CHAPTER 6
In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Hellenistic Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. Acts 6:1
In the Fourth Century BC, the world conqueror, Alexander the Great (356-323 BC), subdued most of the known world and brought along with his conquests the Greek culture and language. By the First Century, Greek was the lingua franca (common language) in most of the Mediterranean world. By this time many Jewish people were dispersed through the whole area and thus they too became Greek speakers. There was always a desire of the Jews to return to the land of Israel and often in their old age they did so. Since women often outlived the men, there began to be a large number of Greek-speaking widows in Jerusalem and in the church as well.
What seems to be reflected here are the normal growing pains of a rapidly expanding church. Many Greek-speaking Jews (Gk. Hellēnistōn) were swept into the church. The rest of the church was Semitic-speaking, with the languages of Aramaic and Hebrew. We can imagine the confusion of Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew all mixed together in the church. The Greek speakers may have spoken little or no Aramaic or Hebrew. The natural thing was for them to form their own Greek-speaking synagogues and assemblies, which we see reflected in verse 9 and following.
The Greek speakers began to be neglected in the daily distribution of food to widows and the needy. This was probably not on purpose but was likely just do to inefficiency and the barriers of language. There was not only a language barrier but a cultural barrier. Stott says that the Hellenists were not just Greek speakers but they behaved and even thought like Greeks, while other Jerusalem Jews were immersed in the Hebrew culture.1 To make matters worse, the normal Jewish synagogue distribution to these needy new Christians would no longer be available.
Growing problems obviously had to be dealt with. “Henry Ward Beecher called success ‘a last-year’s nest from which the birds have flown.’ Any ministry or organization that thinks its success will go on automatically is heading for failure.” 2 There began to be complaints from the Hellenists that their widows were being neglected and these complaints had to be dealt with immediately.
“So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, ‘It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables’” (6:2). Stott comments here: “There is no hint whatever that the apostles regarded social work as inferior to pastoral work, or beneath their dignity. It was entirely a question of calling…” 3 There has been much discussion here regarding the origin of the deaconate. It is interesting that while the language of Greek diakonia is used both in verses 1 and 2, the Seven who are chosen are not called deacons (diakonioi).4
It would be good for us to understand something about the Jewish custom of caring for the poor and needy. Barclay gives us a good summary of this system:
No nation has ever had a greater sense of responsibility for the less fortunate brethren than the Jews. In the synagogue there was a routine custom. Two collectors went round the market and the private houses every Friday morning and made a collection for the needy partly in money and partly in goods. Later in the day this was distributed. Those who were temporarily in need received enough to enable them to carry on; and those who were permanently unable to support themselves received enough for fourteen meals, that is, enough for two meals a day for the ensuing week. The fund from which this distribution was made was called the Kuppah or Basket. In addition to this a house-to-house collection was made daily for those in pressing need. This was called the Tamhui, or Tray. It is clear that the Christian church had taken over this custom.5
By this time the church was quite large. About the only place where the whole church could come together was on the temple mount. They probably continued to worship in local Jewish synagogues on Saturday and in house churches on Sunday and other days. At this point Christians were not yet thrown out of the synagogues (Matt. 10:17; 23:34). We do know from Acts 2:46, that the believers moved from house to house.6 From what we have read so far in scripture we can assume that home groups also may have divided themselves according to the various language groups.
“Brothers and sisters, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word” (6:3-4). Keener remarks here: “Those with political power generally repressed complaining minorities; here the apostles hand the whole system over to the offended minority. This may thus be the first recorded instance of what we might today call ‘affirmative action.’” 7 They were instructed to choose seven men for the task. With the Hebrews, seven was a sort of perfect number or number of completion. It is interesting that the main requirements of these men was that they be filled with the Spirit of God and with wisdom. With such men in place the disciples could now be relieved to do their normal work of preaching. D. L. Moody once said “that it was better to put ten men to work than to try to do the work of ten men.” 8
The men chosen were likely leaders in the Hellenistic community. We know that some of them were truly filled with the Spirit to an amazing degree. Utley asks, “Isn’t it paradoxical that it was these ‘seven’ who were the first to catch the vision of the world mission of the gospel, not the apostles.” 9 Pett sums up their task by this comparison: “The new appointees would be administrative ‘ministers’ (deacons) and the apostles would be ‘deacons’ of the word.” 10
“This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism” (6:5). Let us review what we know about these men. Stephen, whose name means “victor’s crown,” 11 would soon gain his crown by offering himself as the church’s first recorded martyr. Philip has often been confused with the disciple Philip but they are not the same. This Philip is known as “Philip the Evangelist.” After the church was scattered, Philip brought the gospel to the Samaritans with signs and wonders (8:6, 39), and may have had a lot of influence in bringing the gospel to the Ethiopians and to Africa (8:26-40). It was this Philip who had four unmarried daughters who were prophetesses.12
We do not have much information on Procorus, Nicanor, Timon and Parmenas. We know they all had Greek names. In church tradition it is said that Parmenas was martyred at Philippi.13 There is some discussion on Nicolas in early church writings. We see here that he was a Gentile who converted to Judaism and that he was from Antioch. The church father Irenaeus (c. 180) charged this Nicolas with being the founder of the sect known as the Nicolaitans. This group ate things sacrificed to idols and practiced adultery.14 The father Hippolytus (170-235) agreed with this assessment.15 However, Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c. 215) totally disputed this idea.16 Pett says, “There are no genuine grounds for associating him with the Nicolaitans of Revelation 2:6; Revelation 2:15.” 17 We know how heretical groups often wrote in the name of some famous biblical figure in order to gain respectability for themselves. No doubt this is what happened with Nicolas.
Again, in this passage these men are not specifically called “deacons.” Yet, most feel that they were the first people to fulfill the office as we see it described in 1 Timothy 3:8-13. 18 This section tells us that sometimes traditional structures need to be adapted to meet the existing situations. It seems that the welfare of the church depends on this type of flexibility.19
“They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them” (6:6). There are scriptural precedents for the laying on of hands (Gen. 48:13-20; Num. 27:18, 23; cf. 11:25). Barnes says, “Though the seven deacons had been chosen by the church to this work, yet they derived their immediate commission and authority from the apostles.” 20 With the approaching martyrdom of Stephen the church would be scattered from Jerusalem by persecution. They would go in all directions with some of these Hellenists in the forefront of introducing the gospel to the Gentiles.21
“So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith” (6:7). When we consider how difficult it is in this age to gain a convert and make of that convert a true disciple, we must stand amazed at the skill the early church had in doing this. The increase of the church was rapid and they were reaching into the core of Judaism in the process. Keener says of this outreach to the priesthood, “Although most upper-class priests were Sadducees, the poorer priests, many of whom came to Jerusalem only several weeks of the year, were not; some priests were even Pharisees.” 22 Likely many of these were humble people just seeking to serve the Lord. Their hearts were obviously open to the gospel.
STEPHEN’S AMAZING MINISTRY
Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people. Acts 6:8
It is interesting that Stephen in his powerful ministry performed wonders and signs just like the Twelve had done. We will later see a similar thing also with Philip and his ministry in Samaria (8:6-8). Wiersbe says, “Stephen’s powerful testimony would be the climax of the church’s witness to the Jews.” 23
We see here that Stephen was full of God’s grace. This indicates that he had a Christ-like character. The Greek word for grace is charis, and it can include things like gracefulness, loveliness, graciousness, goodwill, favor and the like.24 It appears that these are some qualities that are often missed by modern and postmodern Christians.
“Opposition arose, however, from members of the Synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called)— Jews of Cyrene and Alexandria as well as the provinces of Cilicia and Asia— who began to argue with Stephen. But they could not stand up against the wisdom the Spirit gave him as he spoke” (6:9-10). Obviously, Stephen was visiting some of the Greek-speaking synagogues and declaring the gospel to them. Perhaps we should say a word about synagogues in general. They seem to have arisen even as early as the exile in Babylon.25 Synagogues were especially needful once the temple was destroyed, but they continued on even in the days of the Second Temple. They were convenient places for Jews to meet, discuss the scripture, pray and tend to local affairs.
Commentators have had a good discussion as to whether Luke is speaking of one synagogue or a number of synagogues.26 There would certainly be no problem if several synagogues were involved. Having lived in Jerusalem for many years, I can attest that there are numerous synagogues in the city. In several places it is impossible to go for two or three blocks without running into a small synagogue. Many of these are located in apartments. In fact, one of the first apartments my family and I rented in the city had a small synagogue in one of the front units. Once, while visiting the Great Synagogue in downtown Jerusalem, I realized that there were even small synagogues located within it. Many small synagogues in the First Century may have catered to different nationalities of Jews or to differing languages. Today the small synagogues are especially handy since devout Jews refuse to drive their cars on the Sabbath.
The real problem for Stephen and his preaching was the Synagogue of the Freedmen. These were likely Jewish people who had been carried off as captives by Rome or else the children of such captives. Later, these were freed or manumitted and thus allowed to return to their native land.27 The mention of Cilicia here presents us with the possibility that Saul, who later became known as Paul, might have attended this synagogue.28 Cilicia was of course his native land (Acts 21:39). We know that young Paul was caught up in this conflict for he makes his appearance at the stoning of Stephen.
We note here that the Jewish people, who usually seem do well at debating, could not withstand the spirit and wisdom of Stephen.
THE PLOT AGAINST STEPHEN
Then they secretly persuaded some men to say, “We have heard Stephen speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God.” So they stirred up the people and the elders and the teachers of the law. They seized Stephen and brought him before the Sanhedrin. Acts 6:11-12
There was much anger among the Jewish people against Stephen. It seems that their philosophy was this, “…if you cannot beat him have him beaten.” 29 In their anger they seized Stephen and somehow got him before the Sanhedrin. Just as the Sanhedrin had done with Jesus, they rounded up some no-good people who would testify against Steven.
Calm religious temperament was usually in short supply in Jerusalem. Bruce says, “Any threat, real or imagined, to the temple was not only an offense to their religious feelings; it was also a threat to their livelihood. The economic life of the city and its residents depended on the temple…” 30
“They produced false witnesses, who testified, ‘This fellow never stops speaking against this holy place and against the law. For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs Moses handed down to us’” (6:13-14). There were two basic charges from the false witnesses— that Stephen was preaching against the temple and against the law and customs of Moses. Either charge if proven true could get one killed in that day. It is clear that this charge was practically the same as the one lodged against Jesus (Mk. 14:58), and the one that much later would be lodged against Paul (Acts 21:28).31 Essentially, the charge would be blasphemy and this subject was interpreted more liberally in the First Century than in earlier years.32
When we look at Stephen’s following sermon, we realize that there were certain things he said that could be twisted around in order to support the charges against him. Still, Luke describes the charges against him as false (v. 13).33 We will observe in his sermon that Stephen was speaking of a higher and greater temple, a spiritual one in Christ (cf. Jn. 4:23). He was speaking of a greater law than that of Moses, one written on hearts and minds of God’s true followers (Jer. 31:33). The people on hearing the sermon became angry and assaulted Stephen with half-truths. Someone once said that a half-truth is like a half-brick and it can be thrown a lot further than a whole one.
Coffman says, “it was time, in the will of God, for the church to be scattered; and, therefore, God here permitted what he had not permitted before.” 34 God would now make the supreme Christian witness to Israel and to her leaders. Then, very quickly, the gospel would move out to the Gentiles.
“All who were sitting in the Sanhedrin looked intently at Stephen, and they saw that his face was like the face of an angel” (6:15). We simply cannot miss the comparison of Stephen’s face with that of Moses. When Moses gave the law to Israel it is recorded that his face shone (Exo. 34:29-35; cf. 2 Cor. 3:7). Now God’s messenger is bringing a new law, one that will be written on the heart, and his face is also shining.35 Saul of Tarsus was most likely in that council. It is a reasonable thought that many years later, as they worked together, he conveyed much of this information to Luke.36 No doubt Paul would never forget that look on Stephen’s face.