Acts 6:1-7

A Growing Church

In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. 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. Brothers, 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.”

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. They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.

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.

C

ompared to the churches described in the pages of the New Testament the average church of this day is desperately sick. Entertainment masquerades as worship. Pastors are reduced to a role resembling glorified cheerleaders and deacons are elevated to positions of power utterly foreign to the revelation of the New Testament. The people in the average church demand entertainment and are prepared to enforce their demands through moving to whichever church is willing to pander to their foolish demands. Were the situation not so pitiable, it would be humorous.

What characterises a Growing church? What marks should be seen in a church functioning as the Lord intended? What features does a New Testament church exhibit? The questions are one. Should I refer to any of the New Testament lists which list the graces of the Spirit we would have some understanding of the features sought, but we would be no closer to achieving the heights expected of the churches of our Lord.

A Growing Church Will Experience Conflict. Conflict is a characteristic of our fallen world and the churches of our Lord are not protected from conflict. It should not be surprising, therefore, that the first church experienced conflict early in its history. The growing congregation experienced a cultural clash which threatened its continued existence if not quickly addressed. The Grecian Jews complained that their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. Unlike this present day, the churches in that ancient day assumed responsibility to care for the poor among them. The saints were actively involved in caring for their own people, providing what was necessary for those incapable of providing for themselves.

In those days when the number of disciples was increasing… The chapters preceding our text describe the honeymoon days of the church. How exciting those days of prayer and fellowship must have been when by the Spirit’s power more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were added to their number [Acts 5:14] and when the number of disciples was increasing [Acts 6:1]. The growing church was fused into a loving fellowship and [a]ll the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had [Acts 4:32]. Wouldn’t we like to have the problem arising from the Lord add[ing] to [our] number daily those who were being saved [Acts 2:47]?

We may rightfully assume that among the worshipers were representatives of Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs [Acts 2:9-11]. These particular linguistic/cultural groups are specifically stated to have been represented among those present on the Day of Pentecost. Representatives from each of these linguistic/cultural groups are likely to have therefore been included among the membership of the first church.

Though the Apostles and elders could not know individually every member, they appear to have been alert to attitudes displayed among the members. They recognised discontent when it appeared. The multicultural milieu, while appealing to a segment of modern thought, insures that contentment is difficult to maintain. By the time chapter six opens growth had continued to the point that Grecian Jews comprised a significant proportion within the church. In this chapter we read of Nicolas from Antioch [verse five] a convert to Judaism who was already recognised for his wisdom [verse three].

We may imagine that a number of these members drawn from those who were associated with the Diaspora were widows. John Polhill, in an excellent commentary, writes that Diaspora Jews often moved to Jerusalem in their twilight years to die in the Holy City[1]. The widows of Diaspora Jews who died would likely have no relatives in Palestine to look after them; they would be completely dependent on charity for their very survival. Many of these widows had no doubt been attracted to the Faith in the first place because of concern exhibited by the church for the material needs of its members. The social concern validated the message of life in Jesus the Messiah.

Judaism provided an elaborate system of public welfare for the poor, but Jewish persecution of Followers of the Way had no doubt cut off this source of support. The Christian concern that there be no needy among them has already been referred to in Acts [Acts 2:44 ff.; 4:32,34 ff.]. The administration of this charity appears to have initially been in the hands of the Apostles. Perhaps in response to this pressure arising from Jewish persecution, or perhaps simply as spontaneous expression of love which characterises believers in the Risen Son of God, the church had set up a voluntary community of goods. All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had [Acts 4:32].

The pattern for distribution of charity was found first in the Jewish community. The Jews had a weekly dole for resident need called the quppah. It was given out every Friday and consisted of enough money for fourteen meals. There was also a daily distribution, known as the tamhuy. It was for non-residents and transients and consisted of food and drink delivered house-to-house where those known to be needy were staying. The Christian practise seems to have embraced elements of both Jewish systems. Like the tamhuy it was daily, and like the quppah it was for the resident members. Yet the administration of this spontaneous approach was not equal to the growing complexity of needs within the fellowship. The problem was not so much insufficient resources as it was that one group of widows felt neglected. Everyone involved had the best of intentions, yet the rancour of simmering criticism emerged to threaten the nascent Faith. The lines were drawn and culture was pitted against culture.

The church is an amazing paradox. On the one hand, it reaches out to all people in total and unqualified acceptance. Every human difference on the face of the earth is welcomed within its fellowship. Greeks and Jews alike retain all of their cultural diversity, even after each has repented, believed, been baptised, and been filled with the Holy Spirit. Yet this pluralistic church is to be united as no other group on the face of the earth. Each member is to experience a oneness of loving fellowship, an intimacy of sharing, that transcends every human difference. Thus, no church that reaches out to all people can escape the dilemma of the text: namely, the more a congregation grows, and so deepens its diversity, the greater the likelihood that newcomers will grumble because they feel neglected by those with backgrounds different from their own.

[T]he Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. What sort of spontaneous combustion sparked the controversy igniting fires of discontent? In the identification that two cultural groups were found within that first church—Grecian Jews and Hebraic Jews—lies a clue. Grecian Jews spoke Greek and were Greek in culture and life-style, whereas the Hebraic Jews were Semitic in language, culture and life-style. Though both groups were Jews by birth and Christians by rebirth, these shared experiences were not sufficient to overcome the profound tensions festering between Jewish and Greek culture in that day.

The source of discontent, the excuse for grumbling, if you will, appears to have been less a case of overt hostility than one of benign neglect. Grecian Jews considered themselves to be the outsiders; Hebrew Jews were seen as the insiders. Grecian Jews were the newcomers; Hebrews the old guard. Each spoke differently, employed different terms for the same concepts, each dressed differently, acted differently, had differing expectations; and so each became increasingly clannish. The Hebrews seemed to have all the power, the Twelve came from within their camp; therefore it was easy to suppose that their widows received preferential treatment in the daily dole. Nevertheless, nobody wanted to appear to openly attack the Lord’s Apostles, the preachers for the congregation, so dissent was driven underground and assumed the form of suppressed indignation rather than erupting openly as defiant criticism. In fact, there was no hard evidence for favouritism, only a lurking suspicion of slight that was all the more dangerous because it was inarticulate and so could not be dealt with decisively.

The growing discontent could have resulted from any of a thousand causes. That it grew out of cultural differences within the congregation is apparent. The cause of the discontent is less important for our discussion than the response. In order to study that response I invite you to consider the composition of the church, adopting in your mind this church as a model for the Growing church. Perhaps this is the type of church which is needed here. At the least it is the type of church which must be studied to insure that an appropriate response is mounted to any challenge within the congregation.

A Growing Church Will Exhibit Godly Leadership. Everything rises or falls on leadership, states an old saw. This is simply a restatement of the biblical position, which though often ignored is nevertheless clearly and plainly articulated in the Proverbs.

It is not fitting for a fool to live in luxury—

how much worse for a slave to rule over princes

[Proverbs 19:10]!

Solomon, in Ecclesiastes, states the same principle in other language when he says:

There is an evil I have seen under the sun,

the sort of error that arises from a ruler:

Fools are put in many high positions,

while the rich occupy the low ones.

I have seen slaves on horseback,

while princes go on foot like slaves

[Ecclesiastes 10:5-7].

It is well and good to say that Christ is the Head of the church. In practise that truth is harder to demonstrate, for if He is Head of the church then He must have the right to appoint whom He will to direct the affairs of the church. According to the Word He has done precisely that in appointing elders to direct the affairs of the church and deacons to serve the church. I avoid segregating church matters into the artificial categories of sacred and secular. All the affairs of the church are spiritual and thus those who direct the response of the church to those affairs must themselves be spiritual.

Though the term Elders is not applied to the apostles in our text, they nevertheless functioned as elders. Peter refers to himself as a fellow elder [1 Peter 5:1]. When the Jerusalem church addressed the issues raised by the efforts of the Judaisers against the growing numbers of Gentile believers, the leadership was noted to be composed of apostles and elders [Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23] and treated as equal in oversight of the church. The Apostles held a unique position which was not to be repeated, but in terms of local oversight they passed responsibility to elders, pastors or overseers.

There are two issues to consider for the purpose of our discussion, the responsibility of elders and the response to their presence. The detailed responsibility of elders within the congregation should be easy to determine through review of apostolic writings, but the broader responsibility is seen in our text and that is where I invite you to focus attention. The first responsibility is implied. The growing tension within the congregation demanded action, and the responsibility for action rested on the leaders.

I have been in the service of our Lord for a sufficiently long period to observe that it is common today for those who are unqualified to serve as elders of the church. Individuals assume the role of overseer because they possess wealth or because they are viewed as powerful in the world or by reason of their popularity. When tensions arise in the church, as will ever be the case, such individuals respond inappropriately since they are spiritually unsuited to the role they have assumed. Either they dither and delay in hopes that application of the discredited strategy of ignoring the problem will resolve the conflict, or they seek immediate quiet at the expense of long-term peace.

The requirement for pastors to act in the face of tension rests upon their other responsibility which is stated in the words of the Twelve: we will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the Word. Stated simply, spiritual leadership is responsible to engage in spiritual pursuits. A fellow elder was called to a church which was having difficulties in the Okanagan. He was a man of prayer and gave himself to extensive prayer upon going to that congregation. Within two years the congregation had more than doubled in size, and he continued to give himself to prayer and the ministry of the Word. God blessed mightily and souls were regularly added to the assembly.

Nevertheless, a few young men on the Deacon’s Board of that church began to complain that their pastor did nothing but pray and study the Word. When I heard their complaint I responded, “Would that such a charge could be brought against me!” These young men were moved by pride of place and they displayed their ignorance of the Word. They wanted a pastor who would have stature in the community, who would preside over every turtle race in town and who would hold office in the denomination and who would pray over every brewery dedication in town.

Though that godly pastor attempted to address their concerns and sought assistance from denominational leadership, his vocal critics would not be silenced and he was shortly compelled to resign the pulpit. The people and the denomination justified this action by reciting an old saw, Pastors come and pastors go, but the church remains. The church has not prospered, but they now have a politician in the pulpit. No one is saved any longer and the church continues to dwindle, but they have what they wanted. The result achieved does not, however, provide for a Growing church.

It is difficult for those who have not received appointment to holy office to imagine prayer and study of the Word as work. The jokes abound about the minister who works but one day a week. If prayer is such easy work, however, why don’t more people pray? Why is the prayer service the most poorly attended service—if prayer services are even held by the church! If study of the Word and discernment of the will of God is easy, why aren’t there more people engaged in that work? If comfort of the soul is easy work, why do you turn to the pastor in the dark day when heartache and hurt attend your way?

Of course, I am speaking in the broadest of terms, but the responsibility of elders is to devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word. The pastor should know intimately the needs of the people and regularly call their name before the Lord God, asking that He provide their needs and that He minister to them and that He equip the shepherd to tend the flock. The pastor should tread familiar paths each time he picks up the Word and reads therein, discovering the mind of God and preparing to relate that mind to the flock that they may be strengthened and equipped for every occasion. This is the work of the elder, the labour of the pastor, the responsibility of the overseer.

By implication, the response of the congregation to the elders is to protect them that they might engage in this high and holy labour. The pastors’ time should be jealously guarded by the people. When he is in the study, the people should respect that and avoid intruding. He should be encouraged to pray and to study. Because the overseers are responsible to address the tensions within the congregation and to provide spiritual direction to the flock, the people must be prepared to obey them and submit to their leadership. As the book of Hebrews draws to a close, Christians are enjoined to Obey [leaders] so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you [Hebrews 13:17].

There is another group assigned responsibilities within the Growing church. Deacons are also appointed … appointed and not elected. Stephen, Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas are not specifically called deacons in the text, but it is evident that they received appointment to the office of deacon. The term deacon is a transliteration and not a translation. The Greek noun is frequently translated minister or service. Though the office is frequently seen as a position of power or position from which to rule in this day, the few references to deacons in the New Testament present those appointed to particular service within the church.

I note here, and in other texts, that a deacon is appointed to a particular service to the church. There is no hint in Scripture that a deacon is to be a ruler. This is not to say that service is despised, for our Lord Himself exalted service through His teaching that the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve [Mark 10:45].

You may recall that the disciples jockeyed for position even as the Master faced the cross. They argued about who among them was the greatest, and the Master found it necessary to gently rebuke them. In His rebuke we also are rebuked whenever we imagine we can exalt ourselves. Hear again the Master’s words: The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves [Luke 22:25-27].

The service to which a deacon is appointed is to be performed with diligence. When the particular task is accomplished and no longer need be performed, the assigned role is completed. An individual may certainly have the heart of a servant, and may even have the gift of serving, but the assigned role is always that which is recognised by the church.

There is yet another aspect of the work of deacons which is frequently ignored. If we adopt the model provided in Scripture, deacons are soul-winners. Deacons are to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. How would you know if an individual possesses these criteria? Wisdom does not refer to technical knowledge, but to spiritual wisdom such as that described by James. The wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere [James 3:17]. Deacons are to exhibit heavenly wisdom which will be seen in unity, but not at the expense of truth. There will be a balance in their service to the congregation.

What about that other criterion required for appointment as a deacon, however? What is it to be full of the Spirit? On one occasion I helped a woman who was a new neighbour change her tire. Her husband had been called out of town the night before. My wife noticed that she had a flat tire and suggested that I might wish to help her. As I changed the tire I spoke with the woman about the Faith. Was she a Christian? Did she know the Lord? “Oh, yes,” she responded, “I’m saved, sanctified and filled with the HolyGhost.” (That’s the way she said it, HolyGhost, one word.)

She then began to tell me about her experience and how she felt and how she had spoken in an unknown language. Did I have what she had? “No, ma’am,” I replied, “though I am filled with the Holy Spirit I got what the apostles got.”

Here is the evidence that one is full of the Holy Spirit. The disciples on the Day of Pentecost were filled with the Spirit and spoke the Word of God boldly in the very city where Jesus was crucified. Peter when hailed before the Sanhedrin was filled with the Holy Spirit and boldly confronted these wicked men with their evil deeds [Acts 4:8-12]. The disciples, having prayed were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the Word of God boldly [Acts 4:31]. Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, stood resolutely before the howling mob that would soon strike his life from the earth [Acts 7:55]. Barnabas, dispatched by the Jerusalem church to inspect the new work in Antioch, was seen to be full of the Holy Spirit, and that result was that a great number of people were brought to the Lord [Acts 11:24]. There is a pattern here! Filled with the Spirit equates with holy boldness and souls won.

May I say very plainly that any deacon who does not witness for Christ should be promptly removed from office. The deacon who is silent before a perishing world is not full of the Spirit and has no business engaging in spiritual business. If it is expected that pastors must do the work of an evangelist, then it must be recognised that deacons likewise are responsible to endeavour to win souls. A Growing church will have deacons who serve and who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. Having first proved themselves in spiritual labours let them then assume responsibility for the particular task which the church assigns.

A Growing Church Will Encourage Participation in Conflict Resolution. Do you imagine that the position advocated presents an impossible goal? Some may object that elders might abuse their situation and members will have no recourse to correct the situation. Or they think that deacons will perhaps seize power and abuse the congregation leaving the people to suffer silently. The answer to such concerns is to remind every member of his or her responsibility to unite in the fellowship of the assembly. Outside the Body one has no say in the conduct of body life. If you are not a member of the congregation, you have no basis for complaint about the conduct of the congregation.

Those who have united to commit life and gifts to building one another up are provided safeguards to protect against abuse by leaders who forget their responsibility to Him who appoints to holy office. First, the membership can remove an elder if such is necessary, but they are proscribed from acting capriciously. Paul, in his first letter to Timothy, makes this abundantly clear when he teaches: Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning [1 Timothy 5:19, 20].

Our text presents safeguards which are even more foundational, however. Presented within the text are the truths that members who are not appointed to positions of leadership must be informed and involved in the direction of the Growing church. The first truth is that Membership must be informed in the Growing church. Long before an elder knows of dissent within the congregation members of the congregation are likely aware that a problem exists. Though they may be incapable of dealing with or unwilling to deal with the growing conflict, members will know a problem exists.

It was this growing knowledge which preceded the action of the apostles in the Jerusalem church. More particularly, the leadership, when they realised the extent of the conflict, informed the members of sufficient details to allow them to participate in resolution of the problem. The church was assembled and the membership informed that it would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the Word in order to wait on tables. What was implicit was made explicit so that everyone was on an equal footing in confronting the issues before the church.

It is natural for us to want to keep our “dirty laundry” out of sight of the public. We are frequently cautioned against letting people know too much about the problems of the church. I make this observation about all such efforts at maintaining secrecy: men love darkness instead of light because their deeds are evil [cf. John 3:19]. Likewise, whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God [John 3:21]. It is as we walk in the light as He is in the light that we have fellowship with one another [cf. 1 John 1:7]. In short, any resort to hide a problem from the congregation is evidence that the Spirit of God is not at work among us.

Of course I am not referring to issues requiring pastoral discretion. Some of our sins are private and they need to be resolved privately. Those sins and conflicts which involve the assembly, however, must be dealt with openly and swiftly. The membership of the assembly must know not only that leadership is aware of the problem but that they are taking appropriate steps to deal with the problem. The quickest way to rid a house of cockroaches is to insure they have no darkness in which to hide. Likewise, gossip and calumny within the church is quickly stifled when light shines brightly on the problem.

It is not simply that members must be informed when a problem arises, but Membership must be involved. If there is to be a lasting solution, the members must be invited and encouraged to participate in the solution. When the apostles had formulated a response they treated the assembly with respect due God’s people. The entire Body was treated as deserving of dignity and trust befitting God’s holy people. Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. The church was capable of uniting to discover God’s provision among them. The people of God were well equipped to discern the mind of the Lord. They were invited to participate in the solution to the conflict which was then threatening the continued life of the Body.

The assembly was informed of the solution proposed by the leaders and they in turn were involved in bringing that solution to fruition. Having sought out the seven men requested by the leaders, they then presented the fruit of their labours to the apostles who in turn set apart with prayer and laying on of their hands those selected to the role of the required service. Thus, in a Growing church the members will be involved in solutions to conflicts threatening the church.

I think it vital to note the sequelae to this event. Verse seven states: 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. The Word of God spread! The church was no longer distracted by internal conflict and the people were free to do what every Christian is called to do—witness to the grace of God. If you are a believer you are responsible to speak of Christ and what He has done for you. Peter and John’s words to the Sanhedrin apply to us to this day: we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard [Acts 4:20].

Are you a Christian? To whom did you speak in this week past concerning that which you have seen and heard? If nothing of spiritual import has been seen or heard, what have you done to keep you from seeing the Lord’s hand at work? So long as a church is distracted by conflict she can neither reach out nor witness to the grace of God.

Where the Word of God is spread you may take it as a given that the number of disciples will increase. The greater the spread of the Word the greater the increase of disciples. Few witnesses, few conversions. Great witness, great conversions. You may gauge the spiritual temperature of our own church by looking on this one aspect. While the leaders of the church bear awesome responsibility in this realm of spreading the Word, witnessing is at last a shared responsibility and all alike must participate.

I have spoken of these truths that the people of God may be confronted by the will of God. If these things are now being done in this place you will rejoice that God has preceded this messenger and you will no doubt pray that God will graciously continue His work in your midst. If, however, you realise that you are failing in this realm, whether as a leader of the assembly or as one who follows, let the Word of God serve to urge you to do that which honours the Lord Christ. Begin now to participate, to encourage adherence to the model God has given, to glorify Christ the Lord. Amen.

----