Acts 6
Despite Jesus’ orders to engage in the Gentile mission (1:8), the apostles had stayed in Jerusalem and remained there as late as 15:2. It is ultimately the bicultural minority within the Jerusalem church that holds the promise for the future. Luke gives us examples of two leaders from that minority (6:5), Stephen (chap. 7) and Philip (chap. 8).
Stephen became the center of opposition, in part because he was a Hellenistic Jew and in part because he was so eloquent in his espousal of his faith.
6:9–10. Stephen’s fellow Hellenists felt local Jewish hostility more acutely than the church’s Hebrew faction (see comment on 6:1). Jerusalem had many synagogues (though not the 480 of later tradition), including some of those mentioned here. Archaeologists have found the dedicatory inscription from a “synagogue of the freedmen,” those descended from former Roman slaves. (They constituted a particular class in Greco-Roman society in the first generation; Judaism ranked them just below proselytes.) Later sources attest the synagogue of the Alexandrians and that of the Cilicians; the capital of Cilicia was Tarsus, Paul’s hometown. Other ancient cities with large Jewish immigrant populations also sported diverse synagogues.
The men from the Synagogue of the Freedmen made the mistake of trying to refute Stephen’s arguments. They had two problems: first, they were trying to defend a false position, and second, they had to face a man who was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
We don’t know the exact nature of these arguments, but from verses 13 and 14 we can infer their content. It is evident that Stephen preached the Messiahship of Jesus as the fulfillment of the law. To the Jews, this would seem like a blasphemous attack on everything that they held sacred. Though both Stephen and his opponents accepted the authority of the Scriptures, they drew radically different conclusions from them.
Once these men realized that they could not best Stephen in argument, they did what men in such circumstances often resort to—falsehoods and violence. If you can’t beat your opponent with logic, beat him with lies or attack his character or his person.
Little did they realize that their actions would simply give him a bigger pulpit. Instead of silencing him, they succeeded in putting him in such a situation that his words still speak to us. Blasphemy in first-century Judea was a serious charge, one that could lead even to the death penalty. Such a charge was serious enough that it was immediately brought to the attention of the Sanhedrin.
Not only did all Jews look upon the temple as sacred, but many derived their livelihood directly or indirectly from the temple. Thus, they had twin motives for becoming alarmed at anything that seemed to threaten it.
It is interesting that one charge brought against him, that Jesus would destroy the temple (Acts 6:14), was similar to the charge that had been brought against Jesus himself (Mark 14:58).
It was like the “face of an angel” (Acts 6:15). We cannot be sure exactly what this expression implied, but probably it indicated that his fate revealed a calm assurance, a serenity that was extraordinary even though he was the target of false and threatening accusations. Such an appearance can come only to one who has placed his life completely in the hands of God.