The passage
      18:24-28. Our story opens with a man named Apollos who comes 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 other texts have "who had been instructed in the word of God." The NIV follows the Western text. Clearly Apollos is a disciple of the Baptist with only 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 new-found understanding of the Old Testament, is now able to explain how Jesus fulfills the scriptures.
      19:1. It is while Apollos is in Corinth that Paul comes to Ephesus. Here Paul meets a group who, like Apollos, were disciples of John the Baptist. The word "disciple" is usually reserved for believing Christians, but here it is obviously being used of John's followers.
      v2. Paul then asks these "disciples" whether they have received the Holy Spirit. Presumably Paul has in mind a reception of the Holy Spirit in a form similar to Pentecost. In Acts, the staged movement of the gospel from Israel to the Gentiles is accompanied by the miraculous outpouring of the Spirit. Their answer seems to imply that they had never heard of the Holy Spirit. Yet, John the Baptist taught that the coming Messiah would baptize with the Holy Spirit, Mark.1:8. So obviously, it's not that they had never heard about the Holy Spirit, but rather that they are unaware that the promised Spirit had already been poured out. So, these disciples of John are not yet believers since they have yet to hear the good news about Jesus, respond in faith and so receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
      v3-5. Paul then goes on to enquire about their "baptism". They knew John's "baptism", but not Jesus' baptism. John's "baptism" only pointed to Jesus, but 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 Baptist. The word "baptism" means "immersion" and it is very likely that the "immersion" that is being referred to here is a "flooding with information", teaching, instruction. These "disciples" had been instructed in John's teachings, but had yet to be "immersed/instructed" into the name, into the person of Jesus. They were short on information, not liturgical rites.
      v6-7. Following thir "immersion", 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 teachings 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 name of 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. It is often argued that these disciples of John were forgiven, but were without the Spirit. Yet as Jesus himself tells us, unless a person is born of the Spirit they cannot enter the kingdom of God. Also, what do we make of "they spoke in tongues and prophesied"? Some argue that these are essential signs accompanying the reception of the Spirit. Yet, if that were the case then it would fly in the face of Jesus' own simple teachings on salvation.
      What we do know is that salvation is dependent upon a simple acceptance of what Christ has done for us. Only the truth will set us free.

v24
      logioV adj. "learned [man]" - eloquent. A hapax legomenon (once only use in NT). Possibly "man of learning", or "man of culture", Moffatt, but "eloquent" is more likely.
      dunatoV wJn en taiV grafaiV "with a thorough knowledge of the scriptures" - being powerful in the scriptures. "Knew a lot about the scriptures", CEV.

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", meaning "God", 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. Unlikely "John's message about baptism", CEV.

v26
      parrhsiazesqai (parrhsiazomai) inf. "to speak boldly" - to speak openly, boldly. Complementary infinitive, completing the sense of "began". "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. Participle as a substantive. 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 this 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 very 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. This 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, and is 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 call 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 above. Note, the 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."