By John Stott
Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Christ there. Acts 8:5
It is difficult for us to conceive how bold Philip’s action was in evangelizing Samaritans, for the hostility between the Jews and Samaritans had lasted about a thousand years. But Jesus had told his followers to include Samaria within the area of their witness (1:8). So Philip preached Christ in a Samaritan city, and many believed and were baptised. But when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent two of their number (Peter and John) to investigate. On arrival they discovered (we are not told how) that the Samaritans had received the gospel and baptism without receiving the Holy Spirit. So the apostles prayed for them and laid their hands on them, and they received the Spirit. Did Luke understand the Samaritans’ divided experience as normal or as abnormal? Opposite answers were given. According to some Christians, initiation into Christ is a two-stage experience, either baptism followed by episcopal confirmation or regeneration followed by baptism with the Spirit as a second and subsequent experience.
According to other Christians, however, initiation into Christ is a single-stage experience comprising repentance and faith, new birth, baptism, and the gift of the Spirit. If this is correct, then the Samaritan experience of two stages was abnormal. For the apostles’ normal teaching was that all believers receive the Spirit when they believe (Acts 2:38; Rom. 8:9), and their normal practice was not to send an apostolic delegation to evaluate the work of evangelists.
So why did they do it on this occasion? And why, in any case, was the Spirit not given to the Samaritans when they believed? The most natural explanation of the delayed gift of the Spirit in the case of the Samaritans is that this was the first time that evangelism had taken place outside Jerusalem and inside Samaria. This is the importance of the incident in Luke’s unfolding story.
It was a crucial moment. Would the long-standing rift between Jews and Samaritans be perpetuated in the Christian community? Is it not reasonable to suggest that it was in order to avoid such a disaster that God deliberately withheld his Spirit until the apostles had endorsed Philip’s policy? The apostles’ action was effective. A Samaritan schism within the church was avoided.
For further reading: Acts 8:14-17