24—26.
3917
µόνον τὸ βάπτισμα “lwdvvou- 26. οὗτός τε ἤρξατο παβῥησιάζεσθαι
~
ἐν τῇ συναγωγή.
A , ἀκούσαντες δὲ αὐτοῦ 1 ᾽Ακύλας καὶ Πρίσκιλλα,
1 Ακυλας και Πρισκιλλα, so DHLP, Syrr. P. and H., Sah., Arm., Chrys., Gig. ; but Πρ. και Ax. ABE 13, Vulg., Boh., Aeth., Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, so Blass, although in B we might have expected the other order, as characteristic of the Bezan text; see Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 268, and see below on verse 2.
heard of Jesus, whereas the words used to describe them, µαθηταί and πιστεύ- σαντες, are never used except of Chris- tians. What is the conclusion? That whilst Apollos, like these twelve men, was acquainted with no other Baptism than John’s, he may have known quite as much of our Lord’s words and deeds as was contained in the Gospel of St. Mark in its mutilated form, xvi. 8, which tells us nothing of Christian Baptism. And if we further ask from what source did Apollos gain this accurate informa- tion, Blass answers: ‘ videlicet non sine scripto aliquo Evangelio”. If, he urges, it had been otherwise, and Apollos had been instructed by some disciple of the Apostles and not through a written Gos- pel, the position of things in the text would be reversed, and Apollos would have been imperfectly acquainted with our Lord’s life and teaching, whilst he could not have failed to know of Christian Baptism as the admission to Christian churches. Blass therefore believes that before the year 50 (he places the Confer- ence in 45 or 46) written Gospels were in existence, and he evidently leans to the veuef that St. Marks Gospel, or some first edition of it, was the Gospel from which Apollos was instructed (see in loco, and cf. also Philology of the Gospels, p. 30). But the word κατηχ. on this view must be taken not to include but to exclude, at all events mainly, a reference to catechetical teaching, and this from the use of the word in the N.T. is most unlikely. In the majority of the cases, as Blass admits, the word denotes oral teaching, although he main- tains that this meaning is not always strictly kept. In the N.T. the word is used only by Luke and Paul, altogether eight times, in six of which it is used with reference to oral instruction, accord- ing to Mr. Wright: ‘ Apollos: a study in Pre-Pauline Christianity,” Expository Times, October, 1897 (but see also in answer, Blass, Philology of the Gospels, Ῥ. 31). Mr. Wright suggests that Apollos may have derived his knowledge of ‘‘the facts concerning Jesus” from one of the many Catechists who were sent out from Jerusalem, and visited
4
in large numbers the capital of Egypt, and by him Apollos like Theophilus was instructed in the way of the Lord. This view certainly gives an adequate meaning to κατηχ., but still it seems strange that a Catechist, even if | his chief business was to catechise or instruct in the facts of the Gospel history, should say nothing about Christian Bap- tism; surely a Catechist would himself be a baptised member of Christ. It is possible that Apollos may have de- liberately decided to abide as he was; he may have said that as the Master Himself had fulfilled all righteousness in John’s Baptism, so that Baptism was sufficient for the servant. But on this view one has to suppose that no news of the events of Pentecost had reached Alex- andria, although Egyptian Jews had been present at the feast. But the news which Apollos may have received had been im- perfect, cf. xix. 2, 3, and he had not therefore abandoned his position as a follower of the Baptist, who accepted the teaching that Jesus was the Messiah without knowing fully how that claim had been fulfilled, who had been baptised with the Baptism of the Baptist unto repentance without knowing the higher blessings conferred by membership in the Body of the Risen and Ascended Lord: see further Expository Times, vol. vii., pp. 564, 565; Hermathena, xxi. (1895) ; Weiss and Zéckler, in loco.—édd der καὶ ἐδίδασκεν : Blass prefers D ἀπελάλει, which Wright, uw. s., p. 11, renders “‘re- peated by rote”.—Léwv τῷ πνεύµατι, cf. Rom. xii. 11, this fervency was shown not only in speaking what he knew, but in teaching it to others, cf. ver. 11, where the same word is used of Paul’s instruc- tions. We can scarcely take ἐλάλει as privatim, ἐδίδασκεν publice (Bengel).— ἀκριβῶς: “accurately,” so often in classics, and as agreeing best here with this verse and the comparative in ver. 26; on the use of the word in medical writers. see Hobart, p. 251; Weiss, Meyer’s Kommentar, Luke i. 3, also com- pares the similarity between St. Luke’s phrase and Galen’s dedication of his work to a friend (he also finds a parallel in Jos., C. Apion, i., 10); see also below on