4. The Trial.— For sucli sayings he was arrested at the instigation of the Hellenistic Jews and brought be- fore the Saiilicdriin, w here, as it would seem, the Phari- saic party had, just before this time (Acts v, 34; vii, 51), gained an ascendency. As they were unable to withstand his powers of reasoning, their malice was ex- cited ; they suborned false witnesses against him as a blasphemer. Tlie charge brought against him was, as we have seen, that he had spoken against the law and
STEPHEN
1010
STEPHEN
tlie Temple, asainst Moses and against God. This accu- sation was calculated to incite all parlies in the Sanhe- drim against him (comp.xxii,-22); and upon receiving it the predetermined purpose ol" the council was not to be mistaken. Stephen saw that he was to be the victim of the blind and malignant spirit wliich had been ex- hibited by the Jews in every perii>d of their history. But his serenity was unrutited; his contidence in the g<K>dness of his cause and in the promised support of his heavenly Muster imparted a divine trani|uillity to his mind; "anil when the judges lixed their regards uiwn him, the light that was within beamed forth upon his countenance, and "they saw his face as if it had been the face of an angel" (vi, 15).
For a moment, the account seems to imply, the judges of the Sanhedrim were awed at his presence. Then the high-i)riest that presided appealed to him (as Caiaphas had, in like manner, appealeil in the great trial in the tiospel history) to know bis own sentiments on the ac- cusations brought against him. To this Stephen re- plied in a speech which has every appearance of Ijeing faithfully reported. The peculiarities of the style, the variations from the Old-Test, history, the abruptness which, by breaking ott' the argument, prevents us from easily doing it justice, are all indications of its being handed down to us substantially in its original form.
5. :Step/ien's Defence. — His speech is well deserving of the most diligent study, and the more it is under- stood the higher idea will it convey of the degree in which he possessed the qualities ascribed to him in the .sixth chapter. Very different views have been taken of it by commentators. Upon the whole, we are in- clined to follow that which is given by Neaiider in the work referred to. Even as a composition it is curious and interesting from the coimection which may be dis- covered between the various parts, and from the unity given to the whole by the honesty and earnestness of the speaker. Without any formal statement of his ob- ject, .Stephen obviously gives a confession of his faith, .nets forth a true view of the import of his preaching in opposition to the false gloss that had been put upon it, niaintains the justness of his cause, and shows how well founded were his denunciations against the impenitent .Jews.
The framework in which his defence is cast is a sum- mary of the history of the .Jewish Church. In this re- spect it has only one parallel in the New Test., the elev- enth cha[)ter of the Kpistle to the Hebrews— a likeness that is the more noticeable, as, in all probability, the im- mediate writer of that epistle was, like Stephen, a Hel- lenist.
In the facts which he selects from this history' he is guided by two principles — at tirst more or less latent, but grailually becoming more and more apparent as he proceeds. The lirst is the endeavor to prove that, even in the previous .Jewish history, the presence and favor of (iod had not been contined to the Holy Land or the Temple of .Jerusalem. This he illustrates with a copi- ousness of detail which makes his speech a summary almost as mu<.'h of sacred geography as of sacred histo- ry—the appearance of (iod to .\l)raliam "in Mesopota- mia before he dvell in //(inm" (Acts vii, 2) ; his succes- sive migrations to ll<iran and to Canaan (ver. 4); his want of even ii rent inti-place for /linfoot in Canaan (ver. _ f)) ; the dwelling of his seeil in a slnnuje land (ver. (>) ; the details of the slay in Eifypt (ver. «-lH); the educa- tion of .MoM-s in Eijiipt (ver. •20-22); his exil(! in Miili- Mfi(vcr. 2'.M; the ap|iearaiic(; in .Siniii, with the declara- tion that liie denert t/ronnd was holy earth (y;/ ayta) (ver. 30-;i;{) ; the forty years in the vildivnesx (ver. M, 44); the lout; delay before the preparation for the Tab- ernacle of iMvid (ver. 4.')); the proclamation of spirit- ual worship even after the building of the Temple (ver. 47-.'^>»i).
The second principle of selection is based on the at- tempt to »how ilmt there was a tendency from the ear- liest times towards the same ungrateful and narrow
spirit that had appeared in this last stage of their po- litical existence. And this rigid, suspicious disposi- tion he contrasts with the freedom of the divine grace and of the human will, which were manifested in the exaltation of Abraham (Acts vii, 4), Joseph (ver. 10), and Moses (ver. 20 ), and in the jealousy and rebellion of the nation against these their greatest benefactors, as chicHy seen in the bitterness against Joseph (ver. 9) and Moses (ver. 27), and in the long neglect of true re- ligious worship in the wilderness (ver. 39-43).