Acts 6.1 Again: Refining the Argument

“Now during those days, when the disciples were increasing in number, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food.” Acts 6:1

Below I argued that scholars such as Martin Hengel seem justified in attributing some special significance to the Hellenist Christians in relation to their “Hebrew” counterparts. There is evidence to the effect that there was an ideological distinction between them, but just what that was is not perfectly clear.

Here I want to refine one of the points I made earlier. In reference to Acts 6.1, I asked “why should Luke introduce such a disruptive episode into his ideal picture,” the thought being that Luke was working with traditional material that did not fit well into the narrative, perhaps indicating the author's attempt to provide an explanation for some faint or distant memory. Thus one could feel justified in suspecting that there is more here than meets the eye.

The more I think of this line of argument the less happy I am with it. I also now recall reading someone (perhaps Craig C. Hill or Todd Penner) make the point that the episode is not so disruptive, especially coming on the heels, as it does, of Ananias and Sapphira. It, in fact, allows Luke to show the church responding to and overcoming a potential rift (a similar thing happens in Acts 15), and it has a positive and familiar outcome in terms of the growth of the community (6.7; cf. 2.47; 5.14). In this sense, there may be nothing unusual or awkward about this episode in Luke’s overall narrative.

The better way to make the argument is that the way the narrative develops (and here there are some anomalies in the text) suggests that this episode of grumbling in the community may be indicative or representative of other tensions or differences between the two kinds of early believers in Christ.

I should perhaps also stress that the evidence does not require us to posit two groups in open conflict. Luke shows these believers working together—the Hellenists in subordination to the twelve—and there seems to be no reason to doubt that. His narrative also intimates some differences between them (beside the basic linguistic difference), and there seems to be no reason to doubt that either.