Then Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized. Acts 18:8

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)
You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

In the previous verse, Paul moved his teaching to the house of Justus who lived directly next to the synagogue. With that remembered, it now continues with, “Then Crispus.”

The name Crispus means Crisp in its original sense which is Curly or Bent. Abarim explains –

“The name Crispus is identical to the Latin adjective crispus, curled (of hair), or uneven and wrinkled. From this adjective comes the verb crispo, to curl or to cause to swing — hence our English word crisp for curly potato slices; a crispy leaf is not a leaf that crunches and crackles but a leaf that’s curled up on the edges. Our adjective, in turn, comes from the Proto-Indo-European root ‘s)ker-’, to bend or turn, from which also stems the verb κειρω (keiro), to shear or shave off (as ostensibly used in ACTS 18:18).”

A pun is likely being made by Luke. In the previous verse, Paul entered the house of Justus (Just or Upright as in being straight). Now, Curly is being noted. He is next noted as “the ruler of the synagogue.” Despite having the article before “ruler,” it does not mean he was the only ruler. Synagogues have more than one at times, as is seen in the gospels where the same word is used, such as –

“Now when Jesus had crossed over again by boat to the other side, a great multitude gathered to Him; and He was by the sea. 22 And behold, one of the rulers of the synagogue came, Jairus by name. And when he saw Him, he fell at His feet 23 and begged Him earnestly, saying, ‘My little daughter lies at the point of death. Come and lay Your hands on her, that she may be healed, and she will live.’ 24 So Jesus went with him, and a great multitude followed Him and thronged Him.” Mark 5:21-24

Therefore, he may have been one of several rulers or he could have been the only ruler. If one of several, the use of the article would be to distinguish him from any other person who had the same name. Of him, the NKJV says that he “believed on the Lord.”

It is incorrect. Most translations say something similar to this, but there is no preposition in the Greek. It simply says, “he believed the Lord.” What may be the case is that he had heard the word about Jesus and he, like a Berean, checked the word directly. This seems like a sound conclusion because his conversion is specifically mentioned after the note concerning Paul’s entrance into the house of Justus. If he had heard directly from the Lord, Luke would certainly have included that. Rather, “faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17). He heard, he verified, and he believed the Lord who gave the word.

Therefore, the pun continues. Next door was Justus who was straight. Now, Curly has been made just, having been straightened out. Isaiah prophesied of such things –

“Every valley shall be exalted
And every mountain and hill brought low;
The crooked places shall be made straight
And the rough places smooth;
5 The glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
And all flesh shall see it together;
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.” Isaiah 40:4, 5

Along with Crispus, it also says, “with all his household.” As in Acts 10 and Acts 16, the whole house has believed. This does not mean that everyone is saved through one, nor can that be inferred. It means any who believed were saved. It is the belief that is highlighted and which is then responded to: belief = salvation. Because of this new faith in the household of Crispus, it next says, “And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed.”

This is a testimony to the fact that one conversion can lead to many. It does not mean that the belief was in the faith of Crispus. However, it does indicate that the faith of Crispus led to belief in what had been proclaimed concerning the gospel. In other words, seeing the faith of another, especially one who would otherwise be diametrically opposed to what was presented – as indicated by the opposition and blaspheming of the Jews of verse 18:6 – led these people to consider and accept the gospel.

How this happened is not stated, but one possibility is that Crispus was a known figure. Upon his conversion, he took time to explain to those Corinthians who knew him that he had checked his own Scriptures and realized that they foretold exactly what Paul proclaimed. His faith led to the trust of those Corinthians in the truth of the matter and thus to their conversion as well. From there, it says, “and were baptized.”

This means first Crispus and his household who believed and then also those Corinthians who also believed. This is recorded in 1 Corinthians 1 –

“I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. 16 Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.” 1 Corinthians 1:14-17

Paul personally baptized Crispus and Gaius along with the household of Stephanas. What can be inferred is that Crispus may have then had the honor of baptizing his own household.

Life application: The ridiculously inane teaching of hyperdispensationalists is that Christians today do not need to be baptized. 1 Corinthians 14:17 is used as one of their crazy “proofs” that this is so. Twisting Paul’s words, they say that Paul was not sent to baptize, stopping right there and using those words as validation of their nutty theology.

Paul’s point was not that believers did not need to be baptized. Throughout Acts, Paul baptizes people as do others. Conversion after conversion, when someone believes, he or she is then noted as being baptized. It sets up a normative affirmation that baptism is something that was both practiced and accepted as proper because it is in accord with Jesus’ words of Matthew 28:18-20.

Paul’s baptism of Crispus, Gaius, and others demonstrates that baptism was appropriate, but that was not his main line of work. His job was that of an apostle. Someone had to baptize the first converts. Being several in number, Paul did some and it is likely that those who traveled with him did others. From there, the now-converted and baptized Crispus could baptize others. This would leave Paul free to continue his apostolic ministry without interruption.

A problem with the thinking of the hyperdispensational heretics is that it clearly says that the Corinthians who believed were baptized. As this is so, and as they are Gentiles, then there is no logical point in Scripture or in church history where this was no longer the case. In other words, who is the decider of when the practice of baptizing was to end. There is no point for it to be so and there is no instruction in Scripture to override the clear words of Jesus in Matthew 28. The thinking is crass and illogical.

Don’t get duped into ridiculously presented arguments like those of hyperdispensationalists. They take verses out of their intended context, form pretexts, and then run with them. This is similar to those who use Jesus’ words concerning the law and claim we are still required to observe Moses when He said, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets” (Matthew 5:17).

“See! You must observe the law and the prophets!” No! Rather, Jesus continued speaking, “I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” And fulfill it He did. Now, His work can be imputed to anyone who will believe and accept that fulfillment on his behalf. For those who do not, they will not be saved. They can wallow in their own mire of law observance and be rejected by God for their insolent pride against His offer of grace.

Lord God, help us to think clearly on issues of such great importance as those presented in this commentary. May we never be duped by those who wish to pull us away from either salvation by grace through faith or from obediently following the Lord Jesus via the rite of believer’s baptism. These things are not hard to discern, but they are easily twisted by those who hate what You have set before them. May we not be included with such people. May our hearts be directed toward You in faithful obedience. Amen.