Acts 18 - Introduction

Excursus on Apollos.

The name of Apollos does not appear again in the ‘Acts.' The episode was introduced evidently for the purpose of showing how the disciples of the Baptist joined the church of the apostles of Christ. They were without doubt very numerous, and were scattered far beyond the precincts of the Holy Land. In this short passage they are mentioned as dwelling in Ephesus and in Alexandria. Had it not been for this reason, it is doubtful if any mention of Apollos would have been made in the ‘Acts.' It was, however, important to show, in the story of the origin of the Christian Church, that one of the most distinguished in the second rank among apostolical men had been carefully trained in the school of John the Baptist, and subsequently had joined a Christian church founded by and under the direct influence of Paul. We know, however, some details respecting the after career of this eminent Alexandrian Jew at Corinth, where Acts 19:1 leaves him. He appears to have preached and taught with marked success, so much so that his name at no distant period seems to have been used at Corinth as the watchword of a party. No hint, however, is ever given to us that the slightest jealousy ever sprang up between Apollos and Paul. Instructed at the first in what we may venture to term Pauline Christianity by Paul's loving and devoted friends Priscilla and Aquila, Apollos never seems to have swerved from those doctrinal principles which at the first through the grace of God brought him to the full knowledge of the Lord Jesus. Devoted loyalty to that great master, whom he soon came to know in the flesh, seems to have been the guiding principle of Apollos' self-denying life. After he left Corinth, the scene of his successful labours, he was urged by a numerous party to return thither and again take up the thread of his eloquent and winning teaching. Even Paul, ever above all earthly feelings of wrong and jealousy, pressed him to go back, though he must have felt that the popularity and influence of the younger man would probably efface him and his name from the memory of Corinth. But Apollos the loyal and faithful positively declined to return, thinking his presence would only fan the party spirit in the church, and would injure the influence of Paul. ‘As touching our brother Apollos, I greatly desired him to come to you with the brethren: but his will was not at all to come to you at this time; but he will come when he shall have a convenient time' (1 Corinthians 16:12). Once more we catch a glimpse of this great figure in apostolical story; in nearly the last of St. Paul's letters (Titus 3:13) there is a little loving mention by the aged apostle, then so near the end of his great life, of the old friend and the possible rival. The words are few and on the surface unimportant, but they complete the story of a ten years' friendship unbroken by differences of opinion, uninterrupted by jealousy or heartburning. The self-effacement of Apollos, one of the most brilliant and able of apostolical men so little known or thought of, shines conspicuously even in the pages of early Christian story, so bright with records of heroic chivalry and generous self-denial.

In this brief notice of one so little known, but who probably bore no small or undistinguished part in the work of laying the early stories of the great Christian temple, some mention would naturally be looked for of a supposition first put forth by Luther, that the unknown author of the Epistle to the Hebrews was this Apollos. The hypothesis of Luther has been widely adopted by scholars of various schools of thought in our own critical age.

The mystery which shrouded the authorship of this great epistle during the early ages of Christianity is well summarised by Origen, who exclaims, ‘God knoweth who is the writer of this letter.' That so important and weighty a writing should exist, should be generally received in the churches as canonical, as proceeding equally with the Gospels and the well-known Epistles of Paul and Peter and John and James from the cabinet of the ever blessed Trinity, and yet be nameless, is a strange, inexplicable fact. Would it be too daring to supplement Luther's hypothesis, which ascribes the writing to Apollos, by suggesting that the silence of Apollos on the subject of his own God-inspired writing is exactly what we should look for from that gifted servant of God, whose life as far as we are acquainted with its details was a life of entire self-effacement?

His brilliant winning powers at an early date placed him in the forefront of the Christian leaders. Some men evidently preferred him, and would have made him the equal, perhaps the rival, of the greatest of the apostles. But Apollos would never hear of being the rival or even the equal of Paul.

Is it not a thought at least worthy to be entertained, that the same nobility of heart which induced the Alexandrian Apollos to decline, even at Paul's request, the mission to Corinth where men loved him and admired him with so great a love and admiration forbade him to put his name to his master-work, the Epistle to the Hebrews? He was Paul's pupil his devoted friend; he would never be his master's rival.