Chapter 6
The Complaint of the Hellenists
1 Now at this time, as the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint arose on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food.
2 So the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables.
3 Therefore, brothers, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task.
4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.”
5 And the statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch.
6 And they brought these men before the apostles; and after praying, they laid their hands on them.
7 And the word of God kept spreading, and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.
Translator’s Notes — vv. 1–7:
Ἑλληνιστῶν ... Ἑβραίους (Hellēnistōn ... Hebraious) — v.1: The “Hellenistic Jews” (Ἑλληνισταί, Hellēnistai) were Jews whose primary language was Greek and whose cultural formation was shaped by the wider Greco-Roman world. Many were diaspora Jews who had returned to Jerusalem from places like Alexandria, Cyrene, or Asia Minor. The “native Hebrews” (Ἑβραῖοι, Hebraioi) were Aramaic-speaking Palestinian Jews. The distinction is not ethnic (both groups are Jewish) but linguistic and cultural. It is the first fault line in the church, and it runs along the deepest sociological divide in first-century Judaism: the gap between those shaped by Palestinian culture and those shaped by the diaspora.
v.1: The complaint is specific and practical: Hellenistic widows are being overlooked (παρεθεωροῦντο, paretheōrounto — “neglected,” “overlooked”) in the daily distribution (διακονίᾳ τῇ καθημερινῇ, diakonia tē kathēmerinē — the daily service of food). Widows, without husbands to provide for them, were among the most vulnerable members of any ancient community. The neglect may have been intentional prejudice or simply the result of a distribution system that favored those with stronger social networks among the Aramaic-speaking majority. Either way, the idealized picture of 4:34 (“there was not a needy person among them”) has hit reality. Luke does not pretend the early church was perfect; he shows it struggling with the same human dynamics that affect every community.
v.2: The apostles’ response is instructive on multiple levels. They acknowledge the problem immediately — there is no denial, no defensiveness. They propose a structural solution rather than a moral lecture. And they articulate a principle of focus: it is “not desirable” (οὐκ ἀρεστόν, ouk areston) for the apostles to abandon the word of God to manage food distribution. This is not arrogance; it is recognition that the community needs both preaching and practical administration, and that the same people should not be expected to do everything. The phrase “serve tables” (διακονεῖν τραπέζαις, diakonein trapezais) is the origin of the later office of “deacon” (διάκονος, diakonos), though Luke never actually uses that title for the Seven.
v.3: The qualifications for the Seven are spiritual, not administrative: “of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom.” The task is practical (food distribution), but the people chosen for it must be spiritually mature. The early church does not separate the sacred from the practical. Distributing food to widows is a spiritual act requiring Spirit-filled people. The community selects; the apostles confirm. The process is democratic in selection and apostolic in authorization.
v.5: All seven names are Greek. This is remarkable and almost certainly deliberate. The complaint came from the Hellenistic community; the solution is to appoint Hellenistic leaders. The church does not simply add one or two Hellenists to a Hebrew-dominated committee; it empowers the aggrieved community to solve its own problem with its own people. This is an extraordinary act of institutional humility by the Twelve, all of whom were Palestinian Jews. They entrusted power to the very group that had been marginalized.
Στέφανον (Stephanon) — v.5: Stephen (Στέφανος, Stephanos, meaning “crown” or “wreath”) is listed first and described with a unique additional qualification: he is “full of faith and of the Holy Spirit.” Luke is signaling that Stephen will be the central figure. Philip is listed second and will reappear prominently in chapter 8. The other five — Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas — are never mentioned again. Nicolas is identified as a “proselyte from Antioch” — a Gentile convert to Judaism who then became a follower of Jesus. His inclusion means that at least one of the Seven was not even ethnically Jewish, demonstrating how far the boundaries of the community were already stretching.
v.6: The laying on of hands (ἐπιθέντες τὰς χεῖρας, epithentes tas cheiras) was a Jewish practice of commissioning and authorization, rooted in Moses’s commissioning of Joshua (Numbers 27:18–23, Deuteronomy 34:9). It signifies the transfer of authority and the invocation of the Spirit’s empowerment for a specific task. It will become the standard practice for commissioning in the early church (cf. 13:3, 1 Timothy 4:14).
v.7: Luke inserts a growth summary that includes a stunning detail: “a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.” The word “obedient” (ὑπήκουον, hypēkouon) is striking — faith is something to be obeyed, not just believed. But the truly remarkable claim is that priests — members of the temple establishment, the very institution that has been opposing the church — are converting in significant numbers. The opposition of the Sadducean leadership does not represent the entire priesthood. Many priests, who would have been lower-ranking temple servants rather than members of the high-priestly families, are recognizing Jesus as the Messiah. The church is penetrating the temple itself from within.
Stephen’s Ministry and Arrest
8 And Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people.
9 But some men from what was called the Synagogue of the Freedmen, including both Cyrenians and Alexandrians, and some from Cilicia and Asia, rose up and argued with Stephen.
10 But they were unable to cope with the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking.
11 Then they secretly induced men to say, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God.”
12 And they stirred up the people and the elders and the scribes, and they came upon him and dragged him away and brought him before the Council,
13 and they put forward false witnesses who said, “This man does not cease speaking against this holy place and the Law;
14 for we have heard him say that this Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place and alter the customs which Moses handed down to us.”
15 And fixing their gaze on him, all who were sitting in the Council saw his face like the face of an angel.
Translator’s Notes — vv. 8–15:
v.8: Stephen was appointed to serve tables; he is now performing wonders and signs. Luke says he was “full of grace and power” (πλήρης χάριτος καὶ δυνάμεως) — the same language used of Jesus in Luke 4:14 and of the apostles in Acts 4:33. The Spirit does not respect organizational charts. A man appointed to food distribution becomes the church’s most powerful preacher and miracle worker. The appointment to practical service did not limit Stephen; it launched him.
τῆς συναγωγῆς τῆς λεγομένης Λιβερτίνων (tēs synagōgēs tēs legomenēs Libertinōn) — v.9: The “Synagogue of the Freedmen” (Λιβερτίνων, Libertinōn — from the Latin libertini, “freed slaves”) was a synagogue in Jerusalem composed of diaspora Jews — possibly descendants of Jews taken to Rome as prisoners of war by Pompey in 63 BC and later freed. An inscription discovered in Jerusalem in 1913 (the Theodotos inscription) confirms the existence of a diaspora synagogue built for pilgrims from abroad, which may be this very synagogue. The members come from Cyrene (North Africa), Alexandria (Egypt), Cilicia, and Asia (both in modern Turkey). This is significant: Cilicia’s capital was Tarsus, Paul’s hometown. Paul (“Saul”) may well have been among those who argued with Stephen. If so, this is the first encounter between the two most important figures in Acts.
v.10: The opposition cannot defeat Stephen in argument. The word “cope with” (ἀντιστῆναι, antistēnai, “to withstand,” “to resist”) indicates that public debates took place and Stephen won them. The source of his superiority is not rhetorical training but “the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking” — exactly what Jesus promised in Luke 21:15: “I will give you a mouth and wisdom which none of your opponents will be able to resist or refute.” Stephen is the first fulfillment of that promise outside the apostles themselves.
vv.11–14: When argument fails, the opposition turns to conspiracy. The pattern follows Jesus’s trial with disturbing precision: false witnesses are recruited (cf. Mark 14:56–57), charges of blasphemy are leveled, and the accused is brought before the Sanhedrin. The specific charges against Stephen — speaking against “this holy place” (the temple) and “the Law” (Torah) — are the two pillars of Jewish identity. The allegation that Jesus will “destroy this place and alter the customs which Moses handed down” echoes the charge brought against Jesus himself (Mark 14:58, John 2:19). Luke calls these witnesses “false” (ψευδεῖς, pseudeis), but as with the charges against Jesus, the falsehood may lie not in the content but in the distortion: Stephen probably did preach that the temple and its system were being superseded by what Jesus accomplished. The false witnesses take a truth and twist it into a criminal charge.
v.12: A critical shift occurs in this verse. For the first time, “the people” (τὸν λαόν, ton laon) are stirred up against the believers. In chapters 2–5, the people consistently supported the apostles; it was only the Sadducean leadership that opposed them. Now popular opinion is turning. The accusation that Stephen threatens the temple is the trigger: the temple was the center of Jewish national identity, religious life, and economic activity. To suggest that it might be replaced was to threaten everything.
ὡσεὶ πρόσωπον ἀγγέλου (hōsei prosōpon angelou) — v.15: “His face like the face of an angel” — the description echoes Moses’s face shining when he descended from Sinai after being in God’s presence (Exodus 34:29–35). The parallel is deliberate and ironic: Stephen is accused of speaking against Moses, but his face shines like Moses’s face. The very thing Moses experienced in God’s presence, Stephen now displays before the council that accuses him of blasphemy against Moses. The council members can see it — “all who were sitting in the Council saw his face” — but seeing is not the same as understanding. They look at an angel’s face and proceed to murder.
v.15: This is the last verse of chapter 6, and it freezes the scene like a photograph. Stephen stands before the Sanhedrin, his face radiant. The high priest is about to ask: “Are these things so?” (7:1). Stephen will answer with the longest speech in Acts — a sweeping retelling of Israel’s history that puts the Sanhedrin on trial instead of himself. The angelic face is the calm before the storm.
General Notes on the Chapter
Acts 6 is a hinge chapter. It marks the transition from the Jerusalem church’s early, relatively peaceful existence (chapters 2–5) to the explosive conflict that will scatter the church and launch the wider mission (chapters 7–8). The surface story is simple: a food distribution problem leads to the appointment of seven men. But beneath the surface, forces are gathering that will reshape the entire movement.
The Hellenist-Hebrew tension (v.1) is the first recorded instance of internal cultural conflict in the church, and it reveals that the community was already more diverse than the idealized summaries of chapters 2 and 4 suggest. Greek-speaking diaspora Jews and Aramaic-speaking Palestinian Jews had different customs, different social networks, and different instincts about how Judaism should relate to the wider world. The Hellenists, shaped by the cosmopolitan culture of the diaspora, tended to hold the temple and its rituals in less absolute regard than Palestinian Jews did. This cultural disposition will prove explosive: it is no accident that it is Stephen, a Hellenist, who articulates the most radical theology of the temple in Acts, and it is Hellenistic Jewish believers who will first take the gospel to Gentiles (11:20). The future of Christianity is being shaped by a food distribution crisis.
The appointment of the Seven is often treated as the origin of the diaconate (the office of deacon), and while the later church made that connection, Luke’s own presentation is more complex. The Seven are appointed for practical service, but Stephen immediately becomes a preacher and miracle worker, and Philip becomes an evangelist. Their appointment freed the apostles for prayer and the word, but it also unleashed Hellenistic leaders for ministry that went far beyond food distribution. The Spirit uses organizational solutions for purposes no one anticipated.
Stephen’s emergence (vv.8–15) marks the beginning of a new phase in Acts. Until now, Peter has been the dominant voice. Stephen is the first non-apostle to take center stage, and he will deliver the longest speech in the entire book. His conflict with the Synagogue of the Freedmen introduces a new dynamic: the opposition is no longer only from the Sadducean temple authorities but from diaspora Jews who share Stephen’s Hellenistic background. The debate is intra-Hellenistic — Greek-speaking Jews arguing with a Greek-speaking Christian about the meaning of Moses and the temple. The most intense conflicts are often between those who are closest.
The charges against Stephen (vv.13–14) will shape his response in chapter 7. He is accused of speaking against the temple and the Law — the two institutions that defined Jewish identity. His speech will address both, but in a way his accusers do not expect: not by defending himself but by retelling the entire story of Israel to demonstrate that God has never been confined to a single place or a single set of customs, and that Israel has a long history of rejecting the very messengers God sends. The defense speech will become a prosecution. The man on trial will put his judges on trial.
The Cilicia connection in v.9 is worth highlighting. Cilicia’s capital was Tarsus, and its most famous son was Saul — later Paul. If Saul was among those who debated Stephen and lost (as seems likely, given his prominent role in 7:58 and 8:1), then Stephen’s arguments may have planted seeds in Saul’s mind that bore fruit on the Damascus road. The man Saul could not defeat in argument would become the man whose martyrdom Saul supervised. And the theology Stephen articulated — that God’s purposes transcend the temple, the Law, and Israel’s ethnic boundaries — would become the foundation of Paul’s own theology of the Gentile mission. Stephen may have been more responsible for the conversion of Paul than anyone except Jesus himself.