Deacon ministry

[Jonathan]

The problem that many churches have with deacons is that, no matter what the group is called (board, body, council, gang, gaggle, herd, etc...), as long as it is a "standing body" it will gather (actively or by default) authority over time.

Assuming that Acts 6 describes the first deacons (and, in reality, I don't), we have to recognize that these men where chosen for a specific task. There is nothing in the passage that suggests that they were called as a default body to take care of any other issue other than the one with which they were charged.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Jonathan:
The problem that many churches have with deacons is that, no matter what the group is called (board, body, council, gang, gaggle, herd, etc...), as long as it is a "standing body" it will gather (actively or by default) authority over time.

Assuming that Acts 6 describes the first deacons (and, in reality, I don't), we have to recognize that these men where chosen for a specific task. There is nothing in the passage that suggests that they were called as a default body to take care of any other issue other than the one with which they were charged.

So if there was to be no recurring and standing office of deacon, why does Paul give qualifications for it in 1 Tim 3 right alongside of the standing office of pastor/overseer/elder? And to whom was he addresssing the letter to the Philippians? The NT evidence, while scant, surely leads up to believe that the office of deacon was a standing office.