Acts 19:1-12
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
7 And all the men were about twelve.
8 And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.
9 But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.
10 And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.
11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.
When Paul asked these disciples if they had received the Holy Ghost since they believed he was not referring to the Spirit indwelling, baptizing, and sealing them as we know that He does for every member of the body of Christ upon salvation. That would have been a stupid question for a number of obvious reasons. The commentators that think this was what Paul meant try to change the wording of the question to make it fit their limited understanding . They change it to say, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"
Where do we read about disciples receiving the Holy Ghost after (or since) they believed?
John 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
John 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and satin unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you...
Acts 8:12, 15-17
12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost.
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
In the case of the 12 apostles, they received the Holy Ghost as the Comforter before the ascension AND for power on the day of Pentecost. The Holy Ghost coming upon them (Acts 1:8) was the baptism with the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:5). It is described as the Holy Ghost falling upon them (Acts 10:44; 11:15). Peter said that the household of Cornelius "received the Holy Ghost as well as we" (Acts 10:47).
By comparing scripture with scripture this must be what Paul is referring to in Acts 19:2. Evidently he wondered why those kingdom disciples did not demonstrate the power of the Holy Ghost. He inquired as to the baptism (v.3) because he knew that those who repented and were baptized as kingdom disciples on or after the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 were to "receive the gift the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). Not that Peter had a different baptism but that it had different results. John's disciples did not receive the Holy Ghost upon repentance and baptism.
When they told Paul that they had been baptized unto John's baptism (v.3) he simply reviewed what John had preached (v.4) and how his disciples were baptized in the name of the One that John told to believe on (v.5). If the "they" in v.5 is the 12 men Paul was speaking to in the passage, what was it in v.4 that would cause them to be baptized upon hearing it? But, if the "they" in Acts 19:5 refers to the "people" (v.4) John preached to, the "this" in v.5 would refer to John's preaching. Seeing that he preached "the baptism of repentance", this would make more sense. Unless you are going to just make stuff up and read something into the blank space between v.4 and 5, the "this" in v.5 must refer to v.4 and there is nothing in v.4 that would cause those men to be baptized again upon hearing it. Therefore, v.5 must refer to those that heard John. Then Paul laid his hands on them that they might receive the Holy Ghost and when He came on them (Acts 1:8) they spoke with tongues and prophesied (v.6). I believe that this is when they were brought "up to speed" concerning what all they didn't know had developed in the kingdom program. They actually brought themselves "up to speed" because they would have been speaking about the things of the Lord.
This incident demonstrated Paul's apostolic authority to the Jews that he immediately began to preach to in the synagogue (v.8). Paul always began in the synagogues with the "gospel of God" (Rom. 1:1-4; Acts 17:1-3). He would then preach the gospel of Christ to those that received the basic truth that Christ was the Son of God and was risen from the dead. It would be during his time in the synagogue that the 12 disciples that he laid hands on would have the opportunity to respond to the further light that he was preaching.
The text moves rapidly and does not allow for us to insert a long teaching session between v.4 and 5 that Paul would need to bring them up to speed in their own program and then teach them his gospel!
If Paul did rebaptize them it would be the only recorded occurrence of such a thing in the word of God. Why didn't he rebaptize Barnabas and the other kingdom disciples that believed his message and became members of the Body of Christ? Aquila and Priscilla were used of God to teach Apollos the way of God more perfectly. But the text allows for this to have taken some time. Why wasn't Apollos rebaptized? Some say that Aquila didn't have the authority to do it. Well, where are we given the authority to baptize? When Apollos came to Corinth (Acts 19:1) why wasn't he baptized there by the pastor of that established church?
If Acts 19:5 is the strongest proof that Paul had his own baptism, then that is a very weak and highly questionable position to take that is based on much assumption. We can't prove that those disciples were rebaptized. If they were, we can't even prove that Paul is the one who did it or even suggested it! We should never try to establish a doctrine on an unclear passage especially when there is NO other passage that teaches what we think that unclear passage teaches. Therefore, Acts 19:1-7 should not be used as a proof text to support rebaptism or the idea that Paul had his own distinct water baptism. Besides, Paul himself said that "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (1 Cor. 1:17).
In the same passage Paul laid hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost, they spoke in tongues and prophesied, Paul preached to the Jews first, did special miracles (even sent out "prayer cloths") and cast out devils. What a pattern for today!
12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost.
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
In the case of the 12 apostles, they received the Holy Ghost as the Comforter before the ascension AND for power on the day of Pentecost. The Holy Ghost coming upon them (Acts 1:8) was the baptism with the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:5). It is described as the Holy Ghost falling upon them (Acts 10:44; 11:15). Peter said that the household of Cornelius "received the Holy Ghost as well as we" (Acts 10:47).
By comparing scripture with scripture this must be what Paul is referring to in Acts 19:2. Evidently he wondered why those kingdom disciples did not demonstrate the power of the Holy Ghost. He inquired as to the baptism (v.3) because he knew that those who repented and were baptized as kingdom disciples on or after the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 were to "receive the gift the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). Not that Peter had a different baptism but that it had different results. John's disciples did not receive the Holy Ghost upon repentance and baptism.
When they told Paul that they had been baptized unto John's baptism (v.3) he simply reviewed what John had preached (v.4) and how his disciples were baptized in the name of the One that John told to believe on (v.5). If the "they" in v.5 is the 12 men Paul was speaking to in the passage, what was it in v.4 that would cause them to be baptized upon hearing it? But, if the "they" in Acts 19:5 refers to the "people" (v.4) John preached to, the "this" in v.5 would refer to John's preaching. Seeing that he preached "the baptism of repentance", this would make more sense. Unless you are going to just make stuff up and read something into the blank space between v.4 and 5, the "this" in v.5 must refer to v.4 and there is nothing in v.4 that would cause those men to be baptized again upon hearing it. Therefore, v.5 must refer to those that heard John. Then Paul laid his hands on them that they might receive the Holy Ghost and when He came on them (Acts 1:8) they spoke with tongues and prophesied (v.6). I believe that this is when they were brought "up to speed" concerning what all they didn't know had developed in the kingdom program. They actually brought themselves "up to speed" because they would have been speaking about the things of the Lord.
This incident demonstrated Paul's apostolic authority to the Jews that he immediately began to preach to in the synagogue (v.8). Paul always began in the synagogues with the "gospel of God" (Rom. 1:1-4; Acts 17:1-3). He would then preach the gospel of Christ to those that received the basic truth that Christ was the Son of God and was risen from the dead. It would be during his time in the synagogue that the 12 disciples that he laid hands on would have the opportunity to respond to the further light that he was preaching.
The text moves rapidly and does not allow for us to insert a long teaching session between v.4 and 5 that Paul would need to bring them up to speed in their own program and then teach them his gospel!
If Paul did rebaptize them it would be the only recorded occurrence of such a thing in the word of God. Why didn't he rebaptize Barnabas and the other kingdom disciples that believed his message and became members of the Body of Christ? Aquila and Priscilla were used of God to teach Apollos the way of God more perfectly. But the text allows for this to have taken some time. Why wasn't Apollos rebaptized? Some say that Aquila didn't have the authority to do it. Well, where are we given the authority to baptize? When Apollos came to Corinth (Acts 19:1) why wasn't he baptized there by the pastor of that established church?
If Acts 19:5 is the strongest proof that Paul had his own baptism, then that is a very weak and highly questionable position to take that is based on much assumption. We can't prove that those disciples were rebaptized. If they were, we can't even prove that Paul is the one who did it or even suggested it! We should never try to establish a doctrine on an unclear passage especially when there is NO other passage that teaches what we think that unclear passage teaches. Therefore, Acts 19:1-7 should not be used as a proof text to support rebaptism or the idea that Paul had his own distinct water baptism. Besides, Paul himself said that "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (1 Cor. 1:17).
In the same passage Paul laid hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost, they spoke in tongues and prophesied, Paul preached to the Jews first, did special miracles (even sent out "prayer cloths") and cast out devils. What a pattern for today!
No comments:
Post a Comment