Have a question? Then you’ve come to the right place! Use the search bar below to see if your question has already been answered, otherwise click here to send in your question.
Considering the Ethiopian eunuch would have been in the desert as mentioned in the sermon, do you think there might have been water there at the time and less desert or might it be possible that God worked a miracle to have water there to be baptized in for that specific time?
This question is related to the sermon “The Spreading Flame: Christ and the Ethiopian Eunuch.”
In truth, we cannot know without a doubt where this source of water came from or what it was like. The word ‘desert’ in Acts 8:26 certainly indicates a place where, ordinarily, there is very little water. However, there were things called “wadis” in the desert. A wadi was an ordinarily dry creek bed which, when rain came, would suddenly be filled with water and create a small river. Because the ground was so dry, the rain would not be absorbed quickly into the ground. Instead it would run off the surface and gather where these ‘creek beds’ were found. It is possible that there could have been a wadi, or a remaining pool from a wadi, that Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch came across. That being said, it is also possible that they came to a spring or an oasis style small pond that was unexpected and, as you mention, it could also be possible that God worked a miracle and had water appear where it ordinarily would not be. That being said, there is nothing in the text that indicates any kind of miraculous supply of water here; supposing it was miraculous would be a stretch that I don’t think is warranted from the passage. It seems more likely that this water is more in God’s glorious providential supply, and that it allowed the Ethiopian eunuch, before leaving the region where the church was located (in his time) to receive baptism and go back to Ethiopia as one receiving the sign of God’s covenant.
Thanks for your question!
Pastor Bylsma