Stephen's opponents resort to subterfuge. In private they prompt some to make the claim that they have heard Stephen speaking blasphemous things against Moses and God (also see vv. 13-14). In New Testament times blasphemy encompassed more than simply uttering the divine name (as in m. Sanhedrin 7:5); it was any slanderous or scurrilous word spoken against humankind or God or anything associated with his majesty and power (Lk 22:65; 23:39; compare 5:21; Num 15:30). The Hellenistic Jewish instigators and their agents arouse the elders and the teachers of the law and, for the first time, the people against the Christian witness (contrast Acts 2:47; 4:21; 5:13, 26). The opposition gathers such momentum that all rush on Stephen in a violent arrest (4:1; 19:29; compare Lk 8:29; Acts 27:15).

A Sanhedrin trial for blasphemy required witnesses, and the Hellenistic Jews make sure they are present here—though, as Luke is careful to point out, these are false witnesses. They are not false simply because they are opposing God's spokesperson. Rather, their testimony is a "subtle and deadly misrepresentation of what was intended" (Longenecker 1981:336). Comparing their words with Jesus' teaching reveals an identifiable mixture of truth and falsehood (v. 14; for v. 13 compare 21:28). Jesus did predict the temple's destruction, but he did not say he was its destroyer (Lk 21:6). When challenged for a sign to validate his right to drive the moneychangers from the temple area, Jesus responded, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days" (Jn 2:19; compare Mk 14:58). Did Jesus of Nazareth predict that he would change the customs Moses handed down? No, Jesus was not an opponent of the law (Mt 5:17-18; Lk 16:16-17). Yes, Jesus did alter the customs of Moses, the oral tradition, when he found that allegiance to them meant nullifying the written law of God (Mt 15:1-9; Lk 6:1-5, 6-11).

Opposition tactics like these are still found today. When serious theological or religious debate is not successful, a personal campaign of lies may follow. And if the witnesses' or the message's integrity cannot be undercut this way, legal action may be pursued. Sadly, this path is followed by opponents of the truth within as well as outside the church.