3---δ.
403
, gor} ἠκούσαμεν. 3. εἶπέ τε πρὸς αὐτούς, Eis τί οὖν ἐβαπτίσθητε;
οἱ δὲ εἶπον, Eis τὸ Ἰωάννου βάπτισμα.
4. εἶπε δὲ Παῦλος, Ιωάννης
μὲν ἐβάπτισε βάπτισμα µετανοίας, τῷ λαῷ λέγων, eis τὸν ἐρχόμενον
3 lol μετ᾽ αὐτὸν ἵνα πιστεύσωσι, τουτέστιν εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 5.
/ a “A ἀκούσαντες δὲ ἐβαπτίσθησαν eis τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ.
6. καὶ
ἐπιθέντος αὐτοῖς τοῦ Παύλου τὰς χεῖρας, ἦλθε ὃ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Άγιον
1 Instead of εστιν D!, Syr. Harcl. mg., Sah. read λαμβανονσιν τινες, so Blass and Hilg. εστιν very likely misunderstood; it seems impossible that AapB. τινες
should be replaced by the difficult εστιν.
2 mwev om. SRABD, Vulg., Sah., Arm., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. Χριστον om. SABE 13, 25, 40, Vulg., Boh., Syr. Η., Aethro., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Blass; although Sah., Gig., Pesh. read εις τον |. X., and D
(so Hilg.) has εις Χ.
3 D, Jer., instead of ηλθεν, have ευθεως επεπεσεν.
After γλωσσαις, Sah., Syr. H.
mg. add erepats, and Syr. H. mg. (Par.) continue και επεγινωσκον εν εαντοις, wore
και ερµήηνευειν αυτας εαντοις͵ τινες δε και επροφητευον. Weiss regard as interpolations after 1 Cor. xiv.
Both Wendt (1899) and Blass, on the other hand, accepts
in β, cf. also p. xxviii., and speaks of this as “locus gravissimus”’.
notice of Apollos (see Felten, p. 351, note).—ei, cf. 1. 6.---πιστεύσ.: ‘ when ye became believers,” or ‘when ye be- lieved,” R.V., in contrast with A.V.—the question was whether they had received the Holy Ghost at their Baptism, and there is no allusion to any subsequent time. The two aorists, as in R.V., point to one definite occasion.—ei f."A. ἐστιν : ‘‘ whether the Holy Ghost was given,” R.V. (cf. John vii. 39): (the spirit was not yet given), A.V., but in margin, R.V. follows A.V. in the passage before us: ἐστιν, accipitur, Bengel. There could not be any question as to the existence of the Holy Ghost, for the Baptist had pointed to the future Baptism of the Spirit to be conferred by the Messiah, and the O.T. would have taught the ex- istence of a Holy Spirit—the meaning is that they had not heard whether their promised Baptism of the Spirit by the Messiah had been already fulfilled or not. So δοθέν, ἐκχυνόμενον may be understood. Alford holds that the stress should be laid on jKkovoapev—when we received Bap- tism we did not even hear of a Holy Ghost.
Ver. 3. οὖν: presupposes that if they had been baptised into the name of Jesus, they would have received the Spirit at Baptism.—eigs: “' to baptise into”’ (R.V.) may have been suggested by the original practice to baptise by dipping or plung- ing, see Humphry, Comment. on R.V.,in loco.—eis τὸ ἸΙ. βάπτισμα, {.ε., into or unto repentance. For the strange notion that they were baptised into John as the Messiah see Hackett’s note.
Ver. 4. εἰς τὸν ἐρχ.: placed first be- fore tva, perhaps for emphasis. The phrase had been a favourite one with the Baptist (cf. Matt. iii. τ). John’s own words showed that his Baptism was in- sufficient. ἵνα may express both the purport and the purpose (so Alford).
Ver.5. ἀκούσαντες δὲ: neither gram- matical nor in accordance with fact can these words be regarded (as by Beza and others) as part of St. Paul’s words, as if they meant, ‘‘ and the people when they heard him,” 7.e., John.
Ver. 6. καὶ ἐπιθ. αὐτοῖς τοῦ Π. τὰς X-» see above on viii. 16.--ἐλάλουν τε yA. καὶ προεφ.: the imperfects may mean that they began to speak, or that the exercise of the gifts mentioned continued. The two gifts are discussed in 1 Cor. xii. 1ο, xiv., in an Epistle which was written probably during this stay at Ephesus— no doubt the gifts are specially men- tioned because the bestowal of such gifts distinguished Christian Baptism from that of John. McGiffert, p. 286, while admitting the accuracy of the ac- count as a whole, thinks that its repre- sentation is moulded, as in viii., in ac- cordance with the work of Peter and John in Samaria; so too Hilgenfeld refers the account to his ‘‘ author to Theophilus,” who also, in viii. 16, narrates that the bap- tised Samaritans received the Holy Ghost by the laying on of Peter’s hands. This is in some respects not unlike the older view of Baur, who held that the narra- tive was introduced to parallel Paul’s dignity and work with that of Peter in x. 44—the first speaking with tongues in