Why does Stephen begin his defense with a question in Acts 7:1? Contextual Overview: Acts 6:8 – 7:2 Stephen, “full of grace and power” (6:8), is arraigned before the Sanhedrin on the twin accusations of blasphemy against Moses and the temple (6:11–14). As required by Deuteronomy 19:16–17 and later codified in Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:1, the high priest opens formal examination with a direct question: “Are these charges true?” (Acts 7:1). Luke’s precision in recording this mirrors contemporaneous Greco-Roman trial protocols, underscoring the historical reliability long affirmed by the early papyri (P45, c. AD 200) and Codex Vaticanus (4th cent.). Legal Necessity: Due Process in the Sanhedrin Jewish law demanded that the accused be invited to speak before any verdict (Exodus 23:1; Deuteronomy 1:16–17). By posing a question, the high priest satisfies that legal step. Stephen’s subsequent speech (7:2-53) is therefore framed not as an unsolicited sermon but as a legitimate legal defense within Second-Temple jurisprudence, corroborated by Josephus (Antiquities 20.9.1) and the Dead Sea Scroll 4QMMT, which outline similar procedures. Rhetorical Strategy: Turning Interrogation into Proclamation Rather than giving a terse “yes” or “no,” Stephen leverages the opening question to seize the rhetorical initiative. Like the prophets before him (cf. Isaiah 1:18; Micah 6:1-2), he converts a courtroom inquiry into a covenant lawsuit against the nation. By recounting Israel’s redemptive history, he reframes the indictment: the real transgressors are those resisting God’s appointed deliverers. Prophetic Pattern: Questions as Divine Invitations to Self-Examination From Genesis 3:9 (“Where are you?”) to Malachi 1:2 (“How have You loved us?”), Scripture employs questions to expose hearts. Stephen follows this prophetic template. The high priest’s question becomes God’s invitation for the council to examine its own covenant infidelity—a pattern echoed by Jesus’ counter-questions in His own trial (Matthew 26:62-64). Establishing Common Ground: “Brothers and Fathers” Stephen’s first words, “Brothers and fathers, listen” (Acts 7:2), echo Greco-Roman forensic oratory (cf. Acts 22:1) and Rabbinic courtesy. This respectful address gains a hearing, lowers defensiveness, and demonstrates obedience to 1 Peter 3:15—defense “with gentleness and respect.” Modern behavioral research on persuasion confirms that identification with the audience markedly increases receptivity. Didactic Function: Reviewing Redemptive History to Reframe the Charges The question permits Stephen to display exhaustive Scripture knowledge: • Abraham (7:2-8) answers the temple charge—God met the patriarch in Mesopotamia. • Joseph (7:9-16) parallels Christ—rejected yet exalted. • Moses (7:17-43) shows repeated rejection of God’s deliverer, undermining the blasphemy accusation. • Tabernacle and temple (7:44-50) prove God is not confined to stone, echoing Isaiah 66:1-2 (quoted verbatim). Thus, the question opens a didactic platform that dismantles each allegation point-by-point. Psychological Dynamic: Question-Driven Cognitive Dissonance As a behavioral scientist, one notes that an open question engages the hearer’s evaluative faculties, producing internal dissonance when personal history conflicts with new evidence. Stephen exploits this, leading his listeners from shared narrative to an unavoidable verdict: “You always resist the Holy Spirit” (7:51). Christological Trajectory: Aligning Stephen’s Defense with Jesus’ Resurrection By accepting the high priest’s question, Stephen identifies with Christ, who likewise responded under oath (Mark 14:61-62). Stephen’s climactic vision—“I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God” (7:56)—is admissible testimony under Jewish law requiring two witnesses: Stephen and the heavenly Christ. This reinforces the resurrection reality attested by “over five hundred brethren at once” (1 Corinthians 15:6) and precisely the minimal-facts data set reviewed in modern resurrection scholarship. Missiological Consequence: Catalyst for Global Evangelism The forced clarity the question brings results in Stephen’s martyrdom, scattering believers (Acts 8:1-4) and fulfilling Jesus’ mandate to be witnesses “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). God sovereignly employs a courtroom question to propel the gospel’s expansion, mirroring Genesis 50:20—human evil, divine good. Conclusion Stephen begins his defense with a question because the high priest’s inquiry is legally mandatory, rhetorically opportune, prophetically patterned, psychologically strategic, theologically loaded, and missiologically potent. The Spirit turns a procedural formality into a redemptive megaphone, vindicating both Scripture’s internal coherence and the risen Christ who stands to welcome His faithful witness. |
    |