Deacon ministry begins in Acts 6. Most Baptist discussions about deacon ministry start at Acts 6:1, and end at Acts 6:6. (I almost want to hear Paul Harvey say, "And now for the REST of the story.") Our church just went through a minor "split", with most of the senior deacons leaving the church, when there was a disagreement between the pastor and some deacons about the role of deacons. The pastor’s view was that he is the one in charge, and that they should "obey him" (Hebrews 13:17, but the word obey here does not mean what it looks like). The deacons felt that they were operating more as elders in the church, and so resisted, and basically, felt that they needed to leave. In the book of Acts, after chapter and verse 6:6, we are told of how deacon Stephen and deacon Philip did many marvelous things for God, besides serving widows. How would most Baptist churches feel about that, if their deacons acted like Stephen and Philip? Would pastors allow it, or would they fell threatened? Why do Baptist discussions of deacons stop at Acts 6:6? Why do they keep deacons only serving widows, when there is so much more they could be doing?