Rebaptism and the Teaching of John
Acts 18:18-19:7
Acts Series Part 36
By Dave Redick

So Paul baptized these people – even though they had already been baptized. Why would he do that? Because John’s baptism, though effective in its time, that is, in the time when Jesus walked the earth, was now obsolete. John’s was a baptism of repentance that came with instruction that people believe in the one coming after him. It was preparatory – the pre-game show, if you can think of it that way. But Jesus had died for the sins of the world. Full atonement was attained on the cross with Jesus as God’s great offering for sin. Then three days later He had risen mightily from the grave. Before Jesus ascended back into heaven He had said in Matthew 28:18-20: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit....” A new baptism was now in effect – the baptism commanded by Jesus. All authority now belonged to Him so that baptism could be by His authority – or, as we see here, “in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” This could not happen before Jesus died. 

Introduction 

Many years ago when I was preaching in another city I received a late night call from a friend and fellow preacher who lived in another town. After we exchanged greetings my friend told me he needed my help. I responded that I would do whatever I could and asked him to explain. He said he needed someone to do a baptism. I told him that it would be no problem. I could have the baptistery ready in a couple of hours. Then I asked him who it was who wanted to be baptized and there was a long pause on the other end of the line. “I do,” he said. Suddenly both of us were quiet.   

After asking him if I heard him correctly, he explained himself. He had been very young when he was baptized – so young, in fact, that he had little recollection of his state of mind at the time. Had he really understood what he was doing? Had he really surrendered his life to Christ at the time? My response at first was to try to talk him out of it. Surely his time spent preparing for ministry and the subsequent years of service were proof of his commitment, I suggested. We continued to bat the thing back and forth until finally he told me that he simply could not live with the doubts he had in his mind anymore. He needed to be sure. Would I baptize him or not? 

That night, very late, perhaps around midnight, we both slipped into the tank of water at the church building and I baptized my friend in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for the forgiveness of his sins. 

Was I right in doing so? Should I rather have told him no, that I wouldn’t participate, and that surely God would make things right because of his sincerity, regardless of whether he had properly understood as a child? 

I would like you to keep that question in the backs of your minds as we consider the next portion of Scripture awaiting us in the book of Acts in our ongoing study called Acts of the Apostles. I’ve called today’s lesson, Rebaptism and the Teaching of John. We’ll consider Acts 18:18-19:7, where we see first: 

1. A Journey Completed.

 The journey I refer to is Paul’s second missionary journey. We left him in Corinth last time, where he spent an extended period of time evangelizing that city in relative peace after receiving so much persecution and rejection at the hand of both Jews and Gentiles in Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, and Athens. The Jews tried it again in Corinth, but their scheme failed in a situation that ended in the beating of the leader of their synagogue – a man named Sosthenes, who may later have become a Christian and companion of Paul. We pick it up in verse 18:

18 And Paul, having remained many days longer, took leave of the brethren and put out to sea for Syria, and with him were Priscilla and Aquila. In Cenchrea he had his hair cut, for he was keeping a vow.  

We know nothing more of this vow than what Luke says here so I’m going to refrain from stopping to talk about it. Note who is with Paul: Priscilla and Aquila.

19a And they came to Ephesus, and he left them there.  

Paul would leave in Ephesus this dynamic couple who had been so helpful to him in his time of discouragement. We’ll soon see that this was a good move as they did a great work there. Paul didn’t stay long in Ephesus, but while he was there he preached to the Jews. 

19b Now he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews. 20 And when they asked him to stay for a longer time, he did not consent, 21 but taking leave of them and saying, "I will return to you again if God wills," he set sail from Ephesus.  

While there was the promise of fruit in the response of these people in the synagogue in Ephesus, for some reason it seems Paul was in a hurry. Perhaps his haste was to return to Antioch, his sending church, before the weather stopped safe travel for the year. 

22 And when he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and greeted the church, and went down to Antioch.  

This return to Antioch marked the end of Paul’s second missionary trip. Surely there was much for him to share with the church there as he recounted the many opportunities, dangers, and victories he had experience while preaching the gospel in strange cities. Best of all he would share the news of many converts made for Christ during his trip. Luke expends little ink on the subject however, so we won’t either – except to say that verse 22 marks the end of Paul’s second journey and verse 23 the beginning of his third. 

23 And having spent some time there, he departed and passed successively through the Galatian region and Phrygia, strengthening all the disciples.

The verses that follow these in Acts contain some very interesting events. Not surprisingly, they introduce some controversy among Bible students because they impact important doctrines of the church. I hope you’ll pay close attention as we see next: 

2. A Preacher Corrected. 

24 Now a certain Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures.

We know nothing of Apollos before this time in Acts. From this verse we learn that he was a Jew from Alexandria. According to one commentator there were a million Jews living in Alexandria at the time.[1] Two out of five of the wards into which the city was divided were Jewish. Alexandria was a city of scholars and a depository of ancient wisdom and knowledge. It is very likely that Apollos was educated at a fairly high level because of this background. 

Luke tells us that Apollos was “an eloquent man” who was “mighty in the Scriptures.”  Not only could he speak convincingly but he could expound the Old Testament powerfully as well. I can’t help but note as we pass these words that these two qualifications ought to be of great concern for both preachers and congregations today. Far too often the eloquent part is all that is sought when evaluating a preacher and soon an entire congregation is led away from the truth because the man was not well versed in the Bible, or had some other agenda. 

25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John;  

Apollos was well instructed in God’s ways. He knew about Jesus. Besides that Luke tells us he was “fervent in spirit.” The word in the Greek translated “fervent” means “boiling.” Apollos was no milquetoast preacher whose only aim was to please people. He was fervent for the things of God. In the spirit of John the Baptist, his ultimate mentor, he was a man of conviction and zeal for God. He also was teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus – up to a point. Apollos had a deficit. He understood God’s will only up to the point of the teaching of John the Baptist.  

John was, of course, the forerunner of Christ. His message was one of repentance as he came to prepare the hearts of the people to receive the Messiah. John had identified Jesus as “the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world,” but he had died before the Lord’s death, burial, and resurrection. Apparently Apollos was not aware of these latter facts – of if he was, he didn’t sufficiently understand their significance. So when he came to Ephesus: 

26 …he began to speak out boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.  

Here we have this wonderful Christian couple again, Priscilla and Aquila, attached to the synagogue at Ephesus, doing the work of God. This powerful preacher shows up one day, they listen to his message, which is great as far as it goes. But there is this deficit. So they take him aside and explain to him the rest of the story that his preaching lacks.  

It is quite amazing to me how humble this man with the Alexandrian education must have been – to listen to an ordinary Jewish couple, and after hearing them, to willingly correct and update his message. Great learning should never take away humility and a willingness to listen to truth – though it often does just that. The man who believes he is too far advanced to listen to those with less recognition than he has is setting himself up for a fall. 

Of course such an adjustment in his message would perhaps do several things. First it would give him pause about going to those he had been teaching in order to correct his message. Did he do that? Luke doesn’t tell us. It would seem that his fervency for the things of God would not allow him to leave people without sharing the same update with his followers that he had received. Actually there may be a clue in the next verse. Apollos wanted to go from Ephesus, across the Aegean Sea, to Corinth, the capital of Achaia. I want you to notice how the brethren in Ephesus handled it.  

27 And when he wanted to go across to Achaia, the brethren encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him; and when he had arrived, he helped greatly those who had believed through grace; 28 for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.  

The willingness of the Ephesian brethren to endorse him to those in Achaia indicates to me that Apollos must have made corrected the teaching he had given in Ephesus, to the extent that he could.  

So Apollos, with the correction of Priscilla and Aquila and a letter of recommendation from the Ephesian brethren, goes across to Corinth where, you will remember, Paul had spent some time working to establish a church. Luke tells us that the ministry of Apollos in Corinth “helped greatly those who had believed through grace.” He also was quite successful there among the Jews in the synagogue in proving that Jesus was the Christ. 

Luke goes on now to tell what was happening with Paul during this time. He was, you will remember according to verse 23 of this chapter, on his third missionary journey, passing through the region of Galatia and Phrygia, strengthening the disciples. He would soon arrive in Ephesus – after Apollos had gone to Corinth. Interestingly, Paul’s arrival in Ephesus would involve something very similar to what we just read. Though John the Baptist had died decades before this, his influence and teaching lived on, and there were others, like Apollos, who still held to his preparatory teaching. As strange as it might sound, it would be like someone still raving about the pre-game show, anxious to get started with the game, totally unaware that the game had transpired without their knowledge, the stadium was dark, and all the fans had gone home. There must have been others whose understanding had the same deficit as Apollos – even some who had been taught by Apollos in Ephesus and other places. That’s what we find next as we see:

3. Some Disciples Converted. 

19:1 And it came about that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found some disciples, 2 and he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said to him, "No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit." 3 And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" And they said, "Into John's baptism."  

Alright – some things to consider from these verses. First, Luke tells us that Paul “found some disciples.” A disciple is a learner. That these disciples were not Christians becomes clear when we see that they were ultimately baptized in the name of Jesus after Paul taught them. These were more disciples of John the Baptist, just like Apollos. In fact, it is possible, though not sure, that they had been taught by Apollos since they were in Ephesus.  

Paul immediately asks the question, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” Why would he ask that? Some say he noticed something missing in their behavior – that they were noticeably lacking the “fruit of the Spirit” as taught in Galatians 5. Others say that Paul wanted to impart some miraculous spiritual gifts to them but first needed to determine whether they were true Christians. That has some merit since Paul does lay hands on them in verse 6 to impart the gift of speaking in tongues. I’ll say more on that shortly. 

My view on the matter is that Paul had probably encountered others who were in this same condition – that is, like Apollos they were acquainted only with the baptism of John. Though John foretold a time when the Holy Spirit would come,[2] he died before the event was fulfilled on Pentecost in Act 2. A good question to ask anyone with this deficient understanding then, would be whether they received the Holy Spirit when they were converted. If they said no, it would be further cause to check out whether they were more of John’s disciples who needed to be updated. 

By the way, the New American Standard Version gives an alternate reading for verse 2 in the margin. Where it says, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit,” it gives the possible alternate as, “No, we have not even heard whether the Holy Spirit has been given.” To me this alternate reading seems more feasible since the thing John lacked in his teaching was not that the Holy Spirit existed but rather, when the Holy Spirit was given. 

At any rate, a lack of understanding of the giving of the Holy Spirit would identify these men as disciples of John’s teaching and verify that they needed further instruction. Paul wasted no time getting to the point. 

4 And Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5 And when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 

So Paul baptized these people – even though they had already been baptized! Why would he do that? Because John’s baptism, though effective in its time, that is, in the time when Jesus walked the earth, was now obsolete. John’s was a baptism of repentance that came with instruction that people believe in the one coming after him. It was preparatory – the pre-game show, if you can think of it that way. But Jesus had died for the sins of the world. Full atonement was attained on the cross with Jesus as God’s great offering for sin. Then three days later He had risen mightily from the grave. Before Jesus ascended back into heaven He had said in Matthew 28:18-20: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit....” A new baptism was now in effect – the baptism commanded by Jesus. All authority now belonged to Him so that baptism could be by His authority – or, as we see here, “in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” This could not happen before Jesus died. 

These disciples of John therefore, though they were immersed in water, just like in Christian baptism; though according to Mark 1:4, they received forgiveness of sins, just like in Christian baptism; though they understood that it was only for repentant people – a fact we see when John rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to him without repentance in Matthew 3:7; nevertheless, something was missing and as a result they were baptized again to correct a deficit. John’s baptism wasn’t done by Jesus’ authority in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. John’s baptism was not associated with the giving of the Holy Spirit as, according to Acts 2:38, Jesus’ baptism is. People were rebaptized when something in their original baptism was deficient.   

Now, with the correct baptism, Paul could lay hands on these new Christians who, according to Acts 2:38 now had the “gift of the Holy Spirit” and impart some of the miraculous spiritual “gifts” of the Holy Spirit so necessary in the establishment of the first century church before the New Testament Scripture was complete. 

 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying. 7 And there were in all about twelve men.  

As we have noted before in Acts, the miraculous gifts came by the laying on of Apostles’ hands, as we see here again.  

So, now we need to consider how this applies to us. 

4. An Application Considered. 

The most obvious issue that this portion of Scripture raises is that of rebaptism. Apparently there is a case to be made for immersing a person again when an earlier baptism lacked an essential element of understanding. It may not, therefore, be sufficient for us to say, “Oh, well, I didn’t get it quite right the first time, but I’m sincere and God knows my heart so He’ll make the adjustment.” Paul was not willing to accept that line of reasoning. The focus of this passage wasn’t their sincerity. It was the validity of their baptism and their understanding of it.

 So when, we might ask, is rebaptism appropriate? 

According to New Testament teaching there are five essential elements involved in Christian baptism correctly administered:  

 In the example we have seen it wasn’t enough just to be baptized. The right understanding was also necessary.  

So when would rebaptism be appropriate today? Having addressed this issue for many years it seems to me that rebaptism is needed: 

Having said these things I want to make a clarification. Ephesians 4:4 tells us that there is only one baptism – and that is certainly true. The “one baptism” is the correct one. It is, therefore, in reality inappropriate for us to speak of “rebaptism.” We need rather to speak of right baptism or correct baptism, or simply, New Testament baptism. 

When one has been correctly baptized there should never be a need to be baptized again – even in a case where a person has fallen away. In the case where a person was correctly baptized and has since fallen away, the remedy is confession and repentance. This can be seen clearly in Acts 8:22 and 1 John 1:9.                        

Conclusion 

My preacher friend that I mentioned in the beginning has gone on in his Christian walk and continued to serve God. Was his decision to be rebaptized the right one? I believe so. Even if he was mistaken about what he believed at the time, it was the only way for him to settle his doubts.  

What about you? It is entirely possible that this sermon has raised some questions in your mind. If so, and you need further study from the Bible, we stand ready to help you.