Acts 6:9 – 7:2 — What Is Blasphemy? Lessons from Stephen Before the Sanhedrin

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 47:07 — 8.1MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Stephen, one of the seven servants the 12 picked to serve the Yerushalayim congregation, is brought before the Sanhedrin on a number of serious accusations that the law of God indicates are worthy of death. Before looking at his defense in Acts 7, we should look at what blasphemy is.

Download study notes in PDF format (Overview of the Accusations and “What is blasphemy?”).

Introduction and Setting

The study examines Acts 6:8–7:2 with a focus on Stephen’s trial before the Sanhedrin. The discussion traces the accusations against Stephen, their legal and theological background, and their connection to earlier trials of Yeshua (Jesus) and the apostles. Participants emphasize the relationship between the written Torah, later traditions, and the charge of blasphemy. The conversation also follows related themes such as the abomination of desolation, false witnesses, and the reputation of the name of God among the nations.

The meeting opens with prayer, asking God for understanding through the testimony of the apostles and specifically through Stephen’s example. Acts 6:8–15 and 7:1–2 (NASB 1995) set the primary text. Stephen appears “full of grace and power,” performing “great wonders and signs among the people” (Acts 6:8). Opposition arises from members of certain synagogues, who dispute with him but cannot withstand “the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking” (Acts 6:10). In response, they secretly induce men to bring charges of blasphemy.

Accusations Against Stephen

The text reports that men claim, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God” (Acts 6:11, NASB 1995). This leads to agitation among the people, elders, and scribes, and Stephen is seized and brought before the Council. False witnesses then testify, “This man incessantly speaks against this holy place and the Law; for we have heard him say that this Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place and alter the customs which Moses handed down to us” (Acts 6:13–14, NASB 1995).

These accusations have several elements: blasphemy against God, blasphemy against Moses, speech against the temple, and a threat to the “customs” associated with Moses. The group notes that these charges echo those brought against Yeshua. Statements such as “tear down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19, NASB 1995) reappear in distorted form. The witnesses report words that resemble what Yeshua actually said, but they remove his statements from their original context.

Parallels with Earlier Trials

Participants identify clear parallels between Stephen’s trial and previous trials of Yeshua and of Peter and John. False witnesses feature prominently in all of them. The pattern follows a familiar path: powerful signs and wonders provoke jealousy among religious leaders, who respond by stirring up opposition.

Several speakers link this to the Gospel trial narratives. The trial of Yeshua includes grave procedural failures. Capital cases occur at night, despite halakhic principles that forbid such practice. False witnesses appear, and their testimony does not agree (Mark 14:55–59). The study recalls that, under the Torah, false witnesses face the same penalty they seek for the accused. Deuteronomy 19:16–19 states that when a witness testifies falsely in a capital matter, “then you shall do to him just as he had intended to do to his brother” (NASB 1995). The severity of that standard raises questions about how the leaders in Acts handle witnesses and oaths. Either the court does not fully warn the witnesses, or the inducement to lie is so strong that the witnesses ignore the risk, assuming the process is a “kangaroo court” that will not enforce the Torah’s requirement.

Sanhedrin, Authority, and Corruption

Discussion turns to the Sanhedrin and its roots in the system of judges established under Moses. The structure originates in Exodus 18, when Yitro (Jethro) advises Moses to appoint capable men as leaders of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens. Over time this model develops into higher courts, culminating in the Great Sanhedrin. However, by the first century, this system has decayed. Historical sources and the Gospel narratives depict a leadership class that often misuses its authority.

Participants point out that the Sanhedrin still embodies a God-given ideal of ordered judgment. Yet the reality in the time of Yeshua and Stephen includes bribery, political maneuvering, and violation of due process. The presence of false witnesses at Stephen’s trial confirms this pattern. Another speaker notes a distinction between those secretly induced to spread accusations and the formal false witnesses presented in court. The multiplicity of groups involved highlights the complex machinery used to build a case.

Blasphemy: Greek and Hebrew Dimensions

The Greek term in Acts for “blasphemy” is βλασφημία (blasphēmia, “defamation, evil speech”). The study notes that in Greek usage this includes slander, impious speech, and actions that dishonor God. However, the Hebrew background adds nuance. Several Hebrew roots express forms of blasphemy or profanation, including:

• חלל ḥalal (“to profane” or “to make common”)
• גדף gādef (“to revile” or “to blaspheme”)
• נקב nāqab (“to curse by naming,” as in Leviticus 24:11, 16)
• קלל qillel (“to curse, treat lightly”)
• נאץ nā’ats (“to spurn, reject”)

These varied terms indicate different aspects of dishonoring God, whether through speech, action, or attitude. The charge against Stephen involves blasphemy “against Moses and against God” (Acts 6:11). This raises the question of what the accusers mean by “Moses.” One participant notes that many equate “Moses” directly with the written Torah (תּוֹרָה, Torah, “instruction”), while others extend “Moses” to include a broader body of tradition.

Torah, Oral Tradition, and Customs

The discussion moves to the distinction between the written Torah and later traditions. In the first century, many leaders speak of the “tradition of the elders” as if it descends uninterrupted from Moses. The Mishnah tractate Pirkei Avot (פרקי אבות, Pirkei Avot, “Sayings of the Fathers”) famously begins: “Moses received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets transmitted it to the men of the Great Assembly.” This chain treats Torah as a broad category that comes to include interpretive rulings and commentary.

The phrase “customs which Moses handed down to us” (Acts 6:14, NASB 1995) therefore sits at the center of the debate. The study notes that by the first century, fences have formed around the Torah. The elders prescribe additional regulations to protect the commandments. Over time, further commentary accumulates around these sayings. Later figures such as Rashi (רש״י, Rashi) receive high authority in interpretation, and subsequent interpreters feel bound to justify or elaborate upon their readings, even when those readings move away from the plain sense of the biblical text.

Several participants compare this development to Christian use of commentaries and sermon helps. Large collections of topical sermons can replace direct engagement with Scripture. People may rely on these secondary works instead of opening the Bible. The same dynamic appears in Jewish tradition when the Talmud and commentaries overshadow the Tanakh. The issue is not the existence of learned commentary, but its elevation to a functional replacement for the written word of God.

Yeshua, the Torah, and Misrepresentation

The group reflects on how Yeshua’s relationship to the Torah often suffers from misrepresentation. In the Gospels, Yeshua states, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill” (Matthew 5:17, NASB 1995). Yet the accusations against him, and later against his followers, claim that he opposes Moses and seeks to destroy the temple and the Torah.

Some streams of later Christian teaching appear to align with those ancient accusations. When believers treat the Torah as obsolete and set it aside in principle, observers can interpret this as evidence that Yeshua came to cancel God’s instructions. From the perspective raised in the study, such teaching inadvertently becomes a form of “false witness” about Yeshua’s true stance. This contrasts sharply with Deuteronomy 13:1–5, where God warns Israel not to follow a prophet who performs signs and wonders yet urges people to depart from God’s commandments. Deuteronomy 18:15–19 further announces a “prophet like” Moses whom God will raise up, commanding Israel to heed him. For Yeshua to fulfill this role, his ministry must align with the Torah, not contradict it.

The Abomination of Desolation and the Temple

The conversation moves to the “abomination of desolation” mentioned in Daniel and referenced by Yeshua (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14). Historically, one clear instance appears in the Maccabean period, when pagan sacrifice defiles the altar. Yet the group notes a broader pattern. The abomination arises when people exalt the temple structure above God Himself.

Jeremiah addresses this mentality when people chant, “This is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD” (Jeremiah 7:4, NASB 1995) while living in disobedience. God warns that He will make the house like Shiloh if the people do not listen (Jeremiah 7:12–14). The building becomes an idol. In such cases, God withdraws His presence. The word “desolate” then marks not only physical ruin but also the absence of the divine glory. One participant notes that when God leaves, desolation becomes inevitable, even before armies arrive.

Reference arises to a modern structure on the Temple Mount bearing an inscription denying that God has a son. The comment suggests that such a declaration, placed on the historic site of the temple, qualifies as an abomination. Another voice adds that many of the historical abominations arise as a result of the unfaithfulness of God’s own people, not only of foreign powers. This highlights the repeated cycle: idolatry, judgment, desolation, and eventual restoration.

Stephen’s Appearance and Prophetic Role

Acts 6:15 reports, “And fixing their gaze on him, all who were sitting in the Council saw his face like the face of an angel” (NASB 1995). The study explores the meaning of this description. In much popular thinking, angels seem gentle and comforting. In Scripture and Jewish tradition, encounters with angels often inspire fear. Their appearance reflects heavenly glory and burning holiness.

Traditional Jewish sources sometimes describe Moses and other great figures with a radiant or angelic countenance. A cited rabbinic passage portrays Moses’ face as shining like the sun, resembling an angel of God. Another source states that when Moses and Aaron stand before Pharaoh, they appear like ministering angels. When Stephen’s face shines like that, the leadership receives a clear signal. A prophetic figure stands before them. The text later notes that Stephen’s words “cut to the quick” (Acts 7:54, NASB 1995), echoing the effect of the prophets whose messages confronted Israel’s leaders.

Paul, Gamaliel, and Insider Testimony

The study considers how the early community gains detailed knowledge of what happens inside the Sanhedrin. The Gospels and Acts provide fairly precise dialogue from closed sessions. Several internal witnesses likely carry this information. Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus appear as members of the Council who show sympathy to Yeshua (Luke 23:50–51; John 3:1–2; 19:39). In Acts, Gamaliel emerges as a respected Pharisee and teacher of the law who warns the Council not to fight against God (Acts 5:34–39).

Saul of Tarsus (Paul) studies under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Acts 7:58 and 8:1 show Saul present at Stephen’s execution, approving of his death. The study infers that Saul likely belongs to the Council or at least participates in its deliberations. These figures, once brought to faith or sympathetic to the movement, can later recount the inner workings and conversations of the Sanhedrin. This explains how the believing community knows what God spoke through His servants in that setting.

The Name of God and Witness Among the Nations

In the latter part of the discussion, attention shifts to Romans 2:17–24. Paul addresses those who boast in the law and see themselves as guides to the blind. He asks whether they obey the very commandments they teach: “You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?” (Romans 2:21–22, NASB 1995). He concludes, “For ‘THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU,’ just as it is written” (Romans 2:24, NASB 1995), echoing passages in Ezekiel 20, 36, and 39.

The “name” (שֵׁם, shem, “name, reputation”) of God includes His character, reputation, and perceived identity. When those who claim to belong to Him live in hypocrisy or lawlessness, observers form a distorted picture of who God is. If people associate His name with injustice, hardness, or deceit, they blaspheme that name, even if they speak it often. In that sense, blasphemy includes not only explicit curses but also misrepresentation through conduct. The participants liken believers to ambassadors. As representatives of Messiah, they carry His policy, character, and message. Their lives communicate what kind of God they serve.

Works of the Law and Growth in Obedience

The study briefly connects the phrase “works of the law” (ἔργα νόμου, erga nomou) in Paul’s letters to emerging first-century discussions about identity markers and community boundaries. Some texts from Qumran use a similar expression to refer to specific practices that define membership. Certain works, such as circumcision, derive directly from the Torah, yet function as entry requirements or status badges.

In Acts 15, the apostles insist that faith in Messiah is the primary and necessary threshold for inclusion. New believers then learn and grow in obedience over time, as they hear Moses read every Shabbat (Acts 15:19–21). A participant ties this to Peter’s exhortation to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18, NASB 1995). Growth replaces graduation. The process continues throughout life.

Conclusion

The study of Acts 6:8–7:2 thus brings multiple themes together. Stephen stands accused of blasphemy against God, Moses, the temple, and the customs tied to Moses. The charges rely on twisted reports of Yeshua’s words and on a blurred line between written Torah and later traditions. Stephen’s radiant face signals a genuine prophetic witness, in continuity with Moses and the earlier prophets, confronting the leaders of Israel with their history of resisting God’s messengers.

The examination of blasphemy, false witness, and the abomination of desolation underscores how quickly symbols and institutions can replace the God they were meant to serve. The reflection on Romans 2 and the “name” of God emphasizes the responsibility of all who claim to belong to Him. Actions either honor or profane that name before the nations. In this context, Stephen’s trial becomes not only a historical episode but also a mirror, challenging contemporary believers to test their loyalty to Scripture, to avoid exalting tradition or structure above God, and to represent His character faithfully in word and deed.

Speaker: Jeff.