The passage
      18:24-28. Our story opens with a man named Apollos who came to Ephesus and "speaks boldly in the synagogue." He was a "learned man" (better, "eloquent") with a "thorough knowledge of the Scriptures." In the Western text it is noted that he "had been instructed in the way of the Lord", but many other reliable Greek texts have "who had been instructed in the word of God." The NIV follows the Western text.
      Clearly he is a disciple of the Baptist with a limited understanding of the coming kingdom, so Priscilla and Aquila (Aquila is added in the Western text. You can't have a woman instructing a man!!!) took him aside and "explained to him the way of God more adequately" ("way" = the way of Christ = the gospel). Apollos later moves on to Corinth and with his now sound understanding of the Old Testament, he is able to demonstrate how Jesus fulfills the scriptures.
      19:1-7. It is while Apollos is in Corinth that Paul comes to Ephesus. Here Paul meets a group with a similar problem to Apollos. We are told they were "disciples", a term usually reserved for believing Christians. None-the-less, the term here obviously refers to the disciples of John the Baptist.
      Paul's question to these "disciples" is whether they have received the Holy Spirit. This is a very interesting question because what does Paul mean by "receive"? How are believers to know whether they have received the Holy Spirit? Their answer seems to imply that they had never heard of the Holy Spirit. Yet, John the Baptist taught that the Messiah was coming after him and that he would "baptize you with the Holy Spirit", Mark.1:8. So, obviously their answer is that they are unaware of the fulfillment of John's words. These disciples of John are not believers since they have not yet received the Holy Spirit.
      Paul then goes on to enquire about their "baptism". They knew John's baptism, but not Jesus' baptism. John's baptism pointed to Jesus and so now, what was anticipated has arrived. On hearing this they are "baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus." If we are dealing here with water baptism, then this is the one and only recorded re-baptism in the New Testament. There is no evidence that the apostles themselves were rebaptized and we know that many of them were originally followers of John. The "baptism", or better "immersion", that Paul gave these disciples, was instruction. They were short on information, not liturgical rites.
      Following the baptism, Paul lays hands on them, they receive the Holy Spirit, and they speak in tongues and prophesy.

The baptism of teaching
      Apollos was a disciple of John the Baptist. He was looking forward to the coming of the Messiah and could speak on the subject with great knowledge and fervor. He "had had been instructed in the word of God", that is, he was an Old Testament scholar, and he knew the "baptism of John" in the that he had been immersed (baptized), in the sense of instructed, into the teaching of John with regard the coming of the Messiah. There is little doubt he had received water baptism from John, but the phrase "the baptism of John" is most likely a technical term inferring an immersion (instruction) into the teaching of John. So, what does Priscilla and Aquila do for him? They invite him to their home and explain to him the Christian way more adequately. They tell him how Jesus has completed the ministry of John. So, off goes Apollos, now a Christian apologist.
      When it comes to the twelve disciples of John, we discover that they suffer from a similar problem; they are short on knowledge. They were into John's baptism, that is they were into John's instruction, into John's teaching. They knew all about repentance for the forgiveness of sins and its sign of water baptism. They knew all about the one who was coming after John and of the promised outpouring of the Spirit, but that was it. Once Paul found this out, he "baptized (them) into the Lord Jesus Christ." We could argue that Paul rebaptized them, but it is more likely that he gave them further instruction; he immersed them into the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ; he immersed them into "the name"; he immersed them into the gospel.
      Only when properly informed (evangelized with the gospel) were the twelve able to respond in faith - to put their trust in Jesus. Only then did Paul have the authority to pray for the gift of the Holy Spirit. This he did in the usual Jewish way with the symbolic laying on of hands. Only then were they "baptized" (overwhelmed) with the Spirit, which washing was outwardly evidenced in ecstatic prophetic utterance.
      Many questions remain from this most interesting passage. Clearly these twelve disciples had been forgiven, but were without the Spirit. Is this phenomenon possible today? Also, what do we make of "they spoke in tongues and prophesied"? Is prophecy an integral element of tongues and if so, what can we say about the modern phenomenon?
      What we do know is that salvation is dependent upon hearing and believing. No ministration of the church can be relied upon for salvation. Only the truth will set us free.

v25
      hn kathchmenoV perf. pas. part. "he had been instructed in" - had been taught. Periphrastic pluperfect formed by the imperfect of the verb "to be" and the perfect participle, expressing a past continuous, but now completed event. "He had received instruction in the way of the Lord", Barclay.
      thn oJdon tou kuriou "the way of the Lord" - "The Lord's way" in Acts has nothing to do with a person's manner of life, their conduct, but their having become a follower of Christ, a believer. It is unlikely that Apollos is a believer and therefore this statement, absent from many texts, is best replaced by the variant oV hn kathchmenoV en h/ patridi ton logon tou qeou, "who had been instructed in the word of God in his own home town."
      zewn tw/ pneumati "[he spoke] with great fervor" - burning, bubbling in/with spirit [he was speaking]. Probably "spirit" is Apollos' own spirit, therefore spoke "with great enthusiasm", TEV; "with great excitement", CEV. Possibly, but unlikely, the "Holy Spirit" is intended; "glowing with the Spirit", Goodspeed.
      akribwV adv. "accurately" - precisely, diligently. He obviously wasn't "accurate" in his teaching, given that Priscilla and Aquila had to explain "to him the way of God more adequately", so "he taught painstakingly", Goodspeed; "faithfully", Phillips.
      peri tou Ihsou .... tou kuriou "about Jesus" - The not well attested "the Lord" is better. If he is not a Christian, which it seems he isn't, why would he be teaching about Jesus?
      epistamenoV (epistamai) pres. pas. part. "though he knew [only]" - being acquainted with, understanding. Properly meaning "being aware of / having experience of", Barrett.
      to baptisma Iwannou "the baptism of John" - Descriptive genitive, a John type baptism, rather than possessive, belonging to John, "John's immersion = the teaching of the kingdom that was publicly proclaimed by John the Baptist." See note below. Unlikely "John's message about baptism", CEV.

v26
      parrhsiazesqai (parrhsiazomai) inf. "to speak boldly" - to speak openly, boldly. "He began to speak freely and fearlessly", Barclay.
      akribesteron (akibwV) comp. adv. "more adequately" - more diligently, precisely, accurately. "They gave him detailed instruction about the way."

v27
      dia + gen. "by" - through, by means of. Identifying "grace", obviously "God's gracious and unmerited kindness toward the sinner", here as the instrument of salvation, of gaining a state of believing, so Barrett, or the instrument for assisting the believers, "he was able by God's grace to help the believers considerably", NJB.
      toiV pepisteukosin (pisteuw) perf. part. "had believed" - the ones having believed. The perfect tense expressing the sense of "believed and kept on believing."

v28
      diakathlegceto (diakatelegcomai) imperf. "refuted" - he was refuting. "He strenuously out-argued the Jews", Barclay.
      dhmosia/ dat. adj. "in public debate" - in public. "Debate" assumed, "publicly refuted", Phillips.

19:1
      egeneto "-" - it came about, it happened.
      en tw/ + inf. verb "to be." "while" - Forming a temporal clause.
      maqhtaV (hV ou) "disciples" - disciples, students. A word normally used of believers, but it must be remembered that the Baptist also had disciples and it is very likely that the sense here is not "believers", but "disciples of John", cf. Marshall.

v2
      ei "did [you ....]" - Introducing an indirect question.
      elabete (lambanw) aor. "you receive" - you received. "Did the Holy Spirit come upon you."
      pisteusanteV (pisteuw) aor. part. "when you believed" - having believed. Temporal participle seems best, as NIV etc. "Became believers", Barclay, underlines our problem, in that if they had not as yet received the Spirit, how could they be believers? Second blessing theology answers the problem by looking to the empowering / baptizing / filling of the Spirit as a post conversion experience. Yet, asking the question does not necessitate an affirmation of assumptions contained in the question. Assuming a person is a believer, doesn't make them a believer. John's disciples would present like believers, but would lack Christ-specific information and thus, the gift of the Spirit.
      oud ... hkousamen (akouw) "we have not even heard" - not .. we heard. Obviously they had heard, been told about, the Holy Spirit. Even John taught of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, but the reception of the Spirit was not a promised consequence of John's baptism. So, "reception of", expressed in the question, should be assumed in the answer. The Western text actually contains the variant "we have not heard if some have received the Holy Spirit", which at least indicates that some ancient scholars assumed an ellipsis (an omission of words) here.
      ei "that" - if. Expressing the substance of the disciples reply, namely, concerning the reception of the Holy Spirit. John's teaching simply concerned repentance and "conveyed no promise beyond that of the forgiveness of sins", Barrett.
      pneuma aJgion "a Holy Spirit" - The anarthrous adjective-noun construction (lacking the definite article) does not rule out a translation "the Holy Spirit" and that is surely the sense here. John's disciples were well acquainted with the Holy Spirit, but lacked the gift of the Spirit and thus rebirth/regeneration; "we have not heard about the reception of the Holy Spirit". Possible, but unlikely, "we have not heard whether a spirit can be holy", Wallace.

v3
      eiV ti "did you receive" - into what. The preposition probably carries the sense "in", as "in/into, and the "certain thing / what" = "name". Again the translators assume that the baptism referred to here is water baptism. The question is actually "into what [name] were you immersed?" As noted below, the word can be used of being immersed into truth. That is not to say that the sign of water baptism isn't a symbolic element of the immersing. So, here again we have, not a deficiency in liturgical rites, but of information. John's information, concerning the messiah ("into the name of John"), is preparatory and has long since been subsumed (fulfilled) by the information (gospel) concerning Christ ("the name of the Lord Jesus").

v4
      ebaptisen (baptizw) aor. "[John's] baptism was a baptism [of repentance] - baptized. The aorist verb is probably constative, encompassing the whole of John's preaching/teaching ministry. He immersed Israel into the truth of a coming kingdom for which entry required repentance for the forgiveness of sins, and this realized in the hope of a promised messiah. The gospel has a similar thrust, except that the kingdom is now in and through the life, death, resurrection and present reign of the promised messiah, Jesus.
      iJna + subj. "to [believe]" - that [they should believe]. Forming an imperatival clause of indirect speech. The actual sense of Paul's words depends on whether we think these "disciples" are believers or not. No further mention of the gift of the Holy Spirit or of water rebaptism (unknown in the New Testament), but rather the necessity to believe in Jesus, surely reinforces the view that they were not yet believers; "but he also told them that someone else was coming and that they should put their faith in him. Jesus is the one that John was talking about", CEV.

v5
      ebaptisqhsan eiV to onoma tou kuriou Ihsou "they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus" - See below. Note, Western text adds, "for the forgiveness of sins", assuming that the "immersion" here is water baptism. There is no evidence that John's disciples, on following Jesus, underwent water baptism again. In fact, Jesus himself didn't practice the rite. As a sign of repentance, in the face of the coming kingdom, there was no point getting dunked again. These disciples were short on information and so were "immersed into the truth concerning the Lord Jesus."

v6
      epiqentoV (epitiqhmi) aor. part. "when [Paul] placed [his hands] on [them]" - having placed upon, put on, laid on. Old Testament expression of identification in prayer. We may assume, "upon the head."
      ep "on" - over, on, to. "Came down on them", NJB.
      elaloun (lalew) imperf. "they spoke [in tongues]" - they were speaking. The imperfect here is probably inceptive; "they began and continued speaking in tongues." Luke is clearly describing this experience in the terms of the Pentecost event. For Luke, tongues serve to verify the outpouring of God's Spirit upon all peoples and thus their inclusion in God's new kingdom. Jews receive the Spirit and speak in tongues, but so do Godfearers and Gentiles, and yes, even the followers of the Baptist. Thus, the kingdom is now.
      eprofhteuon (profhteuw) imperf. "prophesied" - were prophesying. Again, inceptive. The word underlines the fact that this event parallels Pentecost where speaking in tongues consisted of ecstatic utterances with a language content which could be understood, "we hear them proclaiming the mighty acts of God", 2:11