Stephen is often used in church as the “first Christian martyr”. Because in church we are taught that Jesus/Yeshua came and changed the Law or ended it or made a new Law, when Stephen is portrayed like this we think he is standing up for those thoughts. However, here in Acts we can see this is not the case. Stephen is first accused of teaching against the Law and teaching that Yeshua will change it. Then when he is challenged on it, he teaches the story of Israel and then accuses the leaders who are putting him on trial that they are in fact the ones not keeping the Law. This is what set the leaders off.

Just like in Yeshua’s teachings against the Pharisees, the problem with many of the religious leaders at the time is that they were following their own law and equating breaking that law as sin (see Mark 7). This is something I have brought up before and something that isn’t taught in church. This is why Paul seems to be talking against God’s Law, the Torah, the Law of Moses. When he is, in fact, talking about the “traditions of men” as Yeshua puts it. He is calling it law because he is a Pharisee (Acts 22:3, 23:6, Phillipians 3:5). Interesting point on that, he never says he is no longer a Pharisee.

We don’t know a lot about Stephen, just about a chapter and a half of text on him. We do know from that text that he held that Torah was still to be followed and wasn’t changed and that Yeshua is the Messiah.