Quote:
Originally Posted by TRFrance
There's an assumption in your question though -- an assumption that can't really be validated. If the assumption can't be shown to be truly factual, then it kind of makes the whole question moot, I'd say.
Real simply:
Why should we assume that Apollos's baptism took place during the church age? The scriptures dont say or imply that. From all we know, his baptism may well have taken place during the time John was still alive.
Same with the other disciples that were in Ephesus.
We see nothing in scriptures that says that John's baptism continued after his death. His teachings apparently lived on after his death (in Apollos and the disciples in Ephesus), but it doesnt anyway tell us that the baptism of John had continued on.
|
hmmm... John's teaching continued on, Apollos knew "only the baptism of John" as did the disciples in Ephesus (
Acts 19). Yet they didn't know that John's teaching involved baptism? And they continued the teachings of John the Baptist but didn't baptize their children or converts? Seems highly unlikely given the importance tha John placed upon baptism.
I think that only an overly rigid reliance upon both Dispensationalism and the so-called "Water & Spirit" teaching would cause someone to say that
no one had been baptized under the baptism of John in the 20 some years between his death and Paul's visit to Ephesus in
Acts 19; especially given the emphasis that the text itself places upon John's baptism being an important topic of the conversation.
Threaded Mode
