Acts 19:2

he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” Acts 19:2

The previous verse noted that Paul had arrived in Ephesus and met some disciples. That thought continues now, saying, “he said to them, ‘Did you receive the Holy Spirit.’” The text does not say why Paul asked this, but there is obviously something that made him suspect concerning their walk that must have precipitated the question. Further, there is no article before Holy Spirit. As Bengel notes, “the language is indefinite, to accord with the part (pro parte) of those who are being interrogated.”

With that understood, Paul next says what should be the case. Though this is a descriptive account, it carefully details what is normative with the words, “when you believed?” It is obvious that Paul understands that belief equates to reception. There is a one-to-one correspondence between the two. The verb is an aorist participle, “when you believed,” or more exactingly, “having believed.”

This is in accord with the words of Ephesians 1:13, 14 –

“In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”

It should be noted that Paul’s words of Ephesians, being a written epistle, are prescriptive. They outline what is always to be the case. Belief means sealing. It does not necessarily include what will occur in the coming verses in Acts. In other words, what occurs in these coming verses is a description of what happened at that time but it is not something that should necessarily be expected to occur. The only thing that can be expected is the sealing of the Spirit which occurs upon belief.

Expressed more fully, Paul’s words in Acts show that it is normative that the Spirit is received upon belief. That is confirmed in Ephesians. However, what occurs beyond that cannot be taken as normative, such as speaking in tongues and prophesying. These outward demonstrations that take place are described by Luke, but they are not to be taken as normative events. If they were, then Paul’s words of Ephesians would include that as well.

This is the problem with Charismatic and Pentecostal churches. They mix what is prescriptive and what is descriptive and they also take what is not normative and they assume it is normative. In this, they fail to rightly divide Scripture. This results in faulty theology. As for the account now, it continues with, “So they said to him, ‘We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.’”

In these words, it appears to be saying that they didn’t know of the existence of the Holy Spirit. This is not the intent of what is said. Rather, it was that they had not heard He had been given to the people of God. As Bengel says –

“...they could not have followed either Moses or John the Baptist, without hearing of the Holy Spirit Himself. [Therefore what they were ignorant of was, the effusion of the Holy Spirit peculiar to the New Testament.—V. g.]”

For example, the Holy Spirit is mentioned explicitly in Psalm 51:11, but He is inferred as far back as Genesis 1:2. He is referred to in verses such as Numbers 11:17 as well. When John the Baptist came, he spoke of the Holy Spirit in Matthew 3:11 and elsewhere. Thus, it could not be that they did not know of the existence of the Holy Spirit but of the reception of Him by believers. John 7:39 gives the sense –

“But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.”

The word “given” is inserted for clarity in this verse. It simply says, “the Holy Spirit was not yet.” Therefore, a translation such as the ERSV gives the sense of this verse in Acts –

 “Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Ghost was given.”

What is being detailed here begins to explain why the account of Apollos was given just prior to this account now. If the narrative is closely analyzed and properly understood, there would not be as much poor doctrine permeating the church as there is.

Apollos “had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord” (Acts 18:25), even if he had not yet received the baptism Jesus spoke of. These disciples have not been so instructed. Thus, the account in Acts 19 is given to reveal to us what occurred as the church began (describing events as they happened) and to form a normative or not-normative basis for future events during similar circumstances.

In this case, it is normative and expected that when a person rightly believes, he will be sealed with the Holy Spirit. It is not normative, however, that external evidences of this sealing will occur. Further, water baptism, though expected for every believer in Jesus, is not required for being sealed with the Spirit, and thus being saved. This will continue to be fleshed out as the account continues.

Life application: Look at the difference between these two translations of this verse:

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? KJV

he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” NKJV

Just a few words can lead to a complete misunderstanding of what is being conveyed. The word “since” does not connect the two. It could be any amount of time from belief to reception. The two verbs are in the aorist tense and therefore denote instantaneous acts. Thus, the KJV is contrary to Eph 1:13, 14. The NKJV corrects this with the word “when.”

The word “since” can be expressed as a preposition to denote the intervening between two events, such as, “I haven’t spoken to Bob since the wedding.” It can be used as a conjunction, denoting a time in the past until the time being considered, which is usually the present, such as, “Daniel has been eating durian since he got here.” It can be a conjunction signifying “because,” such as, “Wade is happy, since better protections have resulted in fewer accidents at his office.” It can also be used as an adverb, such as, “Sergio took off for a Nephilim hunt and nobody has seen him since.”

None of these accurately equate to the Greek of Acts 19:2. The verb, as noted above, is an aorist participle, most appropriately rendered “having believed.” The error introduced by the Tyndale Bible of 1526 (or earlier), was carried on by the Coverdale Bible of 1535, the Bishop’s Bible of 1568, and the Geneva Bible of 1587.

The KJV and many other translations took the easy path and simply passed on what earlier translations had set forth. This has surely led to many people coming to faulty conclusions concerning the matter being presented. And, inevitably, faulty conclusions lead to faulty doctrine.

Be wise, be studious, and be willing to check things out. Don’t just accept what you read, hear, or see on a TV program or YouTube video. Theology is hard work, but it will pay off in a sound walk with the Lord and in the right doctrine to guide your life.

Heavenly Father, may we be responsible with the time You have given us, carefully searching out Your word and making sound conclusions concerning what it presents. It is of the greatest importance to a wholesome walk with You to know what is accurate and proper. Help us in this all our days. Amen.