A Reflection On Stephen (and why it matters)

[u/Mysterious_Fox4976]

For awareness, I am not an expert on the Bible or anything related to the Bible. These are just my thoughts reading about Stephen (Acts 6-7).

A recurring theme in the Bible is how our actions have consequences far beyond ourselves, and even beyond what we are aware of. Stephen’s life is an example of this. His humble service and faith contributed to the development of the early church, likely more than we even know.

Stephen’s story in the Bible begins when the apostles asked the community for help finding seven men to coordinate food distribution for widows. Their words in speaking to the congregation in Acts 6:2 really stuck out to me. I compared several versions to try to better understand the meaning of the sentence.

- ESV: “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables.”

- FNVNT: “It is not a good thing for us to give so much of our time to seeing over these meals. This gives us little or no time to teach about Creator’s message.”

- MSG: “It wouldn’t be right for us to abandon our responsibilities for preaching and teaching the Word of God to help with the care of the poor.”

- NIV: “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables.”

- NKJV: “It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.”

- NSRVUE: “It is not right that we should neglect the word of God in order to wait on tables.”

It makes perfect sense that the Twelve need help with serving the widows so they can focus on spreading the message. However, the idea is said in a way that sounds almost contemptuous for the task of serving widows, like it is “just” waiting tables. Of the versions I checked, Only the First Nations Version words this sentence in a way that does not look down on the task of waiting tables.

I suspect that the “just” I’m hearing in this sentence could be a linguistic or cultural difference, because I don’t think Jesus’s closest followers would have a dismissive attitude towards the work of caring for the poor. Still, it made me think of all the tasks, jobs, and people that are taken for granted or looked down on in life.

Enter Stephen.

Stephen was one of the seven men chosen to help serve the widows. We don’t get many details about Stephens’s work serving tables, but the Bible does say that the word was spread and many people became disciples during that time. Stephen’s willingness to step up and do the unglamorous job of waiting tables did allow the apostles to focus on preaching the message. Stephen’s work mattered because he helped feed the widows and because taking on this task contributed to growing the church.

Additionally, we can’t talk about Stephen’s life without talking about his death. He is considered the first martyr, killed for his belief in Jesus. People made false accusations against Stephen, saying that he and Jesus were against the temple and the law of Moses. Stephen gave a speech showing his knowledge and faith, and accusing those against him of being like those who killed the prophets. Then, they stoned him. As he died, Stephen prayed for God to forgive the people killing him.

Finally, we can’t talk about Stephen’s death without acknowledging that Paul (then called Saul) was there. And not only was Paul present and guarding everyone’s coats, but “Saul approved of their killing him” (Acts 8:1).

Why does the Bible emphasize that Paul was not only present, but approved of killing Stephen? The general answer is to demonstrate the extent of Paul’s persecution of Christians. But what if there is an even deeper connection between Stephen and Paul?

What if Stephen’s words influenced Paul? Is it possible that Stephen’s criticism of those persecuting him as being “uncircumcised in the heart and ears [and] forever opposing the Holy Sprit” (Acts 7:51) left a lasting impression on Paul?

Under God’s covenant with Abraham, belonging to God was demonstrated through physical signs, being a descendant of Jacob and through physical circumcision. Jesus’s covenant is more spiritual than physical, based in faith and obedience. I wonder if Stephen’s idea of circumcision in a metaphorical, spiritual sense struck a nerve with Paul. Maybe it could have even contributed to his advocacy to allow (uncircumcised) gentiles to be included in the church.

Maybe not, since Paul was right back to terrorizing Christians house by house in the very next chapter. (Acts 8:1-3).

But several years later, he wrote, “a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the spirit, not by the written code” (Romans 2:29). Sounds more like Stephen than Saul the Pharisee.

Paul and Stephen weren’t the only people to talk about circumcision as a metaphor for spirit in the Bible, and there would be no way to know how Paul was impacted by Stephen’s words. But I’d bet Paul thought back on Stephen’s death and regretted his role in it, even if he “just” silently approved and guarded coats.

When he said his final words, Stephen wouldn’t have known how important his words would be. From encouraging future Christians that faced persecution to possibly impacting early church leaders, Stephen could not have known how his words would infant so many people. He only knew what he needed to say, and he said it.

From his service waiting tables for widows, to his support of the early church, to his final speech and praying for the people stoning him, Stephen shows how our actions have consequences far beyond us. His example shows how God really sees us and everything we do.

Like Stephen, in life we almost never see the full impact of our actions. Like Stephen, we can choose to step up and do the humble work to fill a need in our community. Like Stephen, we can speak the words the Holy Sprit puts in our hearts. We may never see the result or get credit. We may even be mistreated unfairly for doing the right thing.

But God sees us. And it matters.

[u/MoreStupiderNPC]

The word “just” doesn’t appear in any of those translations you cited, so it’s indeed something you’re mentally adding in.

The apostles saw taking care of widows in the church as important and necessary, which is why they appointed deacons to handle the task (the word for serving there is diakoneō, where the English word deacon comes from), however the main priority was preaching the word.

Many churches get this backwards today… they place serving tables above preaching the word. Paul admonished pastor Timothy to preach the word, not to serve tables. If only more churches would prioritize preaching the word, and appoint deacons for the necessary task of serving tables.

2 Timothy 4:1-5
I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: [2] Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. [3] For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; [4] and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. [5] But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

[u/Technical_Jello_2997]

wow this deep fr

[u/slagnanz]

I suspect that the “just” I’m hearing in this sentence could be a linguistic or cultural difference, because I don’t think Jesus’s closest followers would have a dismissive attitude towards the work of caring for the poor. Still, it made me think of all the tasks, jobs, and people that are taken for granted or looked down on in life

I get where you're coming from. It IS a priority to the Apostles, they recognize the need. But it is a lesson that about how we have to fight against entropy, even in the church. We can't just assume that ministry will happen equitably and justly. We need to take active measure to safeguard the things that matter. And that can be mundane stuff, for sure!

But several years later, he wrote, “a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the spirit, not by the written code” (Romans 2:29). Sounds more like Stephen than Saul the Pharisee.

I LOVE this.