John,

        "(2)  The idea that the "office of deacon" 
originates in Acts 6 is incorrect."

        In Acts 6, the congregation was facing a
specific situation.  The people brought the issue
to the apostles.  The apostles instructed the people
to chose some individuals.  That choosing and the
subsequent work of those individuals resolved the
problem.  

        While this is certainly a historical example of
how problems in a church were handled the text of
Acts 6 does not include any statement that a new "office"
in the church was being instituted or that people chosen
to such a position were chosen permanently for an
ongoing "office."

        It seems to me, however, that one principle we
should learn from Acts 6 is that those who are involved
in the ministry of the word - preachers and teachers - 
should not leave that ministry to wait on tables.  The
church should choose others for this task.

        I Timothy 3 shows that deacons were as much
an "office" in the church as were overseers.  Paul's
words here deal with the qualities a person in these
"offices" must possess.  But there do not seem to
be clear statements here concerning the duties of the
people in these "offices."  We could infer those duties
from the qualities, I suppose.  An overseer is to teach,
since he is required to be able to teach, but a deacon is
not to teach, since he is not required to have this ability.
I'm not sure how valid such inferences would be.

        It is interesting to me that neither overseers nor
deacons are required to be tithers.  At least, they have
no greater requirement here than any other believer has.

                                                        Jim