the Second Week after Easter
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
Biblia Przekład Toruński
Dzieje Apostolskie 19:5
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- BridgewayEncyclopedias:
- CondensedParallel Translations
A przetoż oni usłyszawszy to, pokrzczeni są w imię Pana Jezusowe.
A usłyszawszy to, ochrzczeni są w imię Pana Jezusowe.
Gdy to usłyszeli, przyjęli chrzest w imię Pana Jezusa.
A kiedy to usłyszeli, dali się ochrzcić względem Imienia Pana Jezusa.
A usłyszawszy to, ochrzczeni są w imię Pana Jezusowe.
Gdy to usłyszeli, zostali ochrzczeni w imię Pana Jezusa.
A gdy to usłyszeli, zostali ochrzczeni w imię Pana Jezusa.
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
they: Acts 2:38, Acts 8:12, Acts 8:16, Romans 6:3, Romans 6:4, 1 Corinthians 1:13-15, 1 Corinthians 10:2
Reciprocal: Matthew 3:6 - were Luke 3:16 - I indeed Acts 19:2 - Have ye
Gill's Notes on the Bible
When they heard this,.... That is, the people to whom John preached, his hearers; when they heard of the Messiah, and that Jesus was he, and that it became them to believe in him:
they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus; not the disciples that Paul found at Ephesus, but the hearers of John; for these are the words of the Apostle Paul, giving an account of John's baptism, and of the success of his ministry, showing, that his baptism was administered in the name of the Lord Jesus; and not the words of Luke the Evangelist, recording what followed upon his account of John's baptism; for then he would have made mention of the apostle's name, as he does in the next verse; and have said, when they heard this account, they were baptized by Paul in the name of the Lord Jesus: the historian reports two things, first what Paul said, which lies in Acts 19:4 then what he did, Acts 19:6 where he repeats his name, as was necessary; as that he laid his hands upon them, which was all that was needful to their receiving the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, having been already baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus: which sense is the more confirmed by the particles μεν and δε, which answer to one another in verses 4 and 5, and show the words to be a continuation of the apostle's speech, and not the words of the historian, which begin in the next verse. Beza's ancient copy adds, "for the remission of sins".
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
When they heard this - When they heard what Paul had said respecting the nature of Johnâs baptism.
They were baptized ... - As there is no other instance in the New Testament of any persons having been rebaptized, it has been made a question by some critics whether it was done here; and they have supposed that all this is the narrative of Luke respecting what took place under the ministry of John: to wit, that he told them to believe on Christ Jesus, and then baptized them in his name. But this is a most forced construction; and it is evident that these persons were rebaptized by the direction of Paul. For:
(1) This is the obvious interpretation of the passage - what would strike all persons as correct, unless there were some previous theory to support.
(2) It was not a matter of fact that John baptized in the name of Christ Jesus. His was the baptism of repentance; and there is not the slightest evidence that he ever used the name of Jesus in the form of baptism.
(3) If it be the sense of the passage that John baptized them in the name of Jesus, then this verse is a mere repetition of Acts . Acts 19:4; a tautology of which the sacred writers would not be guilty.
(4) It is evident that the persons on whom Paul laid his hands Acts . Acts 19:6, and those who were baptized, were the same. But these were the persons who heard Acts . Acts 19:5 what was said. The narrative is continuous, all parts of it cohering together as relating to a transaction that occurred at the same time. If the obvious interpretation of the passage be the true one, it follows that the baptism of John was not strictly Christian baptism. It was the baptism of repentance; a baptism designed to prepare the way for the introduction of the kingdom of the Messiah. It will not follow, however, from this that Christian baptism is now ever to be repeated. For this there is no warrant in the New Testament. There is no command to repeat it, as in the case of the Lordâs Supper; and the nature and design of the ordinance evidently supposes that it is to be performed but once. The disciples of John were rebaptized, not because baptism is designed to be repeated, but because they never had been, in fact, baptized in the manner prescribed by the Lord Jesus.
In the name of the Lord Jesus - See the notes on Acts 2:38.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse Acts 19:5. When they heard this, c.] As there is no evidence in the New Testament of persons being rebaptized, unless this be one, many criticisms have been hazarded to prove that these persons were not rebaptized. I see no need of this. To be a Christian, a man must be baptized in the Christian faith: these persons had not been baptized into that faith, and therefore were not Christians: they felt this, and were immediately baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. This is a plain case but let one instance be produced of a person being rebaptized, who had before been baptized in the name of the holy Trinity, or even in the name of Jesus alone. In my view, it is an awful thing to iterate baptism when it had been before essentially performed: by "essentially performed," I mean, administered by sprinkling, washing, or plunging, by or in water, in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, being invoked at the time. Whoever has had this has the essence of baptism, as far as that can be conferred by man; and it matters not at what period of his life he has had it; it is a substantial baptism, and by it the person has been fully consecrated to the holy and blessed Trinity; and there should not be an iteration of this consecration on any account whatever. It is totally contrary to the canon law; it is contrary to the decisions of the best divines; it is contrary to the practice of the purest ages of the Church of God; it is contrary to the New Testament, and tends to bring this sacred ordinance into disrepute.
