8:14-17 The 12 apostles were, of course, the divinely appointed leaders of the Christians (ch. 1). It was natural and proper, therefore, that they should send representative apostles to investigate the Samaritans' response to the gospel. This was especially important in view of the hostility that existed between the Hebrews and the Samaritans. It was important that both the Samaritan Christians and the Hebrew Christians believe that God had united them in Christ. When Peter and John came down, they observed that these Samaritans also had accepted Jesus as the Messiah. They asked God in prayer to send His Holy Spirit to baptize them as He had baptized the Jews who believed in Jesus (cf. Luke 11:13).
"This was a period of transition from the OT dispensation to the NT era, and these believers at Samaria were in a position similar to the believers at Jerusalem prior to Pentecost."360
However the baptism of the Spirit occurred somewhat differently here than it had in Jerusalem (ch. 2). There it happened spontaneously, but here it came in answer to the apostles' prayer and with the laying on of their hands. There the sound of a mighty wind, visible flames of fire, and speaking in tongues accompanied it. Here there is no mention that these phenomena were present. Perhaps tongues were not spoken here because the Jews and the Samaritans spoke the same language. In both places, Jerusalem and Samaria, the Spirit's reception for permanent indwelling through Spirit baptism is in view, and the Holy Spirit baptized people who were already believers in Jesus Christ.
"But what if the Spirit had come upon them [the Samaritans] at their baptism when administrated by Philip? Undoubtedly what feelings there were against Philip and the Hellenists would have carried over to them, and they would have been doubly under suspicion. But God in his providence withheld the gift of the Holy Spirit till Peter and John laid their hands on the Samaritans--Peter and John, two leading apostles who were highly thought of in the mother church at Jerusalem and who would have been accepted at that time as brothers in Christ by the new converts in Samaria."361
Does what happened in Jerusalem and Samaria set a precedent for a "second blessing"experience (i.e., the baptism of the Spirit as a separate work of God subsequent to regeneration)? Paul described normative Spirit baptism in 1 Corinthians 10:13 and Romans 8:9. The person who has not experienced Spirit baptism is not a Christian (Rom. 8:9). Therefore the instances of Spirit baptism in Acts when it followed salvation later must have been exceptional occasions. This unusual separation of salvation and Spirit baptism is understandable. People needed to perceive Spirit baptism as such at the beginning of the church's history. God baptized believers with the Spirit in this way to validate Jesus' promise that He would send the Spirit to indwell believers permanently, something not true previously (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7).362
In chapter 2 God identified Spirit baptism--which normally takes place without the believer being aware that it is happening--with wind, fire, and speaking in tongues. These things served as signs to the Jews present of God's working. Here in chapter 8 signs apparently did not announce the baptism of the Spirit but accompanied Philip's preaching. What would have impressed the Samaritans that the baptism of the Spirit was taking place? What would have impressed the Jews in Jerusalem that it had taken place in Samaria? The Spirit's baptizing work taking place in response to the laying on of the apostles' hands would have done so. This is, of course, exactly what God did.
"Peter used the keys committed to him (Matt. 16:18, 19) to open the door officially to the Samaritans, just as he did to 3,000 Jews at Pentecost, and would again a little later to the gentiles at the house of Cornelius (chap. 10). It would be a great mistake, however, to treat this incident at Samaria as normative for all subsequent believers. A look at the Spirit's coming upon Saul (9:17) and Cornelius (10:44) will reveal considerable differences, so that the Samaritan experience was not the regular pattern in the Book of Acts."363
8:18-19 Clearly some external sign accompanied the coming of the Spirit to baptize because the people present perceived it as happening. Perhaps the sign was speaking in tongues as in chapter 2. Simon desired to buy the ability to precipitate Spirit baptism and its accompanying sign from Peter and John. This practice, the attempt to buy spiritual powers and offices, has become identified with Simon's name (i.e., simony). Simon failed to appreciate the uniqueness of Spirit baptism. He appears to have wanted to produce this in anyone, not just believers. Perhaps Simon's error was an innocent mistake due to theological ignorance.
Note that it was clear to Simon that the laying on of hands communicated Spirit baptism (v. 19).
8:20-23 Peter's stern response, however, revealed the seriousness of Simon's error. J. B. Phillips paraphrased Peter's opening words, "To hell with you and your money!"364By his request Simon had revealed that he hoped he could buy God's gifts, namely the Holy Spirit and the ability to impart the Holy Spirit to others. Peter corrected him harshly. God's gifts are gifts; people cannot purchase them because God gives them freely. Simon had much to learn about the grace of God. Peter told him God would not grant the ability he sought because his heart was not right with God. Simon wanted to be able to bring glory to himself rather than to God.365Proper motives are essential as we seek to serve Jesus Christ. Simon's flesh rather than the Holy Spirit still controlled him. Bitterness, bondage, and iniquity still characterized him (v. 23). He was to the Samaritan church what Ananias and Sapphira were to the Jerusalem church: an early instance of self-seeking (cf. 5:1-11). Peter may have wondered if God would judge Simon as He had Ananias and Sapphira, if Simon was about to fall dead at his feet.
8:24 Peter's rebuke terrified Simon. A man with the spiritual power Simon had seen Peter demonstrate was no one to antagonize. Probably Simon's request for prayer that God would be merciful to him was sincere though superficial.
Many interpreters believe that Simon was not a genuine believer, but he may have been. True Christians can do and have done everything that Simon said and did. His background, fresh out of demonism, makes his conduct easier to understand. I see him as another Ananias except that Ananias knew exactly what he was doing whereas Simon's error seems to have involved ignorance to some extent. Probably that is why he did not suffer the same fate as Ananias. Both men became examples to the Christians in their respective areas of how important it is to behave under the control of the Holy Spirit (cf. Eph. 5:15-21).
