Strange Story: Stephen Was Not Stoned; He Was Murdered with Stones (Part 2)

HOW DID STONING WORK?

First the key witnesses presented their evidence to the leaders of the community. The one who was accused always had an opportunity to state his side of the situation. If the evidence of the accusers was considered sufficiently sound, and if the crime merited stoning based on the Law of Moses, the town leaders would pronounce stoning as the sentence.

From there everyone who had gathered would take the guilty person outside the city. This was prescribed in the Law as well, for taking a life inside the city would make the city “unclean.” They always used a place with an elevation difference, preferably about twice the height of a man. The prisoner was bound and shoved to the bottom of the ravine or cliff, etc. They could also throw him over the city wall and throw stones at him from the top of the wall, but that would require having a stash of stones ready for such an event, which is a possibility. We have no way of knowing exactly where they took Stephen but something comes up later that helps us know he was not thrown from the city wall.

The primary witness was the first one to throw a stone, followed by the secondary and tertiary witnesses, etc. In the end, anyone who had a cursory knowledge of the situation and was in agreement with the verdict, could throw a stone. Bystanders who had no knowledge of the situation could not participate. But each “witness” only got one stone. If they missed, they did not get a second chance. If the criminal lived through the stoning, they had to stop trying to kill him. If he was covered with a pile of stones but still alive, he might die from his wounds or from starvation. If relatives were willing to take on some of the shame of the accused, or if they thought he was innocent, they could pull stones off the pile in hopes of uncovering their relative while he was still alive. The death of the criminal depended largely on the number of people willing to serve as witnesses and cast one stone. Therefore, stoning was not 100% certain in its outcome. We get the idea that most of the people who were stoned in the Old Testament era did die, but the possibility of surviving it did exist.

THE UNIQUNESS OF THIS SITUATION

Keep in mind the following facts. Only those inside the chamber of the Sanhedrin had heard the “blasphemy”, so they were the only witnesses that had knowledge of the crime. There were 71 of them but most of them were very old, incapable of throwing a large or medium-size stone and very bad at hitting their target with a small stone. But they had lots of authority, and they were very, very angry. They really, really wanted this man dead. They thought they had gotten rid of Jesus, but his followers kept doing miracles just like Jesus had. That scared them. And this simpleton’s boldness also scared them. Just like what had happened on Pentecost, this guy was trying to pin on them the death of a man the general populous considered innocent.

DID ROME ALLOW THE JEWS TO CARRY OUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?

We know from the Biblical narrative of the crucifixion of Jesus that the answer is “No, only the Romans could execute someone.”

However, stoning was a unique situation in that death was not assured. When the Romans executed someone, he died. No chance of survival. But in a stoning, the chance did exist and the participants were expected to follow the rules and allow the person to live if that is the way it turned out. So it appears that the Romans may have allowed some stonings to happen because the practice existed in a nebulous legal middle ground. We know the people tried to stone Jesus at one point, Paul was stoned in a different part of the Roman empire (and survived with God’s help), and we have this incident with Stephen. In each of these three cases recorded in the New Testament, the Romans looked the other way.

So why didn’t the Jewish leaders just stone Jesus instead of crucifying him? I believe the answer is that they wanted an assured outcome. They did not want to take the chance of him possibly surviving the stoning. And they did not want His disciples to come at night and dig Jesus’ body out of the pile of stones and claim that he had risen from the dead. Therefore, they pressured the Roman authority (Pilot) to give Jesus a true, inescapable Roman execution.

STEPHEN FINALLY FELL TO HIS KNEES

It is interesting that, up to this point, Stephen had remained standing. That fits what I said about the old men being incapable of hurling stones with deadly force. This also tells us that they did not throw him off the city wall.

I envision it happening like this. The old Rabbis of the Sanhedrin acted in fury. They rushed Stephen to the place designated for stonings and were breathing heavily by the time they got there. Right away they ordered that Stephen’s feet to be bound, and that he be cast into the lower area, wherever that was. His hands were already bound. Then they began to throw whatever stones they could throw. But they were completely ineffective and became winded very quickly.

Then they began to command their assistants and others that had come with them to cast bigger stones. Some of those people may have resisted at first, saying, “But I was not in the chamber, so I am not a witness to his crime.” The old Rabbis responded, “Just do what I tell you! Believe me, this man deserves to die.” So the servants, assistants, and anyone else that had come with them slowly began to do as they were commanded. I believe that is when Stephen said his prayer asking God receiving his spirit. He could see what the outcome would be now that anyone and everyone was getting involved.

STEPHEN WAS BEING LIKE JESUS

Stephen had wanted to die well, to honor his Lord in his final moments. And he did! God had allowed him to see a glimpse of God’s glory in heaven, and Jesus had stood up to indicate that He wanted to help Stephen go through this trial in the right way. Through this act of asking for mercy instead of full consequences, Stephen was showing everyone what Jesus is like and what God is like.

THIS WAS NOT DONE THE RIGHT WAY

The word chosen for the end of this short sentence is very important. It means “to take away” and refers to “the taking of a life, either by execution at the hands of the authorities, or of the destruction of a life through nefarious means.”  That is why this word is sometimes rendered “murder.” The Jews did not have the authority to execute someone in a fail-safe way, but that is what they turned this into. They made sure this man did not survive; that is an execution, not a stoning.

Earlier, in verse 59, the verb for stoning is used in the imperfect form (continued action in the past). That makes the second time in this passage that verb is used in the Imperfect. By itself, this would not be enough to make an issue of, but the use of the word “murder” here in 8:1, helps us think back just a little bit and realize verse 59 was a hint that things were not being done properly.

Dr. Luke wrote this in a such a way that a reader who is well-informed about Jewish law and customs would begin to wonder about the appropriateness of what happened. Then at the end, he reveals that any such questions are well-founded. The Sanhedrin over-stepped their bounds and did not follow the Law they so vehemently defended. They broke the law in the process of killing a man for breaking the law.