Acts Chapter 6
The Appointment of Deacons and the Arrest of Stephen
A. The Appointment of Deacons
Acts 6:1 – “Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists, because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution.”
At this point in the Book of Acts, the church was experiencing remarkable growth, described as the multiplying of disciples. This increase in numbers brought with it not only blessings but also challenges. The enemy, unable to hinder the church through persecution, attempted to sow division within. A complaint arose from the Hellenists against the Hebrews, revealing the tension between different cultural groups within the body of Christ. Satan had tried intimidation, corruption, and direct assault, but here he used a more subtle tactic: “divide and conquer.” He sought to pit believer against believer, threatening the unity of the church.
This moment marked a new phase for the early believers. The “good old days” of Acts chapters 2 through 4, with their remarkable unity and joy, gave way to the challenges of growth, administration, and internal strife. Yet how the church responded to this challenge would prove critical. By addressing the issue with wisdom and order, the apostles ensured that the growth of God’s kingdom continued unhindered.
The mention that the number of disciples was multiplying indicates that the gospel was advancing powerfully. The early church was not stagnant; it was vibrant and expanding. This also implies that the church maintained a degree of organization. They knew how many were being saved, they gathered at set times and places, they collected offerings, and they distributed resources to those in need. They also confronted sin when it arose. This demonstrates that the early church was not chaotic but structured, showing intentional stewardship of people and resources.
The complaint itself reflected the cultural divide between Hebrews and Hellenists. The Hebrews were Jews primarily from Judea who held strongly to Jewish customs and language. The Hellenists were Jews from the broader Greek-speaking world, scattered throughout the Roman Empire, who had adopted elements of Greek culture. Tension naturally existed between these groups. Hebrews often regarded Hellenists as worldly compromisers with Greek influence, while Hellenists saw Hebrews as rigid traditionalists. This longstanding suspicion now found an outlet in the care of widows, where the Hellenists believed their widows were being neglected.
It is important to note that although labeled Hebrews and Hellenists, these were all Christians. They were Jewish in background but united in their faith in Jesus Christ as Messiah. Still, cultural differences within the church created opportunities for conflict, and the adversary sought to exploit these tensions.
The issue centered on the daily distribution, a practice by which the church ensured that widows were cared for. Widows in that culture were especially vulnerable since they often had no financial or social support system apart from the community of faith. The church took this responsibility seriously, reflecting the heart of God who commands His people to care for widows and orphans. Yet this care was not without expectation. The Apostle Paul later gave guidelines in 1 Timothy 5:3-16, where he distinguished between widows who should be supported and those who should not, showing that responsibility and faithfulness were expected in return.
There may also have been a deeper reason for the tension. In Jewish life, the temple authorities typically oversaw care for widows and orphans. But as the early church proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah, it seems the Jewish leaders excluded the Christian widows from this system of support. This forced the church to create its own means of care. Thus, the neglect of the Hellenistic widows may have been worsened by outside hostility toward the followers of Christ.
The concern was not merely administrative but spiritual. Even if the oversight was unintentional, as some commentators suggest, it became a potential wedge of division. In a large congregation, it was inevitable that some needs would be overlooked, but Satan thrives on turning unintentional wrongs into sources of bitterness and strife. The Hebrews were right in their hearts, seeking to serve faithfully, but the Hellenists were right in their facts, pointing out a real shortfall. This combination created the perfect storm for division unless handled with wisdom and grace.
The Apostles Arrange for Deacons to Be Nominated
Acts 6:2-4 – “Then the twelve summoned the multitude of the disciples and said, ‘It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business; but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word.’”
When the complaint arose about the neglect of the Hellenistic widows, the apostles responded with clarity and wisdom. They gathered the multitude of the disciples together, addressing the entire congregation rather than making the decision privately. Their words set forth a principle of priorities in ministry: “It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.” The apostles did not diminish the importance of serving the widows, but they understood that their God-given calling required them to devote themselves primarily to prayer and the preaching of the word. To abandon this in order to manage the practical details of distribution would have been a neglect of their true mission.
This was not an attitude of superiority or disdain for humble service. Jesus Himself had washed the disciples’ feet and taught them that true greatness is found in serving (John 13:14-15). Rather, the apostles recognized that God does not call one person to do everything in the church. Spiritual leadership requires focus, and their task was to lay the doctrinal and spiritual foundation of the church through the ministry of the word. Delegation was therefore not avoidance of responsibility but obedience to their calling. A pastor today should not consider practical service beneath him, but neither should he be consumed by such tasks to the neglect of his essential duty to pray and proclaim the word of God.
The expression “serve tables” did not refer merely to waiting on dining tables but pointed to the administration of resources, finances, and provisions for the needy. In the first-century context, a “table” often referred to the place of a moneychanger or a steward of resources. Thus, this ministry involved overseeing the fair and faithful distribution of funds and goods to widows. The apostles wisely delegated this responsibility so that the church could be cared for both spiritually and practically.
Instead of dismissing the complaints or silencing those who felt neglected, the apostles turned the situation into an opportunity for participation and growth. They instructed the congregation, “Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.” In doing so, they gave the body of believers a voice in nominating those whom they trusted, while retaining the responsibility of final appointment. This was not congregational government in the modern sense, but it was Spirit-led leadership that valued the input of the people. By asking the congregation to nominate the seven, they ensured that those chosen were trusted and respected by the entire church family.
The qualifications emphasized character over skill. The chosen men needed to be of good reputation, meaning that their integrity was recognized both inside and outside the church. They were to be full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, showing a balance of spiritual maturity and practical discernment. The apostles sought men who were not only godly but also capable of handling sensitive matters with fairness and prudence. This demonstrates that practical service in the church is not secondary work; it requires Spirit-filled men of proven character. The combination of being spiritually minded and practically wise is rare but essential for leadership in God’s house.
The number seven may have been symbolic or practical. It is possible that seven men were chosen so that one could oversee the work each day of the week. More importantly, the number reflects completeness, showing that the apostles intended to fully address the need without partial measures.
Finally, the apostles declared, “but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” Here we see the twin pillars of apostolic leadership: intercession before God and proclamation of His truth to the people. Prayer was not a formality but the very lifeblood of their ministry. The preaching of the word was not casual but a consuming task requiring study, meditation, and Spirit-empowered delivery. Together, prayer and the word formed the foundation of apostolic ministry and remain the central calling of pastors and elders today. As Calvin observed, pastors must not think their duty is done once they have spent some time teaching; they are to devote themselves continually to prayer and the word, for these are inexhaustible responsibilities.
This passage sets forth a timeless principle: when unmet needs arise in the church, the solution is not to distract spiritual leaders from their primary calling but to raise up others, full of the Spirit and wisdom, who can share the burden of ministry. In this way, the body of Christ is strengthened, unity is preserved, and the word of God continues to advance without hindrance.
The Selection of Deacons
Acts 6:5-7 – “And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them. Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.”
The response of the congregation was marked by unity. “And the saying pleased the whole multitude.” Agreement among God’s people does not automatically validate a decision, but in this case, it showed that the apostles had indeed discerned the will of God. The apostles were not swayed by popular opinion; rather, God confirmed their Spirit-led solution by bringing the people into harmony. True spiritual leadership is not driven by consensus, but when God’s people are rightly led, He often unites their hearts around His direction.
The congregation then chose seven men, beginning with “Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit.” Stephen is highlighted first, foreshadowing his significant role as the first Christian martyr. His description as full of faith and the Holy Spirit reveals not merely his personal devotion but his character as one marked by spiritual power and dependence upon God. Alongside Stephen was Philip, later known as “Philip the evangelist” (Acts 21:8), who would preach Christ in Samaria and lead the Ethiopian eunuch to faith. The other five men—Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas—are less known in Scripture, yet their service was no less valuable in the work of God’s kingdom. Nicolas is specifically described as a proselyte from Antioch, meaning he was a Gentile who had converted to Judaism before coming to Christ. This shows the inclusiveness of the early church, as God raised up leaders from diverse backgrounds to serve His people.
Notably, all seven men had Greek names, indicating that they were most likely Hellenists themselves. This demonstrated sensitivity and wisdom, for the complaint had originated among the Hellenistic believers. By appointing men from their own cultural group, the apostles and congregation ensured that the needs of the neglected widows would be handled with fairness and empathy. This choice reflected humility on the part of the Hebrews, who likely outnumbered the Hellenists, yet entrusted responsibility to men who could best resolve the problem. It is a reminder that leadership in the church is not about dominance or control but about service and wisdom.
“Whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them.” Here we see the cooperation between the congregation and the apostles. The congregation nominated the men, but the apostles, after prayer, laid hands on them as a sign of blessing, commissioning, and the recognition of God’s appointment. The laying on of hands symbolized the transference of responsibility, God’s empowerment, and the unity of the church in affirming these men. It is significant that prayer accompanied the act, reminding us that even the most practical service is deeply spiritual when done for the glory of Christ. The same Greek word used for “distribution” in verse 1 is also used for “ministry” in verse 4, showing that whether one preaches the word or oversees resources, both are ministry before God.
Though these men are not explicitly called “deacons” in this passage, most scholars agree that this marked the beginning of the diaconal office, later described in 1 Timothy 3:8-13. The word “deacon” simply means “servant.” These men were not seeking titles or prestige but served faithfully in practical matters. Yet, Scripture promises that faithful deacons will obtain for themselves “a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 3:13). This demonstrates that in God’s kingdom, even practical service is honored with eternal reward.
The result of this Spirit-led decision was profound: “Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.” What could have become a source of division instead became a catalyst for greater unity, growth, and gospel advance. The Hellenists who raised the concern responded rightly by bringing the matter forward and trusting the solution. The Hebrews responded rightly by acknowledging the need and supporting the appointment of Hellenistic leaders. The seven men responded rightly by accepting the call to unglamorous but essential service. And the apostles responded rightly by guarding their focus on prayer and the ministry of the word while ensuring the need was met. Each group acted with humility and faith, and God blessed their obedience.
The outcome was remarkable: the word of God continued to spread, disciples multiplied greatly, and even “a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.” This note is striking, for many priests had been among the fiercest opponents of the apostles’ preaching. Yet here we see the power of God’s word overcoming resistance and drawing even those deeply entrenched in temple service to Christ. The wisdom of the apostles in resolving this crisis protected the church from division and opened the way for new spiritual victories.
Satan’s attempt to divide the church through neglect and suspicion was defeated. He also failed to distract the apostles from their calling. Instead, God turned the enemy’s scheme into a greater triumph, raising up new leaders, strengthening unity, and multiplying the advance of the gospel. As one preacher put it, “The church gave Holy Ghost deacons and got converted priests.” What began as a complaint ended in revival.
B. Stephen’s Witness and Arrest
Acts 6:8-10 – “And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke.”
Stephen, though appointed to serve tables, was also a man “full of faith and power.” His spiritual life overflowed beyond administrative service into powerful witness, marked by miracles and signs performed among the people. Just as God authenticated the ministry of the apostles with miracles, so also He validated Stephen’s ministry. This shows that the Spirit’s power is not restricted to the apostles but is given to all who are yielded to God. Stephen’s faith was not passive belief but active trust in God’s promises, producing a life characterized by both spiritual grace and spiritual power.
A textual note is worth mentioning: some manuscripts read “full of grace and power” rather than “full of faith and power.” Either reading captures the essence of Stephen’s character, for faith and grace are inseparably linked in the believer’s life. To be full of faith is to live under grace, and to be full of grace is to demonstrate faith in action.
Stephen’s ministry provoked opposition. “There arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen… disputing with Stephen.” The Synagogue of the Freedmen was composed of Jews who had once been slaves but were freed, many from regions such as Cyrene, Alexandria, Cilicia, and Asia. These were likely devout Jews committed to the law and temple, fiercely protective of their traditions. Their dispute with Stephen was not merely intellectual but spiritual. They were contending against the truth of the gospel that Stephen proclaimed. Among them may well have been Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul the apostle, since he was from Cilicia and soon appears in direct connection with Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 7:58).
Despite their zeal, “they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke.” This was not due to Stephen’s natural intellect or rhetorical skill but because the Holy Spirit empowered him with divine wisdom. Jesus had promised His disciples in Luke 21:15, “for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist.” Stephen’s ministry is a direct fulfillment of this promise. His words were Spirit-given, unanswerable, and convicting.
Acts 6:11-14 – “Then they secretly induced men to say, ‘We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.’ And they stirred up the people, the elders, and the scribes; and they came upon him, seized him, and brought him to the council. They also set up false witnesses who said, ‘This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law; for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us.’”
Unable to overcome Stephen’s Spirit-filled wisdom, his opponents turned to deceit. “They secretly induced men to say…” False witnesses were prepared to accuse Stephen of blasphemy. This tactic echoes the same method used against Jesus. In Matthew 26:59-61, false witnesses accused the Lord of claiming He would destroy the temple. The similarity is striking, for a servant of Christ often shares in His sufferings, including enduring false accusations (Matthew 5:11).
The charges against Stephen were carefully designed to inflame both the religious leaders and the common people. “They stirred up the people, the elders, and the scribes.” Up until this point, persecution against the apostles had been limited because public opinion favored them (Acts 2:47; Acts 5:26). But once the crowds were stirred against Stephen, opposition hardened. This demonstrates how volatile popular opinion can be. The same crowds that praised Jesus at His triumphal entry (Luke 19:35-40) demanded His crucifixion days later (Luke 23:18-23). Likewise, those who once honored the apostles now turned against Stephen. For this reason, the church must never ground its mission in public approval but in the unchanging truth of God’s Word.
The accusations themselves reveal much about Stephen’s preaching. He was accused of blasphemy against Moses, against God, against the temple (“this holy place”), against the law, and against the customs of their fathers. In essence, Stephen was charged with undermining everything the Jews held sacred. Yet each accusation twisted the truth:
He exalted Jesus as greater than Moses, which was taken as speaking against Moses.
He proclaimed Jesus as God, which was construed as blasphemy against God.
He declared Jesus as greater than the temple, which was twisted into an attack on the holy place.
He taught that Jesus fulfilled the law, which was distorted into slander against the law.
He proclaimed that Jesus fulfilled the shadows of their customs, which they misrepresented as an attack on their traditions.
In truth, Stephen was simply proclaiming the supremacy of Jesus Christ. His opponents, unable to resist his Spirit-filled wisdom, perverted his words to bring charges against him. This again parallels the treatment of Jesus, who was falsely accused yet faithfully testified of the truth.
Even the specific accusation, “This Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us,” was a distortion of Christ’s teaching. Jesus had prophesied the destruction of the temple (Matthew 24:2), but this was a judgment on national unbelief, not an act of rebellion against God’s law. Jesus also fulfilled the law (Matthew 5:17), not by abolishing it but by bringing it to completion. Stephen’s bold proclamation of these truths, however, was too threatening to the entrenched religious establishment.
Thus, Stephen stands as a faithful witness, filled with the Spirit, preaching Christ with clarity and boldness, and enduring the same slanders that were brought against his Master. His words and his life embody the call of Acts 1:8, where Jesus promised that His followers would be witnesses to Him in Jerusalem. Stephen’s arrest set the stage for his Spirit-filled defense in Acts 7, one of the most powerful sermons in the New Testament.
Stephen’s Countenance When Accused
Acts 6:15 – “And all who sat in the council, looking steadfastly at him, saw his face as the face of an angel.”
Stephen now stood before the Sanhedrin, the highest religious authority in Israel, composed of the most honored, educated, and powerful leaders of the Jewish nation. This was the same council that had condemned Jesus and threatened Peter and John. Stephen was falsely accused, surrounded by hostility, and seemingly abandoned by popular support. Yet as they gazed intently upon him, they saw something unexpected: his face appeared like “the face of an angel.”
This description is not to be understood as a sentimental or artistic image of angelic softness, as often depicted in paintings. Nor was it the stern look of judgment. Instead, it reflected an extraordinary calm, confidence, and heavenly radiance. Stephen’s countenance testified that he was not overwhelmed by fear but filled with the presence of God. His peace was not manufactured by human effort; it was the fruit of the Spirit, who had filled him with boldness and assurance.
The phrase recalls the experience of Moses, who after communing with God on Mount Sinai returned with his face shining with reflected glory (Exodus 34:29-35). Stephen, like Moses, reflected the glory of God because he walked in His presence. What his accusers intended as a moment of shame became instead a testimony of divine approval. The council, intending to intimidate and condemn him, were confronted with visible evidence that God was with him.
This angelic countenance also speaks of Stephen’s perfect peace. Though facing the prospect of death, his face bore no trace of terror. His serenity demonstrated the truth of God’s promise that He never forsakes His people. Jesus had said in John 14:27, “Peace I leave with you, My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.” That peace was now evident in Stephen, confirming his unshakable trust in the Lord.
Furthermore, this moment foreshadowed Stephen’s role as the first martyr. Before delivering his Spirit-inspired defense in Acts 7, God marked him with the visible sign of His presence. It was as if heaven itself placed its seal upon Stephen, showing that though the earthly court condemned him, the heavenly court approved him. The “face of an angel” was God’s testimony that His servant was upheld, empowered, and ready to glorify Christ even in death.
