The Expositor's Bible: The Acts of the Apostles, Vol. 2Stokes, George Thomas
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Acts of the Apostles, Vol. 2
Stokes, George Thomas
Bible. Acts -- Commentaries; Bible. Acts -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
[185] Meyer, in his Commentary on ch. xix. 5, enunciates the
following extraordinary theory about Apollos, which plainly shows
that, valuable as may be his textual criticism, his conception of
Christian doctrine and of Apostolic Church life is very defective:
"We may not infer from this passage that the disciples of John,
who passed over to Christianity, were uniformly re-baptized; for
in the case of the apostles who passed over from John to Jesus
this certainly did not take place; and even as regards Apollos the
common opinion that he was baptized by Aquila is purely arbitrary,
as in xviii. 26 his instruction in Christianity, and not his
baptism, is narrated." Again: "Apollos could dispense with
re-baptism, seeing that he, with his fervid spirit, following the
references of John to Christ, and the instruction of his teachers,
penetrated without any new baptismal consecration into the
pneumatic elements of life." Meyer evidently fails to grasp what
the sacrament of baptism was, as conceived by St. Paul, and uses
the most dangerous line of argument, that from silence, concluding
that, because there is no mention of the Christian baptism of
Apollos, therefore such a baptism never took place. But this is
not all. Meyer's theory cannot possibly explain why baptism was
necessary for Cornelius, though he enjoyed the gift of the Holy
Ghost, while it was not necessary for Apollos, "who penetrated
without any new baptismal consecration into the pneumatic element
of life." Meyer says, indeed, that in the whole New Testament
there is no example except in xix. 1-5 of the re-baptism of a
disciple of John. But then in the Acts and Epistles, where alone
we read of the administration of Christian baptism, there are only
two examples of the admission of John's disciples. In one case
twelve such were admitted, and they were all baptized by Paul's
own order. In the case of Apollos there is silence. Surely the
sounder conclusion is that Christian baptism was administered
there too, though nothing is said about it! As for the apostles
not being baptized with Christian baptism, the explanation is not
far to seek. Baptism is the reception of a disciple into covenant
with Christ through the medium of water. In the case of the
apostles this reception took place in person, and not through any
medium. In the apostles' case, too, there is another
consideration. Meyer's conclusion is simply one _e silentio_ even
in their case. We know not, however, everything that Christ did as
regards His apostles.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account