This is the first of two incidents taken from Paul's ministry in Ephesus that bracket Luke's description of his general ministry there.
19:1-2 Two roads led into Ephesus from the east, and Paul travelled the northern, more direct route (cf. 18:23).758Ephesus, like Athens, had reached its heyday and was in decline when Paul visited it. Its claim to fame was twofold. Its location on the west coast of Asia Minor near the mouth of the Cayster River made it an important commercial center. As commerce declined due to the silting up of the port at Ephesus, its religious influence continued to draw worshippers to the Temple of Artemis (Greek) or Diana (Roman). This temple was four times the size of the Parthenon at Athens and was renowned as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world.
"It was 425 feet long by 220 feet wide by 60 feet high. There were 127 pillars, each of them the gift of a king. They were all of glittering Parian marble and 36 of them were marvelously gilt and inlaid. The great altar had been carved by Praxiteles, the greatest of all Greek sculptors. The image of Artemis was not beautiful. It was a black, squat, many-breasted figure, to signify fertility; it was so old that no one knew where it had come from or even of what material it was made. The story was that it had fallen from heaven. The greatest glory of Ephesus was that she was the guardian of the most famous pagan temple in the world."759
Ephesus was a hotbed of religious superstition and occult practices.
"Ephesus, for all her past splendour, was a dying city, pre-occupied with parasite pursuits, living, like Athens, on a reputation, and a curious meeting-place of old and new religions, of superstition and philosophy, of East and West."760
It is difficult to determine whether the "disciples"whom Paul found in Ephesus were Christians or not. They seem quite similar to Apollos (18:25-26) and may have been Old Testament saints or untaught Christians.761Another possibility is that they were not believers at all but only seekers after the truth.762The second alternative seems more probable to me. Elsewhere Luke used the word "disciple"to describe John's followers (Luke 5:33; 7:18-19). Clearly these men were disciples of John the Baptist, not Jesus.
Paul asked them about their possession of the Holy Spirit, probably because he saw some incongruity in their claim to be admirers of John and their evident lack of the Spirit.763Paul's question assumed two things: they were genuine Christians, since they professed to believe John the Baptist, and everyone who believes in Jesus possesses the indwelling Holy Spirit (cf. Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:13).
John had predicted the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; cf. John 1:32-33). Their response to Paul's question probably indicates that they did not know that the Lord had given the Holy Spirit as John had predicted. This enabled Paul to see that his first assumption about these disciples was incorrect; they were not Christians.
19:3 This discovery led Paul to raise another question to clarify his second assumption. What baptism had they experienced, or with whom did they identify in baptism? They replied that they had undergone John's water baptism. This response told Paul that they had not experienced Spirit baptism and so were unsaved.764
"Like Apollos (18:25), they had been baptized as a symbol of repentance only."765
19:4 Paul explained to these disciples, as Priscilla and Aquila had undoubtedly explained to Apollos, that John's baptism was good but insufficient. John had also instructed his disciples to believe in Jesus who would baptize them with the Holy Spirit. The baptism of the Spirit normally accompanied faith in Jesus.
19:5 When these disciples of John heard that the Messiah had come, they believed in Jesus and submitted to water baptism in His name. This is the only explicit reference to re-baptism in the New Testament.
19:6 As with the new converts in Samaria, these Ephesian disciples received the Holy Spirit when an apostle, this time Paul, laid his hands on them (cf. 8:17). In Samaria, this identification of the coming of the Spirit with Peter and John first authenticated God's giving the Spirit in a non-Jewish context. Here the identification of the coming of the Spirit with Paul authenticated God's giving the Spirit in a town in which demonic religious activity flourished (cf. vv. 13-19). As subsequent events would show, the Jesus whom Paul preached was the more powerful deity. These former disciples of John received the Holy Spirit when Paul laid his hands on them thus obviously connecting their endowment with Paul's message and apostolic authority.766
Note some interesting parallels between Spirit baptism as it took place in Ephesus in this chapter and how it occurred in Samaria in chapter 8.
The phenomenon of the separate conversion and Spirit baptism experiences of some Christians that Luke recorded in Acts may need further clarification. It seems that God wanted to highlight the fulfillment of Jesus' promise that He would send the Holy Spirit to be in and with believers (John 14:16-18, 26; 15:26). To do so God made the coming of that Spirit obvious until the church generally appreciated the fact that it normally occurred at the time of regeneration.
"This story has often been used as the basis for doctrines about the reception of gifts of the Spirit subsequent to conversion; but it has no real connection with these. Rather Paul was dealing with an unusual situation which required special treatment. . . .
". . . it is safe to say that the New Testament does not recognize the possibility of being a Christian apart from possession of the Spirit (Jn. 3:5; Acts 11:17; Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:3; Gal. 3:2; 1 Thes. 1:5f.; Tit. 3:5; Heb. 6:4; 1 Pet. 1:2; 1 Jn. 3:24; 4:13)."768
"It should be noted that the reception of the Holy Spirit [by Christians] in Acts does not follow any set pattern. He came into believers before baptism (Acts 10:44), at the time of or after baptism (8:12-16; 19:6), and by the laying on of apostolic hands (8:17; 19:6). Yet Paul declared (Rom. 8:9) that anyone without the Holy Spirit is not a Christian. Quite obviously the transitional Book of Acts is not to be used as a doctrinal source on how to receive the Holy Spirit (cf. comments on tongues, 1 Cor. 13:8-14:25)."769
"Ephesus was a polyglot city of the Roman Empire. There were many languages spoken there, just as there had been in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost. East and West met all along that coast. . . . These men were now able to give the good news about Christ to the entire city."770
This is the last reference to speaking in tongues in Acts (cf. 2:4; 10:46; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28, 30; 13:1, 8; 14). Is this gift still in the church today? Some charismatic Christians believe that it is. They argue mainly from experience, having heard someone, perhaps themselves, speak in what others refer to as tongues. In most cases what they call tongues is gibberish, not known languages. This is different from what the New Testament identified as tongues, namely known languages (cf. 1 Cor. 12; 14). In a few cases people have apparently spoken in known languages that they have not studied, the type of tongues-speaking that the New Testament describes.
The real issue is what does the New Testament say about tongues? It says that they would pass away or cease of themselves, as in petering out (1 Cor. 13:8, middle voice of pauo). When would this happen? The New Testament does not specify when, but it implies that they would peter out before prophecy would end (lit. be terminated [by God], passive voice of katargeo, 1 Cor. 13:8). I do not believe that any one verse indicates that tongues would cease or did cease in the apostolic period. However, I think it is reasonable to conclude that they did for two reasons.771First, other New Testament passages imply that they would and did cease then (Eph. 2:20; Heb. 2:3-4). Second, the early church fathers wrote that tongues petered out in the early history of the church even though there were rare instances of the phenomenon after that.772
How can we explain the instances of people speaking in languages they have not studied today? It may be that God occasionally gives people this ability today, though the evidence of this happening is rare. Practically no one, including respected charismatic leaders, claims that the ability to speak in a language that one has not studied exists today as it did in New Testament times.773
God evidently gave the gift of prophesying to each of these Ephesian disciples to enable them to assume leadership of the church and the church's mission.
19:7 Luke may have intended this group of "about 12"to remind the reader of another core group, the 12 apostles, though these were not on the same level of authority. The Ephesian church became the center of Christian witness in western Asia Minor and the Aegean region as Antioch and Jerusalem had become earlier.
