Page 44 - Acts Student Textbook

How does Luke introduce us to Saul?

This Scripture introduces us to Saul of Tarsus. Luke says the witnesses laid their garments at the feet
of Saul of Tarsus. It is clear that Stephen’s death made a great impression on Saul for he later
mentioned that he had consented to Stephen’s death (22:20). Holding the coats of those who did the
actual killing was a form of fellowship. As such it helps us understand how people can be guilty of sin
without physically doing it. To support or encourage those who sin is to be guilty ourselves (2 John 9-
11; Rom. 1:32; Eph. 5:11; 2Cor. 6:14-7:1).

In which way can we say that Stephen died like Jesus? (7:59-60)

Stephen called on Jesus to receive his spirit as he was being stoned. This shows that Stephen
expected his spirit to continue to exist after death. It is also similar to Jesus’ statement as He died,
calling upon His Father to receive His spirit (Luke 23:46).

Stephen died, calling on the Lord to not lay the sin to their charge. Jesus did the same as He died on
the cross (Luke 23:34). The first recorded Christian martyr died much like His Master had died. Such
willingness to forgive is an overwhelming example to us all.

Did Stephen share an accurate Old Testament history?

Yes he did! Pratte makes an interesting apologetic point here against the accusation that Stephen
was not accurate in his narration of the Old Testament history, “Regarding Stephen’s defense,
Stringer points out that some points of Stephen’s account are hard to reconcile with Old Testament
history. Some have used this to claim that Stephen was not inspired in his speech. However,
Stephen’s message had been confirmed by miracles (6:8), showing he was guided by the Spirit.
Several verses state or imply he was inspired by the Spirit (7:55; 6:10). As Stringer points out,
Stephen was on trial before the most learned scholars of the Old Testament that existed in that day.
They were determined to find fault with him, even to the point of bringing false witnesses against
him. If he made any real blunder in his account of Old Testament history, they would have
immediately jumped on it and used it to discredit him. But no such statements ever happened. It
follows that they found nothing objectionable in his account. This means that any apparent conflict
with Old Testament accounts is not a real conflict but simply the result of a lack of knowledge on our
part. Or in some other reasonable way, the accounts can be harmonized, whether or not we
28
ourselves are aware of the exact way to harmonize them.”

Stephen’s Old Testament Defense of Christ – Part 2

28 Ibid, (p. 112).
43