TRANSLATION LEGEND: ALT = Analytical-Literal Translation (2005), AMPLIFIED = Amplified Bible (1965), ASV = American Standard Version (1901), BBE=Bible in Basic English (1949), DRA = Douay-Rheims (1899), ERV = English Revised Version (1885), ESV = English Stand Version (2001), GNB = Good News (1966), GWN = God’S Word (1995), IE = International English, ISV = International Standard Version (1967), JPS = Jewish Publication Society (1917), KJV = King James Version (1611), L.ITV = Literal Translation of the Bible ((1976), LIVING = Living Bible (1971), MKJV = Modern KJV (1962), MONTGOMERY = Montgomery’s New Testament (2001), MRD = Peshitta-James Murdock Translation (1852), NAB = New American Bible (2002), NASB = New American Standard Bible (1977), NAU = New American Standard Bible (1995), NIB = New International Bible, NIV = New International Version (1984), NJB = New Jerusalem Bible (1985), NKJV = New King James Version (1979), NLT =New Living Translation (1996), NRSV = New Revised Standard Version (1989), PHILLIPS = J B Phillips New Testament (1962), PNT = BISHOP’S New Testament (1595), RSV = Revised Standard Version (1952), TNK = JPS Tanakj (1985), Webster = The Webster Bible (1833),WEYMOUTH = Weymouth’s New Testament (1903), WILLIAMS = William’s New Testament (1937), TYNDALE = Tyndale’s Bible (1526), WYCLIFFE = Wycliffe New Testament (1382), YLT =Young’s Literal Translation (1862).

---------- Lexicon and Bible Translation Codes with Identification -----------

LEXICON LEGEND: FRIEBERG = Friberg Lexicon, UBS = UBS Lexicon, LOUW-NIDA = Louw-Nida Lexicon, LIDDELL SCOTT = Liddell Scott Lexicon, THAYER = Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, LEH = LEH Lexicon, GINGRICH = Gingrich Lexicon

DISCLAIMER: The quoting of other translations is not to be taken as a condoning of them. My purpose is rather to show the remarkable diversity, and sometimes outright contradictions that exist among these various versions of Scripture. Our understanding of the Word of God ultimately depends upon our comprehension of the Lord Himself and His eternal purpose. Where this understanding is not present, we are shut up to scholasticism and conjecture, both of which are of the world, not of God.

“^19:1 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, ²He 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. ³And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. ⁴Then 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. ⁵When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. ⁶And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. ⁷And all the men were about twelve.” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Acts 19:1-7)

While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took a road through the upper interior of the country, and came back to Ephesus. Upon arriving in the region, Paul finds “certain disciples” in Ephesus. Having discerned a level of faith and commitment in them, he asked them a most arresting question: “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” Upon hearing that they were not even aware there was a Holy Spirit, Paul inquired about their baptism. Having learned they were baptized with John’s baptism, he told them the purpose of that baptism. They were then baptized in the name of Jesus, Paul laid his hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. As at the house of Cornelius, they spoke in other languages, prophesying. This marked the final Scriptural account of someone being baptized with John’s baptism – approximately 25 years after the day of Pentecost. This is the Scriptural record of a group of “about twelve” disciples, marking a spiritual epoch. As is apparent, numbers are not what is given attention in the Scriptures. Rather, it is nature of what took place.

The works that are written up by the Spirit always have to do with what the Lord is doing. The record of the beginning of the heavens and the earth are a record of what the Lord did (Gen 1).

The works can be judgment, as in the cases of Adam and Eve being driven from the Garden(Gen 4:22-24), the flood (Gen 6:12-13,17; 7:21-22), Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19:24-25), Egypt (Ex 9:14-16; 12:12), Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 4:22-33), Belshaszzar (Dan 5:5-30), or Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 1-11). In each of these cases, the point was not simply that something happened. God was working!

The work may also be one of great blessing, as in the calling of Abraham (Gen 12:1-3), the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage (Ex 12)), the setting of God’s love upon Israel (Deut 7:7), the exaltation of Joseph (Gen 41:37-46), the preservation of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Dan 3:20-30), the deliverance of Daniel (Dan 6:16-27), and, ultimately, the sending of Jesus to bless the people (Acts 3:26). All of the details associated with these, and other, accounts were a report of how the Lord worked among men.

When men behold and consider what is taking place in the world, they must not divorce God from their thinking. The highest form of consideration involves seeing and pondering the work of the Lord. If men fail to do this, they will be dominated by carnal curiosity, and led into erroneous conclusions and patterns of thought.

Throughout Scripture there are expressions of this kind of thinking – even from ancient times.

➪ “Hearken unto this, O Job: stand still, and consider the wondrous WORKS OF GOD” (Job 37:14).

➪ “Come and see THE WORKS OF GOD: he is terrible in his doing toward the children of men” (Psa 66:5).

➪ “That they might set their hope in God, and not forget THE WORKS OF GOD, but keep his commandments” (Psa 78:7).

➪ “Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that THE WORKS OF GOD should be made manifest in him” (John 9:3).

➪ “Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues THE WONDERFUL WORKS OF GOD” (Acts 2:11).

All of God’s works “are done in truth” (Psa 33:4). None of them violate either sound reasoning or righteous law. Further, God is “holy in all His works” (Psa 145:17), which are an expression of His righteous character, for He is “righteous in all His works” (Dan 9:14). . This is why it is sinful to question God, dispute with Him, or consider what He has done to be unfair. Further, when once the works of God are perceived, it is sinful to forget them (Psa 78:11). The Lord rejoices “in His works,” and men ought to do the same (Psa 104:31). Whatever form they may take, discerning men can report the works of the Lord “with rejoicing” (Psa 107:22). It is in the consideration of His works that men will receive “counsel” from the Lord (Psa 106:13). God’s foreknowledge is said to be in regard to His own works (Acts 15:18). How can it possibly be right for men to men to ignore the fact of His working?

The works of the Lord have moral power – power that enables men to think and assess things properly. Thus it is written, “He hath showed His people the power of His works, that He may give them the heritage of the heathen” (Psa 111:6). For those who correctly assess His works, giving due heed to them, this word will be fulfilled: “The LORD is good to all: and His tender mercies are over all His works” (Psa 145:9).

From the highest vantage point, “the whole earth is full of His glory” (Isa 6:3). From the most precise viewpoint God is “working salvation in the midst of the earth” (Psa 74:12).

Truly insightful souls have recognized the works of God and given Him due honor. When young Samuel divulged to Eli the message that had been given to him – one of judgment and sorrow – Eli responded, “It is the LORD: let Him do what seemeth him good” (1 Sam 3:18). When Samuel considered Moses and Aaron and the deliverance of Israel, he told the people, “It is the LORD that advanced Moses and Aaron, and that brought your fathers up out of the land of Egypt” (1 Sam 12:6). Early one morning following Christ raising from dead, He appeared to His disciples at the sea of Tiberias. After causing them to garner a great catch of fish, John recognized the work and cried out, “It is the Lord” (John 21:7).

During the early days of the Judges, “an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochum,” and delivered a message to the people. Speaking for Jehovah he said, “I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers.” Following his words, this notation is made concerning the people who were not allowed to enter the promised land: “and there arose another generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel” (Judg 2:1-10). That is the generation that “forsook the Lord God . . . followed other gods . . . and provoked the Lord to anger” (Judges 2:11). And why did this happen? It was because they did not know the works of the Lord. They failed to see His hand in their own remarkable history.

A similar thing has happened in our day – “the day of salvation” and “the accepted time” (2 Cor 6:2). A new kind of Christianity is being perpetrated that majors on men, not God. What men are to do is presented as the fundamental thing, not what the Lord has done. Although there is a kind of stereotyped presentation of the things God has done, it is not with much clarity. Things are said accommodatingly, and include the creation of the world by God, the death of Christ, and the interest God has in the welfare of mankind. However, the burden of emphasis is not placed on these matters, and there is very little exposition of them – i.e. an opening of the Divine rationality behind them.

The exaltation of human reasoning, and the proneness to carnal analyzation are employed in a professed interest in helping the people – i.e. helping them with their problems, not assisting them to glory. As you peruse the Word of God, you will find a total absence of such an approach to life in Christ Jesus. When dealing with natural interpersonal relationships, there is an obvious generalization. Here are some statements that confirm this.

➪ “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith” (Gal 6:10).

➪ “See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil” (Eph 5:15-16).

➪ “Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time. Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man” (Col 4:5-6).

➪ “See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men” (1 Thess 5:15).

➪ “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate” (1 Tim 6:17-18).

➪ “This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men” (Titus 3:8).

➪ “But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased” (Heb 13:16).

The details of people with sordid backgrounds are not provided. Rather only general comments are made concerning what they were, or the circumstances under which they were living. In none of the cases was a plan or regimen presented to remedy a troubling situation. Those who are fond of presenting resolutions are forced to assemble texts of Scripture for such a purpose, piecing them together like a theological puzzle. This is because there is no extended teaching in Scripture on the correction of specific flaws in human behavior. No book or letter was written to outline a process by which earthly problems could be resolved.

The overriding emphasis of apostolic teaching relates to the comprehension of what the Lord has done in our salvation. Every issue relating to human conduct, whether that of morality, domestic responsibility, or proper deportment of life, is addressed in view of the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Consider these examples and behold their manner of reasoning. The matter of the salvation of God is always brought into the scenario,

➪ Servile relationships (Eph 6:5-8; Col 3:22; 1 Tim 6:1-2; Tit 2:9-10; 1 Pet 2:18-21).

The point to be seen is that the primary sphere of knowledge pertains to the Person and works of God.

➪ The Person and accomplishments of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is in charge of bringing that purpose to fruition.

➪ The work of the Holy Spirit, who is the appointed Interface with the redeemed, bringing the work of God to fruition within the individual.

To my knowledge there is no apostolic proclamation, instruction, correction, or rebuke that does not directly interface with these matters. In other words, neither the Lord Jesus Himself, nor any person empowered by Him, addressed life in any of its complexities independently of the salvation of God. Life in this world was never viewed as fundamental. It was not the pivot on which instruction or decision turned.

Among a plethora of other reasons, this is why it is imperative that the saints of God be regularly exposed to the Scriptures.

“^19:1 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 . . . ”

Again, I want to call to your attention the nature of the inspired narrative. This not a chronological report of the varied earthly activities of men and women of God. What men refer to as “real life” and “where the rubber meets the road,” are not what is being communicated. From a very limited perspective, the “what are you doing now” scenario may be very interesting, but the Spirit does not take up our time with such considerations. From the perspective of this world, we know very little about Paul, the apostles, or anyone else of Scriptural record. In other words, we are never led to know such people “after the flesh.” Of course this is in strict keeping with the nature and intent of spiritual life. As it is written, “For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: And that He died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him which died for them, and rose again. Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16). That is, what is accomplished by Divine affiliation dwarfs all other perspectives. I am careful to say that such views are not altogether unlawful. However, they are vastly inferior, and therefore can no longer be the foundational or primary view of those who live by faith and walk in the spirit. Associations and activities that belong to this world alone tend to be distracting – and blessed is the person who knows it.

It will be clear from the narrative that follows that things pertaining to life and godliness held the unquestioned priority in the life of Paul – even down to the kind of people with whom he chose to interface. Additionally, the preferred activities of Apollos will be identified with the work of the Lord.

“And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth . . .” The original reference to Apollos’ travels did not say he was going to Corinth, simply that he was “disposed to pass into Achaia” (18:27). Now it becomes apparent that this disposition was toward the saints in Corinth, where Paul had spent at least one-and-a-half years. In his letter to Corinth, Paul states that Apollos “watered” what he had “planted.” Furthermore, spiritual “increase,” or “fruit,” came from the labors of Apollos (1 Cor 3:6).

I do not wish to make more of this than is proper, but the accounts of Scripture are set within the context of God and His work – within either a favorable or unfavorable identity. Life in this world is never seen as the primary environment, nor is the accent placed on matters that have uniquely to do with living in the flesh. Jesus highlighted this circumstance when He said, “Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof” (Matt 6:31-34). Admittedly, you will, not be able to build a kind of Christian business or career on these words. Perhaps that is why they are not taken seriously by many who profess to be Christians. However, notwithstanding a lack of popularity, these are words that will either snare or rescue all who hear them. Either they will disregard them and fall, or they will embrace them by faith and stand.

The relevancy of this is confirmed by the nature of the narrative we are now considering. Clearly, it is within the framework of the work of the Lord, and of those who were personally, willngly, and aggressively engaged in it.

The ministries of both Paul and Apollos involved the communication of words through which the Lord could work. While it is not true in all cases, many times words that are said to be in the name of the Lord are actually impotent because the Lord cannot use them. There is too much of the world’s wisdom in them, which wisdom shuts off the power of God. This is because such wisdom is “foolishness” with God. For this cause He has assigned it to the scrap heap of human thoughts, making ut impotent and vain (1 Cor 1:20; 3:19). The more men attempt to mingle such wisdom with their proclamations, the more senseless and useless they become.

The “upper coasts” probably included “the inland districts of Galatia and Phrygia,” ^{PULPIT COMMENTARY}where Paul labored extensively (Acts 16:6; 18:23). Paul had labored plentifully among the churches there (1 Cor 16:1). Now, however, he works his way back to Ephesus, having completed his work in “the upper coasts” for the time. He had already told the brethren in Ephesus he would return to them “if God will” (18:21). Living in the lively awareness of the good and acceptable and perfect will of God (Rom 12:2), it is apparent to Paul that the Lord indeed was willing, and therefore he returned. However, we must not ignore the involvement of Paul’s discretionary powers in all of this. There is a manner in which the believer can walk that makes God’s will both knowable and preferred. That is from the perspective of the believer himself. From the higher perspective, this is the Lord guiding His children with His eye (Psa 32:8). That is, there does not have to be a violent disruption of the believer in order to get his attention. When the peace of God is keeping the heart and the mind (Phil 4:7), guidance becomes the conscious norm, not the exception. There is no way to codify or systematize this kind of Divine direction. However, those who do, in fact, live by faith, will come to the point where they will recognize this reality, and joyfully acquiesce to it.

“ . . . and finding certain disciples . . . ” Other versions read, “There he found some disciples,” ^NIV“where he found some disciples,” ^NRSVhe found several believers,” ^NLT“some followers,” ^IEand “a few disciples.” ^WILLIAMS

The word “finding” is translated from an interesting Greek word (eu`rei/n). The lexical meaning of this word is, “to come upon, hit upon, to meet with . . . to see, learn, discover, understand . . .to find for oneself, to acquire, get, obtain, procure,” ^THAYERand “to find after searching discover, come on.” ^FRIBERG

There are a number of opinions that have been written concerning the identity of these “disciples.” Some say they possibly were “companions of Apollos, and had come with him from Alexandria.”^{PULPIT COMMENTARY}It is also assumed they had not only been baptized with John’s baptism, but had “embraced John’s doctrine that the Messiah was soon to appear.” ^{ALBERT BARNES}Another view is that they were “Asiatic Jews.” ^{ADAM CLARKE}Yet another view is that they “professed faith in Christ as the true Messiah, but were as yet in the first and lowest form in the school of Christ.”^{MATTHEW HENRY} Still another view is that they were “in the same stage of Christian knowledge as Apollos at the first.” ^{JAMIESON, FAUSETT, BROWN}One view states that they did “profess the name of Christ,” yet “were ignorant of the principle glory of the Gospel.” ^{JOHN CALVIN} Another view is: “They had evidently been baptized by some of John's disciples, possibly in Asia, after the Great Commission was given, and were no doubt Jews.” ^{B.W. JOHNSON} A view that I was taught is well articulated in the following statement. “They were disciples, not of John, but of Jesus; for the uniform currency of the term disciple, throughout Acts, requires us to so understand it. This is further evident from Paul's question, “Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?” The term believed evidently refers to Jesus as its object. They were known, then, as disciples of Jesus, and were so recognized by Paul.

Up to the moment of his conversation with them, Paul knew nothing of any irregularity in their obedience; for this was made known, to his surprise, during the conversation. When, therefore, he asked the question, “Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?” he could not have referred to that gift of the Spirit which all disciples receive; for he would take this for granted, from the fact that they were disciples. He must, then, have had reference to the miraculous gift, which some disciples did not receive. ^{J. W. McGARVEY}

Most of those commenting on this text affirm that it is a difficult one. The difficulty they have, however, is not with the text itself, but with its obvious clash with their understanding. What is being attempted is to fit the text into the theological view they have embraced. That is what makes the text so difficult for them.

However, what if the text is not intended to fit into a preconceived notion, or some theological template. What if it is, as the text clearly says, truly a unique situation?

First, let us see if there are any genuine similarities between these “disciples” and Apollos.

APOLLOS	DISCIPLES
A Jew.	Unspecified
Eloquent .	Not noted for speaking
Mighty in the Scriptures.	No statement concerning their knowledge of Scripture
Instructed in the way of the Lord.	Were basically untaught. Had not heard if there was a Holy Spirit.
Fervent in spirit	Called disciples
Taught the things of the Lord.	Nothing said about them teaching
Knew only the baptism of John.	Were baptized unto the baptism of John
Was taught the way of the Lord more perfectly.	Had to be taught they should believe on Jesus.
Nothing said about Apollos receiving the Spirit.	Paul laid his hands on them and the Spirit came on them.
Helped them much who had believed through grace.	Spoke with tongues and prophesied.

As is apparent, there is little revealed similarity between these disciples and Apollos.

It is true that throughout the book of Acts, the words “disciple” and “disciples” refer to those in Christ Jesus. However, in the Gospels, there are at least “four references” to “the disciples of John” (Matt 9:14; Mk 2:18; 5:33; Lk 7:18). There is also a reference in Acts to “disciples” who were followers of false teachers (Acts 20:30). The word translated “disciple” (maqhta.j) means “one who follows one’s teaching.” ^THAYERA disciple of Jesus, therefore, is one who follows the teaching of Jesus, and there is not so much as a word in this text that suggests the possibility that these men were following the teaching of Jesus. Although not specifically stated, their discipleship was devoted to John, and it was very limited at that, for Paul had to tell them about Jesus.

I conclude, therefore, that these men were a kind of second-hand disciples of John the Baptist. That is, someone who had been taught by John, or about John, had taught them. That teaching was not to be compared with that to which Apollos was subjected. He had been taught in the way of the Lord, and taught accurately the way of Christ.

There is also no suggestion that these men were Jews, or that they had been to Jerusalem, or had in any way been subjected to the message declared about Christ Jesus – a message in which he clearly identified that the Christ had come, for he pointed him out within six months of his initial ministry, affirming that He was “the Son of God” (John 1:34), and “the lamb of God that taken away the sin of the world” (John 1:29,36).

These, then, were elementary disciples who had shifted the focus of their lives, and had adopted a spiritual stance that differed from the world, and even from Judaism, yet was severely limited. They were learners, for that is what a disciple is. That is precisely why they will be able to be taught. They had a learner’s heart, even though their understanding was not mature. This should not be too difficult for us to receive, for disciples of this caliber are abundant in number – having a learning heart, but having been taught little.

“ ^2aHe said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” Other versions read, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed,” ^NKJV“when you became believers,” ^NRSV“when you had faith,” ^BBE“when you came to trust,” ^CJB“when you believed [on Jesus as the Christ]?” ^AMPLIFIED and “when you first believed.” ^MONTGOMERYNeither the Greek nor the English text include the words “Jesus” of “Christ,” as the Amplified Bible suggests.

The question is asked in such a manner as to draw out the understanding of these “disciples.” If they are truly disciples of Jesus, they will make it known, for those who believed John’s words concerning the Christ left him, and became followers of Jesus (John 1:36-37), for John had made clear that the Messiah was greater than himself, and to be preferred over him (Mk 1:7; John 1:15,27,30).

From the experiential viewpoint, these disciples had apparently “believed” John’s message as it pertained to repentance. This is the stance that was rejected by certain religious leaders. Concerning that rejection, Jesus said to them, “Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe Him” (Matt 21:32). It is apparent to me the men in our text had evidenced a clear abandonment of worldly manners, for that is what John required. Paul now asks them a question that will uncover the extent of their belief, and whether or not they are on a track that involves more than outward reform.

Oh, this is a difficult question for one who has embraced a merely traditional religion. Paul does not ask these men if they had received miraculous spiritual gifts – a position taught by John Gill, Albert Barnes, John Calvin, J. W. McGarvey, and others. Why would such a question be asked in the first place, seeing that such a conferment is wholly in the hands of the Lord? Paul’s question pertains to Divine acceptance, not being endued with special power.

The doctrine of Scripture is that all who are in Christ, or are the sons of God, have been given the Holy Spirit.

➪ “And we are His witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him” (Acts 5:32).

➪ “And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us” (Rom 5:5).

➪ “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God” (1 Cor 2:12).

➪ “Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts” (2 Cor 1:22).

➪ “Now He that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit” (2 Cor 5:5),

➪ “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father” (Gal 4:6).

➪ “He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us His holy Spirit” (1 Thess 4:8).

➪ “And he that keepeth His commandments dwelleth in Him, and He in him. And hereby we know that He abideth in us, by the Spirit which He hath given us” (1 John 3:24).

These things being true, a serious issue is raised when any one is asked if they have received the Holy Spirit. Paul asks the question in such a way as to determine the true condition of these disciples. We are not told what provoked the question, but it appears obvious to me that the words and manners of these disciples required more clarification concerning their state. This could not have been immoral conduct, for that issue was settled by any serious followers of John the Baptist.

I have often pondered why this question is rarely heard in our time – a time when John’s disciples in all of their novicehood would appear advanced when compared to the average modern day Christian. Let it be clear that this is a relevant question in our time as well as that of our text. Some approach the subject with a sectarian view of being baptized with the Holy Spirit in mind. Their aim is to confirm that people possess the evidence they perceive to confirm the presence of the Spirit. However, their approach has only muddied the waters, and contributed to more division and confusion.

Apostolic reasoning confirms the importance of knowing the answer to this question. “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His . . . But IF the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you . . . ” (Rom 8:9,11).

This question is to be understood within the context of that teaching. It further assumes an intelligent view of the Spirit, and the awareness of some evidence of His presence. This is not an inquiry concerning the doctrine of the Spirit. I will address the teaching concerning the Spirit later in this lesson.

“ ^2b And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.” Other versions read, “and he said to them, "No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit,” ^NASB"No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit,” ^NIV“No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit,” ^RSV“No, we have had no knowledge of the Holy Spirit,” ^BBE“We did not even hear if the Holy Spirit was come,” ^DARBY“Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Ghost was given,” ^ERV“No, we've never even heard of the Holy Spirit,” ^GWN“No, we were never even told there was such a thing as a Holy Spirit,” ^NJB“we don't know what you mean. What is the Holy Spirit?” ^LIVINGand “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” ^AMPLIFIED

As I have already pointed out, there are diverse views on what this response really meant.

➪ One commentary says that the response really means, “Not only have we not received the Holy Spirit, but we had not even heard that the dispensation of the Spirit was Come.” ^{PULPIT COMMENTARY}

➪ Another commentator says, “they could not mean the person of the Holy Ghost: for they must have known that there was such a divine person as the Holy Ghost, from the writings of the Old Testament, with which they were conversant: and from the ministry of John, into whose baptism they were baptized; who saw the Spirit of God descend on Jesus, and bore witness of it; and declared, that Christ who was to come after him, would baptize with the Holy Ghost: nor could they mean the special grace of the Spirit, which they themselves had received; but the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit of God, which they at present knew nothing of, and which were afterwards bestowed upon them: they knew that there were prophecies in the Old Testament, concerning the effusion of the Spirit in the last days, in the days of the Messiah; but they had not heard that these had had their accomplishment; they had heard nothing of the day of Pentecost, and of the pouring out of the Spirit upon the apostles then, nor of any instance of this kind since; they did not know that the Holy Ghost was yet, they knew he was promised, but not that he was given; the Ethiopia version, to avoid the difficulty of the text, renders it, “we have only heard that there was an Holy Ghost.” ^{JOHN GILL}

➪ Another commentator says, “That is, they had not heard that there were particular gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit to be received. They could not mean that they had not heard of the Holy Spirit; for John, in his baptism, announced Christ as about to baptize with the Holy Ghost, but they simply meant that they had not heard that this Spirit, in his gifts, had been given to or received by any one.” ^{ADAM CLARKE}

➪ Another says, “They knew (as Dr. Lightfoot observes) that, according to the tradition of their nation, after the death of Ezra, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Holy Ghost departed from Israel, and went up; and they professed that they had never heard of his return. They spoke as if they expected it, and wondered they did not hear of it, and were ready to welcome the notice of it.” ^{MATTHEW HENRY}

➪ Yet another says, “This cannot be the meaning, since the personality and office of the Holy Ghost, in connection with Christ, formed an especial subject of the Baptist’s teaching. Literally, the words are, “We did not even hear whether the Holy Ghost was (given)”; meaning, at the time of their baptism. That the word “given” is the right supplement, as in John 7:39, seems plain from the nature of the case.” ^{JAMIESON, FAUSSET, BROWN}

➪ Another says, “How could it be, that men being Jews heard nothing of the Spirit, concerning which the prophets speak everywhere, and whose commendations and titles are extant in the whole Scripture? Surely we gather by this that Paul did neither speak generally of the Spirit; and that these men, as they were asked, did deny that they knew those visible graces wherewith God had beautified the kingdom of his Son. Therefore, they confess that they know not whether God give such gifts.” ^{JOHN CALVIN}

These views, together with others like them, assume several things that are not stated in the text.

➪ That the men were Jews. This is not stated in the text, nor is there a sound basis for assuming this was the case.

➪ That the men had personally heard John the Baptist, and knew of all that he said. This is neither stated nor insinuated by the text.

➪ That they were disciples of John the Baptist, and therefore ardent followers of his teaching. This is also assumed. The text does not say they were disciples of John, but that they were disciples. It is doubtless true that they were subjected to some of his teaching, but certainly not to the whole of it.

➪ That the men were knowledgeable of the writings of the Prophets. This is not stated in the text, nor can it be assumed.

➪ That the men knew the Holy Spirit had left, but did not know that He had returned.

➪ That the men knew the Holy Spirit was given, but did not know that He also conferred gifts.

Let me be clear in what I am saying. There is no firm basis for these persuasions, however reasonable they may appear to those who embrace them. Further, it is the height of absurdity to adopt a view of Scripture that is founded upon a humanly perceived inference, lacking any clear declaration by the Scriptures themselves. Notwithstanding this circumstance, a sectarian spirit compels a person to perceive Scripture in a way that justifies the position that is held – whether it can be proved or not.

I will take the text to mean precisely what it says. These were not seasoned disciples. They knew some things – namely that sin was to be abandoned and an upright life lived before the Lord. However, they did not have a clear thought of a Spirit that was “holy,” much less One that could be received. One must remember that even among the Jews, there was a sect – the Sadducees – who did not believe there was such a thing as a spirit – to say nothing of the “Holy Spirit” (Acts 23:8). Among other things, this confirms the existence of this idea in the world – namely, that there was no such thing as a spirit. While the text does not specifically state these men embraced that view, the very existence of a spiritless doctrine confirms that we should not consider it strange that such an ignorance could exist among a body of sincere religious men.

To this day, among the people with whom I have been affiliated, there is a group who maintains that the Holy Spirit is the Bible. While there are varying shades of this meaning adopted, there is one that unwaveringly affirms that the Holy Spirit is the Bible, and that it is all anyone can have of the Holy Spirit.

Notwithstanding these view, within the framework of the textual considerations, there is no logical or doctrinal need to justify not taking the text simply as it reads. This will also free is from any seeming necessity to adopt a purely traditional view of the text.

“ ³And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.”

One can only imagine how a modern day preacher would have responded to the answer of these “disciples.” Here a response is given that is untainted with religious tradition. It is not given to promote the advancement of a sect, nor is the aim to justify a private opinion. This is a man of God, with spiritual understanding, responding to honest and good hearts, who are not as informed as they can be. This will not be the occasion for debate or disputation – even though that is how many have chosen to respond to the subject under consideration. In our text the environment and the motives are pure, and the love of the truth is undeniably present. Those who cannot approach this subject in the manner revealed in this passage should back away from it. Such people should not take it upon themselves to speak on matters that are only seen through a sectarian template. Should they choose to speak on such matters, we should not listen to them.

“And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized?” Other versions read, “Into what were ye baptized?” ^NKJV“what baptism did you receive?” ^NIV“What sort of baptism did you receive?” ^BBE“into what were ye immersed?” ^CJB“With what baptism were you baptized?” ^CSB“What kind of baptism did you have?” ^GWN“How were you baptized?” ^NAB“what baptism did you experience?” ^NLT“where with were ye baptized?” ^TNT“In what thing be ye baptized?” ^WYCLIFFE“Into what [baptism] then were you baptized?” ^AMPLIFIEDand “W ell then, how were you baptized?” ^PHILLIPS

There are Christian circles in which this question would never be asked – and they are infinitely more in number than anyone would dare to imagine. Some people would be satisfied to hear that a person was baptized regardless of the effects that followed it, or the understanding that attended it. Some perceive baptism as completely unrelated to salvation or the receiving of the Holy Spirit. Some see it as only related to the remission of sins, while others confine it to the matter of being identified with a local congregation of believers. There is by no means unanimity in the Christian community on the matter of baptism, even though there is only “one baptism” (Eph 4:5).

In this particular text, the subject is not the remission of sins – even though that is unqualifiedly associated with baptism (Acts 2:38; 22:16). The matter is not the formula that was uttered when the person was baptized, although that is a critical matter to some. Here the subject is receiving the Holy Spirit, and it is directly related the baptism of the people.

Notice also that baptism is assumed. Scripture contains no direct statement of, or any kind of allusion to, an unbaptized person in Christ. Baptism into Christ is consistently assumed for all that are in the Son. Apostolic doctrine makes clear that those who are in Christ were, in fact, baptized. The sixth chapter of Romans contains extensive reasoning on the subject. The epistle to the Colossians declares critical matters that attend baptism, including “the circumcision of Christ” and “the operation of God” (Col 3:11-12). The epistle to the Galatians affirms that we are baptized into Christ, and therein have “put on Christ” (Gal 3:27). Peter affirms that baptism with water “saves us,” being tied to the procurement of a “good conscience” (1 Pet 3:21).

Men may reason about the pious unimmersed, but no such reasoning is found in Scripture. Others may speculate about a person being saved, yet not being baptized, owing to an ignorance of the truth. However, such reasoning is not reflected in the Word of God. There, if people were not baptized, yet gave evidence of being accepted by God, they were “commanded . . . to be baptized” (Acts 10:48). The very first people who inquired what they ought to do in response to the Gospel were told to repent “and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). We have the record of a man who heard Christ preached and concluded that he ought to be baptized (Acts 8:36). There is simply too much said in Scripture about baptism to justify any continued ignorance on the subject. Its necessity is always affirmed and never debated.

The word “baptized” is mentioned twenty-one times in the book of Acts (1:5; 2:38,41; 8:12,13,16,36,38; 9:18; 10:47,48; 11;16; 16:15,33; 18:8; 19:3,4,5; 22;16). Even though Jesus is declared to baptize with the Holy Spirit, not a single one of those references refers to that baptism. That baptism is not a response of men, but is a Sovereign act of the Lord Jesus. The above texts all refer to human response, or to John baptizing people (1:5; 11:16; 19:4). The word “baptized” is never used when referring to the receiving of the Holy Spirit – even though, technically, that would be a correct statement. However, it is not a sound doctrinal statement. No person of Scriptures ever said they were “baptized with the Holy Spirit” – even though, speaking loosely, that might be viewed as an accurate statement. However, this is not the manner of the Holy Spirit. It is not how He has cultured our minds to employ the word “baptized.” When referring to the unseen and spiritual baptism, the emphasis is always on the one who did the baptizing, or the Spirit Himself (Matt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; Acts 11:16;1 Cor 12:13). Baptism into Christ always accentuates the ones being baptized, and what was accomplished by the Lord at that time.

The text further suggests that someone baptized into Christ is not totally ignorant concerning the Holy Spirit. The same doctrine that provoked them to be baptized would have included some teaching concerning the Spirit. Therefore, Paul, assuming they had been baptized, asked concerning the kind of baptism they experienced. He is not inquiring about an inner experience, but an outward one.

The fact that Paul accented baptism suggests that the ordinary means through which the Spirit was given was not the laying on of hands – else he would have asked if anyone laid hands upon them.

The peril of our times is confirmed by the confusion that exists within the professed church concerning the subject of baptism. This is an elemental point of the doctrine of Christ (Heb 6:2), and those who have no understanding of it are, at the very best, infants.

“And they said, Unto John's baptism.” Other versions read, “Into John’s baptism,” ^NKJV“John’s baptism,” ^NIV“The baptism of John,” ^BBEand “the immersion of John.” ^CJB

This event occurred roughly 25-27 after the day of Pentecost. At that time, when the New Covenant was formally inaugurated, the baptism of John was obviated, together with the Old Covenant and its ceremonies. Yet, although this was the case, there was a period of time during which the former things were allowed to fade away. This display of Divine patience is confirmed by the following statement from Hebrews: “In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Heb 8:13). Other versions read, “what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear,” ^NIVand “And what is obsolete (out of use and annulled because of age) is ripe for disappearance and to be dispensed with altogether.” ^AMPLIFIED

Admittedly, there is an element of mystery to all of this that makes it difficult to codify or systematize. Notwithstanding, spiritual growth presumes the gradual fading, and consequent abandonment, of old things, as well as the appropriation of new things. Old views, even when they were formerly valid, are rendered obsolete by new light. A kind of spiritual disintegration commences when the light of newness shines into the soul. That is one reason why continuance in sin always confirms there has been a failure to embrace the truth.

In our day, this fading period has long since passed. In fact, it had passed during the time of our text. The fact that these disciples had only been baptized with the baptism of John will not be allowed to pass as though it was inconsequential. Keep in mind, that John’s baptism meant those who were so baptized had, in fact, repented. Their lives had been altered by a determination to live acceptably before the Lord, and to refuse to allow sin to erupt in all manner of immoral conduct.

The baptism of repentance was “unto” such a life – to abstinence from sin. However, according to Divine intent, that kind of life was not an end of itself. Rather, it was the appointed way to prepare for Christ. That was the primary objective of both John’s ministry and his baptism. Now that Jesus has come, and has been enthroned in heaven, John’s baptism will no longer be honored.

“ ⁴Then 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.”

The manner of Paul’s response suggests that these men had not been exposed to the fulness of John’s teaching. At the very least, they certainly had not grasped what he taught. However, being the kind of teacher that he was, it is highly unlikely that they could have been exposed to his teaching directly or indirectly, yet missed the central point that Paul is making.

Paul knew the purpose fulfilled by John – what he did, and what he said – even though he was never actually a disciple of John. There is no record that affirms he was directly exposed to John, although that is theoretically possible, judging from his age at the time of Stephen’s stoning. However, John did not preach in Jerusalem. His preaching was in the wilderness of Judaea, where he also baptized (Matt 3:1; Mk 1:4). It is not likely that Saul of Tarsus ventured out to see and hear John. This is because John fulfilled a Scriptural prophesy, providing the means through which men were prepared for Christ. I gather that Paul received some revelation on this. That, coupled with his understanding of the prophecies of John (Isa 40:3-5; Mal 3:1), account for his understanding of John’s role in the preparation of the way of the Lord.

“John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance . . . ” Other versions read, “baptism which goes with a change of heart,” ^BBE“an immersion in connection with turning from sin to God,” ^CJBand “John's baptism called for repentance from sin.” ^NLT

The idea here is that John’s baptism accompanied a turning from sinful expression, and the resolution to abstain from iniquity. Men were not created anew through John’s baptism, but were rather made ready for the new creation that occurs in Christ alone. They were not given a new heart during his baptism, but were rather being prepared to receive one. Because Christ was the sin-bearer (Heb 9:28), and came into the world “to save sinners” (1 Tim 1:15), men were required to become sensitive of sin, and learn to hate it, resolving to abstain from it. There was no other way to be effectively prepared for the Christ.

One of the great tragedies of our time is the near-total lack of this kind of mindset among the people. Christ is being presented as facilitator of human objectives, and the resolver of their unwanted experiences. In such a state, men are not made ready for Christ. This is a total misrepresentation of Christ. He came to do the Father’s will, placing it above even His own desires. As He Himself said, “For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me” (John 6:38). Therefore He said, “I seek not Mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent Me” (John 5:30).

It must be remembered that the will of man is what led him into an eternal dilemma – one that could only be resolved at great cost to both God and Christ. It is therefore the height of absurdity to imagine that God is preoccupied with what men desire – unless their desire is a precise reflection of His own.

“ . . . saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” Other versions read, “believe in Him,” ^NASB“have faith in,” ^BBEand “put their trust in.” ^CJB

Repentance, therefore, necessarily precedes believing on Christ Jesus. Even John the Baptist preached, “repent ye, and believe the Gospel” (Mk 1:15). Jesus said of those who did not respond to John’s introductory message, “For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him” (Matt 21:32). The person who has not repented, insisting on continuing to sin is thrust into the position where believing is not even possible.

However, these “disciples” from Ephesus had repented, and now they will be told the objective of repentance. They are not among those who “could not believe” (John 12:39).

If conformity to, and friendship with, the world is the kiss of death, then a very real hatred of sin, and the honest determination to wage war against it is the kiss of life – the commencement of living toward God.

What does it mean to “believe on” Christ? The Greek word translated “on” is eivj. As a preposition (as it is used here), it means “entrance into, or direction and limit: into, to, toward.” ^THAYER

Repentance is the beginning of an orientation toward fellowship with Christ. Believing on Jesus is the beginning of fellowship with Christ – a fellowship into which we are called by the living God (1 Cor 1:9). Several things are implied in the expression “believe on Him . . . on Jesus Christ”

➪ A discontent with sin and its guilt, and a determination to be freed from its dominion.

➪ Some knowledge of Christ – knowledge that is revealed in and through the Gospel.

➪ Being convinced that Christ has accomplished what God required as a basis for the salvation of men.

There are certain promises given to those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and they are most remarkable.

➪ They will not come into condemnation, and are passed from death to life (John 5:24).

Anything of this magnitude must not be viewed simplistically, or treated as though it was one of a series of steps that have equal value. Furthermore, the objective of the commandments, whether it is repentance, or others that are delivered to men, is said to be “love out of a pure heart,” “a good conscience,” and “faith unfeigned,” or unpretentious (1 Tim 1:5).

Faith is not a mere creedal or intellectual persuasion. As it is written that men believe “with the heart” (Rom 10:10). Faith is associated with the following, none of which are unnecessary.

Faith is depicted as a “door” through which one enters into the plentitude of God – a door that is opened by the Lord. As it is written, “And when they were come, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how He had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles” (Acts 14:27). In fact, there is nothing within the remarkable scope of salvation that is not made available to the person who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ.

While the text does not mention Paul preaching Christ to these men, it seems to me that this is a foregone conclusion. It is inconceivable that these men had heard Christ preached, yet had only been baptized with the baptism of John. Further, in order to believe on Christ, the truth concerning Him must be declared, for “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Rom 10:14).

The baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch was preceded by Philip preaching Jesus unto him (Acts 8:35-38). The baptism of the Philippian jailer and his household was preceded by an admonition to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and the declaration of the word of the Lord (Acts 16:31-33). When Lydia was baptized, it was because the Lord “opened” her heart in order that she might attend “unto the things which were spoken of Paul” (Acts 16:14-15). Thus believing and obeying the Gospel is always preceded by a declaration of the same – and there is no evidence that this was done prior them encountering Paul. When they believed, Paul was the preacher.

“ ⁵When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Other versions read, “baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus,” ^ASV/NIV“they were immersed by the authority of the Lord Jesus,” ^IE“they were baptized [again, this time] in the name of the Lord Jesus,” ^AMPLIFIED

The same Greek word translated “on,” in the expression “believe on the name” (eivj) is translated “in” in this verse. Some perceive this as meaning “by the authority of Christ” ^IE/Robertson However, I do not see how such a meaning can be applied to the Greek word eivj, which has to do with entrance into something.

Others feel as though this refers to a formula that is said when the person is baptized. Those who teach this will not accept a baptism that is done “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matt 28:19). However, there is no record in Scripture of the person doing the baptizing stating a fixed expression when doing so.

Concerning the Lord’s words in Matthew 28:19, the Greek word eivj is also used in that text, and it is prepositional use as well. Jesus was affirming that the person being baptized is brought into the Father, into the Son, and into the Holy Spirit. This is in strict accord with His prayer on the eve of His betrayal, which focused on believers being joined to the Lord. “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word; That they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art IN ME, and I IN THEE, that they also may be one IN US: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory which thou gavest Me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I IN THEM, and THOU IN ME, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast sent Me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.” (John 17:20-23).

In Scripture, the word “name” is used to denote the person. When God revealed Himself to Moses He said He was declaring His name – WHO He was by nature (Ex 34:5-7). When the Lord changed the name of a man, it was because the nature of the person had been changed in some way (Gen 17:5,15; 32:28; John 1:42; Acts 13:9).

Apostolic doctrine also affirms that this is precisely the status of those who are correctly called “the children of God.” They are “in the Father” (1 John 2:24; 4:15-16), “in the Son” (Rom 8:1; 1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:17; 1 John 2:24), and “in the Spirit” (Rom 8:9; Gal 3:3; 5:16,25). This is encompassed in marvelous expression, “But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit” (1 Cor 6:17). Thus we are made “partakers of Christ” (Heb 3:14), and of the “Divine nature” as well (2 Pet 1:4). There is a very real entrance into Christ that is both initiated at our baptism, and maintained by faith.

“ ^6aAnd when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them . . . ” Other versions read, “the Holy Spirit came on them,” ^NASBand “the Holy Spirit came down on them.” ^NJB

The initial receiving of the Holy Spirit by a group of people, as well as individuals, is described in differing, yet similar, ways.

➪ THE DISCIPLES ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST. “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4). UNIQUENESS: The inauguration of the New Covenant. REFERRED TO AS being filled with the Spirit (Acts 2:4), receiving the promise (Acts 2:39), receiving the Spirit (Acts 10:47; 15:9), and the Spirit being “poured out” (Acts 2:17-18). Not ATTENDED with the laying on of hands.

➪ THE SAMARITANS. “Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost” (Acts 8:17). UNIQUENESS: A people who were kind of half-breeds believing in the coming of the Messiah, yet having flawed views of worship. REFERRED TO AS the falling of the Spirit (Acts 8:16), and the giving of the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:18). ATTENDED with the laying on of apostolic hands (Acts 8:16-17).

➪ SAUL OF TARSUS. “And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 9:17). UNIQUENESS: The call of the apostle to the Gentiles. REFERRED TO AS Saul being “filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 9:17). ATTENDED by the laying on of non-apostolic hands (Acts (9:17).

➪ GENTILES AT THE HOUSE OF CORNELIUS. “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word” (Acts 10:44). UNIQUENESS: The participation of the Gentiles in the salvation of God. REFERRED TO AS the Holy Spirit falling on them (Acts 10:44), the Spirit being “poured out” (Acts 10:45). receiving the Spirit (Acts 10:47), and the Holy Spirit being “given” to them (Acts 15:9). Not ATTENDED with the laying on of hands.

➪ THE EPHESIANS DISCIPLES. “And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied” (Acts 19:6). UNIQUENESS: The formal termination of the baptism of John. ATTENDED with the laying on of an apostles hands (Acts 19:6).

Much is made of this in Scripture – the giving of the Holy Spirit in the time of the new and better covenant.

➪ “For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, and My blessing upon thine offspring” (Isa 44:3).

➪ “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out My spirit” (Joel 2:2829).

➪ “And I will put My spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them” (Ezek 36:27).

➪ “Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out My spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord GOD” (Ezek 39:29).

It is in view of these prophecies that the Holy Spirit is referred to as “the Spirit of promise” (Eph 1:13). Believers are said to “receive the Spirit of promise” (Gal 3:14). Peter referred to the gift of the Spirit as “the promise” (Acts 2:39). To my knowledge the Prophets never distinguished between a miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit and an ordinary one. This is, however, how several notable commentators and religious bodies view the matter. There is an attending logic that appears to these people to fully justify their view. However, I am going to affirm that it is not the Divine manner to confer the Holy Spirit in a unique and limited manner that He did not promise. Amos boldly announced, “Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto His servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7). For Him to contradict this revealed principle would also impact upon His own glory, for God has declared that His glory is found in the fact that He does what He says. “Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it” (Isa 46:9-11).

This applies to blessings as well as judgments. In fact, Paul is careful to say that He did not preach or teach anything that was not previously promised by Moses and the Prophets. “Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come” (Acts 26:22). The same may be said of the Lord Jesus Himself, His twelve apostles, and other inspired men.

When reporting the reality of receiving the Holy Spirit, it was not declared as a unique thing, even though it may have been attended by unique circumstances.

➪ THE EVENTS OF PENTECOST. No laying on of hands. The recipients received the Spirit when they were sitting in one place and in one accord. They spoke with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance, speaking of “the wonderful works of God” (Acts 2:4,11).

♦ The same thing occurred that later took place at the house of Cornelius (Acts 10:47; 11:15).

♦ The “promise” was applicable to the hearers are their children (Acts 2:39).

➪ THE SAMARITANS. Peter and John laid their hands upon them, and they “received the Holy Spirit.” There is no record of them speaking with other languages or prophesying.

➪ CONVERSION OF THE GENTILES. No hands were laid on the recipients, but the Spirit fell on them while Peter was preaching. They did speak with other languages and prophesied.

♦ They “received the Holy Spirit,” just as Peter and those with him (Acts 10:47).

♦ Peter remembered the words of the Lord concerning being baptized with the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:16).

♦ God gave them then “like gift,” who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 11:17).

♦ God visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name (Acts 15:14).

➪ THE EPHESIANS DISCIPLES. Paul laid his hands on the disciples following their baptism, and the Spirit came on them. They spoke with other languages and prophesied.

Although the things that were manifested at these times were unique, care was taken in the reporting of the events to associate them with the common salvation. The fact that the Holy Spirit was given without any human interposition, whether in word of deed, did not make it a special gift. The conferment of the gift through the laying on of hands did not make it a special gift. The giving of the Spirit while Peter was speaking, and without any other human involvement did not make it a special outpouring.

When, for example, Peter delivered the report of the events taking place at the house of Cornelius, he did not report that they spoke in tongues and prophesied – even though that did take place (Acts 11:15-17; 15:8-11). In fact, that marvelous working was categorically associated with being “saved” by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ (15:11), believing (Acts 11:7,17), being granted repentance (Acts 11:18), hearts being purified by faith (Acts 15:9), God taking a people for Himself (Acts 15:14), and turning to the Lord (Acts 15:19).

What could possibly warrant the development of a doctrine that views these events as unique experience that were not directed related to the salvation of God. What would constrain men to think of them in association with special empowerment and special gifts? The Scriptures never review these historical matters in such a way, and neither should we!

The Apostles are not the only people who conferred the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands –although that work is most generally assigned to them. Ananias, however, was the means through which Saul of Tarsus was not only healed of his blindness, but also received the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17-18).

The Holy Spirit is given to those who believe (John 7:39), and also to those who obey (Acts 5:32). The Spirit is sent into their hearts because they are sons (Gal 4:6). All who are in Christ are apprised of the fact that the Holy Spirit has been given to them (John 7:39; 1 Cor 2:12; 2 Cor 1:22; 2 Cor 5:5; 1 Thess 4:8; 1 John 3:24; 4:13). In fact, it is strongly affirmed, “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His” (Rom 8:9).

In the dispensing of the Holy Spirit, the laying on of hands has been employed by God – but not always. In fact, this was not the norm. In the instances where this did occur, or where there was a manifestation of speaking in other languages and prophesying, or declaring the wonderful works of God, a spiritual epoch was taking place.

➪ PENTECOST. The first time the exalted Christ shed forth the Spirit. This was the time the New Covenant was inaugurated, and the Gospel was preached with power and insight. Such an occasion required confirmation. There could be no doubt concerning what was taking place.

➪ SAMARIA. This was a body of people that had not been granted the privilege of hearing the Gospel of the Kingdom as those in Galilee and Judaea. Jesus had forbade His disciples to go among them (Matt 10:5). Jesus had spent two days there during His ministry (John 4:40). However, with the belief of the Gospel as preached by Philip, a new era started for them. During this beginning, confirmation was given because of the newness that was taking place, and to establish the apostles as the foundation-layers of the church (Eph 2:20). It was through their word, or doctrine, that men would believe (John 17:20).

➪ THE HOUSE OF CORNELIUS. This marked the acceptance of the Gentiles, something that had been prophesied, yet remained unclear. This required confirmation, in order that the scope of salvation might be seen. Special confirmations were given to both Cornelius and Peter at that time (Acts 10).

➪ THE DISCIPLES AT EPHESUS. This marked a formal end to John’s baptism. John had said he had to decrease, and yet that had not yet taken place among these disciples. Therefore things accompanied the receiving of the Spirit that were by no means ordinary.

It should not surprise us that extraordinary phenomena accompanies great beginnings. When Israel came out of Egypt, great signs and wonders took place. The same was true when the Law was given at Sinai, and when Jesus commenced His ministry among men. But these signs were not intended to have a permanent presence. That would have diminished their effectiveness.

In addition to these things, the government of the kingdom is upon the shoulder of Christ Himself. He is the One who determines both the extent and nature of any manifestation. Because epochal beginnings are by their very nature within an environment of relative ignorance, extraordinary things accompany them. In a way of speaking, it is like kick-starting faith, so that the beginning itself is effective. Signs and wonders are not intended to awaken an appetite for them.

However, as faith matures, the confirmation of Divine working takes a form that must be discerned independently of physical, or outward, phenomenon. This matter is develop-ed in apostolic doctrine, which defines the role of the Holy Spirit in the perfecting of salvation, or sanctification. I will address this more fully after commenting on verses six and seven.

“ ^6b. . . and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.” Other versions read, “they had the power of talking in tongues, and acting like prophets,” ^BBE“they began to talk in other languages and to speak what God had revealed,” ^GWN“they spoke in languages, and prophesied,” ^WEBSTER“They began speaking different languages and prophesying,” ^IE“they began to speak in foreign tongues and to prophesy,” ^WILLIAMS“they spoke in [foreign, unknown] tongues (languages) and prophesied,” ^AMPLIFIED“they began to speak with tongues and the inspiration of prophets.” ^PHILLIPSand “they spoke in strange tongues and also proclaimed God's message” ^GNB

This is one of three new covenant accounts of men speaking in tongues. Men first did this on the day of Pentecost, when the disciples of Jesus were filled with the Spirit and so spoke. Their subject was “the wonderful works of God,” but we do not know a single syllable that they said (Acts 2:4,11). The second was at the house of Cornelius where Peter and those with him heard the Gentiles “speak with tongues and magnify God” (Acts 10:46). We are not apprised of a single specific word that they spoke – although the nature was that of drawing attention to the God of heaven. The third is our text, where, following their baptism and the imposition of Paul’s hands, men spoke with tongues and prophesied. Again, we have absolutely no idea concerning the message they gave. Three unique occasions, and three ways of stating the subject on which they spoke. (1) The wonderful works of God. (2) Magnifying God. (3) Prophesying. I do not know how it is possible to develop a syllabus on speaking in tongues with that kind of data – but vain men have managed to do so. All of this is compounded by the fact that no eye-witness reporting such an event ever drew attention to the fact that the recipients of the Spirit spoke in tongues (Acts 11:15; 15:8-9).

That is true of Pentecost, the house of Cornelius, and the disciples from Ephesus. No one ever interpreted what they said for those hearing the report – even though they doubtless did understand what was spoken in another language – else they could not have identified it as relating to the wonderful works of God, magnifying God, or prophesying. In other words, when speaking of a message from God, the Holy Spirit never dignified mystery, drew undue attention to it, or provoked people to desire to speak in such a manner – never!

Additionally, Paul taught that speaking in a language that is not understood by the hearers is forbidden in the assembly of the saints (1 Cor 14:11-20). He also affirmed that an insistence upon maintaining such a practice was the evidence of the curse of God, not his blessing (1 Cor 14:21-25). Actually, the first example of men speaking in other languages was a judgment from God to abort the vain work they had undertaken (Gen 11:7-9).

“ ⁷And all the men were about twelve.” Twelve men, all disciples, all hearers, all learners, all obedient, and all blessed. Among them there were no dissenters, no disobedient, and none who did not receive the love of the truth. That is a most extraordinary circumstance!

God does not always provide the count of those who turn to Him. Sometimes He simply says that “multitudes both of men and women” were added (Acts 5:14). Another time it is said that “the number of disciples multiplied” (Acts 6:1,7). Other times He says that “much people was added to the Lord” (Acts 11:24), and once speaks of an entire city that gave heed to the Gospel (Acts 8:6-8). Another time it is written that “a great number believed and turned to the Lord” (Acts 11:21). Other times He simply refers to a household, and omits all counts (Acts 10:33; 16:14,34; 18:8). There was also a period of time when the churches “increased in number daily” (Acts 16:5). In the cases of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:38) and Saul of Tarsus, we have one person. There were also counts cited: 3,000 (Acts 2:41), and 5,000 (Acts 4:4).

Here we read of twelve men. It is obvious that the number of people, while sometimes impressive, is not the real point. Where the hearts of men are tuned to the Lord, a great work of God has been accomplished, for any conversion, whether of a single man or a multitude, is “impossible” with men (Matt 19:25-26).

No person can claim identity with Christ who does not have the Spirit, for “if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His” (Rom 8:9). How, then, can it be known that a person has the Holy Spirit? It is true that God gave immediate evidence of that affiliation with the disciples on Pentecost, those at the house of Cornelius, and the Ephesians disciples. However, this kind of evidence was required by the times, and the freshness of the work that was being done. The standard means of making this determination is to look for what the Spirit does in the people of God. That evidence cannot be limited to speaking in tongues and prophesying, for it is written that all who have the Spirit do not do such things (1 Cor 12:30).

We are not left to conjecture on this, for considerable has been revealed concerning the ministry of the Holy Spirit, which is the evidence of His presence. While the following is by no means a complete list, it provides enough information to enable the nature of the Spirit’s work to be detected.

➪ The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts: “And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us” (Rom 5:5). It is because of this work of the Spirit that we love God, because He first loved us (1 John 4:19),

➪ Mortifying the deeds of the body: “For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live” (Rom 8:13). Those who have the Spirit suppress the expression of sin .

➪ Confidence that we are the children of God: “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God” (Rom 8:16). Those who have the Spirit of God possess assurance of their sonship.

➪ The favorable testimony of our conscience: “I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost” (Rom 9:1). The indwelling Spirit removes a condemning conscience.

➪ The possession of joy: “For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost” (Rom 14:17; 1 Thess 1:6). The Holy Spirit broadens the scope of perception and participation.

➪ Abounding im hope: “Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost” (Rom 15:13). The Holy Spirit beings one to the point where live is lived in prospect of the coming of the Lord and glory.

➪ Keeping what God has given to us: “That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us” (2 Tim 1:14). Spirit enables us to maintain what we have been given.

➪ The continual renewing of spiritual life and strength: “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Titus 3:5). In a world that is constantly diminishing, the Spirit causes the believer to continually increase in strength.

➪ Patiently waiting for the hope of righteousness: “For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith” (Gal 5:5). Through the Spirit, the believer can patiently wait for the experience of thorough righteousness.

➪ Obeying the truth: “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently” (1 Pet 1:22). The consistent obedience of the truth is a fruit of the Spirit.

➪ Saying from the heart that Jesus is the Lord: “Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost” (1 Cor 12:3). The Spirit moves one to personally confess, and acquiesce, to the fact of Jesus being Lord.

➪ An increasing moral and spiritual change into the likeness of Christ: “But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord” (2 Cor 3:18; Rom 8:29). Where the Spirit dwells, there is consistent growth and conformity to Christ.

➪ Being free from the dominion of the law of sin and death: “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death” (Rom 8:2). There is a liberty from the dominion of sin whoever the Spirit is.

➪ Obtaining things that help our weakened condition – even though we do not know what we should pray for: “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.” (Rom 8:26-27). No person who possesses the Spirit will ultimately lack what is required to live in a manner that pleases God.

➪ Groaning under the weight of mortality, and living in expectation of occupying our new bodies: “For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life. Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit” (2 Cor 5:4-5). The presence of the Spirit produces a certain discontent with the world, our present bodies, and temporality.

➪ Unity with the children of God: “Endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3). The Spirit draws the person possessing Him to the other members of the family of God.

➪ A life that is lived “in goodness and in truth”: “For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth” (Eph 5:9). Goodness and truth characterize the life of a person who has the Holy Spirit.

➪ Accord, or a fellowship of agreement with the Spirit: “If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies” (Phil 2:1). Those who possess the Spirit and do not quench Him, will find themselves in agreement with Him.

➪ Keeping the commandments of God: “And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us” (1 John 3:24). The Spirit of God brings a preference for, and obedience to, God’s commandments.

➪ Not fulfilling the lust of the flesh: “This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh” (Gal 5:16). The Spirit enables the one in whom, He resides to resist the devil, reject his encroachments. And refuse to obey the sinful impulses of the flesh.

➪ The unique and effective fruit of the Spirit: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law” (Gal 5:22-23).

♦ Love: Giving of self, bringing advantage, not causing abuse, loving the saints as Christ’s brethren, being considerate.

♦ Peace: Peace that rules, keeping the heart and mind, peace with God, causing one to be a peacemaker, at peace with the brethren.

♦ Longsuffering: Able to endure long, not easily provoked or discouraged, and consistent.

♦ Gentleness: Not carnally abrasive, intention to bless, not offending or offensive.

♦ Temperance: Self control, not excessive, moderation, not allowing the flesh to dominate.

When these evidences are absent in professed believers, the presence of the Holy Spirit cannot be confirmed. Further the Holy Spirit is a “seal” that marks the individual as a child of God, and is the earnest of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13; 4:30).

Our view of the Holy Spirit must be associated with His role in the Kingdom of God – what He DOES within the on who is “accepted in the Beloved” (Eph 1:6). Our text has to do with the entrance of people into the Kingdom, not with their ultimate conformity to the image of Christ. It is not necessary for us to decide whether this experience was intended to be a permanent one, or was confined to the first century. If we were able to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on such a matter, what difference would it make?

Apostolic doctrine does not associate the experience of the Ephesians disciples with the standard entrance into the Kingdom of God, anymore than it does the thief on the cross, the Samaritans, or Saul of Tarsus,

The doctrine, or teaching, concerning the work of the Holy Spirit, has to do with the fruit that He bears in the believer, and the ministry He fulfills in the behalf of those who are in Christ Jesus. His ministry to the brethren consists of directing them in the subduing of the desires of the flesh. This assistance is seen from two perspectives. First, from the subjective viewpoint, the “deeds of the body, ” or “the evil deeds prompted by the body” are sudued. ^AMPLIFIED(Rom 8:13). Second, behind the scenes, and apart from our consciousness of His activity, He makes intercession for us when we do not know what we should pray for as we ought (Rom 8:26-27). This doubtless relates to the fruit of the Spirit, even though that is not the immediate emphasis of the text just cited.

It seems to me that these are the matters with which men of godly thought ought to be occupied. The attempt to convert inspired examples into doctrine is quite common in Christian circles, but it is not right. Examples may have some association with doctrine, but only to the extent they are handled in that manner by the inspired writers of Scripture.

Our text is a case in point. The doctrinal emphasis is whether or not the disciples of reference had received the Spirit, not how He was received, or the immediate impact that reception had on the disciples. Also, the point was not whether they had worked miracles.

Subjectively, the common thing in accounts of the Spirit being given is that He was “received” by the people (Acts 8:17; 10:47). This is in perfect accord with the doctrine, which pertains to all who are in the Son (Rom 8:15; 1 Cor 2:12; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:2). The attending circumstances, however, were not identical.

Objectively, the point was that the Spirit had been “given,” or “shed forth” (Acts 2:38; 5:32; 8:18,20; 10:45; 11:17). This also precisely accords with apostolic doctrine (Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 6:19; 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; 1 Thess 4:8; 1 John 3:24; 4:13). Again, the attending circumstances were not identical.

The doctrine also states that the Spirit dwells in the saints (Rom 8:9,11; 1 Cor 6:19; James 4:5). At no point does the experience contradict the doctrine – yet the experience itself is not the doctrine. It is the doctrine that is to be taught.

By their very nature, texts like the one with which we have just dealt draw the attention of men. This is because it departs from the norm – a prerogative that is open to God, but not to men. Theoretically, things like this are associated with the transition to the New Covenant, and not to the covenant itself. They were probably evidence of the acceptance or lack of acceptance of the people to the ones who were preaching to them. However, the text does not say this, but simply gives the report of what the Lord did, and how He did it.

When it comes to what men teach, or the doctrine they affirm, they must affirm what is consistent, not what is inconsistent. They are not pass over unique texts, such as events concerning the disciples from Ephesus. However, they are not to be declared as though they were a pattern for future generations. It is quite possible for them to occur again, because they are things that are strictly governed by the Lord Himself. These are some of those paths that are “in the sea,” and His footsteps “that are not known” (Psa 77:19). They are not intended to be things that formulate a doctrine, or experiences that are to be eagerly sought. These are not matters over which saints are to divide.