Acts 19:1-7 is one of the most controversial texts in the book of Acts. Being controversial implies that it is difficult to interpret the contents of the text. For example, were the ‘certain disciples’ presented in the passage believers or unbelievers· Also, whose disciples were they· In verse 2, what is the meaning of the saying that they did not even hear that the Spirit existed· Did they really not know the Spirit· Also if they were ones who sincerely believed, why did they get another baptism· What is the meaning of the phenomena that occurred when they received the Spirit· At first sight, it may seem hard to give answers to these questions. This is merely because Acts 19:1-7 does not provide any adequate information to provide sufficient answers. Nevertheless, the questions indicated above have been continuously debated among scholars and commentators with no agreements. In this situation, it is meaningful for us to pay attention to the opinions of one of the greatest pastors in this century concerning this text. In comparison with other scholars, what would be the point of studying how Yonggi Cho(Youngsan), the one who is contributing to worldwide evangelization, understands this text· The writer intended to add some points to this. Foremost, Youngsan, an evangelist and preacher, is one who shall leave his name in Christian history and so studying his opinion about a controversial passage would be meaningful. In addition, comparing the opinion of a great preacher to that of professional scholars about a biblical passage would be obviously fruitful. Lastly, there is a textual analysis regarding the Pentecostal interpretation of Acts 19:1-7. The word “Pentecostal” may have the danger of a premised doctrine preceding. However, we need to put the premise in the back and focus on what the passage itself is telling us. This provides theological and exegetical evidence regarding Youngsan’s(and Pentecostal) interpretation of the passage. The purpose of this article was thus to compare Youngsan’s understanding on Acts 19:1-7 with other notable NT scholars. For this, the writer considered the following main three closely related questions: 1) Were the certain disciples in verse 1 believers or unbelievers·; 2) What does the saying, “We have not heard the gift of the Spirit” in verse 2 mean·; 3) If they were believers, why did they take the second baptism· First, Youngsan asserts that the Ephesian disciples were believers and this conclusion is highly plausible when observing Luke’s expression of them as “those who believed” and “disciples”. Also, regarding the ignorance of the Spirit, Youngsan asserts that when they said that they did not know it, it meant that they did not know Spirit baptism which will be bestowed by the Messiah, not baptism to become believers. This argument may challenge against some scholars(for example, Dunn) who understand that the presence of the Spirit determines whether or not one can be a believer. However, if the reference to the Spirit here in this text is an eschatological sense rather than an ontological sense which will be bestowed by the Messiah who will come after John, Youngsan’s assertion is highly acceptable. Also, the description of the Ephesians as ones who have not received the Spirit despite they were believers is an example of Luke’s pneumalogical perspective. This idea is elucidated in the narrative of Acts 8:14-17. Therefore, Youngsan’s conclusion that there can be a believer without Spirit baptism is possible in a Lukan perspective. In relation to this, Youngsan points out that the reason why the Ephesian disciples took the second baptism was to receive Spirit baptism and this conclusion is right if one looks at the outcomes thereafter. The motivation of the second baptism of the Ephesians is stimulated by Paul’s teaching that the Messiah will eschatologically pour out the Spirit. Instead of a simple motivation of believing in the Messiah, faith about the Messiah who will give the Spirit becomes the direct motivation to take the baptism twice. If this is true, the conclusion Youngsan has given is persuasive. Therefore, Youngsan’s conclusions about important issues that have been brought up from Acts 19:1-7 are, in a theological and exegetical sense, valid.