that

time they were perfectly willing to forget Moses completely. How, then,

could Stephen's audience seriously entertain the charge that he had

spoken against Moses. The only answer is that they could not, except for

the fact, that they were completely blinded to truth by their guilt filled consciences. And what about the similarities between the treatment given Moses by the people of his day and that afforded Christ by the people of 53 his day? Both the ancestors of Moses' day and their descendants of

Stephen's day were alike in their rejection of God's prophets and messengers.

Stephen now proceeded to Show just how rebellious God's people actually became, and again, he had chosen that part of the history of his audience which was designed to prick their sin-blinded memories.

And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron. And he received them at their hand (Exodus 32:2-1i).

"It was then that they made an idol in the shape of a calf" (Acts 7:141). "And they said, These by thy gods, 0 Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it. . . . And they rose up early on the marrow" (Exodus 32:h-6),

"and offered sacrifice to it, and had a feast in honor of what they themselves had made" (Acts 7:111). "And the people sat down to eat and to drink, ard rose to play“ (Exodus 32:6). "But God turned away from them, and gave them over to worship the stars of heaven, as it is written in the book of tlre prophets" (Acts 7:1:2).

The "book of the prophets" refers to the melve Minor Prophets, which in ancient Jewish division of the sacred writings formed only one book. The specific reference in this book was Amos 5:25-26, which reads:

'People of Israel! It was not to me tint you slaughtered and sacrificed animals for forty years in the desert. It was the tent of the god Moloch that you carried, and the image of the star of your god Rephan; they were the idols 514

you had made to worship. And so I will send you away beyond Babylon' (Acts 7:142-1i3).

The point Stephen was making was that Israel had not only rejected

Moses as their leader, they had substituted a golden calf in his place,

and offered sacrifices to it instead of to God. He agreed with Amos that

because of the treacherous, unfaithful attitude of Israel, as shown in

their worship of the golden calf, in their rebelliousness in the wilderness, and in the sacrifices which they made (even those offered to the

God of glory), their demonstrations were utterly worthless. So all the

sacrifices offered up during the forty years in the wilderness were no real sacrifices at all, and their hypocrisy was clearly revealed when

they reached the land of canaan. For there, according to Moses' prophetic declaration, they "forsook God, who made them . . . and sacrificed

unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not" (Deuteronomy 32:15-

18) such as Rephan and Moloch.

Moloch was the Canaanite Sun deity to whom child sacrifices were barbariously offered. The "tent of the god of Moloch" refers to the tent shaped little boxes bearing images of the god Moloch which were carried about on the person of those who worshipped this heathen deity. Some think that Rephan was the Moon deity, while others say the word is a

Persian language reference to the Planet Saturn, another Egyptian god.

"I will send you away beyond Babylon" undoubtedly speaks of the captivity that} awaited the Israelites as a punishment for their apostasy as evi- denced by their idolatrous practices. This prophecy was later fulfilled when in 597 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylonia, conquered the

Southern Kingdom, Judah, and took thousands of Jews captive back to SS

Babylon.’~lo Stephen's aim here seems to be to show that God will very likely again punish the great sins of the people by withdrawing from them his protection and leave them to be carried by their enemies into exile.

This actually took place in 70 A.D., whal the Roman armies overran Pales-

tine and completely leveled the city of Jerusalem, at which time many

Jews were slain and others carried captive back to Rome.

Having dealt with the objections of his opponents regarding the delays in the fulfillment of God's promise of redemption, the treatment and mistreatment of God's prophets and messengers, and the seriousness of the crimes committed against God by God's people, Stephen was now ready to deny their notion of the inviolability of the sanctity of the Temple.

His goal was to prove that the places consecrated to God had no such sanctity as the Hellenists imagined, but they might be deserted by God and appropriated to other uses whenever he chose to do so.

"Our ancestors had the tent of God's presence with them in the desert.

It had been made as God had told Moses to make it, according to the pattern that Moses had been shown" (Acts 7:1L1i). Detailed specifications had been given in the book of Exodus chapters 25 through 27 for this tent, or tabernacle, as it is called. In this "tent of God's presence" were kept the two tables of stone, referred to previously, on which were inscribed by the finger of God the ten laws called Commandments. These were laid up in the tent as a testimony that God had delivered them to the people, and that the people had promised to obey them. This tent had been carried about during the entire forty years of Israel's wanderings in the

L‘OFerm, A3 Encyclopedia, p. 52. 56 wilderness. Whenever the people pitched camp they set up the tent as a place of worship and sacrifice. Whenever they departed from their camp, they folded up the tent and took it with them.

"later on our ancestors who received the tent from their fathers carried it with them when they went with Joshua and took over the land

[5f Canaan] from the nations that God drove out before them" (Acts 7:115).

After the death of Moses in the land of Moab (Deuteronomy 311:5), just across the Jordan River from the Canaanite City of Jericho, Joshua, on whom Moses laid his hands as a symbol of the transfer of leadership, assumed command of the children of Israel and led ttem to conquer the people who occupied Canaan. The land area was then divided among the several tribes of Israel according to the "inheritance . . . which [Cod had promised] unto their fathers to- give them" (Joshua 1:6).

"And it stayed there until the time of David" (Acts 7:145). That is, the tent stayed in the land of Canaan during the entire time of Joshua's leadership of Israel, and also, on through the years when Israel was ruled by a long series of judges, and finally, amidst the reign of

Israel's first king, Saul, up until the time of David, his successor. "he ﬁavid? won God's favor, and asked God to allow him to provide a house for the God of Jacob" (Acts 7:16). The full story of this request is recorded in 2 Samuel 7:1-17.

And it came to pass, when king [David] sat in his house, and the Lord had given him rest round about from all his enemies; That the king said unto Nathan the prophet, See now, I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains. And Nathan said to the king, 00, do all that is in thine heart; for the Iord is with thee. And it came to pass that night, that the word of the lord came unto Nathan, S7

saying, Go and tell my servant David, Thus saith the Lord, Shalt thou build' me an house for me to dwell in? Whereas I have not dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the‘ children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle. In all the places wherein I have walked with all the children of Israel spake I a word with any of the tribes of Israel, whom I commarded to feed my people Israel, saying, Why build ye not me an house of cedar? Now therefore, so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the lord of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote, from following the sheep, to be ruler over my people, over Israel: And I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies out of thy sight, and have made thee a great name, like unto the name of the great men that are in the earth. Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime. And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. Also the Iord telleth thee that he will make thee an house. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of tin bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee; thy throne shall be established for ever. According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.

From this extended reference we can readily see that David‘s request to build God an house was denied. Instead, God said that David's son

"shall build an house for my name." That this son was Solomon is clearly indicated in 1 Kings 8:12-20.

Then spake Solomon, . . . and said, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, which spake with his mouth unto David my father, and hath with his hand fulfilled it, saying, Since the day that I brought forth my people Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build an house, that my name might be therein; but I chose David to be over 58

my people Israel. And it was in tte heart of David my father to build an house for the name of the lord God of Israel. And the Lord said unto David my father, Whereas it was in thine heart to build an house unto my name, thou didst well that it was in thine heart. Nevertheless thou shalt not build the house; but thy son that shall come forth out of thy loins, he shall build the house unto my name. And the Lord hath performed his word that he spake, and I am risen up in the room of David my fatter, and Sit on the throne of Israel, as the Iord promised, and have built an house for the name of the Lord God of Israel.

And so Stephen was right when he said "It was Solomon who built him a house" (Acts 7:147). But why was David not permitted to build this house of God? The reason is clearly revealed in 1 Chronicles 22:7-8, where we read what David said to his son.

And David said to Solomon his son . . . it was in my mind to build an house unto the name of the Iord my God: But the word of the Iord came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast sted much blood upon the earth in my sight.

Although David was not permitted to build a house of God because of his involvement in warfare, he did

command masons to hew wrought stones to build the house of God. And he prepared iron in abundance for the nails for the doors of the gates, and for the joinings; and brass in abundance without weight; also cedar trees in abundance, . . . and an hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents of silver, . . . and workmen in abundance, . . . and all manner of cunning men for every manner of work (1 Chronicles 22:2-5, 114-15).

These he gathered in preparation for building the house of God which he urged to be built which would be "exceeding magnifical, of fame and of glory throughout all countries" (1 Chronicles 22:2-5).

After the death of David, his son, Solomon, became king over Israel 59 and immediately began to "build the house of the Lord at Jerusalem in 'Mount Moriah" (2 Chronicles 3:1), the detailed specifications for which are given in the third and fourth Chapters of 2 Chronicles. ‘When Solomon had finished building the house of God, he offered a prayer of dedication

(2 Chronicles 6:12-h2) from which Stephen drew the following statement

'which must have startled his already angry audience: "But the Most High

God does not live in houses built by men" (Acts 7:h8). To add more weight to this affirmation, Stephen quoted the highly respected prophet, Isaiah,

‘who said: "Heaven is my throne, says the.Lord, and earth is my footstool.

What kind of house would you build for me? 'Where is the place for me to rest? Did not I myself make all these things?" (Acts 7:h9-50 and Isaiah

66:1) 0

Stephen's object in mentioning David was to shift attention from the tent which he had set up, to the Temple which his son built in Jerusalem.

And this was to demonstrate, from their own Scriptures, Isaiah 66:1, that even that Temple, magnificent though it was, was not the proper resting place of Jehovah upon earth as his audience and the nation of Israel had all along been prone to believe.

It was considered a defamation of the Temple to speak of its destruction as if the Lord was restricted to his house and had need of it.

Stephen's reply was clear. Had Israel always had this Temple? If such a house was so necessary to God, he must have always had it. But when the people were chosen as a people, they had nothing but the tabernacle. God had so ordered it, and in the possession of it the people had been blessed in a peculiar way, even as they were given victory over the inhabitants of the land they now occupied. It had been like this under Moses and 60

Joshua, through the period of the judges, and even under David, a man

after God's own heart. Even he had not been permitted to build God a

house. The people of Israel had not until Solomon's time been allowed

to have a Temple. They had gone without one for more than five hundred

years! And even though Solomon had been permitted to build a Temple, was

the Lord bound to it? Did he need it as a man needs a house? Obviously

God did not require a Eemple, as Solomon had said in his dedicatory

prayer; he had a much better sanctuary, for his throne was in heaven and

his footstool was the earth. No, God did not have to have this Temple

which the enemies of Stephen were so jealous of keeping intact, nor any

other Temple built by man‘s hands. He could meet with man anywhere, any

time, so long as man's heart was humble and receptive to God's truth

spoken through his prophet. Had Stephen spoken against God or Moses in

saying what Jesus had said, that this Temple would come down? :Assuredly

he had not. But his audience did not want to hear him any more than they

wanted to believe and follow the teachings of Moses, Solomon, Isaiah, or

even Jesus. Much more were they defilers of God's Law and God's Temple.

'While it is true that they were faithful attendants of the Temple services,

they continued to resist the Holy Spirit, who would Speak to their hearts

if they would let him.

Stephen had shown from the history of God's dealing with Israel that

God had never limited himself to one sacred spot, but had, instead, re-

vealed himself to patriarchs and prophets throughout the vast world in

Mesopotamia, in Egypt, and in the wilderness. He was worshipped without

any shrine in the time of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses. He was worshipped in the fixed Temple projected by David, but built by Solomon. 61

But he was not confined there! He could'be worshipped in any part of his

domain as Jesus had said, "the true worshipper shall worship the Father

in spirit and in truth“ (John hz23).

These words of Stephen sounded the death-knell of the exclusive

privilege of one place, the Temple, as the one place of worship for the

world. They asserted the right to establish special places of worship

throughout the world. They rejected the exclusive claims of Jerusalem,

but they did not reject the right and the duty of God's people to assemble

themselves as a collective body for public worship, and to experience

God's covenanted presence. His words protested against any attempt to

localize the divine presence to one special spot on earth, making it

alone the center of all religious interest. Thus Stephen struck the

keynote of Christian freedom.

Stephen had proven that no place, not even the Temple he had been

charged with.“speak1ng against," had the inviolable sanctity which the

Jews ascribed to it and its site. The place of worship had all along

been subject to change, and to suggest this possibility with regard to

the Temple was not to speak against it. ‘When God appeared to Moses at

the bush, the ground on which the prophet stood was holy, but not after

the vision. 'When the tabernacle was erected in the wilderness, that was

holy, too, but not the ground on which it stood after it had been removed.

”When God spoke from Mount Sinai, the mountain was holy, but not after the

Israelites moved on to Canaan. Each place lost its sanctity when God moved on with his people. So could the Temple lose its sanctity when God

should choose to move on to something greater with his people. And this he had chosen to do when his Son Jesus had made his appearance to the 62

people and had taught them to “worship the Father in Spirit and in truth“

(John h:23).

The impact of Stephen's thought was not so much that God is to be

worshipped only in spirit and that all places of worship, such as the

Temple, should be abolished; it is rather that mere external worship is

not enough if the hearts of the worshippers are turned away to other gods.

And this “turning away to other gods" is what Stephen had attacked

in the closing moments of his Speech before the Sanhedrin. To him the

early history of God's people seems to have appeared an almost continual

rejection of God, in striking contrast to which was God's constant

faithfulness to them. He now had made clear by the direct assertion that

in their apostasy from God and their persecution of his messengers, there

was an exact parallel between those whom he was addressing and their re-

volting fathers.

How stubborn you are! How heathen your hearts, how deaf you are to God's message! You are just like your ancestors: you too have always resisted the Hely Spirit! 'Was there a single prophet that your ancestors did not persecute? They killed God's messengers, who long ago announced the coming of his righteous Servant. And now you have betrayed and murdered him. You are the ones who received God's law, that was handed down by angels --yet you have not obeyed it! (Acts 7:51-53).

The word "stubborn" appears in this one instance in the New Testament

although it comes from the same root word which is often translated "stiffnecked!" in the King James Version of the Old Testament. It is a metaphor

taken from the headstrong characteristic of oxen which cannot be broken

into the yoke and whose strong necks cannot be bent to the right or to the left. In applying this expression to his hearers, Stephen was using the 63 identical language of'Moses when he conveyed God‘s rebuke to his audience (Exodus 32:9). Inasmuch as they professed to be standing on Moses' side against Stephen, this must have made his words doubly cutting to them.

They would not submit their necks to the easy yoke of God's leadership, nor would they how their heads in humble worship before him.

Stephen's reference to "heathen“ hearts and deafness to God's message is translated "uncircumcised in heart and ears" in the King James

Version of the speech, and it has a very close relationship to the Old

Testament connotation of these terms. This phrase, "uncircumcised in heart and ears," was a Jewish.made of speech, often used by the prophets,

implying a covering over the heart and ears which made the person's mind insensitive to the truth, and thus spiritually disobedient. 'Where such a spirit of’disobedience was found, where the heart was prone to iniquity, and the ears deaf to reproof and counsel, the person was said to be uncircumcised in those parts. When applied to Stephen's Jewish audience, this phrase contains a whole volume of rebuke. They had prided them! selves on their circumcision; they had trusted in it as a sure Sign of favor in the Sight of God; but all the while they were on a level with the heathen whom they despised, and were to be included among the uncircumcised, whom they loathed, when God's judgment came. For they were without the true circumcision, that of the heart.

“uncircumcised in heart and ears" they, therefore, would not devote themselves completely to God and his service. ‘Like their ancestors, they had "always resisted the Holy Spirit!“ (Acts 7:51). They were not only aware of the methods by which God sought to reform them, they were enraged and incensed against them. This they proved by their resistance to 6h

the Holy Spirit's message spoken to them through the prophets whom they

opposed, contradicted, hated, and ridiculed, and also by failing to com-

ply with the dictates and convictions of their own consciences when

strongly influenced by the Holy Spirit. As a consequence they had become

hardened through the deceitfulness of Sin in their own hearts and neither

repented at the preaching of John the Baptist, the forerunner of Jesus who urged them to repent (Matthew 3:2), nor received the glad tidings

told them by Christ (John 10:10), who said: "I am come that they might

have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.“ Truly, Stephen's

hearers had shown themselves to be disobedient children of disobedient parents through all generations back to the time of their ancestor Joseph.

Spiritual obedience had been replaced by attention to ritual and ceremony.

No wonder they had not recognized the voice of the Spirit Speaking

through Stephen, who stood before them as a condemned criminal.

"Was there a Single prophet that your ancestors did not persecute?

They killed God's messengers, who long ago announced the coming of his righteous Servant. And now you have betrayed and murdered him" (Acts 7: 52), They, like their fathers, persecuted and Slew those whom God had sent unto them to call them to repentance, to duty, and to make them offers of mercy. That their fathers had persecuted and even killed the prophets may be concluded from two quotations, one from the Old Testament, and the other from the New Testament.

They mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets (2 Chronicles 36:16).

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of tie righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our 65

fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of tie prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets (Matthew 23:29-31).

According to tradition, Isaiah and Jeremiah both suffered martyrdom.

And we know that John the Baptist was put to death for speaking God's truth (Matthew 1h:lO). These and other prophets had been persecuted and put to death because they had dared to speak under the influence of the

Holy Spirit a message, the purpose of which was to prepare the people of

God for the coming of the long promised Messiah, whom Stephen here refers to as "his righteous Servant."

The term "righteous Servant" is undoubtedly drawn from Isaiah 53:11, where we read "by his knowledge shall my righteous Servant justify many."

This is the sane person mentioned in Isaiah h2:1, which Jesus quoted in

Matthew 12:18-21 and applied to himself:

Behold my Servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, are he Shall shew judgment to the Gentiles . . . and in his name shall the Gentiles trust.

But now, Stephen charges, you have committed a far worse crime than your fathers committed; you have "betrayed and murdered him" (Acts 7:52), referring, of course, to Jesus of Nazareth, God's righteous Servant.

Stephen, the accused, had now become the accuser. He was bold enough to declare what he had proved in his long historical review. His hearers, like their fathers, had resisted God in spite of his readiness to fulfill their own familiar prophecies and meet their deepest spiritual needs.

They had hired Judas to betray Jesus; they had been responsible for having him put to death. But Stephen had not been the only one to expose their 66 guilt. Just a few weeks previous, the Apostle Peter, in speaking before

some of these same people had said:

The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses (Acts 3:13-15).

Stephen held his listeners guilty of delivering Jesus up into the hands of the Romans, hoping they would find him worthy of death. But when he was declared innocent, they demanded his crucifixion nevertheless.

The facts were too fresh for them to deny this terrible charge as Matthew has clearly reported:

The chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should . . . destroy Jesus . . . . The governor . . . Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: . .' ......

And when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified. Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. and when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And they spit upon him, and took a reed, and smote him on the head. And after they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify

him 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, thatistosay,aplaceofaskull,...... theycrucifiedhim,...... and sitting down they watched him there (Matthew 27:20-36). 67

Stephen further charges “You are the ones who received God's law, that was handed down by the angels «yet you have not obeyed it!" (Acts 7:

53). While it is true that none of Stephen's audience was actually present. at Sinai, all tare represented by their ancestors. That there were angels in attendance at the giving of the law may be concluded from the following references. Paul said the law was ordained by angels:

"The law . . . was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator" (Ga.- latians 3:19). The writer of Hebrews said "the word [law] was spoken by angels" (Hebrews 2:2). David, in the Psalms, indicated that angels were in attendance at Sinai when the law was given: "the chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among then, as in Sinai, in the holy place" (Psalm 68:17). It was then, not by the hand of

Moses, but by the hand of God himself, while accompanied by many thousands of angels, that the law was given. Moses was not, then, the originator of the law against which Stephen had been charged with

Speaking. God was the giver of the law, and his people had to obey it or suffer the consequences. Stephen's accusers, like their fathers before then, put contempt upon divine revelation, and would not be guided and govemed by it. And this was the aggravation of their sin. God had given to them, as he had to their fathers, the message of salvation; but it was in vain. Their fathers had received the law and did not obey it. They had received the gospel, through the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and had not embraced it. The Holy Spirit had spoken to them through

Abraham, Joseph, and Moses, but would they listen to them now, more so than when these same messengers spoke to their ancestors? They had known the treatment given God's messengers by their ancestors, and yet they gave the same treatment to God's only Son, Jesus. Though tl'e Jews, who 68

had long ago received the law by the mediation of angels, had disregarded

it, did their descendants, these who sat before Stephen, need to follow

in their steps ani refuse the Messiah in whose life the law was fulfilled? According to Stephen, as in Hebrews 1:1, God had spoken "many times and

in many ways through the prophets" to his people, but they had been diso-

bedient just as were their descendants who now condemned Stephen. Here is, thus, an explicit announcement that those whom he was addressing

presented in their spirit and conduct towards God and his prophets an

exact parallel to their rebellious fathers. As their fathers had always

resisted the Holy Spirit, so had the priests and rulers before whom

Stephen was arraigned. As their fathers had persecuted and slain the

prophets of old, so had they persecuted and slain God's greatest prOphet,

his Son Jesus, the long promised Messiah.

It is probable that Stephen had one more application to make, and

that may have been a warning of jtxlgment. As God had punished the

ancestors whose hands were stained with the blood of the martyred prophets by delivering them to the power of their enemies, so he was about to punish the rejectors and murderers of the Messiah, by delivering them to

the Romans, who would drive such of them as escaped the sword into exile,

to await the second coming of Christ. But Stephen was interrupted, finally, and forced to conclude his speech.

Up to this point in Stephen's speech the Sanhedrin had probably paid passive attention to his historical narration with little offense. But with the quotation from Isaiah which included three rhetorical questions, the answers to which undoubtedly strengthened his case and weakened their charges, Stephen had ilnmediately arrested their attention ard revealed 69 the ultimate direction in which he was heading. And when he disassoci— ated himself from his audience, no longer to share their responsibility of disobeying God's law nor their guilt in ignoring and abusing God's prophets, "the menbers of the Council listened to Stephen" (Acts 7:5h).

Perhaps for the first time they really heard what he had been saying. At any rate, they were stung to rage by his reproaches; and “they became furious and ground their teeth at him in anger“ (Acts 7:51;) like infuriated beasts when they realized the full impact of the unanswerable arguments that Stephen had so effectively presented before them. It is difficult to imagine such loss of dignity as must have been manifested by those august gentlemen of the Supreme Court of Israel.

Meanwhile, Stephen, standing with upturned face, and seeing nothing of their menacing faces, rendered demoniac by evil passion, and hearing nothing of their threatening cries, but "full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw God's glory, and Jesus standing at the right Side of

God“ (Acts 7:55). His surroundings -that circle of angry faces and the enclosing walls ard roof of that court of justice-- had retreated into the background of his consciousness.

When Stephen saw "God‘s glory" what did he see? While the terms,

"Glory of God," "Glory of Christ," "Glory of the Lord," and "Glory of the father," are used nearly sixty times in the Scriptures, only in Ezekiel's vision is a description given of "God's glory" which Stephen no doubt saw.

And above the fimament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the 70

appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about. AS the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord (Ezekiel 1:26-28).

It is interesting to note that Stephen "saw . . . Jesus standing at

the right Side of God“ (Acts 7:55). We are told in the Gospel of Mark

that after our resurrected Lord had Spoken to his disciples "he was re-

ceived up into heaven ," and that he "sat on the right hand of God" (Mark

16:19). Since Sitting at the right hand, or Side, of God is the usual

position ascribed to Jesus in the Scripture (see Luke 22:69; Ephesians l:

20; Colosians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2), there must be some

Significance in his "standing" as Stephen saw him. he can only con-

jecture that Jesus arose from his sitting position to extend a welcome

to his faithful witness who was soon to be martyred and to be ready to place on his head the crown of life mentioned in Revelation 2:10.

In an effort to share his vision with his entire audience, Stephen cried out, "Look! . . . I see heaven opened and the Son of man standing at the right side of God!" (Acts 7:56). The designation, "Son of man," is definitely a Messianic title for the coming divine judge and is first mentioned in Daniel 7:13-lb where we read:

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him near before him.

This same title occurs in the New Testament eighty-two times as ap-

plied by our Lord to himself. It is highly significant that Stephen's

reference to "Son of man" is the only instance where it is reportedly used

by human lips other than by our Lord. It was, though, his favorite 71

designation of himself.

It is obvious that'Stephen's use of this title, not an attack on the

Jewish race or law or temple, excited the fury and brought the enraged

mob to stone him. For we read that "with a loud cry they stopped up their ears and all rushed together at him at once" (Acts 7:57). Thus, with the

loud cry of infuriation, and stopping up their ears to shut out any

further word that might convict them, from both Sides of the semi-circle

about which the members of the Sanhedrin sat, priests, judges, witnesses, and spectators all converged upon this hated prisoner. And "they threw

him out of the city and stoned him" (Acts 7:58).

we might well ask, why did Stephen use this designation, when he doubtless knew from reports he had heard that Jesus' use of the same term

in his prophetic utterance recorded in Matthew 2h:29-31, referred to earlier in this chapter, had so infuriated some of these same people that

they "assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and consulted that they might take Jesus by subtility, and kill him" (Matthew 26:3-h).

The only answer we can suggest is that Stephen, full of the Holy

Ghost, and speaking now not of himself at all, but entirely by the Spirit, was led to repeat the very words which Jesus himself, before this same

Sanhedrin, had foretold his glorification. "I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven" (Matthew 26:6h). On that occasion "the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further 72

need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye? They answered and said, he is guilty of death“ (Matthew 26:65- 66). Thus did Stephen assure his accusers that exaltation of the Son of

man which they should hereafter witness to their own dismay, had already

begun.

It would also be good to ask why such a designation should infuriate

these Jews. The answer seems to be Simply this: Stephen called upon them

to face their heavenly judge as seen by the prophet Daniel:

And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which Shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed (Daniel 7:11;).

The Jews now saw most clearly that they could expect no mercy at the

hand of God if they persisted in their opposition to the message and

influence of Jesus of Nazareth, and that their Temple and entire political

existence must fall a sacrifice to their persevering obstinacy. Their

guilt stung them to the heart, and they were determined rather to vent

their insupportable feelings by hostile and murderous acts than in peni-

tential sorrow and petitions for mercy. This was fearful proof against

them. For if Jesus was atjthe right hand of God, then they had murdered an innocent man, who in reality was the real Messiah for whom they claimed

to be looking. And, as if the murder of one guiltless man were not enough, "they threw him [Stepherj out of the city and stoned him“ (Acts 7:58), a man who had dared to tell them the truth about God, about Moses, and about

the Temple. Thus had Stephen's two parallel arguments converged to a

single sharp point. God's divine presence no longer inhabited the once

sacred Temple; he now could be worshipped wherever men turned to worship 73 him in Spirit and in truth. And God's Son, the other prophet foretold by

Moses, had already made his first visit, and though murdered by his people, was on his heavenly throne, making ready for his second coming to judge those who had refused him. How divine the wisdom and grace of this mighty witness for Christ, who, though martyred for his fidelity, was caught up immediately into the presence of God. CHAPTER III

STEPHEN} STQIED AIVD BELIEVERS SCATTERED

“look," Stephen had said, "I see heaven opened and the Son of Man

standing at the right Side of God!“ (Acts 7:56). These final words had been to the crowd of wrath filled Jews "like a spark that started an ex- plosion,”141 and they had penetrated to the very hearts of the council members. But, instead of repenting, "with a loud cry they stopped up

their ears, and all rushed together at him at once" (Acts 7:57). And then, without a regular trial, or official court action, or any authority from the Roman Governor, the members of the Sanhedrin and their sup- porters dragged Stephen through the "crowded squares and stairlike streets of Jerusalem“2 and "threw him out of the city“, (Acts 7:58).

Stephen's accusers were convinced that, to avoid defilement of their holy city, Mosaic law required them to "bring forth him that hath blasphemed without the camp" (Leviticus 2b:lh) «which they undoubtedly concluded meant "without the city."

"The scene of Stephen's murder is located in the Valley of Jehosha- phat, near the brook Kedron, and under the shadow of Olivet. To that spot the gate of Jerusalem, called the gate of St. Stephen, now leads.“43

When the place of execution was reached, the condemned man was stripped

1‘1Munck, The Acts, p. 69.

L‘ZDaniel Rops, Saint Paul, Apostle Of Nations, trans. by Jex Martin (Chicago: Fides PubIIsHers Association,—I955), p. l. 143 matings, The Greater Ell—(.19, p0 101.

7b 75 of his clothes and placed on a high rock with his hands tied behind himm‘ and then thrown violently down from a height of twelve feetl‘5 so that he might be killed by the fall.

And "the witnesses," so aS to perform their laborious piece of work unencumbered by their flowing garments, "left their cloaks in charge of a young man named Saul" (Acts-”7:58). This is the same man who later became the Apostle Paul (Acts 13:9). and who confessed with deep Shame that

"when . . . Stephen was put to death, I myself was there, approving of his murder and taking care of the cloaks of his murderers“ (Acts 22:20).

In compliance with the Mosaic law which required the witnesses to cast the first stones (Deuteronomy 17:7) as proof of their conviction of the guilt of the condemned, they “flung upon him two large stones, one intended for his stomach, and the other intended for his heart."L‘6 than death did not at once ensue, "they kept on stoning Stephen as he called

. . . 'Iord Jesus, receive my spirit!” (Acts 7:59). "Using the heavi- est blocks they could manage, they flung them . . . upon Stephen's head, chest, back, and face"h7 unrelentlessly and unmercifully.

While the rage of his enemies was spending itself upon him, instead of pleading for mercy or cursing his murderers, Stephen, bruised and bleeding, "knelt down, and cried in a loud voice, 'Lord! Do not remember

M‘Charles R. Erdman, Commentaries On New Testament Books. Volume V, T__1_1__e _A___cts (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1929), p. 65.

hSRobertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible. Volume I, The Acts Of _'I_‘__he Apgstles (New York: George H. Doran Company, n.d.), p.3 3T.

l‘6Ibid.

MRops, Saint Paul, p. 7. 76 this sin against than!” (Acts 7:60). Perhaps while saying those last words, Stephen was thinking of the young Pharisee from Tarsus who was standing just a short distance away guarding the cloaks of the as- sailants, for whom Stephen's martyrdom would pave the way to "the most fruitful of apostolates.“he How obedient Stephen had been to his Lord's exhortation, "pray for those who mistreat you" (Matthew 5:14h), and how imitative he had been with respect to his lord's emple on the cross where he prayed, “Forgive them, Father! They don't know what they are doing" (Luke 23:314). Having prayed this prayer, Stephen, "the first

Christian of whom we know to suffer death for the faith,"h9 did glori- ously die, and thus mark out a pathway down which others would follow as they gave their testimony that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Only four years had passed since Jesus had died upon the cross of infamy; thirty years later, Stephen's deadliest opponent, Saul of Tarsus, died also for the same identical faith.50

The execution of Stephen was a clear violation of all civil order because the Romans had abolished the authority of the Sanhedrin over life and death. Consequently, the Jews had not dared to take upon themselves the responsibility for the death of Jesus. How, then, could they have been so bold on this occasion? While it is true that the Sanhedrin was permitted to pass the death sentence on a condemned criminal, its

hBJusto Perez de Urbel, Saint Paul, The A ostle Of The Gentiles, trans. by Paul Barrett (Westmiﬁster, Mary-rand: The Newman Press, I956), p.11.

1‘9 Kenneth Scott Latourette, A Histo Of Christianity (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, I9 , p. ‘67. SOFarrar, 333. Paul, p. 109. 77 execution lay with the Roman Procurator.51 But during the trial and stoning of Stephen there was no mention of any intervention on the part of the Roman Procurator, antius Pilate, who should have appeared at some point since he alone had the right to pronounce or'to approve the death sentence. He had to do this at the trial of Jesus, and his approval should, therefore, have been necessary for Stephen's sentence of execution Since legally it was the same kind of case. Instead, we find only the Sanhedrin in action, before whom the false witnesses appeared, and there is not the slightest reference to the Roman Procurator. 'Why? In all probability, Pontius Pilate was no longer in office, having been de- posed by his superior, Vitellius, Legato to Syria, and sent to Rome to answer before the Emperor the charges brought against him by the Jews.

The Sanhedrin, then, had tgkenadvantage of the fact that the procurator- ship was empty, or occupied at best by the inexperienced Marcellus

(Pilate's successor) and had made a show of authority in the stoning of Stephen . 52

‘What a sublime contrast Stephen's self-possession, trust, and pity' for his murderers presented to the infuriate passions of his Slayers. He died, unagitated by their angry taunts, unresentful of their merciless treatment, uncomplaining of his terrible pain. The last pulse that throbbed in his veins was not marked by hatred; the last wave of emotion that swept through his heart was compassion for those who were staining their hands with his blood. In the last moments of his life he reflected

5lsmith, g3. Paul, p. is.

SZGiuseppe Ricciotti Paul The.Apost1e (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1952), p. 127: 78 the image of his dying redeemer. Worthily did Stephen take the lead in the glorious company of martyrs whose blood from that time forth has an- riched the life of the church. He died for advocating the principle of freedom in Christian worship as opposed to narrow,lforma1 Judiasm. This concept continued to live after his death and was nore fully developed by the Apostle Paul, who was at that time, his most violent opponent.

After his death, "some devout men ,“ gathering up the poor crushed and broken remains, " buried Stephen, weeping for him with loud cries" (Acts 8:2), showing that they were not ashamed of the crime for which he suffered, nor afraid of the wrath of those who were his enemies, and that they had great love for this faithful servant of Jesus Christ.

Although "the activity of Stephen may have been confined to only a few weeks, it had momentous results for the whole later history of the church"53 and earned for him the title, "father of Christian missions."5b

Saul of Tarsus, a scholar and a rabbi, was not merely passive in the matter of Stephen's death, he “approved of his murder" (Acts 8:1). So deep-rooted was his hatred for Jesus Christ and his followers that he de- lighted in their destruction. So blind was he with superstitious zeal that he thought he did God service by offering up the blood of his fellow human beings, whose creed he supposed to be erroneous. “That very day the church in Jerusalem began to suffer a cruel persecution" (Acts 8:1) as

Saul "tried to destroy the church; going from house to house, he dragged

53Scott, New Testament Reli ion, p. 95.

5“William Manson, The Epistle To The Hebrews (London: Hodder And Stoughton, 1951), p. 37".- ‘ 79

the believers out, both men and women, and threw them into jail" (Acts 8:3). So dreadful was the persecution that "all the believers, except

the apostles, were scattered througiout the provinces of Judas and Sa-

maria" (Acts 8:1) as they fled for their very lives. Those "believers

who were scattered went everywhere, preaching the message" (Acts 8:14) and they were "like so many lamps, lighted by the fire of the Holy Spirit,

spreading everywhere the sacred flame by which they themselves had been

illuminated. "55

With the assault against the Christians continuing more or less une- abated until the

Saul kept up his violent threats of murder against the disciples of the Lord. He went to the High Priest and asked for letters of introduction to the Jewish meeting houses in Damascus, so that if he should find any followers of the Way of the lord there, he would be able to arrest them, both men and women, and take them back to Jerusalem (Acts 9:1-2).

There was something significant to arrest attention in Saul's fever-

ish efforts to stamp out Christians and their faith. He seemed to be making an effort to crush a conviction which was trying to take shape within him and which he dreaded to recognize as he went about his task, hoping to silence his disturbed conscience. He had heard that speech before the Sanhedrin, and he knew that it was not-answered by arguments, but by stones. He had marked the bearing of the martyr in his last moments, while he himself stood guard over the cloaks of them who slew

Step hen .

c'c: ”Clarke, Matthew _T_g Acts, p. 738. 56Lebreton, The Primitive Church, p. S. 80

While he listened to Stephen, he must surely have felt the contrast between a dead theolog and a living faith; between a kindling inspiration and a barren exegesis; between a minute analysis of unimportant ceremonials and a preaching that stirred the inmost depths of the troubled heart.57

All of this had "profoundly moved Saul the persecutor in the di-

rection of personal conversion to Christ."58 It is not surprising then

to learn that en route to Damascus, when he came near the city,

a light from the sky suddenly flashed all around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, 'Saul, Saul! Why do you persecute me?’ 'Who are you, Lord?‘ he asked. 'I am Jesus, whom you persecute,‘ the voice said. ‘But get up and go into the city, where you will be told what you must do.‘ . . . Saul got up from the ground and opened his eyes, but could not see a thing. So they took him by the hand and led him into Damascus. . . .

There was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias. He had a vision, in which the Lord said to him, 'Ananiasl' 'Here I am, Lord,‘ he answered. The Lord said to him: 'Get ready and go to Straight Street ard look in the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul. He is praying, and in a vision he saw a man named Ananias come in and place his hands on him so that he might see again.‘ Ananias answered: 'Lord, many people have told me about this man, about all the terrible things he has done to your peOple in Jerusalem. And he has come to Damascus with authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on your name.' The Lord said to him: 'Go, for I have chosen him to serve me, to make my name known to Gentiles and kings, and to the people of Israel. And I myself will show him all that he must suffer for my sake.‘

So Ananias went, entered the house and placed his hands on Saul. 'Brother Saul,‘ he said, 'the Lord has sent me --Jesus himself, whom you saw on the road as you were coming here. He sent me so that you might see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.’ At once something like fish scales fell from Saul's eyes and he was able to see again. He stood up and was baptized 3 and after he had eaten, his strength Came baCkc

57Farrar, St. Paul, p. 97.

58Robert A. Baker, A Summary 93 Christian History (Nashville: Broad- man Press, 1959), p. 9. 81

Saul stayed on a few days with the disciples in Damascus. He went straight to the meeting houses of the Jews and began to preach about Jesus. 'He is the Son of God,‘ he said. All who heard him were amazed, and asked, 'Isn't this the man who in Jerusalem was killing those who call on this name? And didn't he come here for the very purpose of arresting them and taking them back to the chief priests?‘

But Saul's preaching became even more powerful, and his proofs that Jesus was Messiah were so strong that the Jews who lived in Damascus could not answer him. After many days had gone by, the Jews gathered and made plans to kill Saul; but he was told of what they planned to do. Day and night they watched the city gates in order to kill him. But one night Sanl's followers took him and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket. Saul went to Jerusalem . . . boldly preaching in the name of the Lord. He also talked and disputed with the Greek-speaking Jews, but they tried to kill him (Acts.9:3-29).

Thus we have seen that Saul, Stephen's bitterest enemy, was converted to the same faith in Christ which Stephen held so firmly, and that he was given the same hostile reception. We learn from the writings of Saint Chrysostom that the Roman Emperor, Nero, in 614 A.D., sentenced Saul, now called Paul, to death, charging him falsely with helping set fire to

Rome. When the sentence was carried out Paul's eyes were bound and his head laid on the block and severed by the headsman's axe.59 Both he and

Stephen now await “the crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give . . . on that Day“ (2 Timothy 14:8).

595m1th, §_*:- Paul, p. 61.0. CHAPTER IV

CGVCLUSICI. S

In his Speech before the Jewish Sanhedrin, Stephen presented a con- tinuous narration of Jewish history from the call of Abraham to the es-9 tablishment of the kingdom under Solomon as a means of grasping and holding the attention of his audience. For supportive material he used quotations from two well known Old Testament prophets, Amos and Isaiah. Such a procedure enabled both the speaker and the listener to establish a common ground of interest from the very beginning.

More than eighty percent of the 1350 word speech uses five letter words or less (as we have it translated into English), with several words and phrases being used over and over again. For example, the name "God" and "Lord" or a personal pronoun referring to him appear more than fifty times. The name "Moses" or a personal pronoun referring to him was used forty-eight times. These facts seem most significant inasmuch as Stephen had been charged with speaking against God and against Moses, while here in his speech he left little doubt of the high esteem and even reverence which he felt toward them. His references to Abraham some twenty-two times, to Joseph fifteen times, and to Jacob eight times --all three beloved ancestors of his listeners-- were intended as efforts to gain acceptance in the minds of his hostile audience. Other often re-occuring phrases of a personal nature, such as “our ancestors ," "our people ," and pronouns referring to them, were used by Stephen thirty-three times as he

82 83

sought to identify himself closely with his listeners. He also used the

phrases "fellow Israelites" and "people of Israel" for the same reasons.

He obviously hoped to alleviate some of the hostility which his audience

felt toward him. Even when he mentioned the refusal of the people to o-

bey Moses, he included himself as a member of the disobedient group by

saying “our ancestors“ and thus implying a shared guilt. Only when he

reached the climactic conclusion of the speech did Stephen disassociate

himself from his hearers by saying “you are just like your ancestors, you

are the ones who received God's law, . . . yet you have not obeyed it!"

With calculating logic he left little room for doubt about whom he spoke,

inasmuch as the words "you" and "your" appear nine times in just eighty-

seven words used in the conclusion. His audience could not escape the

dynamic thrust of his message.

So emotionally charged was Stephen's conclusion that when he leveled

repeated references to his audience, using the word "you," he left them

but two choices. They could admit to themselves that they, like their

ancestors, were rebellious and disobedient and guilty before God, or they

could silence the speaker. They chose to do the latter since they found

it too difficult to face up to their actual condition, as revealed by one

of their own kinsmen who dared tell them the truth. Until the very last,

Stephen had managed to keep his audience in suspense as to the real point

of emphasis he was intending to make. Otherwise, he would probably have

been interrupted long before he had made his application. As in all good

inductive speeches, he reserved his purpose sentence or sentences until

the close of his arguments, and then, with a sword-like thrust, his words

hit their mark. 8h

That Stephen followed the inductive reasoning process throughout his speech may be seen in the cause-to-effect relationships he developed in handling the chief personalities and events. He began with Abraham's move from his homeland because of God's command; he showed how Joseph and his entire family went to live in Egypt as a result of the jealousy of his brothers and of his willingness to forgive; he recounted the birth and life of Moses who became the "great deliverer" in response to God's di- rections; and he concluded with the final application which charged his listeners with murder because of their rebellious and disobedient hearts.

There are twenty-four references to geographical locations which support Stephen's contention that the favor of God was signally shown in lands other than Palestine and places other than the area occupied by the temple. God first appeared to Abraham "in Mesopotamia, before he had gone to live in Haran" and again while he lived in "Haran." The word

"Egypt" occurs six times in the account of Joseph. An angel appeared to

Moses at "Mount Sinai," and he there received the law from.» the angel “who spoke to him." He performed his wonders on the way to the promised land, not in that land. Abraham was made to move to Palestine, but he had no inheritance whatever in it. The patriarchs, though buried, it was true, at "Shechem," laid no claim to the land, but were placed, in a tomb which their forefathers had "bought from the tribe of Hamor for a sum of money."

And God had directed Moses to remove his shoes when he stood on "holy ground" at "Mount Sinai." Stephen thus proved that God was not confined to Just one place as his listeners seemd to believe so strongly.

The most elaborate description in Stephen's speech is devoted to

Moses, against whom he was charged with speaking. Approximately one-half 85 of the entire message is given over to a re-telling of the high points in the life of this highly esteemed ancestor of his hearers. It seems obvious that he did his best to refute this malicious charge against him.

The massing of detail about Moses is especially significant in the light of only casual mention of such ancestral greats as David and Solomon who are given only slight coverage. Moses is described as a "great man in words and deeds," who had a reputation of "performing miracles and wonders," a probable effort on Stephen's part to associate Moses, in the minds of his hearers, with himself, inasmuch as he, Stephen, had gained a similar reputation of performing "great miracles am wonders among the people."

The structure of Stephen's speech includes a very brief introduction, a four point body, and a conclusion. The one line introduction may have been much too brief for a speech to such a hostile audience. It is possible however, that the entire body of tie speech could be considered as an interweaving of introduction and developmental materials. The four main headings of the body include: Abraham's divine call to leave his own country for another one God would show him; Joseph's divine appointment as a saviour of his people from the famine; Moses divine selection as a ruler and saviour of the people when they were in Egyptian bondage and during their wandering in the wilderness; and David's and Solomon's efforts to establish a permanent place for worship.

Underlying the whole development of Stephen's Speech are the parallel arguments designed to prove that God had never confined himself to just one "holy place" on the one hand , and, on the other, that the chosen spokesmen for God, Joseph, Moses, Jesus the other prophet mentioned by 86

Moses, and by implication Stephen himself, were always resisted and re-

jected by their family members and fellow countrymen. These underlying

arguments were based, no doubt, on the dual charges brought against

Stephen, that he had spoken against the "holy place" and that he had

spoken against Moses, a divinely appointed messenger of God and a repre-

sentative of the people.

The conclusion of the speech seems quite abrupt, but it is so worded

that the listeners could not escape the thrust of so direct an implication

of themselves in the death of God's Son and of their own rebellion against

Moses and against God's law.

In an examination of the speech as made available in the Authorized

King James Version and in Good News For Modern Man, the two texts are

found to be inbasic agreement. Such differences as may be noted do not

alter the meaning of the message nor affect the impact made in the mind

of the reader. Good News For Modern Man seems to be easier to read and

understand, although, to many readers, the Authorized Version is probably more familiar. However, the reading of the speech in either version with care, and prayer, cannot help but impress the reader with the logical argument that all true worship is dependent upon the worshipper and the God he worships rather than upon the place where he worships.

A number of minor differences in word, phrase, and sentence order, along with a number of word substitutions and changes, appear in a comparison of the two texts used in this study. Punctuation was largely the same in both texts except that quotation marks and exclamation marks were used in Good News For Modern Man but not in the Authorized King James 87

Version .

The followirg are some examples of word changes made from the King

James Version to the more modern version, Good News For Modern Man:

hearken -- listen to me seed -- descendant

dwelt -- was living sojourn -- live

get thee out -- leave ‘ fathers -- ancestors

kindred -- family wot -- know

begat -- had stiffnecked -- stubborn

Several proper names show variations in spelling including the following:

Charran -- Haran Chanaan -- Canaan

Sychem -- Shechem meor -- Hamor

Madian -- Midian Sina -- Sinai

In a number of instances the order of phrases was reversed in con- formity with modern usage and with more up to date words:

then came he out -- and so he left

ard God spake on this wise -- this is what God said

moved with envy -- were jealous of

then fled Moses -- Moses fled

when forty years were expired -- when forty years had passed

A more detailed comparison can be made of the two texts used in this study by consulting the Appendix. APPENDIX APPENDIX

TEXTUAL COMPARISON

Saint Stephen: Speech before the Jewish Sanhedrin, 37 A.D.

The comparison is shown by means of the following typographical devices in the text from Good News For Modem Man:

Use of identical language ...... Capitalized

Use of synonymous words and phrases Underlined

Use of new material O O O O O O O O O O O O O . lower Case

SPEFIJH AS FOUND IN THE KEG SPEECH AS FOTND IN GOG) NEWS JAMES VERSICN OF THE BIBLE FOR MODERN MAN

Men, brethren, and fathers, Brothers AND FATHERS! hearken; The God of glory appeared 315533932931 THEGGJOFGLORY unto our father Abraham, when he APPEARED to OUR ancestor ABRA- was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt HAM while—HE his’l‘iﬁ'n' ' m MESO- in Charran, And said unto him, Get POTAM'IA, BEFORE HE had gone___ to thee out of thy country, and from live ll Haran, AND E110 Iii? HIM, thy kindred, and come into the land Eave you ur Tamil AND CO TRY which I shall shew thee. Then came AND 0 to _t___he Ell-AD that I will he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, showﬁ- . And so HE Ie ft‘i" and dwelt in Charran: and from thence xTChEI— ea —AND "‘"E to HElive when his father was dead, he removed 113 Haran. After Abraham's him into this land, wherein ye now FATMd Lied, God made HJM mo____v_e dwell. And he gave him none inheri- to THIS—— count , where ou MM tance init, no, not so much as to set five. God did no the nL'give his foot on: yet he promised that he Abraham any part _<_>__f W as his would give it to him for a possession o__w_r_1_, NOT even a S'— uare FOOT of and to his seed after him, when as round; but God ED THAT yet he had no child. And God spake W0 oufD GIVE-IT TO HIM and HIS on this wise, That his seed should descendants AFTER HIM. At the sojourn in a strange land; and that time God made this promise Abra- they should bring them into bondage, 'hTa'm'HAD NO children. This Is” and entreat them evil four hundred _w___hat GCD _s____aiH to him: our 3"- years. scendants w__i_ll__ 2_L___ive m A foreign

'88 89

count where THEY wi___l__l be slaves AND wgl” be badly treated for I‘m UR

And the nation to whom they shall But I WILL pass judgment__ on THE be in bondage will I'judge, said people” that THEY WI _s____erve, GCD God: and after that shall they SAID, AID afterward THEY will COME come forth, and serve me in this out o_f_ t__h__at count AND will place. And he gave him the cove- worshipﬂ ME II THS ‘PIACE. T__h___en ' nant of circumcision: and so Ga EVE to Abraham THE ceremon Abraham begat Isaac, and circum- DF’CIHCLHCIW. as a sign—TIEor T cised him the eighth day; ard COVENANT. AND ABRAHAM CIRCUMCISED Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob be- ISAAC a week after he wa___s_ b__9___m; gat the twelve patriarchs. ISAAC circumcised JACOB, and JACOB circumcised the TNELVE PATRIARCHS.

And the patriarchs, moved THE PATRIARCHS were jealous with envy, sold Joseph into Egpt: of JOSEPH, and SOID _h__im as a slave but God was with him, And de- in EGYPT. BUT GOD wAS __WITH HIIT, livered him out of all his af- “AND brogght Hm safely through ALL

flictions, and gave him favour and HIS troubles. When Joseph ap- wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh peared before PHARAOH, the K11 G OF king of Egypt; and 1's made him EGYPT, a GAVE HI VI a pleasing governor over Egypt and all his man___n___er AND hISDOIT. 'PHAHAOH MADE house. Now there came a dearth . Joseph GOVT? RNOR OVER the countr over all the land of Egypt and HIE the re al househoﬁ- Then Chanaan, and great affliction: and THERE—Has amine which caused our fathers found no sustenance. much sifferm ADI: om But when Jacob heard that there AND—Canaan. UR ancestors could was corn in Egypt, he sent out our not ggy food. ' JACOB fathers first. And at the second Hm—WASS grain II. EGYPT time Joseph was made known to his HE SENTI OUR ancestors on their brethren; and Joseph's kindred was PIRST visit there. On THE SECOND made known unto Pharaoh. Then visit he MADE him_____s____elf KNOWN TO HIS sent Joseph, and called his father Brothers, and PHARAOH came TO know Jacob to him, and all his kindred, about JOSEPH—VS family.“ So J threescore and fifteen souls. So 'SEN'T’E messa e to HIS FATHER JACOB, Jacob went down into Egypt, and telling A and-— the whole family died, he, and our fathers, And to come to Egypt: there were seven- were carried over into Sychem, and t ive eo la in all. Then JACOB laid in the sepulchre that Abraham uh WOWGTPIT—herm AIID bought for a sum of money of the OUR ancestors DIED. Their bodies sons of Enmor the father of Sychem. WERE moved to Shechem, where they were Buried— IN grave which mm BOUGHT from THE tribe OF Hamor FOR A SUM Messy.

But when the time of the WHEN‘ THE TIME DREh n__e_ar f__9__r promise drew high, which God had GOD to keep THE HiCIIISE he HAD “made sworn to Abraham, the people grew TO ABRAHAM, THE number oTour and multiplied in Egypt, Till an- PEOPLE IN EGYPT had grown much other king arose, which knew not larger. it last “different _a KING, Joseph. The same dealt subtilly who had NOT Flow wn JOSEPH, began t_g is“ in Egypt. H__e_ tricked 90 with our kindred, and evil en- OUR people AND Egcruel _t_g OUR treated our fathers, so that they ancestors, forcing than to ply: cast out their young children, to THEIR babies OUT of their homes, the end they might not live. In so THAT THEY would die. It was 23: which time Moses was born, and THIS TIME them 0 ES'IIAS EH75 was exceeding fair, and nourished very beaujpiful child. He was up in his father's house three brou ht UP at home for THREE MCNTHS, months: And whm he was cast out, AND Rum RENAS ut OUT of his home Pharaoh's daughter took him up, the DAUGHTER of RAOH adopted HIM and nourished him for her own son. AND brou ht HIM UP as HER OWN SON. And Moses was learned in all the He W—S—JA taLu_ght ALL THE WISDOM OF THE wisdom of the Egyptians, and was E-GYPTIANS, AND became a great man mighty in words and in deeds. m WORDS AND DEEDST"

And when he was full forty WHEN Moses WAS FORTY YEARS OLD years old, it came into his heart _h_e decided TO VISIT HIS fellow to visit his brethren the children Israelites. ﬁg gag (NE OF of Israel. And seeing one of them being mistreated by an Egyptian: so suffer wrong, he defended him, and HE went t_g _h__i_§ help AND took 33- avenged him that was oppressed, ven e (N THE EGYPTIAN killing him. and smote the Egyptian: For he HE thou L ht that HIS OWE—75676— supposed his brethren would have WOWTMD THAmE—igg—going understood how that God by his 339 Egg t_11_:_r_n_ _t_o_ sit THEM free; BUT hand would deliver them: but they THEY did NOT understand. THE NEAT understood not. And the next day DAY HE saw two Israelites fi htin , he shewed himself unto them as they strove, and would have set them. Listen, mpg, he said, m them at one again, saying, Sirs, ARE brothers; WHY DO YOU mistreat ye are brethren; why do ye wrong each other? BUT 3112 one who was one to another? But he that did migtreatigg the other pushed Moses his neighbor wrong thrust him away aside. WHO MADE YOU RULER AND JUDGE saying, Who made thee a ruler and OVER US? h_e_ asked. 122 mwant pp a judge over us? Wilt thou kill KILL ME, just AS YOU killed that me, as thou diddest the Egptian EGYPTIAN YESTERDAY? When MOSES yesterday? Then fled Moses at heard this _h_g FLED from Egypt AND this saying, and was a stranger in started living IN THE LAND OF Midian. the land of Median, where he begat 21191.9. HE _ha_d Two 5015. two sons.

And when forty years were ex— After FORTY YEARS had ssed, pired, there appeared to him in the AN ANFE'IPPRARRD TO MoEEE. H t wilderness of Mount Sins an angel flames OF A burning BUSIT‘IR THE" of the Lord in a flame of fire in a aesert near MOINT Sinai. MOSES was bush. When Moses saw it, he . amazéd what HE SAW, AND went _— wondered at the sight: and as he NEAR—‘Ehe bush TO look at IT closely. drew near to behold it, the voice But he heard THE ISO—13's VOICE: I AM of the Loni came unto him, Saying, THE GOD OF our ancesfzrs, THE GOD I am the God of thy fathers, the OF ABRAHAM . WJACOB. God of Abraham, and the God‘of MOSES TREMBIED with fear AND dared Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then NOT look. And THE LORD SAID TO" Moses trembled, and durst not be- HIM: hold. Tha'i said the Lord to him, 91

Put off thy shoes from thy feet: Take YOUR sandals OFF FOR THE PLACE for the place where thou standest WHERE YOU are standin IS HOLY is holy ground. I have sea, I GROUND. I—HK ooked and SEEN THE have seen the affliction of my cruel suffering OF MY PEOPLE IN people which is in Egypt, and I EGY . I HAVE HEARD THEIR roans, have heard their groaning, and am AND I have C(ME DOWN '10 save Tm. come down to deliver them. And cons: NOW“, I WILL SEND mm EGYPT. now come, I will send thee into Egypt.

This Moses whom they refused, THIS is the MOSES who was re- saying, Who made thee a ruler .and ected b the W 0:31.331." a Juige? the same did God send to ty—Ho MAD o R n15" JWover be a ruler and a deliverer by the us? they asked. he is the one whom hand of the angel which appeared GCD sent E's—RULER AND—smog with to him in the bush. He brought Trish—EFT)? THE Ammm IN THE than out, after that he had shewed burn g BUSH. HE _1_e_a<_1_ TEE—{mph wonders and signs in the land of OUT of Egypt, performing mirac es Egypt, and in the Red Sea, and in AND WONDERS 1N EGYPT AND W the wilderness forty years. This SEA, AND IN THE desert for FOR‘I‘Y is that Moses, which said unto the YEARS. He IS the MOSES who SAID children of Israel, A prophet _t_o_ THE 53121.3 UF'ISRAEL,"GOJ will shall the Lord your God raise up send YO A OPI-IET, ust as he unto you of your brethren, like sent ME, who will _h__e YOUR-2333 unto me; him shall ye hear. This eo 1e. FEE the one who WAS is he, that was in the church in w1' tE THE $.32 I's’f'aTeI—as- the wilderness with the angel semBled desert; HE was there which spake to him in the Mount ancestors arﬁ WITH—TEE Sina, and with our fathers: who ANGEL who spoke TO m on MOUNT received the lively oracles to Sinaig—HE mm!) God's—livin give unto us: To whom our fathers messages _t_o_ pass on TO US. But would not obey, but thrust him OW ancestors refused _tg OBEY him; from them, and in their hearts they pushed Hm aside AND wished turned back again into Egypt, that they could 52 BACK _t_g EGYPT. Saying unto Aaron, Males us gods So they said _t_o_ AARCN: MAKE US to go before us: for as for this some sons who will GO _ig front _a_; Moses, which brought us out of US. WE _d_q NOT know WHAT HAS the land of Egypt, we wot not happened TO that MOSES gm BROUGHT what is become of him. And they US OUT OF EGYPT. It was then that made a calf in the se days, and THEY MADE AN IDOL in the same shape offered sacrifice unto the idol, of A CALF AND OI‘FERED SACRIFICE jg and rejoiced in the works of M: AND _h_a_d_ _a_ feast 1N hongr OF their own hands. Then God turned __twha __lthe Lamina had made- .1333: and gave them up to worship the GOD TURNED away from them, AND GAVE host of heaven; as it is written THEM over TO WORSHIP THE stars OF in the book of the prophets, 0 ye HEAVEN, AS IT IS WRITTEN 11-: THE house of Israel, have ye offered BOOK OF THE PROPHETS: Egople 0F to me slain beasts ard sacrifices ISRAEL! It was not TO ME that you by the space of forty years in slaughtered w M FORTY YEARS the wilderness? Yea, ye took up IN THE desert. It was the tent 01" the tabernacle of Moloch, and the the god MOLOCH that m carried, star of your AND THE image OF THE STAR OF YOUR god Remphan, figures‘whioh ye Gd) Rephan; They were idols th___a_t made to worship than; and I will YOU had MADE TO WORSHIP. AND so I carry you away beyond Babylon. WILL send YOU AWAY BEYOND BABYLGI.

Our fathers had the taber- OUR ancestors HAD THE tent 0F nacle of witness in the wilder- God's resence with them IN THE ness, as he had appointed, d__e___sert. IT __ been made _a_s 999 speaking unto Moses, that he had t__9___ld MOSES TO MAKE IT, A06- should make it according to the CGlDlNG TO THE Ettem THAT Moses fashion that he had seen. Which had been _s____hown. later on O also our fathers that came after ancestors _—received who the tent brought in with Jesus into the from their FAT carried it with possession of the Gentiles, whom them when they went WITH Joshua God drave out before the face of and took over _t_hg land from the our fathers, unto the days of nations that CO) drove OUT BEFORE David; Who found favour before then. And it stayed___ there unti____;l_. God, and desired to fird a THE _t__ime o__f_ DAVID. H__e _w___on God:s tabernacle for the God of Jacob. fa___v__or, AND— _a_—sked God— 10 allow him But Solomon built him an house. provide to houseA FOR TEE GOD OF Howbe it the most High dwelleth JACOB. BUT it was SOIDMCN who not in temples made with hands; BUILT HIM A HOUSE. _B__ut THE MOST as saith the prophet, Heaven is HIGH God d_p___es not 1ive lN h_<_>_____uses my throne, and earth is my foot- built b men; AS T PHET says: stool: what house will ye build "ﬁ’f THRCNE, says THE LORD, me? saith the lord: or what is AND EARTH IS MY FOOTSTOOL. WHAT the place of my rest? Hath not kind of HOUSE wo__ul__.d_ YOU BUIID for my hand made all these things? IE? Where IS THE PLACE _f__or ME to REST? Did idNOT I melf___ make ALL TIESE THINGS?

Ye stiffnecked and uncircum- How stubborn u%r_§l How cised in heart and ears, ye do heathen ypur _——RT, __e_af- 19.2 always resist the Holy Ghost: as are to Gods smessagei You are just your fathers did, so do ye. Which like YOUR ancestors; m__ too have of the prophets have not your AWAYS resisted TEE HOLY S iriti fathers persecuted? and they have Was there a sin 6 PRO that slain them which shewed before of m ancestors ' NOT PERSWE? the coming of the Just One; of __Emessengers, who whom ye have been new the be--,-~ lon 0announced the CCMlNG E'- trayers and murderers: Who have _H_i_s r3. hteous Servant. And NON received the law by the dispo- 3733 8mm. : murdered him. sition of angels, and have not _Y___ou _a__re __e_ t ones who God's kept it. . . . “ml",— that was hana'a down BY ANGELS --yet you mm ya IT!

Behold, I see the heavens Iook! he said, I SEE IEAVPN opened, and the Son of man s 0mm ma son or m sman standing on the right hand ofGod. at TIE RIGHT side OF GODI

Iord Jesus, receive my spirit. LORD JESIB,IRECEIVE MY SPIRIT!

Iord, lay not this sin to their LORD! Do not remember THIS SIN charge. agains't'tﬁ'e-x'nl BIBLIOGRA PHY BIBLIOGRAPHY

Attwater, Donald. Mart 'rs from g. Stephen _t_o_ John Tung. New York: Sheed and and, 9:7.

Bach, Marcus. Adventures in'Faith. Minneapolis: T.S. Denison and Company, Inc., ma:

Bacon, Benjamin Wiener. Biblical and Semitic Studies. New York: Charles Scribner-Tr Sons; 335612" ' " " ' '

Baker, Robert A. A Summary of Christian History. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1939.

Barnard, L. W. Saint Stephen and Early Alemndrian Christiani_t1. Cambridge: CamEriE’ ge ﬁversity Press, 1960.

Blainock, E. M. The Acts of the A ostles, an Historical Commentary. Grand Rap'ﬁ's':'WiIlEm'-B: gains PESlishing Company, 1959.

Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. The S eches in _t_he Acts of the Amstles. London: Tyndale Brass, I955.

Brush, John W. Who's Who in Church Histog. Needham Heights: Whittemore Associates, Inc.,-l9 .

Buttrick, George Arthur, ed. The Interpreter's Bible. Vol. IX. Nashville: Abingdon Cokesb'ury Press,T955.

Cadbury, Henry J. The Book of Acts in History. New York: Harper and Brothers PTiBIisHersTHSS.

Chappell, Clovis G. More Sermons _o_n Biblical Characters. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, l9”.

Clarke, Adam. The New Testament of 933 Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Vol. I: Matthew _t_o_ Acts. Nashville: Abingdon CokesEury Press, n.d.

Cullmann, Oscar. The Early Church. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1956.

Davidson, Francis, ed. The New Bible Commenta . Grand Rapids: Ltilliam B. Eerdmans PublTs'hin' g Company, 19;}.

93 9h

Davis, A. Powell. The First Christians,a aStud of St. Paul and Christian Origin . New York: Farrar, trans, and Cudahy, 1957.

Davis, John D. The Westminster.Dictionary 9E the Bible. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, l9hh.

Dummelow, J. R., ed. The One Volume Bible Commenta_y. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1963;

Eiselen, Frederick Carl, ed. The Abm mgdon Commentary. New York: Abingdon Cokesbury Press,

Enslin, Morton Scott. Christian Beginning_. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers,ﬁl9381

Erdman, Charles T Commentaries on New Testament Books. Vol. V: The Acts. Philadelphia: Theﬁwestminster Press, 1929.

Farrar, Canon. The Life of St. Paul. Philadelphia: Henry Neil Publishers, 1895. — — '—

Perm, Vergilius, ed. An Enc clo edia of Religion. New York: The Philosophical-Library, 195;.

Ford, h. Herschel. Simple Sermons from the Book of Acts. Vol. I. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1950.

Foxe, John. Book of Marty: . Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

. Christian.Martyrs'2£ the World. Chicago: Moody Press, n.d.

Frend, W. H. C. Martylgom and Persecution _'_1_n the Early Church: _a_ Study of a Con c rom Maccabees to Denatus. New York: University Press, 1967.

Gallonio, Antonio. Torture of the Christian Martyrs. North Hollywood: Parliament News,n .3—

Good News for Modern Man, the New Testament in Today‘s English Version. New York: The American Bible Society, 1966.

Haley, Mary Jane. Bible Personalities. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1963.

Halley, Henry H. Pocket Bible Handbook. Chicago: Henry H. Halley, 19h6. harrison, Everett F., ed. Baker's Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960.

Hastings, James. The Greater Men and Women of the Bible. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, T916. 9S

Hefley, James. Heroes 2; _t_hg Faith. Chicago: Moody Press, 1963.

Henry, Carl F., ed. The Biblical E sitor. Vol. III: Matthew _t_o_ Revelation. W a e ph a: E. J. Holman Company, T960.

Henry, Matthew. Matthew Hen 's Commenta on the Whole Bible. Vol. VI: Acts _t_g Revelation. New IY'orl'i: Fleming—H: ReveIl Company, n.d.

Homan, Helen Walker. Letters to _t_hg Martygs. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1951.

Jackson, F. J. Foakes. The Be innin s of Christianity, Part I. The Acts of the A ostlesTVol'ETH . Translated by Henry J. Cadbury—._ 5136-5: acm an, 1933.

Jamieson, Robert; Faussett, A. R.; and Brown, David. Commentary, Criti- cal and Explanatory 2g the Whole Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan

Jones, J. Stephen. The First Martyr. New York: Franklin Knight Publisher, 1360.

Knox, Ronald A. _A New Testament Commentary. Vol. II: The Acts 93 _t_hg AEstles. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1951:.

Knox, W. L. ﬁt. Paul and the Churchgg Jerusalem. Cambridge: Cambridge University Bream-132;.

Kraeling, Emil, G. Rand McNall Bible Atlas. New York: Rand McNally and Company, 1955.

LaSor, William Sanford. Great Personalities 2}: the New Testament. Westwood: Flemin‘Tg . Revel]. Company, 1961‘.

Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A Histor 33 Christianit . New York: Harper and Brothers PubliQiers, 3.

Lawlor, Hugh J., and Alton, J. E. L. Ecclesiastical Histo and Martyrs 2;: Palestine. Naperville, Illinois: Alec R. A enson, Inc., 19514.

Lebreton, Jules. The Histor 2: the Primitive Church. New York: Macmillan, I955.

Lockyer, Herbert; All. _t_hg Men of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1'9'38'.‘ ' '

Manson, William. The E istle _t_o the Hebrews. London: Hodder and Stoughton, I9SE.

McNeill, John T. Makers of the Christian Tradition. Magnolia, Mass.:_ Peter Smith Publisher, n.d. 96

Meade, Frank S. Who's Who _in_ the Bible. New York: Grosset and Dunlap, 193A.

Morgan, C. Campbell. The Acts 2; the Apostles. New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1925.

Morris, Leon. The Apostolic Preachin of 213 Cross. Grand Rapids: William R.Te1dmans ﬁblishingTompany, 1955.

Moyer, Elgin S. Great L6aders _o_i_‘ the Christian Church. Chicago: Moody Press, 1951.

. Who Was Who. _i_n_ Church History. Chicago: Moody Press, 1967.

Munck, Johannes. The Acts _of the A stles. Translated by Johannes Munck. Gmen City: Doublgay and Company, Inc., 1967.

Nicoll, Robertson, ed. The Emositor's Bible. Vol. I: The Acts _0_{ t_hg Apostles. New YES-5k: George? Doran Company, 373'.

Ockenga, Harold J. Power Thro h Pentecost. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing ompany, T959.

Perry, Earl. These First Called _H_i_._m Master. Nashville: Broadman Press, $96 0

Pierce, Earle V. Ye _A_r_e My Witnesses. Philadelphia: The Judson Press, 1955-.

Phillips, J. B. The New Testament in Modern English. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962.

Ramsey, William M. The; Christ 93‘. the Earliest Christians. Richmond: - John Knox Press, 9.

Reese, Paul S. Men of Action in the Book of Acts. Westwood: Fleming H. Revefi'fimfia— _—

Ricciotti, Giuseppe. Paul the Apostle. Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1957.

Robertson, A. T. E ochs in the Life 93 Paul. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons ,191'5:

Rolston, Holmes. Personalities Around Paul. Richmond: John Knox Press, 195k.

Rops, Daniel. Saint Paul, A stle of Nations. Translated by Jex Martin. Chicago: Fides Pu'SIishers Association, 1953.

Schlatter, Adolph. The Church _i_n_ the New Testament Period. Translated by Paul Levertoff. New York: Macmillan Company, 1956. 97

Scott, Ernest F. The Varieties of New Testament Religion. New Ybrk: Charles Scritmer's Sons, -1-97IE.

Simon, Marcel. Stephen, Saint, Martyr. Saint Stephen and the Hellenists _ip the Primitive Church. New York: Longmans Green, 1958.

Smith, David. The Life and Letters of St. P__a___u1. New York: Harper and Brothers, 19 E.

Stalker, James. The Life 93 Paul. New York: Fleming H. Revell

Company, I950. "Stephen." Encyclopaedia Britannica. 1965. Vol. XII

Stevens, George Barker. The Theolo 93 the New Testament. New York: Charles Scribner‘s Sons, 9 7.

The Holy Bible. Newly Edited by The American Revision Committee. New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1901.

The Holy Bible. Revised Standard Version. Toronto: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1953.

The New English Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961.

The New Testament. New York: Anerican Bible Society, 1965.

Townsend, J. T. in: Speeches in Acts. Evanston: Library of Evanston, 1960. "'" "

Townsend, L. T. The Martyrdom of Stephen. New York: Amherst College, 181d. '-

Urbel, Justo Perez de. Saint Pau____]_., the Apgstle__ of the Gentiles. Translated by FEET-Barrett.— Westminster: The Newman Press, 1956.

Walker, Williston. A Histo oi the Christian C__h____urch. New York: Charles Scrﬂner's Sons, 7. .

White, Helen G. Tudor Bo__g__ks of Saints and Martyrs. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 19 3.

Williams, Charles B. The New Testament. Chicago: Moody Press, 19149.

Wuest, Kenneth S. Acts Through Ephesians, an Expanded Translation. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958.

Young, Robert. Anal tical Concordance to the Bible. New York: Funk and WagnaIIs Company, n.d.

Zeller, Edward. The Contents and Origin___ of the Acts of the Apostles. Vol. II. Translated Fir-Joseph Dare. London: ~William and Norgate, 1876. nIiflllfflfflfllfllflfllfiflfllflllITIIWIIIES 34417