audio version

Stephen had been a relatively recent addition to the disciples of Christ and member at Jerusalem. By that I mean we don’t read of him in any of the Gospels, so he had not risen to prominence among the apostles while Jesus ministered among them. He was apparently not an ordained pastor/evangelist; but he was an ordained deacon of the church. He was a servant of the Lord and of His assembly in the capitol city of Judah. Oh, but what a man of God he was; what an example of what we all should be. Acts 6 describes him as a man “full of faith and power” – a man of Holy Spirit wisdom. When the wicked looked at him, it was as though they were looking into the face of one of God’s angels.

Stephen may not have been a preacher of the church, but he wasn’t shy to defend the name of his Saviour. Whether by choice or by providence, it was the will of God that he became embroiled in a dispute with the leadership of the Libertine synagogue – and with Saul of Tarsus. He so thoroughly defeated the corrupted logic of the Pharisees that they had him brought before the Sanhedrin council. Then in chapter 7 he began the defense of his behavior, his doctrines and his faith. That apologetic, although not quite a sermon, took on a sermonic form, flowing along logically, explaining and expounding some of the familiar history of Israel. But with verse 51, Stephen changed his tactics and attitude. The difference between that verse and the preceding verses was like night and day. All of a sudden, like the first, brilliant lightning bolt on an unsuspecting corn field, Stephen brought new and very harsh words crashing down upon his audience.

I have found three explanations for this day-to-night change. Some critics say that Stephen could see that his hearers were getting angry or bored, and if he didn’t change his tune very quickly he wasn’t going to be able to finish his song. Others say that Luke edited Stephen’s sermon. They say that between verses 50 and 51 were another 50 verses. They say that the missing section brought the message higher and higher and prepared his hearers for the charge of “resisting the Holy Spirit.” To this last idea I give no credence at all. If it was the Holy Spirit’s purpose to give us Stephen’s message, tere would be no point in quoting the introduction without sharing the reason for the introduction and setting up the punch-line. And although his audience probably was getting a little restless, it is not necessary to say that Stephen had to skip point number two because of the crowd.

I think that it was just that Stephen’s preaching style was different from mine and most other preachers. I think that he intended to soothe and calm the scribes, priests and lawyers, and then when they weren’t really paying attention to slap them across their collective faces. It may not have been my style, but it was certainly effective. Stephen was charged with blasphemy against God, the law and the temple. And he answered those charges. And then just about everything he said after talking about Abraham were charges against his accusers. They were stiff-necked, wicked-hearted and resistant to the Spirit of God. Although Stephen’s sermon was cut off, it wasn’t after his introduction, it came after his accusations and before he could make his planned application.

Please take note that I’m not bringing you this message today, in order to feed your mind. My intention is not simply to help you understand this sermon which was preached so many years ago. What Stephen declared to those people, can and must be preached today – over and over again. Because although some of the details have changed, the general principles apply to modern Americans as much as to the Jews of two thousand years ago. This message is entitled: “Stephen’s Charges Against Israel (AND US).”

Notice Stephen’s reference to their UNTAMED hearts.

“Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.” What does he mean when he declares that the leaders of Israel were stiff-necked? Well, it certainly wasn’t a medical term. Most of us have gotten out of bed some morning and found it painful or difficult to turn our heads. Maybe that was just a temporary, or one-time thing, because we slept in a funny position. And then for some of us it’s not a temporary or a one time problem – it is chronic. But the problem to which Stephen refers is not related to physical necks.

This is a very common Old Testament phrase, and it relates to an ox or some other animal which refused to wear its yoke and to pull the plow or the wagon. Moses and the Lord often used these words to describe the rebellious children of Israel. Listen to just one passage from Isaiah: “Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the LORD, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness. For they call themselves of the holy city, and stay themselves upon the God of Israel; The LORD of hosts is his name. I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went forth out of my mouth, and I shewed them; I did them suddenly, and they came to pass. Because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass; I have even from the beginning declared it to thee.” When Stephen described Israel as “stiffnecked,” he was using language which these rabbi’s knew well.

But how well does this term apply to us and to the millions of Americans around us? “Why is the house of God forsaken?” Because of the stiff necks of those who profess to be “Christians.” And why do so many refuse to be baptized? Belay the excuses; it’s because people are so stiff-necked. Why is the teaching, preaching and study of the Word of God so hated? Because of stubborn hearts.

Remember that these people to whom Stephen was addressing had heard the Christians before. Some had heard the Pentecostal sermon; others had heard Peter as he stood before the Beautiful Gate. Then Peter and John had been arrested and forced to stand before this same council, declaring that “Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God.” Then again in Acts 5 the Apostles were called before the Sanhedrin. And these same priests and rabbis, senators and lawyers were cut to the heart by the message of God. There was only one way they could reject and resist what they were hearing – they had bowed their necks and refused the yoke.

Stephen charged them with UNCIRCUMCISED hearts. This, too, is not a new charge, even though Peter might not have used those words so far in Acts. This is Old Testament language, once again. When God was reiterating the law, this is the way that He put it in Leviticus 26: “If they shall confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers, with their trespass which they trespassed against me, and that also they have walked contrary unto me; And that I also have walked contrary unto them, and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity: Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land.” Israel was supposed to wear in their bodies a symbol of the nation’s allegiance to Jehovah. And it became a matter of pride for those men. But the outward symbols of religion don’t necessarily mean the presence of true fellowship with God. As Leviticus puts it – a circumcised heart is a humble heart: “If then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity: then will I remember my covenant.” How many people today are in their various religious houses, but with their hearts elsewhere? How many people come to THIS church but whose hearts are uncircumcised? They aren’t “seeking first the kingdom of God and his righteousness.” They aren’t as dedicated to the Lord as the Lord is dedicated to them. Stephen could have been preaching this message in a modern day Baptist church or in a conference filled with Baptist preachers.

The third charge Stephen leveled against his accusers was that they RESISTED THE HOLY GHOST. This was the theme of the much of the previous 50 verses. But what is it to resist the Holy Spirit? This is one of those bipolar doctrines. There is a sense in which it is impossible to resist or reject the Lord. But obviously, that is not the aspect to which Stephen refers. There is a common denial of what the Holy Spirit has said in the Word of God. There is a common resistence against the whisper of the Spirit in the hearts of all men. But then there the irresistible power of the infinite Spirit of God, which cannot be denied. These are two distinct and separate works of the Spirit. Stephen refers to the first.

The proof of this charge of resistance was then laid out at the feet of the Sanhedrin.

They had rejected the LAW; they rejected the PROPHETS – and they rejected the SAVIOUR. “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.”

The word “disposition” is found only one time in the entire New Testament, and it is somewhat mysterious. I am told that the root meaning of the Greek word speaks about “arrangement,” “order” and “rank.” But there are some experts who think that is has something to do with order – in the sense of “ordination.” Clearly, when Moses climbed to the top of Mt. Sinai, it was not to have a meeting with God’s angels. It was Jehovah who gave to Israel the law, and one copy was even written with the finger of the Lord. But that leads us to think about the Second Person of the Trinity, the Lord Jesus Christ. And in the Old Testament, the Lord Jesus is frequently called THE Angel of the Lord.” In Galatians the Apostle Paul was arguing about the misuse of the law. There have been people in every age since Moses who believed that in keeping the law there was leverage to make God become gracious towards them. That is a lie right out of the mouth of Satan himself, and Paul fought the idea ferociously. In the midst of one of his arguments Paul said to the Galatians: “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.” Again later in Hebrews he said, “Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward; How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him.”

Whether with the testimony of angels, or by the direct gift of the Angel of God, has been given the law of the Lord, first to Israel and through them to all of us. And I’m sure that if you had a chance to talk with the Caiaphas, the high priest of Israel, or if you could chat with Gamaliel or the ruler of the temple, who was supervising this trial; If Saul or any of the others who were present at this meeting talked to you, they would almost universally SAY that were striving to keep the law of the Lord. But Stephen declared that they were NOT. The traditions and customs of the Jews had provided them with hundreds of ways to circumvent the dictates of the law. The Lord Jesus, in His “Sermon on the Mount,” pointed out that even when they obeyed the letter of the law they denied and broke the spirit of the law. “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, it him it is sin.” “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law, for sin is the transgression of the law.” And “all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Solomon, the wisest of all the men of his generation testified, “there is no man that sinneth not.” “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.”

Most people don’t like to be told that they are “sinners,” or that they are breaking God’s law. How many homosexuals try to tell us what they are doing does not contradict God’s will? The millions of couples who are living together as man and wife who aren’t man and wife, don’t want to hear that they aren’t keeping God’s law. The millions of women giving birth to babies outside of marriage, don’t want to be told that they are sinners and breaking the law given by the disposition of angels. The world doesn’t want to hear this sort of message, especially if they pride themselves on their religion, the way that these Jewish rulers did.

But they were resisting the Holy Ghost by not keeping the law, and by rejecting the PROPHETS. Throughout the Old Testament, the fathers and grand-fathers of the men facing Stephen had either turned their backs or literally killed the men sent by God to call them back to righteousness. “Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One.” I notice that Stephen called the murderers YOUR fathers” rather than OUR fathers.” It wasn’t that he wasn’t an Israelite, but it broke Stephen’s heart to think about what the fathers had done. He was living in repentance – as much as one man can repent on behalf of an entire nation. But the rulers of Israel in Stephen’s day were behaving just the same way that the rulers behaved in the days of Jeremiah and so many other servants of the Lord.

But what was even worse, these people had personally betrayed and murdered of the Just One, the Messiah, the Anointed of the Lord, the Son of God, the Redeemer. What can more clearly prove the charge that they were resisting the Holy Ghost. They stoned the men to who prophesied of His coming, and they delivered Messiah to the Romans for crucifixion when He finally did come. We see that Stephen’s message before the council was essentially the same as that of Peter and the rest of the Apostles.

Stephen wasn’t very careful about what he said, except to make sure that it was the truth. The charge of blasphemy which had already been leveled against him, was a capital crime. And he wasn’t convinced that he’d be FOUND not guilty, even though he was NOT guilty. He felt that he had nothing to loose except for the smile of the Lord, if he failed to tell these reprobates “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”

Unfortunately, he didn’t get to finish the rest of his message.

And since we don’t have his sermon notes before us, I hope that you will forgive me for putting words in his dying mouth. But I feel confident that if Stephen had a chance to finish what he was saying it would have been something like the conclusion to Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost. “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.” When Peter referred to “this untoward generation” he was talking about the very people before whom Stephen was standing. “Save yourselves from the leadership and influence of this perverse and crooked bunch of false teachers.”