Phlox Pyros

When Acts says of Apollos, "This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord, though he knew only the baptism of John," what do others believe this is saying that he taught?

Does this indicate that Apollos really knew of Jesus, or does it simply indicate that he knew of John, John's baptism of repentance, and that John preached from the scriptures of a coming messiah (thus teaching "accurately the things of the Lord")?

If Apollos really knew of Jesus (and not just prophecy of a coming messiah), I wonder why he would only have known of the "baptism of John"? And would this likely refer to the story of Jesus' baptism by John?

Anyone read any scholarly opinions on this? What does Meier have to say, if anything?

Crucifiction

I'm by no means a scholar or any sort of authority on Biblical philology (I'm not even well-versed in it), but a basic reading of the text seems to suggest he taught the aescetic lifestyle practiced by Jonh the Baptist.

gstafleu

Isn't Acts a work of political fiction, meant to harmonize the competing Pauline and Petrine factions, or did I get that wrong?

If I got it right, the question is not so much what is Apollos teaching, as what point is the author of Acts trying to make. I would suggest two points. First he is portraying Paul as the good guy who can authoritatively baptise you into the only true religion. Second, there may be a swipe at the Baptist faction, who are somtimes seen as competition for the Jesus faction. Hence the condescending bit about "wel, yes, he did preach a baptism of repentance," followed by the snide ascription that even good old John agreed that "Him [Jesus] who would come after him [John]" was the real Macoy.

mountainman

Bernard (1964) makes the claim that in the CODEX BEZAE, the name is spelled not Apollos but APOLLONIUS, and refers to Apollonius of Tyana. Apollos being the abbreviated form of Apollonius.

He mentions this in his Part 3: The Controversy Between Adherents of Apollonius and Jesus.
http://www.mountainman.com.au/Apollo...Nazarene_3.htm





Pete Brown
www.mountainman.com.au

Phlox Pyros

I don't believe so, no. However, that's not really what I'm getting at.

I am curious what Apollos was really teaching. Did he know anything about Jesus? Was he teaching about his baptism by John? If so, why would that be all he knew about?

Or, was Apollos teaching the prophecies about a messiah that John had propounded and about the baptism of repentance performed by John?

I'm just curious what scholars say about this, and what other people think.

I am thinking the latter, myself, that Apollos knew of prophecies from the Hebrew scriptures that John was teaching and that he also knew of the baptism of repentance that John administered. So, since he knew the prophecies of a messiah, he taught "accurately" the things about Jesus...the messiah... Am I out in left field, or right up the middle?

I don't think so, unless I misunderstand you, because chapter 19 talks of those same people being baptized (or "rebaptized") in the name of Jesus.

S.C.Carlson

According to Stevan L. Davies, Jesus the Healer (or via: amazon.co.uk) (Continuum, 1995), 172-132, it means that Apollos did not realize that being spirit-possessed (e.g. speaking in tongues, etc.) was the "single most important factor, the defining factor, in being a member of the [early] Christian movement."

Stephen

Phlox Pyros

Interesting little tidbit of info... Codex Bezae definitely has the form Apollonius, in both the Latin and the Greek (toward bottom of both pages):

Codex Bezae: Acts 18 in Latin
Codex Bezae: Acts 18 in Greek

However, I do not believe that this was Apollonius of Tyana. I do wonder whether the creators of Codex Bezae could have been influenced by his legend, however...

Phlox Pyros

I think I see...so, he is saying that Apollos may have known all about Jesus but (for some unkown reason) only knew of or understood the "baptism of John" (ie. for repentance) as opposed to the "baptism of Jesus" (ie. into the holy spirit).

Naphtali Jones

Growing up in the Pentecostal church it seemed very obvious that the story was about how Apollo only knew of water baptism (ie. basic salvation) and that he hadn't heard about the baptism (or infilling) of the Holy Spirit as recorded in Acts 2:1-4, which gave the apostles all kinds of supernatural powers.

Of course the story is favorite Pentecostal sermon fodder, enabling them to comfortably could look down their noses at the Baptist church down the street, who were just like poor old ignorant Apollo.

Phlox Pyros

Hmm... This really makes me wonder "Why the difference?" How could Apollos have known about Jesus and not known about the baptism into the holy spirit? Who could have known enough about Jesus to teach him and yet left out the part about the holy spirit? Very interesting stuff...to me at least.