《Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures – Acts (Vol. 3)》(Johann P. Lange)
19 Chapter 19
Verses 1-7
§ III. Arrival of the apostle Paul at Ephesus. He meets with certain disciples of John, whom he conducts to the full grace of Christ
Acts 19:1-7
1And [But] it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed [travelled] through the upper coasts [districts][FN1] came to Ephesus; and finding [found][FN2] certain disciples, 2He [And] said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed ? [Did ye receive the Holy Ghost, when ye became believers ?] And they said [But they replied][FN3] unto him, [No,] We have not so much as heard whether there be any [a] Holy Ghost 3 And he said unto them [om. unto them[FN4]], Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism 4 Then said Paul [But Paul said], John verily [indeed, μὲν] baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which [who] should come after him, that Isaiah, on Christ [om. Christ[FN5]] Jesus 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus 6 And when Paul had [om. had, ἐπιθέντος] laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied 7 And [But] all the men were about twelve.[FN6]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Acts 19:1-3. a. And it came to pass.—The ἀνωτερικὰμέρη are the interior regions, such as Galatia and Phrygia ( Acts 18:23), which were more elevated than the sea-coast on which Ephesus was situated. On a former occasion Paul had been forbidden by the Holy Ghost to labor on the western coast of Asia Minor, and when he returned from his second missionary journey, the visit which he paid to Ephesus was very brief. He was now permitted to remain during a much longer period in that city, and the divine blessing attended his labors.
b. Finding certain disciples.—Luke applies to the men of whom he here speaks, the term μαθητάς, i.e., Christians, unquestionably employing it in a wide sense. The apostle must have been induced by certain circumstances which he had noticed, to doubt whether these men had received the gift of the Holy Ghost at the time of their conversion. [“Not, as Engl, version: Have ye received, etc, but: Did ye receive the Holy Ghost when ye became believers?” This translation or interpretation of Alford, is fully adopted by Alexander and Hackett.—Tr.]. He accordingly addressed the question to them in direct terms. And yet this question, especially the word πιστεύσαντες [“which can bear no meaning than that of believing on the Lord Jesus” (Alf.).—Tr.] evidently presupposes that in point of fact they are Christians already. The word ἀλλά, with which their answer begins, implies that it is given in the negative, as if it began with “No !” [The negative is absorbed by ἀλλά; comp. 1 Corinthians 6:6; 1 Corinthians 10:20; John 7:48-49. (Winer: Gram. § 537.).—Tr.].—They proceed even further, and without reserve declare that they did not ascertain from report, and still less from personal experience, whether a Holy Ghost exists. [“Here, again, not, as Engl, version: we have not heard—but: we did not hear, at the time of our conversion, etc.” (Alf.). Both here and in the former case, aorists are used.—Tr.]. Now the Holy Ghost in the answer must obviously be used in the same sense in which it occurs in the question, that Isaiah, the Holy Ghost as the gift of God in Christ, and as a Christian communication of the same to men. The meaning cannot be that they had at no time heard that there is a Holy Spirit of God. Those who received the baptism of John, must necessarily have also had a knowledge of God and of the Messiah, and, no doubt, likewise of the Spirit of God. We are, moreover, constrained to regard these disciples as Jews by birth; the silence of Luke respecting their Jewish descent certainly does not prove the contrary. Their own expressions do not in any manner suggest a pagan origin, and no traces whatever exist, which indicate that the number of the disciples of John had received accessions from the Gentile world.
c. Unto what then were ye baptized? This question can have no other meaning than the following: ‘To what then did the baptism which ye received, refer?’ The answer plainly shows that these men had not yet obtained clear views of the general subject. It is very true that they do not say: εἰςτὸνἸωάννην; such a reply, indeed, would have been inconsistent with the humility and the whole character of John the Baptist. And yet we cannot assume (as Meyer seems to do) that the men distinctly meant the following: ‘We were baptized unto that which constitutes the nature and purpose of John’s baptism, namely, repentance, and faith in the Messiah who was coming. Such was the case in point of fact, and these disciples were, without any doubt, baptized unto the (unknown) Messiah; still it would seem that their general conceptions of the subject were not clear, for Paul would not otherwise have given them preliminary instructions on this point, Acts 19:4. No facts are recorded which sustain the conjecture of Wetstein that these men had been instructed by Apollos, before he was himself made more thoroughly acquainted with Christianity.
Acts 19:4-7. a. John verily baptized.—Paul describes the nature of the baptism of John in brief but expressive terms: It imported—he says—only a change of mind; it was simply a baptism of repentance, combined with the obligation to believe on Him who should come after John. Ἵνα is not to be taken here in a strict sense, as if it implied a purpose or design, or meant: John baptized … in order that they might believe. (Meyer). The expression ἵναπιστεύσωσι, Acts 19:4, stands, on the contrary (in accordance with the process by which concise expressions in the Greek language were resolved or weakened in the progress of time), for the infinitive, and merely states the subject to which the words and exhortations (λέγων) of John referred. [See this point—that the writers of the N. T. sometimes employed ἵνα, where according to the rules of Greek prose writers, a simple infinitive (pres. or aor. but not perf.) might have been expected—established, in Winer: Gram. N. T.§ 448.—Tr.]. When Paul adds the words: that Isaiah, on Jesus, Acts 19:4, he connects the fulfilment with the promise, and testifies that although the baptism of John was not yet in point of fact a baptism unto Jesus, it nevertheless referred in its very nature to none other than to Him. In consequence of this declaration, these disciples of John were now baptized unto Jesus, as the Lord. (Εἰςτὸὄνομα, that Isaiah, unto faith in Him, and the confession of Him.). [See the Doctr. and Eth. views which are subjoined.—Tr.]
b. It is not here distinctly stated whether the apostle himself, or another person, administered the rite of baptism. It seems probable, however, that the latter was the case, because the imposition of hands is expressly attributed to Paul. As the result of this Acts, which was performed after the administration of full Christian baptism, the persons baptized now received the Holy Ghost, whose operations were made manifest, when they spake with tongues, and when the inspired utterances of their souls were heard.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. These disciples of John, even before they receive that which is strictly Christian baptism, and before they advance to a full knowledge, and to the confession, of Jesus, are, nevertheless, already regarded as disciples that Isaiah, as Christians. Luke terms them μαθηταἰ, and Paul assumes that they are already baptized and converted. These circumstances show that even in the apostolic age there already existed a wider [as well as a narrower] circle of the discipleship of Christ, that Isaiah, of the Church. It is not the christianization of entire nations, and still less is it the combination of ecclesiastical and political relations, which lead to a division of the Church into a narrower and a wider circle; the cause is rather to be sought in the general fact of the extension of Christianity. The true boundaries of the two circles are determined exclusively by the relation in which men stand to the Person of Jesus Christ himself. Whoever is united with Him in spirit and in heart, by grace on the one hand, and by faith on the other, belongs to the narrower circle of His people. But he whose relation to the personal Redeemer is only distant, and, indeed, only external, belongs to the wider circle.
2. This is the last occasion on which the results of the labors of John the Baptist are mentioned in the New Testament. The extent of his labors, and the period during which their influence was felt, may be estimated, when we consider the fact, that in the Hellenic, commercial city of Ephesus, and about the year A.D55, or about a generation later than John himself, as many as twelve of his disciples suddenly present themselves, who, it is true, now become members of the church of Christ, but who had previously not advanced beyond John and his baptism. They had, indeed, rather retrograded, which is often the case with any tendency, when a long period of time passes by, and the original author of that tendency has passed away, and when, at the same time, no pure and living medium of communication (like the Scriptures and the Holy Ghost in the church of Christ), is retained. It may be remarked, besides, that the most satisfactory evidence of a willingness to make progress and to seek the truth, is found in the circumstance that these twelve men voluntarily received the baptism unto Jesus, and that the remaining disciples of John abandoned their distinctive character by entering the church of Jesus Christ, instead of resisting grace and truth in its fulness, and obstinately maintaining the position which they had previously held.—We simply add, in one word, that the Song of Solomon -called Christians of John (Mandæans) in Mesopotamia, have no historical connection whatever with John the Baptist; that name they never apply to themselves; it was only introduced by Christian travellers and learned men; see Herzog: Real-Encyk., art. Mendäer. [Vol. IX:318–324.—Tr.]
3. The administration of Baptism in the case of these disciples of John, has been the occasion of many doctrinal discussions. The Reformers (Calvin and Beza), and later Lutheran theologians felt themselves constrained to interpret Acts 19:5 in such a sense, that it could afford no aid either to the views of the Anabaptists, on the one hand, or, on the other, to the dogma of the Council of Trent, according to which there was an essential difference between the Johanneic and the Christian baptism. In opposition to the Anabaptists, Calvin unfortunately adopted the expedient of interpreting Acts 19:5, not of the baptism of water, but of the baptism of the Spirit, so that Acts 19:6 simply furnishes an additional explanation of the meaning of Acts 19:5. But Acts 19:5 undeniably refers to the baptism of water. This circumstance, however, affords no aid to the opponents of infant baptism. The twelve men were baptized a second time, not because they had been baptized as children, but because the baptism which they had received, was not the full Christian Baptism—a circumstance which does not in the least degree sanction the repetition of Christian baptism. And with respect to the Romish canon, viz, that the baptism of John did not possess an efficacy equal to that of the baptism of Christ, no considerations derived from the Scriptures can be advanced against it; only doctrinal prejudices can lead to the opinion that the baptism of John differed from the baptism of Christ, not in its very nature, but only in certain accidental features. Now as that opinion is contradicted by the passage before us, its advocates offered violence to Acts 19:5, by representing it as a part of Paul’s address to the twelve men which begins in Acts 19:4 [see note5 above, appended to the text.—Tr.]. It is not necessary to offer a refutation of such an interpretation. The twelve disciples had, at all events, not been baptized unto the Person of Jesus, and it was necessary to supply this want. The Holy Spirit is also given, but only in Jesus Christ, and for the sake of Christ. The true baptism, and, accordingly, fellowship with the Redeemer Himself, and not the imposition of hands, i.e., the apostolical sanction (as Baumgarten assumes), constitute the conditions on which the gift of the Spirit depends.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Acts 19:1. Paul came to Ephesus, and finding certain disciples.—Paul would not so often have found, if he had not so diligently sought. He that seeketh, findeth. The blessing of God always attended him, because his whole heart was devoted to His cause.—Although these people were still very feeble with respect to experience and knowledge, the Holy Spirit nevertheless numbers them already among the disciples. Even a beginner in religion deserves to receive this noble name, if he only possesses in the eyes of God a heart that earnestly desires salvation. A pastor should take special interest in such souls. They are the children whom we should cherish with the fidelity of a nurse. [ 1 Thessalonians 2:7]. (Ap. Past.).—The course of some Christians of more recent times, who recognize no Christianity as genuine and true, unless it appears in its perfect and complete development, manifests neither much love, nor much knowledge, and is not the course which the apostle adopted. (Menken).
Acts 19:2. Have ye received the Holy Ghost?—This was the theme of all the inquiries which the apostle addressed to the men. He endeavored to satisfy his own mind by various questions respecting the nature and progress of their conversion, and to ascertain whether their religious experience was of that thorough kind, which is the result solely of the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in man. But all their replies amounted simply to the following: ‘We know nothing as yet concerning the Holy Ghost.’ (Williger).—And would not many disciples of our own day, whose Christian knowledge and Christian walk must, to a certain extent, be admitted, be compelled, if they honestly and sincerely replied to the same interrogation, to confess: ‘We know nothing as yet concerning the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of repentance, of regeneration, of adoption, of liberty, of love’?
Acts 19:3. unto what then were ye baptized?—Every Christian should daily address this question to himself, for “every one has much to learn and to practise with respect to baptism during his whole life, seeing that it is necessary for him at all times so to labor and strive that he may firmly believe all that baptism promises and offers, namely, the victory over the devil and death, the forgiveness of sins, the grace of God, Christ in his fulness, and the Holy Ghost with all his gifts.” (Luther).
Acts 19:4. Then Paul said, etc.—With what reverence the apostle here speaks of John! He does not attempt to depreciate that servant of God, but refers to the divine office which he held in his day, and shows that if men did not derive advantage from it, the cause could not be attributed to John. Such was the proper course; it is not well when one teacher despises and disparages another. (Ap. Past.).—After this point of time, no further mention of John the Baptist is made in the New Testament. Here at length he wholly gives place to Christ. (Bengel).
Acts 19:5. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.—Previously to the completion of the work of redemption the baptism of John as a baptism unto Christ, as unto Him who was to come, was the true baptism. But after Pentecost, the true baptism is a baptism unto Christ, referring to Him who has appeared—a baptism into Christ as into Him who is now present; and the intermediate work of his forerunner has ceased.—“Hence the baptism of John is no longer valid. If any man should say: ‘I baptize thee with the baptism of John the Baptist for the forgiveness of sins,’ he would not rightly baptize. For John’s baptism was simply a precursor or herald of the forgiveness of sins. We should, on the contrary, simply say: ‘All thy sins are forgiven thee through the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ; I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Song of Solomon, and of the Holy Ghost. That Isaiah, I take all thy sins away, and do not send thee to another, as John has done. ’But John was obliged to say: ‘Prepare yourselves; receive Him who will give you the Holy Ghost in baptism, and bring to you the forgiveness of sins.” (Luther).—Those were rebaptized, who had received the baptism of John, because he was not the foundation of our righteousness and the giver of the Holy Spirit, but merely the herald of the Spirit and of the saving grace which Christ, as the sole foundation and author of our righteousness, soon afterwards acquired for us. (Justus Jonas.).—It is true that he who comprehended the full and real meaning of the baptism of John, as of the forerunner of Jesus, did not need a new baptism as a follower of Jesus Christ. But whenever John was regarded as the head of a sect, and his baptism as a ceremony, the latter could neither be considered, nor could it operate, as a Christian baptism. (Rieger, and Ap. Past.).