,

When Was Stephen Stoned?

Therefore, Stephen was stoned in the fall of 34 or 35 CE at the latest (depending upon the year Jesus began his public ministry 27 or 28 CE). This would put Caiaphas as High Priest at the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:1). Jonathan would be the new High Priest in 36 CE in Acts 9:1,…

Most scholarship, I believe, puts the stoning of Stephen in 34 or 35 AD. Is there reason within the Scriptures to substantiate this claim? Yes, I believe there is! However, such substantiation comes from prophecy in both Old and New Testaments, but the understanding of these very prophecies is clouded by the interpretation of most scholarship, which puts the fulfillment of them at the second coming of Jesus.

I have written similar posts which had to do with Stephen’s death back in November of 2009. However, I think I should be clearer on this matter in order to have a better understanding of the timeline of early Acts with a particular interest in the placement of the High Priests for Stephen’s death, Paul’s persecution of the Jewish believers in Jesus in Acts 9:1, and when the “peace” occurred in Acts 9:31.

The Seventy Weeks Prophecy of Daniel 9 was supposed to offer the believer the identity of the Messiah by showing the exact time in which he would appear. The 70 Weeks Prophecy begins with the first sacrifice offered on the rebuilt altar on the Temple mount when Joshua, the High Priest, and Zerubbabel returned from the captivity. The Jews began to make daily offerings to God from the first day of the seventh month upon their return from captivity (Ezra 3:6). This is a very important date, as it represents the first time in decades that worship of the God of Israel was offered from the Temple mount, and it represents the “firstfruits” of the decree of the emperor, which I believe is implied in the prophecy. So, the date of the decree itself is not important, but date of the firstfruits of that decree is the important part of the prophecy in terms of when it begins. The Messiah was to come at the beginning of the 70th week or 483 years after the first sacrifice was offered by the returning captives.

No matter which year one chooses to begin the 70 Weeks Prophecy, the 484th year must begin in the fall and on the Feast of Trumpets. I submit that from Luke 4:16 and up to Luke 6:49 Luke shows Jesus beginning his ministry on the Feast of Trumpets (Luke 4:16) and each Sabbath mentioned thereafter is either an annual Holy Day or a seventh day Sabbath. The odd “second Sabbath after the first” in Luke 6:1 is the seventh day Sabbath which occurred in that year back to back with the annual Day of Atonement, a fast day, which is why the Apostles were hungry and began to take some grain from the fields on the Sabbath day, rubbing it in their hands and eating the kernels.

Anyway, long-story-short, 3 ½ years later Jesus was crucified, and the 70 Weeks prophecy foretold the Messiah would be ‘cut’ (offered for the covenant) in the midst or the middle of the prophetic week (Daniel 9:26-27). The 70th week comprises 7 years, 3 ½ of which represented Jesus public ministry culminating in his crucifixion and resurrection. Notice in Luke 10:18 that Jesus said he beheld Satan like lightning fall from heaven. This is shown in Revelation 12:7-10 where Michael/Jesus makes war with Satan. Now I am not saying Jesus is an angelic being, but I am saying Michel is Jesus—the Angel of the LORD who is God in the Old Testament. Anyway, Jesus with his disciples were waging spiritual warfare against Satan’s kingdom (cf. Luke 10:17). The angels in Revelation 12 represent the messengers of Jesus and Satan respectively. In the Gospels they are Jesus’ disciples waging war against Satan or the Pharisees and high priests who fought against Jesus and his disciples. The woman (the Jewish believers) had a place of safety for 1260 days (Revelation 12:6). This is the first part of the 70th prophetic week and represents Jesus care for his disciples—they were safe, and he lost no one.

In the second part of the week the disciples were also safe according to Revelation 12:14. The believers were spiritually nourished for a time (1) + times (2) and half a time (1/2) or 3 ½ years. Daniel refers to this time as the 1290 days.

Formerly, I had believed the 1290 days began on the day of Jesus’ resurrection, which if it did, the days would have culminated on the Day of Atonement in 34 AD. However, had they done this, it would have indicated national repentance, which didn’t occur, and the proof of this is Stephen’s death, which occurred on that day. Thus, the 1260 days ended in blood (the crucifixion), but the 1290 days were intended to end in repentance, but instead Stephen was stoned. Therefore the fulfillment of the 1290 days were delayed. There is a gap between the 1260 days and the 1290 days of nearly 40 years due to unbelief, and is typified by Israel’s wandering in the wilderness for 40 year due to their unbelief. The 1290 days begin when the Roman general, Cestius, surrounded Jerusalem with his armies (cf. Luke 21:20), tore down the northern wall of Jerusalem, but for no good reason retreated, allowing Jesus’ disciples to flee (Luke 21:21). They end, when Titus, the Roman general and son of the Emperor, surrounded Jerusalem with his armies, broke down the northern wall (that was repaired) and encamped inside the walls of Jerusalem. Thus the city fell.[1]

____________________________________

[1] See my study, The Seventy Weeks Prophecy and the 1290 Days, which details this.

105 responses to “When Was Stephen Stoned?”

  1. Greetings Roger. Perhaps you don’t adhere to any commentary, but I find no difference between your interpretation of the text and that which I read in commentaries.

  2. Eddie, there is a big difference, I provided scripture and commentaries do not; no scripture has been provided for the fulfillment of the 7th week – pure assumptions.

  3. What Scripture do you use to explain the first 7 weeks of the count? Is it 2Thessalonians 2:4, 8-10? What possible significance does it have, and where is your proof? One cannot simply throw a Scripture at another and say it fits; one must show how it fits. In any case, you claim the commentaries offer no Scriptures for their understanding, yet I see no difference between their conclusions and yours. How do you account for that?

    Moreover, what possible significance does the first 7 weeks have on Jesus ministry which doesn’t begin until after the 2nd division of the 70 Weeks?

  4. Jesus and Michael are not, I repeat, are not the same person ever. This is a grave misunderstanding and should be taken serious. The angels are not worthy of praise, they are fellow servants and brethren that have the testimony of of Jesus( see revelation 19:17.) An angel is not God nor God and angel. God the father is a spirit ( see john 4:24) and the embodiment is the son, Jesus, and the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Ghost was poured of Jesus at the cross and began leading the true believer at Pentecost and still leads today. Don’t confuse the creator with the created. The only angel that puts himself even with God is satan himself. I would consider strongly what you are saying and teaching( see Galatians 1:6-9.) Jesus is alpha and omega, the first and the last, the truth the way and the life and no man comes unto the Father but by him. He is not an angel, he is the fullness of God.

  5. Greetings Ryan, and thank you for reading and for your comment. I’m sorry I missed your comment a few days ago. I think it came with two other comments about the same day and I totally missed yours.

    I agree in spirit with your reply, but let me explain. I don’t believe Michael is an angelic being. I believe he is God. The Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is called Almighty God by Jacob. The Angel of the Lord is not an angelic being, he is God–the God who became Jesus. If you wish to see my study on this subject, click on the link above concerning the Angel of the Lord. I think you will agree he is not an angelic being. I can assure you that many evangelical pastors agree with me on the subject of the Angel of the Lord being Jesus. Nevertheless, few would also agree Jesus is Michael. This is because most Christians believe Michael is a mere angel. I don’t believe he is. I believe Archangel is a title not a description of his person. Michael is the only being referred to as **archangel**. It means he is the leader of all angels. Jesus is King over mankind. This doesn’t make him a mere human. He is God. He is ruler of heaven and earth.

    Lord bless you, Ryan.