Acts 19:1-7

CRITICAL REMARKS

Acts 19:1. While Apollos was at Corinth.—A note of time for the incidents narrated in the present chapter. The upper coasts, or the upper country.—The district mentioned above (Acts 18:23) as the region of Galatia and Phrygia, and commonly regarded as the territory of Northern Galatia (see on Acts 16:6), though Prof. Ramsay explains the term “upper coasts,” or “higher districts,” as the elevated mountain country of Phrygia which separates the Sangarios from the salt lake Anava, both of which were situated in Low Phrygia, and understands Luke to intimate that instead of pursuing the ordinary caravan route to Ephesus, which “passed along the coast of Lake Anava as it descends to Laodicea,” Paul “traversed the higher districts—i.e., preferred the shorter hill road practicable for foot passengers, but not for wheeled traffic, by way of Seiblia” (The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 94). Came to Ephesus, and finding, should, according to the best authorities, be read came to Ephesus, and found. One MS. (Codex D) begins the verse thus: “But Paul, desirous according to his own plan to proceed to Jerusalem, the Spirit told him to turn aside into Asia.” (See “Critical Remarks” on Acts 18:19.) Certain disciples.—Baur detects a contradiction, and therefore a sign of untruthfulness, in these men being called disciples when they had not been baptised.

Acts 19:2. Whether there be any Holy Ghost.—Better, whether a Holy Spirit is; probably (as in John 7:39) whether a Holy Spirit is given at baptism or on profession of faith.

Acts 19:4. Omit verily and Christ. The verse is not to be read as if Paul intended to say that John baptised in order that the people should believe (Meyer), but his meaning is that while John baptised he spoke to the people that they should believe.

Acts 19:7. Twelve men.—The truthfulness of this story is impeached on three grounds:

(1) the unlikelihood of Paul’s meeting accidentally with these, when Aquila could have told him about them before; and
(2) the improbability that none of these twelve had ever heard of the Messiahship of Jesus and of the baptism of the Holy Ghost from some one of their own kind who had been converted (Wendt); and
(3) the difficulty of seeing why they should have required to be baptised and Apollos not (Holtzmann). But, perhaps
(1) Paul knew of their existence before he met them;
(2) they may never have met with Apollos or Aquila; and
(3) Apollos may have been baptised.

HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS

Acts 19:1. Paul’s return to Ephesus; or, the Re-Baptism of some of John’s Disciples

I. The Apostle’s meeting with these disciples.—

1. When he encountered them. On returning to Ephesus, which he reached

(1) by way of the upper coasts (or country), meaning probably the mountainous regions (as distinguished from the lower elevations (see “Critical Remarks”) of Phrygia or of Asia as distinguished from the low ground on which Ephesus was situated, and

(2) after Apollos had departed and was established in Corinth, where he laboured in the gospel with such acceptance as to draw around himself a considerable body of adherents who recognised him as their spiritual teacher (1 Corinthians 1:12; 1 Corinthians 3:4).

2. Who they were. Certain disciples—i.e., believers in the Christian faith, twelve in number, “living,” probably, “together as a kind of ascetic community, attending the meetings of the Church, yet not sharing the fulness of its life” (Plumptre)—who, like Apollos (Acts 18:25), had some knowledge of the way of the Lord as proclaimed by the Baptist, and had even been baptised by the forerunner or one of his disciples—it is not certain that Apollos was baptised (but see “Critical Remarks,” Acts 19:7)—but were totally unacquainted with the later facts of Christ’s history, and with the Spirit baptism of Pentecost.

3. His surprise at meeting them. The credibility of the narrative is half suspected by Holtzmann on the ground that Paul should not have felt any surprise at falling in with the twelve followers of the Baptist, since Aquila must have prepared him for such a meeting by relating his experience with Apollos; while Wendt is half inclined to doubt whether the disciples spoken of could have been so ignorant as they are represented, if they were really converted; and Ramsay cannot understand how these men could have “escaped the knowledge of Aquila, Priscilla, and Apollos, and yet attracted Paul’s attention before he went to the synagogue.” But

(1) Paul may have met these disciples on his first arrival in the city and before he had resumed acquaintance with his old friends Aquila and Priscilla.
(2) The disciples in question may easily enough have accepted the Baptist’s account of Christ and submitted to baptism without having subsequently learnt about the Resurrection and Ascension, with the Pentecostal effusion of the Holy Ghost. And
(3) it is gratuitous to assume that Paul did not learn of the existence of John’s followers from Aquila and Priscilla, while his knowledge of the state of imperfectly developed Christianity in which Apollos was, may have been the very circumstance which led him to suspect that the disciples now spoken of were in a similar condition.

II. The Apostle’s conversation with these disciples.—

1. The first question addressed to them by Paul. “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” or “Did ye receive the Holy Ghost when ye believed?”

(1) The import of this question was, not whether they were acquainted with the personality of the Holy Spirit, or whether they had received the Holy Spirit at any period subsequent to their believing, but whether on the occasion of their first profession of faith (by baptism) they had been the subjects of any supernatural endowment with spiritual gifts.
(2) The object of the question was to ascertain whether they had been baptised after a full and distinct profession of faith in the crucified and risen Christ.
(3) The sufficiency of the question arose from this, that had they been baptised with true Christian baptism, then undoubtedly they must have received some spiritual gift (compare Acts 10:44; Romans 1:11), whereas if they had not received any such gift, then they could not have been baptised with Christian baptism, and must still be imperfectly instructed Christians.

2. The answer returned by them to Paul. “We have not so much as heard” (or, we did not so much as hear) “whether there be any Holy Ghost” (or, whether the Holy Ghost was given). Again

(1) the sense of this reply can hardly have been that they had never heard of the existence of a Holy Spirit (Hackett), since, as Bengel remarks, they could scarcely have been followers either of Moses or of the Baptist without attaining to such knowledge (Exodus 31:3; Exodus 35:31; Numbers 27:18; Matthew 3:11); but

(2) must have been that when received into the faith either nothing had been said about the Holy Spirit at all (Alford), or nothing had been spoken about a dispensation of the Spirit being connected with the act of reception into the Church by faith (Lechler).
3. The second question addressed to them by Paul. “Unto” or into “what then were ye baptised?” What was the object of your faith and the subject of your confession when ye were baptised? The questions presuppose that some declaration was made either by them of their faith, or by the administrant of the baptismal rite of the significance of the ordinance, perhaps by both.

4. The second answer returned by them. “They said, Unto (or into) John’s baptism.” Not unto John as the Messiah, or unto John as their spiritual leaders which would certainly have been “opposed to the humility and the entire character of the Baptist” (Lechler); but into that repentance and faith in the coming Messiah which John preached, and to the exercise of which he took those bound who submitted to the rite of baptism.

5. The further instruction supplied them by Paul. This consisted in

(1) an exposition of the true purport of John’s baptism, which was designed to point his hearers to a Messiah who was to come and commit them to faith in that Messiah when he did come, and
(2) an intimation that that Messiah had come in the person of Jesus, on whom therefore it was now their duty to believe.
6. The response given by them to this instruction. When they heard it they did not dispute the correctness of the apostle’s teaching, but believed. This, though not stated, must be assumed.

III. The Apostle’s re-baptism of these disciples.—

1. The fact of it. The text cannot be read in this way—“When they (John’s disciples) heard (what their Master, John, said) they were baptised (by John) in the name of the Lord Jesus,” as if it were a continuation of Paul’s remarks (Beza and others),—even to wrest it from the Anabaptists. That the baptism was performed by Paul is as clear as it is true that John never baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus.

2. The manner of it. Most likely, as was Paul’s usual practice (1 Corinthians 1:14), by the hands of another than himself, though this is not absolutely certain.

3. The accompaniment of it. The laying on of hands upon the baptised disciples. This was performed by the apostle, and was instantly followed by the descent upon them of the Holy Ghost so that they forthwith “spake with tongues and prophesied” (compare Acts 10:44).

4. The inference from it. Not that re-baptism is always necessary when conversion intervenes after the first. It is not demonstrable that those who had been baptised by John’s baptism were always re-baptised on becoming Christian disciples. Doubtless among the thousands baptised at Pentecost were many who had been baptised by John; but no evidence appears that the apostles who had only received John’s baptism were re-baptised. Possibly in their case the baptism with fire at Pentecost rendered the repetition of the water rite unnecessary. The re-baptism of Apollos is also problematical.

Learn.—

1. That genuine faith may coexist with very imperfect knowledge of Christian truth.
2. That sincere faith will always be ready to receive further enlightenment.
3. That a properly instructed faith always looks towards and rests on the name of the Lord Jesus.
4. That true faith is always followed by the reception of the Holy Spirit.
5. That Christian baptism once received does not need to be repeated.

HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

Acts 19:2. On receiving the Holy Ghost.

I. The necessity of receiving the Holy Ghost.—That one who has believed in Jesus must also receive the Holy Ghost was: I. The express declaration of prophecy. See the utterances on this subject of Isaiah, Joel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, John the Baptist.

2. The explicit promise of Christ Himself. As, for instance, to the woman of Samaria (John 4:14) and to the Jews in the temple (John 7:38); to the twelve at the supper table (John 14:16; John 15:26; John 16:7), and again to the eleven after His resurrection (Luke 24:49).

3. The unambiguous assertion of Christ’s apostles. Examine the language of Peter (Acts 2:38, Acts 5:32), of Paul (Galatians 4:6; Ephesians 1:13), and of John (1 John 3:24).

II. Marks by which the Holy Ghost’s presence in the heart may be known.—In the early apostolic age of the Church the descent of the Holy Ghost upon a believer revealed itself in certain miraculous endowments which were thereby communicated to him, such as the gift of tongues (Acts 19:6), the gift of prophecy, or of healing or of discerning spirits, or of interpretation of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:9). Now it is recognised by such signs as:

1. Inward illumination, the Holy Ghost being a spirit of truth (John 14:17), whose office it is to guide into all truth (John 16:13); compare 1 John 2:20.

2. Growing sanctity, the Holy Ghost being a spirit of purity, as His name implies, and bringing holiness into the heart as He imparts light to the understanding (Ephesians 5:9).

3. Habitual devotion, the Holy Ghost being essentially a spirit of grace and supplication (Zechariah 12:10).

III. Advantages that result from receiving the Holy Ghost.—The reception of the Holy Spirit by a believer constitutes

1. A true bond of union between the believer’s soul and Christ. The union of Christ to His people and of believers to Christ is not merely external, forensic, legal, but also internal, moral, and spiritual (1 John 4:13).

2. A seal of the believer as Christ’s purchased possession. By the gift of the Holy Spirit, Christ, as it were, claims the believer as His own (Ephesians 1:13).

3. An earnest of the believer’s inheritance. The indwelling of the Holy Ghost is the foretaste of future glory (Ephesians 1:14).

Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? The influences of the Holy Spirit are extraordinary and ordinary. His ordinary influences are those which are exerted in conversion and after conversion. It is of the Spirit’s work in believers I shall now speak.

1. Have ye received the Holy Ghost as a teacher? Believers need instruction. They do not receive a new revelation. The author of the Book explains it to them. On what subjects? The house of the interpreter.
2. Have ye received the Holy Ghost as a guide? Believers need guidance as well as instruction. Practical religion. No Urim and Thummim. The Bible a guide-book. Ministers and Christian friends convey information about the route. The Holy Spirit is the guide. Mentor.
3. Have ye received the Holy Ghost as a sanctifier? Believers do not learn all at once the plagues of their own heart. They are led from one apartment to another of the chambers of imagery. They desire to be holy as the miser desires gold, or the scholar knowledge, or the statesman power. They use the means, but rely on the Holy Spirit.
4. Have ye received the Holy Ghost as a comforter? He is a comforter because He administers consolation to believers in seasons of affliction. But more. He supplies to them strength adequate to every exigency. And more. He bestows on them true and lasting happiness.
5. Have ye received the Holy Ghost as an intercessor? Distinguish between the intercession of the Spirit and that of Christ.—G. Brooks.

Acts 19:3. On the Import of Baptism.—“Into what were ye baptised?” Into

I. Repentance of sin.
II. Faith in Jesus Christ.

III. Resolution after new obedience.
IV. Submission to the leading of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 19:3; Acts 19:5. The two Masters, John and Christ.

I. Human masters may transmit their words; Christ only can impart His Spirit.
II. Human masters may teach the elements; Christ only can conduct to the goal.
III. Human masters may establish schools; Christ only can found a Church.—Gerok.

Acts 19:6. The Tongues which the Holy Ghost gives.

I. The tongue of the wise.—The tongue of truth, the tongue of knowledge (Proverbs 15:2; Malachi 2:7; Ephesians 4:25).

II. The tongue of the holy.—The tongue of righteousness, the tongue of purity (Psalms 35:28; Psalms 39:1; 2 Peter 1:21).

III. The tongue of the loving.—The tongue of kindness, the tongue of soft speech (Proverbs 31:26; Ephesians 4:15).

IV. The tongue of the learned.—The tongue of eloquence, the tongue of persuasive speech (Isaiah 1:4; Psalms 45:1).

V. The tongue of the earnest.—The tongue of fire, the tongue of zealous utterance (Isaiah 6:7; Acts 2:3).