There is a wide-spread idea that there was an essential difference between the baptism taught and administered by John the Baptist, and that by the disciples of Jesus. (It will be remembered, of course, that Jesus did not personally baptize anybody.)
This idea has come, partly at least, from a misapprehension of the passage in Acts, concerning Apollos and the twelve men whom Paul found at Ephesus. This is not a trivial matter, for the misapprehension contributes to the notion that at some point in the first advent of Jesus there was a change of "dispensations," the former "the Jewish," and its successor "the Christian dispensation." And this notion is particularly pernicious, in that it presupposes that God is changeable, sometimes having one way of salvation, and at other times another way.
The best, and, indeed, the only way to correct an erroneous opinion is to note exactly what the Word of God says. In the case of Apollos, we read that: "[He] was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spoke and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John. And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue; whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." (Acts 18:25-26)
Now read what is said of the twelve disciples whom Paul met at Ephesus, and asked, "Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?" (Acts 19:2)
Their reply was, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." (Acts 19:2)
Paul then asked in surprise, "Unto what then were you baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then Paul said, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. And when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 19:3-5)
Whoever has read the record of John's work ought to be able to perceive at once that these men had not been baptized by him, and that they had never heard John preach. If they had, they would have known about the Holy Ghost; for John proclaimed the baptism of the Spirit. There is in the Scriptures no disparagement of the teaching of John, or of the baptism which he administered.
By a comparison of Matthew 3:1-2 "In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, And saying, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matthew 3:1-2) and Mark 1:14-15 "Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent, and believe the gospel." (Mark 1:14-15), it will be seen that Jesus preached exactly the same thing that John did, namely, repentance and the Gospel of the Kingdom. Paul's words, "John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance," (Acts 19:4) were not a criticism of John's teaching and baptism, but an explanation of what it really was; for they were evidently ignorant of it. It is plain that these men had been baptized, not by John, but by some person who might or might not have heard John, and that they had been baptized in the name of John. This is confirmed by the words that follow those last quoted. "Saying unto the people that they should believe on Him that should come after him." (Acts 19:4)
That is, John had not preached that people should believe on him, but on the One who should come after him; and this is what is to be preached unto this day.
As soon as the men heard the truth concerning John's baptism, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. They had not really been baptized before; for baptism that is not in the name of the Lord Jesus is of no more value than an ordinary bath, if it be as much as that. If John had taught and baptized the men, they would not have needed a second baptism.
The same thing is indicated in the record concerning Apollos. He was instructed in the way of the Lord, but imperfectly. He knew the Scriptures, but only as an unenlightened Jew,--one upon whose heart the veil still lay. He had heard of John, but He evidently did not know of Jesus. This can be gathered from what is said of his teaching after he had been instructed by Aquila and Priscilla: "He mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus is Christ." (Acts 18:28)
Before that, He had not heard of Jesus, or at least did not know that He is Christ.
That there was no "change of dispensation" at the time of the first advent of Jesus is evident from the fact that Jesus and His disciples taught exactly the same thing that John the Baptist did; and, moreover, both John and the disciples of Jesus taught the same things that the Jews had been taught for hundreds of years; for they used the writings of the prophets.
It is true that there was a great revival; but a revival is not a new dispensation. The Word was proclaimed with greater power by John and Jesus than the people had been accustomed to hear it; and in that respect it was "a new doctrine": "And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? for with authority He commands even the unclean spirits, and they do obey Him." (Mark 1:27) "And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof you speak, is?" (Acts 17:19)
So the preaching of Luther and Wesley revealed new truth and made the Bible a new book to thousands; yet the reformations, in which those men were leaders, were not new dispensations of God's grace. They were simply the awakening of the people to the grace and truth that God had from the beginning freely offered to all who would accept them.--Present Truth, February 19, 1903--Timeline: II-1 (Ministry of John the Baptist)--Matthew 3:1-6.