Acts 6:14, commentary and pictures

Acts 6:14 records the hired false testimony brought against Stephen in his trial before the Sanhedrin, claiming he said Jesus of Nazareth would destroy the holy place and change the customs delivered by Moses. The charge was pressed with great force as blasphemy against the temple, the law, Moses, and God, to make Stephen appear dangerous and to frighten others from believing his preaching of the crucified and risen Christ. It is the witnesses' accusation, not a faithful account of what Stephen or Jesus actually said. Stephen had spoken with the wisdom and power of the Holy Spirit that his opponents could not resist, and instead of yielding they were filled with bitter hatred and violent opposition. The need for false witnesses shows that neither Christ nor Stephen could be charged directly with breaking the Sabbath, for even lesser customs were carefully respected and violation of the Sabbath would have brought severe penalty.

Charge Against Stephen

This saying belongs to Stephen's public defense of his faith before the Sanhedrin council for trial. He had been seized and brought there to be silenced despite the evidence he had presented. His opponents tried to refute his teaching as dangerous, and the priests and rulers were determined to silence his voice by putting him to death. They had on several occasions bribed the Roman authorities to overlook the Jews taking the law into their own hands to try, condemn, and execute prisoners according to their national custom, and they did not doubt they could do the same without danger to themselves. Determined to risk the consequences at all events, they seized Stephen and brought him before the council.

Stephen spoke with the wisdom and power of the Holy Spirit, knowing the prophecies and the law. A wonderful manifestation of power attended his ministry, and he met his opponents with clear, calm wisdom. They could not resist his arguments nor prevail against him. Instead of yielding to the weight of evidence he presented, they were filled with bitter hatred and with vehement opposition and revengeful hatred.

What is heard here is hired false witnesses testifying that they heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth would destroy the temple or holy place and change the customs which Moses delivered. The charge came from witnesses hired by the priests and rulers to stir opposition. It was pressed in a most imposing manner as blasphemy against the temple and holy place and the law. It was likewise pressed as blasphemy against Moses and God, to portray his preaching about the crucified and risen Christ as blasphemous and dangerous. In this the priests and rulers determined to make an example of him and to keep others from adopting his belief through fear.

The saying is therefore the witnesses' accusation and testimony brought against Stephen, not a faithful or verified account of what Stephen or Jesus actually said. It does not establish that he made those statements about the temple, the law, Moses, and God.

Influence and Application

Stephen's testimony in the trial and the evidence of God's presence with him troubled Saul. His triumphant death greatly stirred Saul and shook his prejudice. The priests and rulers pressed the charge that Stephen was a blasphemer for preaching that Jesus of Nazareth would destroy the temple and change the customs Moses delivered, that the Jesus Christ whom Stephen preached was an impostor, and that those ministering in holy offices were right. Their opinions and arguments finally convinced Saul that Stephen was a blasphemer and settled him in mind that the priests and scribes were right, and that conviction made him bitter in opposition to Christianity and zealous to persecute believers.

The accusation that Jesus would destroy the temple and change the customs Moses delivered was fabricated testimony brought against Stephen to provide a pretext for condemnation. If Sabbath-breaking could have been charged against Christ or Stephen, their enemies could have accused them directly and would not have needed false witnesses. Their care to respect even lesser customs shows that violating the fourth-commandment Sabbath would have brought severe penalties, indeed the severest penalty.