TWO FRUITFUL YEARS

'And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having

passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain

disciples. 2. He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since

ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard

whether there be any Holy Ghost. 3. And he said unto them, Unto what

then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. 4. Then said

Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto

the people, that they should believe on Him which should come after

him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5. When they heard this, they were

baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6. And when Paul had laid his

hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with

tongues, and prophesied. 7. And all the men were about twelve. 8. And

he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three

months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of

God. 9. But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil

of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated

the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus. 10. And

this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt

in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks. 11. And

God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: 12. So that from his

body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the

diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of

them.'--ACTS xix. 1-12.

This passage finds Paul in Ephesus. In the meantime he had paid that

city a hasty visit on his way back from Greece, had left his friends,

Aquila and Priscilla, in it, and had gone on to Jerusalem, thence

returning to Antioch, and visiting the churches in Asia Minor which he

had planted on his former journeys. From the inland and higher

districts he has come down to the coast, and established himself in the

great city of Ephesus, where the labours of Aquila, and perhaps others,

had gathered a small band of disciples. Two points are especially made

prominent in this passage--the incorporation of John's disciples with

the Church, and the eminent success of Paul's preaching in Ephesus.

The first of these is a very remarkable and, in some respects, puzzling

incident. It is tempting to bring it into connection with the

immediately preceding narrative as to Apollos. The same stage of

spiritual development is presented in these twelve men and in that

eloquent Alexandrian. They and he were alike in knowing only of John's

baptism; but if they had been Apollos' pupils, they would most probably

have been led by him into the fuller light which he received through

Priscilla and Aquila. More probably, therefore, they had been John's

disciples, independently of Apollos. Their being recognised as

'disciples' is singular, when we consider their very small knowledge of

Christian truth; and their not having been previously instructed in its

rudiments, if they were associating with the Church, is not less so.

But improbable things do happen, and part of the reason for an event

being recorded is often its improbability. Luke seems to have been

struck by the singular similarity between Apollos and these men, and to

have told the story, not only because of its importance but because of

its peculiarity.

The first point to note is the fact that these men were disciples. Paul

speaks of their having 'believed,' and they were evidently associated

with the Church. But the connection must have been loose, for they had

not received baptism. Probably there was a fringe of partial converts

hanging round each church, and Paul, knowing nothing of the men beyond

the fact that he found them along with the others, accepted them as

'disciples.' But there must have been some reason for doubt, or his

question would not have been asked. They 'believed' in so far as John

had taught the coming of Messiah. But they did not know that Jesus was

the Messiah whose coming John had taught.

Paul's question is, 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you

believed?' Obviously he missed the marks of the Spirit in them, whether

we are to suppose that these were miraculous powers or moral and

religious elevation. Now this question suggests that the possession of

the Holy Spirit is the normal condition of all believers; and that

truth cannot be too plainly stated or urgently pressed to-day. He is

'the Spirit, which they that believe on Him' shall 'receive.' The outer

methods of His bestowment vary: sometimes He is given after baptism,

and sometimes, as to Cornelius, before it; sometimes by laying on of

Apostolic hands, sometimes without it. But one thing constantly

precedes, namely, faith; and one thing constantly follows faith,

namely, the gift of the Holy Spirit. Modern Christianity does not grasp

that truth as firmly or make it as prominent as it ought.

The question suggests, though indirectly, that the signs of the

Spirit's presence are sadly absent in many professing Christians. Paul

asked it in wonder. If he came into modern churches, he would have to

ask it once more. Possibly he looked for the visible tokens in powers

of miracle-working and the like. But these were temporary accidents,

and the permanent manifestations are holiness, consciousness of

sonship, God-directed longings, religious illumination, victory over

the flesh. These things should be obvious in disciples. They will be,

if the Spirit is not quenched. Unless they are, what sign of being

Christians do we present?

The answer startles. They had not heard whether the Holy Ghost had been

_given_; for that is the true meaning of their reply. John had foretold

the coming of One who should baptize with the fire of that divine

Spirit. His disciples, therefore, could not be ignorant of the

existence thereof; but they had never heard whether their Master's

prophecy had been fulfilled. What a glimpse that gives us of the small

publicity attained by the story of Jesus!

Paul's second question betrays even more astonishment than did his

first. He had taken for granted that, as disciples, the men had been

baptized; and his question implies that a pre-requisite of Christian

baptism was the teaching which they said that they had not had, and

that a consequence of it was the gift of the Spirit, which he saw that

they did not possess. Of course Paul's teaching is but summarised here.

Its gist was that Jesus was the Messiah whom John had heralded, that

John had himself taught that his mission was preliminary, and that

therefore his true disciples must advance to faith in Christ.

The teaching was welcomed, for these men were not of the sort who saw

in Jesus a rival to John, as others of his disciples did. They became

'disciples indeed,' and then followed baptism, apparently not

administered by Paul, and imposition of Paul's hands. The Holy Spirit

then came on them, as on the disciples on Pentecost, and 'they spoke

with tongues and prophesied.' It was a repetition of that day, as a

testimony that the gifts were not limited by time or place, but were

the permanent possession of believers, as truly in heathen Ephesus as

in Jerusalem; and we miss the meaning of the event unless we add, as

truly in Britain to-day as in any past. The fire lit on Pentecost has

not died down into grey ashes. If we 'believe,' it will burn on our

heads and, better, in our spirits.

Much ingenuity has been expended in finding profound meanings in the

number of 'twelve' here. The Apostles and their supernatural gifts, the

patriarchs as founders of Israel, have been thought of as explaining

the number, as if these men were founders of a new Israel, or

Apostolate. But all that is trifling with the story, which gives no

hint that the men were of any special importance, and it omits the fact

that they were '_about_ twelve,' not precisely that number. Luke simply

wishes us to learn that there was a group of them, but how many he does

not exactly know. More important is it to notice that this is the last

reference to John or his disciples in the New Testament. The narrator

rejoices to point out that some at least of these were led onwards into

full faith.

The other part of the section presents mainly the familiar features of

Apostolic ministration, the first appeal to the synagogue, the

rejection of the message by it, and then the withdrawal of Paul and the

Jewish disciples. The chief characteristics of the narrative are Paul's

protracted stay in Ephesus, the establishment of a centre of public

evangelising in the lecture hall of a Gentile teacher, the unhindered

preaching of the Gospel, and the special miracles accompanying it. The

importance of Ephesus as the eye and heart of proconsular Asia explains

the lengthened stay. 'A great door and effectual,' said Paul, 'is

opened unto me'; and he was not the man to refrain from pushing in at

it because 'there are many adversaries.' Rather opposition was part of

his reason for persistence, as it should always he.

There comes a point in the most patient labour, however, when it is

best no longer to 'cast pearls' before those who 'trample them under

foot,' and Paul set an example of wise withdrawal as well as of brave

pertinacity, in leaving the synagogue when his remaining there only

hardened disobedient hearts. Note that word _disobedient_. It teaches

that the moral element in unbelief is resistance of the will. The two

words are not synonyms, though they apply to the same state of mind.

Rather the one lays bare the root of the other and declares its guilt.

Unbelief comes from disobedience, and therefore is fit subject for

punishment. Again observe that expression for Christianity, 'the Way,'

which occurs several times in the Acts. The Gospel points the path for

us to tread. It is not a body of truth merely, but it is a guide for

practice. Discipleship is manifested in conduct. This Gospel points the

way through the wilderness to Zion and to rest. It is '_the_ Way,' the

only path, 'the Way everlasting.'

It was a bold step to gather the disciples in 'the school of Tyrannus.'

He was probably a Greek professor of rhetoric or lecturer on

philosophy, and Paul may have hired his hall, to the horror, no doubt,

of the Rabbis. It was a complete breaking with the synagogue and a bold

appeal to the heathen public. Ephesus must have been better governed

than Philippi and Lystra, and the Jewish element must have been

relatively weaker, to allow of Paul's going on preaching with so much

publicity for two years.

Note the flexibility of his methods, his willingness to use even a

heathen teacher's school for his work, and the continuous energy of the

man. Not on Sabbath days only, but daily, he was at his post. The

multitudes of visitors from all parts to the great city supplied a

constant stream of listeners, for Ephesus was a centre for the whole

country. We may learn from Paul to concentrate work in important

centres, not to be squeamish about where we stand to preach the Gospel,

and not to be afraid of making ourselves conspicuous. Paul's message

hallows the school of Tyrannus; and the school of Tyrannus, where men

have been accustomed to go for widely different teaching, is a good

place for Paul to give forth his message in.

The 'special miracles' which were wrought are very remarkable, and

unlike the usual type of miracles. It does not appear that Paul himself

sent the 'handkerchiefs and aprons,' which conveyed healing virtue, but

that he simply permitted their use. The converts had faith to believe

that such miracles would be wrought, and God honoured the faith. But

note how carefully the narrative puts Paul's part in its right place.

God 'wrought'; Paul was only the channel. If the eager people, who

carried away the garments, had superstitiously fancied that there was

virtue in Paul, and had not looked beyond him to God, it is implied

that no miracles would have been wrought. But still the cast of these

healings is anomalous, and only paralleled by the similar instances in

Peter's case.

The principle laid down by Peter (ch. iii. 12) is to be kept in view in

the study of all the miracles in the Acts. It is Jesus Christ who

works, and not His servants who heal by their 'own power or holiness.'

Jesus can heal with or without material channels, but sometimes chooses

to employ such vehicles as these, just as on earth He chose to anoint

blind eyes with clay, and to send the man to wash it off at the pool.

Sense-bound faith is not rejected, but is helped according to its need,

that it may be strengthened and elevated.

Expositions of Holy Scripture: the Acts · 第 274 / 317 题