The effect of the miracle upon the multitude:

v. 5. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

v. 6. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

v. 7. And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans?

v. 8. And how hear we every man in our own tongue wherein we were born?

v. 9. Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

v. 10. Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and In the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

v. 11. Cretes and Arabians; we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

v. 12. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?

v. 13. Others, mocking, said, These men are full of new wine.

Since this was the festival of Pentecost. one of the feasts upon which all the Jews were to appear at Jerusalem, Exo 23:13-17; Deu 16:1-22, there were people from all parts of the world living, or sojourning for the time, in Jerusalem. Many of them that had formerly lived in distant countries may have returned to the city of their fathers in order to spend their declining years in their sacred city and to die within sight of the Temple. The people here referred to were sincere, devout men, Luk 2:25, not hypocrites like the Jewish rulers. And they hailed from every nation under heaven. Since the time of the Babylonian exile the merchandizing proclivities of the Jews had drawn them out into other countries more and more. In some countries, as in Egypt, there were large colonies of them, with influential men of the class of Philo. And that they were by no means few in number throughout Asia Minor, as well as in parts of Greece and in Italy, appears from the many passages in Acts in which the synagogues of the Jews are mentioned. These Jews, known as the Jews of the Diaspora, spoke the language of the people among whom they lived, retaining the Hebrew only for Sabbath services. Now when that great sound, as of the mighty wind, was heard, the attention of all the hearers was naturally directed to the hall where the apostles and disciples were assembled, and a great multitude came together to find out the reason for this supernatural occurrence. And what they saw and heard filled their minds with such trouble and perturbation that they were no longer sure of their senses; they were altogether confounded and mixed up. For here they heard, every man, the language of the people where he had been born. There were present Eastern or Babylonian Jews, Parthians, from the region of the Caspian Sea, Medes, from the southwestern shore of the same sea, Elamites, in what is now western Persia, dwellers in Mesopotamia, along the Euphrates and Tigris rivers; there were present Syrian Jews, from Judea, the southern part of what is now Syria, from Cappadocia, in eastern Asia Minor, from Pontus, south of the Black Sea, from Asia, the parts of western Asia Minor in general, along the Aegean Sea, from Phrygia, in western Asia Minor, from Pamphylia, in southern Asia Minor; there were present Egyptian Jews, from Egypt itself, as well as from the parts of Libya in the western part, about Cyrene, the modern Tripoli; there were present Roman Jews, sojourners from that city. And finally Luke mentions Jews from the island of Crete, in the Mediterranean, and from Arabia, as being present in only small numbers. Both Jews and proselytes were represented in the assembly, such as belonged to the Jewish nation by birth, and such as had become proselytes of the gate (by acknowledging the truth of the Jewish teaching) or of righteousness (by formally accepting all the rites and ceremonies, as well as the teaching). And all the various members of this’ big gathering heard the apostles speak in their own tongue, fluently addressing them, as though they had spoken the dialects and languages all their life. Such a miracle was unheard of, and Luke exhausts his vocabulary in trying to describe its effect upon the multitude: they were confounded, they were amazed, they marveled, they were perplexed, they asked one another as to the meaning of the wonderful thing they were witnessing. And all the while the apostles were preaching the great and wonderful works of God, namely, that God had fulfilled the prophecies made to their fathers, that He had sent His Son Jesus to work the redemption of the whole world, and that this salvation was now being offered to all of them without exception. But while the majority of the assembled Jews were ready to accept the evidence of an extraordinary manifestation of God’s power in these unlearned Galileans, as they called them, there were also some that scoffed and mocked, derisively declaring that the apostles were full of sweet wine, either the must of grapes still in the fermenting state or a choice sweet wine in use in Palestine. Note: wherever the Spirit of God works through the Word, there are always some that accept the glorious truth, while others are willfully offended and mock at the Spirit that lives in the Christians.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Act 2:5. There were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, &c. There were sojourning, &c. . Devout or pious men, is a title applied not only to those religious persons who observed the Jewish law, but likewise to those Heathens who had renounced idolatry, and lived a life of piety and holiness. From every nation under heavencan signify no more than “from all the several nations among whom the Jews were dispersed.” The Jews were then so numerous, as to have spread through every country; so that, as Agrippa, in Josephus, says, “there was not a people upon earth who had not Jews inhabiting among them.” These men were come up to Jerusalem, not only upon account of the festival then celebrating, but in expectation of the Messiah, who was to be manifested about that time accordingto the concurring testimony of the prophets.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Act 2:5 gives, as introductory to what follows , preliminary information how it happened that Jews of so very diversified nationality were witnesses of the occurrence, and heard their mother-languages spoken by the inspired. Stolz, Paulus, and Heinrichs are entirely in error in supposing that Act 2:5 refers to the . ., and that the sense is: “Neque id secus quam par erat, nam ex pluribus nationibus diverse loquentibus intererant isti coetui homines,” etc. The context, in fact, distinguishes the and the (so designated not as a sect, but according to their nationality), clearly in such a way that the former are members of the nation generally, and the latter are specially and exclusively Galileans. See also van Hengel, p. 9.

] they were dwelling , is not to be taken of mere temporary residence (Kuinoel, Olshausen, and others), but of the domicile (Luk 13:4 ; Act 7:48 ; Act 9:22 , al. ; Plat. Legg. ii. p. 666 E, xii: p. 969 C) which they had taken up in the central city of the theocracy, and that from conscientious religious feelings as Israelites (hence , comp. on Luk 2:25 ). Comp. Chrys.: ; .

.] sc. , of the nations to be found under heaven (Bernhardy).

is classical, . Comp. Plat. Ep. p. 326 C, Tim. p. 23 C. The whole expression has something solemn about it, and is, as a popular hyperbole, to be left in all its generality. Comp. Deu 2:25 ; Col 1:23 .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

B. THE VARIOUS IMPRESSIONS WHICH WERE MADE BY THE EVENT ON JEWS WHO CAME FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE DISCIPLES, FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT, SPAKE WITH OTHER TONGUES

Act 2:5-13

Contents:The amazement of the multitude, when the disciples spake with other tongues; Jews from various countries, in which many different languages prevailed, heard their own respective languages from the lips of the disciples; while large numbers seriously reflected on the matter, others mocked, as if the disciples were drunken.

5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men, out of every nation underheaven. 6Now when this was noised abroad3 [when this sound issued forth], the multitude came together, and were confounded,4 because that every man heard them speakin his own language [dialect]. 7And they were all [omit all]5 amazed and marvelled, saying, [and said] one to another,6 Behold, are not all these which [who] speak Galileans?8And how [then] hear we [them] every man in our own tongue [dialect],wherein we were born? 9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in [inhabitants of] Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts [regions] of Libya about Cyrene,and strangers of Rome [the Romans here present], Jews and proselytes, 11Cretes and Arabians, [:] we do hear them speak in [with] our tongues the wonderful works [great deeds] of God.[!] 12And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying, [and said] one to another, What meaneth this [What then can this be]?7 13Others mocking8 said, These men [They] are full of new [sweet, ] wine.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Act 2:5-6. a. When this was noised abroad [When this sound, etc.].The sound attracted the attention of large numbers of persons; all these assembled in the vicinity of the spot where the disciples had met together. We cannot, with Brenz, Calvin, Grotius, and others, understand , to mean the rumor which was spread concerning the event, ( is not ), nor can we, with Kuinoel, Bleek, and others, refer it to the loudness of the speaking with tongues; for if this were the meaning, in Act 2:4 would be the term applied to loud cries, and, besides, would necessarily be used in the plural number. On the contrary, nothing but in Act 2:2 can be meant by , as all recent interpreters admit. This loud sound from heaven, which Luke compares to the rushing noise of a mighty wind, was not audible in the interior of that house alone, as most interpreters have, without any reason, inferred from Act 2:2-3; the former verse does not give the least intimation of such a circumstance. The sound was, on the contrary, heard in the city within a large circuit: [probably over all Jerusalem. Alf.]; at the same time, it was noticed that the heavenly sound struck in, if we may use that expression, at the spot in which the disciples were assembled: the multitude were, consequently, attracted in that direction. It is obvious from this statement that Neanders explanation, according to which an earthquake drove the people from their houses, rests on a gratuitous assumption. And Langes conjecture, also, that none but those who were rightly disposed in spirit, were influenced by the voice from heaven to sympathize with the disciples, and gather together in the same place, is unsupported by the text before us, and the entire context.

b. The multitude came together.Large numbers came together and listened to the disciples, who, filled with the Holy Ghost, spake with tongues in this wonderful manner. What distinct conception can we form of the whole occurrence? The text does not furnish precise information, and the alleged impossibility of forming a distinct and clear conception of the whole process, has even led some writers to deny the historical truth of the event itself. Such a decision is hasty and unwise. As Luke himself has not furnished the details of the occurrence, we shall not venture to say: It took place thus, or thus, and not otherwise! That it is possible to furnish a clear and coherent account of the whole transaction. cannot be reasonably denied, even if some of the details which are interwoven, should appear less probable than others. It is, for instance, possible, that the disciples were at first assembled in a large apartment of a certain house, of which we have no other knowledge; as soon as the Spirit was poured out upon them, and they began to speak with tongues, praising and glorifying God in an inspired and exalted frame of mind, they may have proceeded to the outside, and there continued to speak in the presence of the rapidly increasing number of hearers. If, moreover, the house was in the immediate vicinity of one of the more extensive public places or squares of the city, a great multitude could easily find sufficient room. It was doubtless under such circumstances that Peter delivered the subsequent address, Act 2:14 ff.

Act 2:7-8. They were all amazed, and marvelled.Luke gives prominence to the fact that the multitude included persons from very many foreign countries, and describes it in the customary amplifying style: , Act 2:5; we have no reason, especially when we refer to Act 2:9-11, to interpret these words in their strict and literal sense. These Jewish men dwelt (Act 2:5) in Jerusalem ( .). This expression has generally been understood, in recent times, (de Wette, Meyer; Chrysostom, among the early writers) as denoting a permanent abode, a settled residence; it is, further, supposed to refer exclusively to Jews who came from foreign countries, and who, influenced by strong religious attachments ( ), and, specially, desirous of being near the temple and passing the evening of life in the holy city, had now established their homes in Jerusalem. It is certainly true that , according to classical usage, conveys the idea of a fixed residence, and not merely of a sojourn; it refers, specially, to a newly chosen abode, after a former place of residence had been forsaken; passages in the New Testament like Luk 13:4; Act 7:48; Act 9:22, fully conform to this usage. The context, however, here deters us from urging such a signification of the word, since the words , etc., Act 2:9, and , Act 2:10, distinctly imply that these persons, or at least the majority of them, still resided in foreign countries at that time, and were only temporarily present in Jerusalem on the occasion of the festival: it is possible that some of the number may have established themselves permanently in the city. The term . in Act 2:5 is accordingly employed in a somewhat wide sense, and thus the older interpretation [a mere sojourn, equivalent to , Hebr. . Tr.] is sustained in its essential features.

Act 2:9-11. a. Parthians and Medes, etc. This list, embracing fifteen countries from which individuals were present, is arranged according to a certain plan which conducts the reader from the north-east to the west, then to the south, and lastly to the west. Still, the writer does not adhere to it rigorously. The first four names embrace the east, or certain countries beyond the Euphrates, to which the nation had been conducted by the Assyrian, and then by the Babylonish Captivity; then, quite unexpectedly, Judea is mentioned. We could not have looked for the insertion of this name at a point where the transition to the provinces of Asia Minor occurs, and the question naturally suggests itself, whether some other geographical name had not originally been introduced here. But the ancient manuscripts afford no information, [no Greek var. lect. occur in the critical editions of Tisch. and Alf,, nor in Cod. Sin.Tr.] and the conjectures that Idumea, or India, or Bithynia had been mentioned, are altogether idle. The reading adopted by Tertullian and Augustine, that is, Armenia, may possibly have had weightier testimony in its favor. Some commentators adduce the circumstance that Luke wrote in Rome, and considered the geographical position of Judea in the light in which it would appear to Roman readers (Olshausen); others suppose that Judea is mentioned in reference to a difference of dialect, since that of Judea differed from the Galilean dialect of the disciples (Bengel; Meyer). But none of the reasons which they assign for the mention of Judea in a list of names of foreign countries, satisfactorily explains its appearance here, and a certain obscurity still attends the subject.The next five names are those of as many provinces of Asia Minor; the direction at first is from the east to the west; the third name, Asia, probably represents a narrow district on the coast of the [gean] Sea, embracing Mysia, Lydia, and Caria, according to the Roman arrangement of the provinces (Mannert: Geogr. der. Gr. u. Rm. VI. 2. S. 27). The direction is then easterly (Phrygia), and a southern province on the coast [of the Mediterranean] is next mentioned (Pamphylia). We are now conducted far to the south, where two countries in Africa, Egypt and Libya Cyrenaica, are particularized; in both, large numbers of Jews had already resided for several centuries. At length Romans from the distant west are introduced, that is, Jews who dwelt in the city of Rome, and, generally, in the western portions of the Roman Empire, and who now appear in Jerusalem as visitors. The names of the Cretes and Arabians constitute a supplement to the list; but before these are appended, and when, at the close, Luke mentions the Romans. he distinguishes in reference to all the provinces named by him, between those who are Jews by birth () and those who are converted pagans (). It is Lukes main purpose, in giving this list of names of nations and countries, as the context clearly demonstrates, to exhibit the variety of languages and dialects which these foreign Jews and proselytes employed. We have, consequently, no reason to represent the list as inexact in this respect, or even unmeaning (de Wette), on the ground, for instance, that the Greek language was then spoken in the cities of Asia Minor and Egypt, in Cyrene and Crete, and was well understood even in Rome. For every country, and, in some respects, every province had, nevertheless, a dialect peculiar to itself, and it is precisely the difference of dialects () to which Luke chiefly refers in Act 2:6; Act 2:8.It may yet be added, as an obvious circumstance, that this extended enumeration of nations is not designed to be a precise report of the language of the multitude, but is ascribed to them in order to exhibit the great variety of their respective dialects; hence, it can give offence to none except to mere theorists, whose views respecting the historical fidelity of a narrative do not correspond to the exigencies of actual life. [We have here recorded, not the very words of any individual speaker, but the sum and substance of what all said. (J. A. Alexander). Tr.]. And the assertion that the whole list, which is found in all the manuscripts, is spurious and a mere interpolation (Ziegler, and others), is a striking instance of arbitrary interpretation and the want of critical tact.

b. We do hear them speak in our tongues.After the statements made above, scarcely a doubt can remain respecting the meaning of the present passage; it describes the speaking of the disciples in different languages and dialects. The circumstance that the disciples spoke in the particular dialects of the hearers respectively, was precisely the one that confounded the latter, Act 2:6. The terms: , furnish merely a brief description of the whole scene. It is only a very superficial glance which could suggest the opinion that each one of the disciples had spoken in several different dialects at the same time (Bleek); such an opinion is supported by nothing except the plural , which, however, is used collectively, and when rationally interpreted, can only mean that while one disciple spoke in one dialect, another employed a different one, so that every foreigner could hear his own dialect spoken by some one of the disciples. And this circumstance created the more astonishment, as the multitude knew that all the speakers were Galileans, Act 2:7. The context, and, especially, the list of names of nations and countries, which is introduced in reference to the manifold languages, demonstrate that this term, Galileans, can also have only been introduced here in reference to language, inasmuch as the Galileans were accustomed to speak the Araman [or Syro-Chaldaic] language alone; it cannot have been intended to designate the speakers as disciples of Jesus (which was a later usage of the word), or to refer to the want of intellectual culture which characterized the province. But that these natives of Galilee should express themselves in the many vernacular dialects or languages of foreign Jews and proselytes, who came from Asia, Africa and Europe, and spoke in the Parthian, Phrygian, etc., tongues (Act 2:8; Act 2:11), was an event that amazed and confounded the hearers. No interpretation is in harmony with the context, which assigns to any other sense than that of language. The following modes of interpretation are, accordingly, inadmissible:(1). Those which take literally, in the sense of tongue, organ of speech [so that that the disciples spoke inarticulately,Tr.] (Wieseler), that is, of an ecstatic speaking in low tones and inarticulate sounds (Stud. u. Krit. 1838. S. 703 ff.). Bardili and Eichhorn (1786 f.) apply, however, a similar mode of interpretation only to 1 Cor. Acts 14., and not to Acts, Acts 2. Dav. Schulz, on the other hand, explains the word as meaning loud and joyous exclamations and exultant tones (Geistesgaben, 1836), while Baur understands it to mean tongues which the Spirit gave, organs of speech of the Spirit.(2). According to another class of explanations, which are all likewise untenable, is equivalent to expression, mode of speech, (J. A. G. Meyer, 1797), or denotes obsolete, foreign or dialectal expressions (Heinrichs; Bleek, in Stud. u. Krit. 1829); but occurs in such a signification only in the writings of learned Greek grammarians; the whole term: , Act 2:4, besides, would then be redundant and altogether inappropriate.(3). No other explanation of the word , accordingly, remains, except that which assigns to it the signification of language, dialect (Olshausen; de Wette; Meyer; Bumlein; Stud. d. wrt. Geistlkt. 1834); it is sustained both by the general usage of the word in question, and by the context. Therefore, Luke describes the disciples as speaking, when filled with the Holy Ghost, in different foreign languages and dialects.

But when this point is decided, another question presents itself: In what manner are we to view the whole occurrence? What is the true, central point, or the substance of the fact itself, viewed objectively? Here again the opinions of interpreters diverge widely. (1). Some suppose that certain of the disciples, who were not natives of Galilee, spoke in the ordinary manner in foreign languages, which were, however, respectively, their own native languages (Paulus; Eichhorn, and others); the only unusual feature, as they allege, was the circumstance that such hymns of praise should be uttered aloud in provincial dialects. This explanation grossly contradicts the text itself, since no reason whatever now remains for the amazement and confusion of mind described in Act 2:6-8; Act 2:11-12, as apparent in the hearers.(2). Some of the early Christian writers (Gregory Nazianzen; Bede), as well as authors of a later age (Erasmus; Schneckenburger), suppose that the miracle was not one of speech, but of hearing; namely, the disciples simply employed their native language, the Galilean, and the foreigners who listened, being placed in a species of [magnetic] psychical rapport [communication, relation], only thought that their own respective languages were spoken by the disciples. But, according to this interpretation, the peculiar feature of the scene is converted into a mere delusion of the hearers, and must, as in the case of the previous explanation, be regarded as a mistakea supposition which dishonors the character of Sacred History, and is irreconcilable with the statement of the narrator given in Act 2:4.(3). According to an interpretation of a more recent date, which has been accepted by comparatively large numbers, the true historical element in the narrative is the following: it was not really a speaking in foreign languages, but was tongue-speaking, [the tongue alone, not the ego, spoke (Kling)Tr.]. that is to say, it was an involuntary and unconscious use of the tongue in the utterance of the language of prayer by men in a state of the highest mental and moral excitement [Begeisterung], whose words needed an intelligent interpretation, according to 1 Cor. Acts 14. The advocates of this opinion usually assume that this historical element had been converted by tradition into a literal speaking in foreign languages, precisely as the present narrative describes the occurrence. This interpretation is adopted by Baur, de Wette, Hilgenfeld and Meyer; but Meyer, in addition, combines with this interpretation the view of Paulus, stated above (under No. 1), and assumes that some of the speakers who were inspired in this manner, were foreigners, whose tongue-speaking was heard in their respective native dialects; this latter explanation contradicts the letter and spirit of the narrative before us in the most positive manner. The decision of the present point depends partly on the parallel passages in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, etc., which treat of the glossolaly [speaking with tongues,], and, partly, on the alleged impossibity of such a miraculous speaking with tongues.

(I). The parallel passages claim respectively, at the outset, an interpretation of their own, independently of each other; of the two, viz. Acts Acts 2, and 1 Cor. Acts 14, neither is to be primarily employed in interpreting the other; but when each has been separately considered, the relation in which they stand to each other can be satisfactorily exhibited, and that relation is an exegetical problem, the solution of which is indispensable. It is true that at a time when commentators generally were inclined to adopt 1 Cor. Acts 14., as their guide in interpreting Acts Acts 2., and when they understood the latter passage as describing an ecstatic speaking with tongues exclusively, Bumlein adopted an opposite course, and, not without a certain degree of success, explained 1 Cor. Acts 14. as referring to a speaking in foreign languages. Still, the difficulties which attend the explanation of the latter passage, have not in every particular been removed; see the Commentary on the chapter [by C. F. Kling, in a subsequent volume.Tr.]. The Corinthian and the Pentecostal speaking with tongues coincide in the following points: (1) It was in both cases an extraordinary influence and gift of the Holy Spirit, , Act 2:4; (2) on both occasions the Spirit of God took possession of the soul of the speaker with great power, insomuch that the free action of the will and the self-consciousness of the latter at last receded; a mental state ensued so strange and mysterious in its character, as to produce on the minds of some spectators the impression, corresponding to their general views, that they beheld a case of drunkenness, while others regarded it as a case of madness; comp. 1. Cor. Act 14:23; (3) in both instances this did not result in a didactic discourse, but was the language of devotion, in which the praise and honor of God were proclaimed.On the other hand, each case exhibits distinctive features of its own: (1) The speaking of the disciples. Acts 2., was intelligible, and was consequently understood by the hearers without the assistance of others, Act 2:8; Act 2:11, whereas the Corinthian speaking with tongues could not possibly be understood without the aid of an interpreter, 1Co 14:2; 1Co 14:13; 1Co 14:16; 1Co 14:27-28; (2) the speaking described in Acts, Acts 2., was clearly a speaking in foreign languages, whereas not a single distinct and unequivocal expression in 1 Cor. Acts 14, intimates that such was the case in Corinth.It appears, then, that certain essential features of both occurrences are the same, while important differences between the two are discoverable; we are, consequently, not authorized to assume that the one described in Acts, Acts 2., was necessarily like the other in all its features, and that the differences which are now noticed are merely legendary variations.

(II). Such a mythical interpretation, however, would have scarcely been suggested, if some writers had not likewise assumed that a miraculous gift of tongues is an impossibility. Zeller (Apost. 1854), who adopts this view in its extreme form, has declared that the narrative of the Pentecostal event is unhistorical in every respect, that it is a mere legend proceeding from certain conceptions in the minds of its original authors, and that it possesses no foundation whatever in fact. But on what grounds is such an event declared to be impossible? Meyer alleges: The sudden communication of the gift of speaking in foreign languages is neither logically possible, nor psychologically and morally conceivable. Now, with regard to the logical possibility, we know that all men in essential points occupy the same position, and that hence in essential features all languages resemble each other, so that every man possesses the key for understanding, and the capacity for acquiring, all languages. And the possibility of conceiving of the event psychologically, is denied chiefly for the twofold reason, that the disciples are supposed to have delivered formal and extended addresses in foreign languages, and, that they permanently retained the ability to express themselves in any and every foreign language. But there is not a single intimation given in the entire history of the apostles that the latter was the case; the section before us, on the contrary, describes a phenomenon which soon passed away, and to which the psychological difficulty, therefore, which has been adduced, does not apply. The whole question, indeed, assumes another form when we give due attention to the fact that the statements of Luke by no means suggest the thought that the disciples delivered extended discourses in foreign languages, but rather imply that their speaking with tongues consisted simply in brief utterances or effusions of the powerful emotions of their hearts, by which they were impelled to praise God for his wonderful works and gracious deeds. Now if, under such circumstances, they expressed themselves in foreign languages, the phenomenon would very inappropriately be assigned to the class of natural and ordinary occurrences, as the so-called natural mode of interpretation has attempted to do, since Lukes report undeniably represents the whole as a wonderful and truly amazing occurrence. Still, when the assertion is repeated that the whole occurrence is psychologically and morally inconceivable, and therefore impossible, we may, in addition, refer to analogous facts, such as the following:Somnambulists and persons who were placed under magnetic influences or appeared in a highly excited state of mind, have been known to speak, not in their usual provincial dialect, but in a pure and elevated style, with which they had previously not been at all familiar, or even in foreign languages; another analogous case may be found in the accounts furnished by persons who were present, respecting the speaking with tongues of the Irvingites, about the beginning of the third decade of the present century. While, then, the event itself, when the disciples were filled with the Spirit, or when their souls were controlled and exalted by the Spirit of God, must undoubtedly be regarded as miraculous, and as proceeding from an extraordinary and heavenly influence, we must with equal reason regard this peculiar manifestation of the Spirit, namely, through the medium of other dialects and languages, as having also been miraculous in its character.

Act 2:12-13.And they were all amazed.The view of the occurrence which has just been given, was, accordingly, entertained by many of the spectators at the time, who wondered and inquired with reverence and devout feeling; Act 2:7-8; Act 2:11-12. They were men who were open to the influences of the truth, and whom Luke describes in Act 2:5, as devout, God-fearing men. [, timens, relate ad Deum=pius, reverens Deum. Wahl: Clavis N. T.Tr.]. But all the spectators did not entertain such sentiments. There were persons present who remained unmoved, and who yielded to a spirit of levity; they would not permit this divine manifestation to make an impression on their hearts, but rather attempted to degrade and profane that which was holy and divine. These men declared that the words which they heard were merely the senseless speech of men who were unusually excited by strong drink, and that it was not the Spirit of God, but the spirit of wine by which they were impelled to speak. It is obvious that such language would have been altogether unmeaning, and could not have occurred to these scoffers, if the deportment of the disciples and the manner in which they spoke had not been unusual, or had not indicated a high degree of mental excitement. But if such was really the case, we have not sufficient grounds for terming these men blasphemers, in the proper sense of the word, much less can we accuse them, as some have done, of committing the sin against the Holy Ghost; Peter himself admonishes them, Act 2:15, in mild terms only, and exhibits no traces of indignant feelings. Many interpreters assume that the scoffers were all residents of Jerusalem, and that the others, whose words are quoted in Act 2:7; Act 2:12, as those of thoughtful men, were foreign Jews; the former are supposed, for instance, to be persons whose religious feelings had been blunted by familiarity with holy things. But the text affords no support for this view; the Israelites from foreign countries are evidently placed in the foreground, chiefly for the purpose of presenting the fact more prominently, that the disciples, when filled with the Spirit, had spoken in a variety of languages and dialects. There were, doubtless, reflecting and devout men, found likewise among the inhabitants of the city, and some of the scoffers may have been foreigners.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. As soon as the Holy Spirit was poured out and had filled the souls of the disciples, the praises of God flowed in a full stream from their lips; the sacred fire from above had enkindled their souls, and the tribute which their devout feelings offered, rose again, like ascending flames, to heaven. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Mat 12:34. The most profound and holy thoughts and feelings are those which can least of all endure constraint; they will break forth and proclaim their power aloud. The soul, struggling in its narrow enclosure with the powerful emotions which move it, finds relief in words. The eternal Son of God himself is called The Word, and the soul, too, employs words in describing the gifts received from the Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. Gods wonderful gift of speech, the prerogative of man alone, although polluted by sin and the depravity of man, is cleansed, consecrated anew, and sanctified by the Spirit of God.

2. The speaking in foreign tongues was a sign of the Holy Ghost. It was a holy speaking of holy thingsa speaking of the wonderful works of God, not of the petty affairs of men, and in so far it was an illustration of the holiness of the Spirit. It was a speaking in many different dialects and languages; herein were revealed alike the comprehensive character of the gift of the Spirit, and also its reference to the human speciesthe Spirit of God was a gift designed for all countries, nations, and tongues. This ability to speak in foreign languages was not acquired after much labor had been bestowed, and time and various aids had been employed, but was freely granted, and was solely a gift of divine gracea sign of the favor and the grace which characterize the operations of the Spirit of God.

3. The fact that Israelites from all the known countries of the world were here present as witnesses of the outpouring of the Holy Ghost, is an evidence that the judgments of God also include gracious purposes, and that his chastisements proceed from a merciful design. The people of Israel had been scattered abroad among all nations on account of their apostasyin earlier ages in the East, and subsequently, in the West also. But now, Jews and proselytes from all these countries assemble in Jerusalem, and are permitted to be eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses of the operations of the Holy Spirit; these were a pledge that the grace of God in Christ was designed for all countries, nations, and tongues. And it was precisely the dispersion of the Jews among all the known nations of the world that opened a pathway for the passage of the Gospel from the people of God to the Gentiles.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Act 2:5. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.O how wonderful is the faithfulness of our God, who, even amid the most severe judgments that overtake his disobedient people, prepares a path way for the Gospel which is unto salvation! The Jewish people had, in accordance with the threatenings of God, been scattered among all nations on account of their sins, and had thus acquired the respective languages of those nations. And now God employs these as the means for communicating his word and the great salvation wrought by Christ, to all nations. He who surveys such deeds with the eye of faith, may with truth exclaim: I remember thy judgments of old, O Lord; and I comfort myself. Psa 119:52. (Apost. Past.).Often when an individual undertakes a journey, or engages in a good work, the blessing of God is added, and conducts him to the way of salvation; see Act 8:27 f. (Starke).Devout men.In those who are truly converted, God begins a good work, at an early period, and opens the way for the operations of his grace. (Starke).A devout spirit is precious in the eyes of God: I. It prompts to willing and continued obedience when God leads; II. Its reward consists in still more precious gifts of divine grace.Whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance [Mat 13:12].He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much. [Luk 16:10].It is not in increasing stores of knowledge, but in true godliness and uprightness of spirit, that your real advantages consist.The dispersion of Israel, a wonderful illustration of the divine government of the world; viewed, I. As the merited punishment of their sins; II. As an effectual means for extending a knowledge of the true God; III. As a promising indication and an instrument in reference to the propagation of the Gospel.The judgments of God during this season of grace, are always channels through which his grace, too, abundantly flows.In Gods hand, the staff called Bands may at any time be converted into the staff Beauty. [Zec 11:7]. (Lechler).

Act 2:6. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded.The curiosity of men, manifested alike in the days of Christ and the apostles, and in our own, must, in accordance with the example of the first witnesses of our Saviour, be so employed by us as to promote the interests of the kingdom of Christ. Wherever that kingdom comes in reality, or is preached in truth and purity, and in the power of God, the previous repose of men is greatly disturbed. Even the amazement and confusion of mind which the Gospel produces, when it comes in power, often render valuable services. We cannot, on the other hand, regard it as a good sign, when all things proceed in their usual quiet course, and when the preaching of the Gospel produces no movement among men. (Ap. Past.).The instructive fact that the Father can employ even the curiosity of men as the means of conducting souls to the Son. (Lechler).The advantages possessed by the Gospel, as compared with the Law: when the law was given, the people fled [Heb 12:18-24; Exod. Acts 19]; here, they are drawn together. (Starke).Men are sometimes conducted to the way of salvation by an alarm, which is employed as the means of preparing their hearts, (ib.).Every man heard them speak in his own language.Every man heard the glorious deeds of God proclaimed in his language. Do we, who are ambassadors of Christ, also take so deep an interest in the spiritual welfare of each individual among our hearers? Or do we content ourselves with making, at all times, only a general public statement of the truth? (Ap. Past.).

Act 2:7. They were all amazed and marvelled.Amazement at great events, the means through which at times God makes known his salvation. (Lechler). Amazement or wonder may indeed prepare the heart for receiving a deep impression from the word of God; but it should also impel us, as the intended result, to praise and adore the grace and truth of God.Are not all these which speak Galileans?A faithful witness of the truth may easily endure it, when others look down on him as on a Galilean. Was not such the experience of David, of Paul (2Co 10:10), and even of our Lord himself? (Joh 1:46).

Act 2:8-11. How hear we every man in our own tongue, etc.Luke is not unmindful of the progress of the Gospel when he adopts the present arrangement of the representatives of the many nations now assembled in Jerusalem, and introduces them as speakers.The commemoration of the wonderful works of God was not unfamiliar to Jewish ears (Psa 71:19). But no ear had ever previously heard of those wonderful works of God which the Holy Ghost on this occasion taught the hearts and lips of the disciples to praise. The language of the Jews was too feeble to describe their grandeur; it needed all the tongues of the world to publish and to glorify the works of the Saviour of the world. (Besser).How gratefully we should confess the goodness of God in permitting us to read and hear the Gospel in our own native language!The wonderful works of God, viewed as the subject of which the Bible chiefly treats.The truth that the divine gift of speech cannot be more appropriately applied, than when it is consecrated to God and to the interests of his kingdom. (Lechler). The Hallelujah of the world, sung by innumerable voices to the honor of God: the hymn of praise, I. Was commenced on the morning of the creation, in the kingdom of nature; II. Was commenced anew on the day of Pentecost, in the kingdom of grace; III. Will be more perfectly continued (but not end) on the day of the revelation of the Lord, in the kingdom of glory.

Act 2:12. They were all amazed, etc.Even such amazement may ultimately conduct men to salvation, since God does not begin his work in their souls, until their reason has discovered its own errors, and confesses its feebleness. (Starke).Now when the question dictated by wonder: What meaneth this? is changed into the question, What shall I do? and proceeds from a deeply moved and penitent heart, the way of salvation is opened. (Leonh. and Sp.).

Act 2:13. Others mocking said, etc.Although such scoffing is one of the most mournful evidences of a Satanic opposition to the kingdom of Christ, the teacher of religious truth is, nevertheless, not excusable when he allows it to arouse his indignation so highly that he casts the scoffer altogether from his path, or even by scornful words and pointed reflections exasperates such persons anew; they are, in truth, entitled to our pity. He should therefore endure them with gentleness of spirit, and persevere in his efforts to rescue some of these wretched men from destruction.When we closely examine the scoffs and blasphemies of Satan, we can always discover from them that such wonderful works of God overwhelm him with confusion, and that he sometimes emits blasphemies which are either totally devoid of meaning, or else self-contradictory, as exemplified here in the words: They are full of new wine. (Ap. Past.).The world loves to tarnish shining objects, and to drag those that are exalted down into the dust. (Schiller).O how often this mocking is only the veil assumed by a desperate spirit! The strongest convictions of the truth are frequently produced on the heart of such a man; he well knows the divine character of the Gospel; but he attempts to repress his convictions, and will not permit them to come to the light of day, for he loves darkness rather than light; hence he endeavors to escape their force by resorting to ridicule and jests. (L. Hofacker).How shall we secure ourselves from taking offence at holy things in consequence of erroneous judgments? I. By carefully maintaining sentiments of profound reverence in our souls, with respect to God and divine things; II. By making ourselves thoroughly acquainted with the sinfulness of man in our own case, and in the case of others; III. By constantly remembering the contradiction and opposition which Gods works have encountered among men, even from the beginning. (Lechler).The Gospel, to some the savour of life unto life, to others the savour of death unto death [2Co 2:16].Christ is still set in our day for the fall and rising again of many. [Luk 2:34]. (ib.).

The significance of the Pentecostal gift: I. It was a token given to Israel; II. It was a prefiguration of Gods dealings with the Gentiles, namely, (a) of the call given to all nations; (b) of the election of those who seek salvation; (c) of the rejection of those who scoff at the wonderful works of God; III. It is still a rich source of hope, consolation and encouragement for all true Christians. (Harless).The outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the disciples of the Lord: I. The circumstances which necessarily preceded such an event; II. The external signs which attended it; III. The power of the Holy Ghost, manifested at once in the disciples; IV. The impressions made on the assembled multitude. (Langbein).The miracle of the Pentecostal gift: I. In the world, a mystery of foolishness; (a) What meaneth this? (b) They are full of new wine. II. In Christ, a mystery unto salvation; (a) a mysterysudden; invisible; wonderful; (b) in Christ made manifest unto salvationmade manifest (by being with one accord together; by prayer; by a holy walk)unto salvation (for all nations and times). (C. Beck: Hom. Repert.).The operations of the Holy Spirit: I. The manner in which they are conducted; II. The results which they produce. (Kapff).The Christian Church, originally founded by the outpouring of the Holy Ghost: I. By what circumstances was the way for this event prepared? (a) Externally, by the fulfilment of an appointed time; (b) internally, by the continuing together of the apostles with one accord. II. What circumstances attended the event itself? (a) Externally, wonderful signs; (b) internally, wonderful influences. III. What impressions did the multitude receive from it? (a) Externally, the effect of the singular character of the testimony of the disciples (mockery); (b) internally, the effect of the truths proclaimed (confusion of mind). (Lisco).The outpouring of the Holy Ghost, an image of regeneration (Homily). I. The praying Church; II. The sound from heaven; III. The holy flames; IV. The preaching with new tongues, (ib.)The confused voices of the world when the Holy Spirit bears witness: I. Are not all these Galileans? The world takes offence at the persons of the witnesses. II. How hear we in our own tongue? It is arrested by the voice of conscience responding to the truth. III. What meaneth this? It distrusts the issue of the ways of God. IV. They are full of new wine. It mistakes the source of the operations of the Spirit.The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God. [1Co 2:14]. I. The disciples of the Spirit are too mean in his eyes, Act 2:7; II. The Spirits witness is too mighty for him, Act 2:811; III. The Spirits purpose is too lofty for him, Act 2:12; IV. The Spirits source is too profound for him, Act 2:13.The impressions made on the individual by divine things, correspond in their character to the actual state of his mind and heart; I. The thoughtless gaze in ignorant wonder; the reflecting, with adoring praise: II. The guilty listen with confusion and terror; the justified, with holy joy; III. The wicked are prompted to indulge in foolish mocking: earnest inquirers are filled with holy awe.[Illustrations of the divine attributes, derived from the outpouring of the Spirit (love; wisdom: power; truth, etc.).Illustrations of the future blessedness of believers, derived from the outpouring of the Spirit (personal merit not the the cause; no hinderances insurmountable; suited to the nature and capacity of the creature; gives glory to God, etc.).The continued operations of the Holy Spirit in the Church.The outpouring of the Holy Ghost, a triumphant display of divine grace: I. In its original design; (a) such a gift could not have been conceived of by man; (b) was, therefore, unsought; (c) and totally undeserved; II. Its actual occurrence; (a) the subjects (disciples); (b) witnesses; (c) immediate effects (Church founded); III. Its permanent results; (a) preservation of divine truth in the Church; (b) conversion of sinners; (c) sanctification, etc.Tr.].Comp. the Hom. and Pract. remarks below, on Act 2:14-21.

Footnotes:

[3]Act 2:6. a.[The margin of the English Bible (which in the text follows Tyndale, Cranmer, Geneva,) renders more literally: when this voice was heard (Rheims and Coverd.: voice). But as never means report or rumor elsewhere, while it does occur in connection with the mention of wind, thunder, etc., as in Joh 3:8; Rev 6:1, etc., Lechler, in the present translation, with many eminent critics and translators, regards it as another term for sound, the of Act 2:2.Tr.]

[4]Act 2:6. b.[Margin: troubled in mind; Vulg. mente confusa est. The original implies that the minds of the people were perturbed, or in a state of confusion, indicated by the tumult and eager inquiries which succeeded. Lechler: bestuerzt.Tr.]

[5]Act 2:7. a.The text. rec. inserts after [with A. C. E. Cod. Sin. (). Vulg. (omnes)]; it has been very properly omitted by recent critics in accordance with important manuscripts [B. D.], ancient translations, and also the example of Chrysostom and Augustine; this addition was designed to be emphatic. [Omitted by Lach., Scholz, Tisch., Born., and Alf.Tr.]

[6]Act 2:7. b.It is, however, more doubtful than in the former case, whether [of text. rec.] is also a later addition to the text, as Lachmann, who omits it, supposes. [Omitted in A. B. C. Cod. Sin. Vulg., and dropped also by Tisch. and Alf., but found in D. E. An explanatory gloss. (Alf.)Tr.]

[7]Act 2:12.In place of [of text. rec. with E.] Lach. [Tisch.] and Bornemann, with C. D. A., and Chrysostom, read ; the latter is an unauthorized correction [as Alf. also believes], founded on the supposition that is an indirect question, which is not the case.[Cod. Sin. reads .Tr.]

[8]Act 2:13.[The text. rec. has with E. and many minuscules; in place of it, the compound is substituted by recent editors (Tisch., Lach., Stier, Alf.) as more emphatic (de Wette), and more in accordance with the best manuscripts, viz., A. B. C. D. (corrected) Cod. Sin.Tr.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. (6) Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. (7) And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? (8) And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? (9) Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, (10) Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, (11) Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

It is well worthy the observation of the Reader, how the Lord, by the ordinary method of his providence, overruled this event, that it should take place at this particular season, to render it more public to the world. As the death and resurrection of Christ took place at the first great Jewish feast, the Passover, so the first coming of the Holy Ghost, in this signal and open display of divine power, should take place at the second great feast of Pentecost, Hence both were so admirably timed, that multitudes from all parts, which came up for the sake of trade, at those Jewish feasts at Jerusalem, should be eye and ear witnesses to the Lord’s glory. Reader! think of these things, and learn to reverence and adore the Lord, both in the appointments of his providences, as well as in the manifestations of his grace.

The consternation occasioned in Jerusalem by these prodigies, may be better conceived than described. Let the Reader figure to himself those poor humble fishermen of Galilee, the natives of a little despised city, whose inhabitants were dull and unlearned, even to a proverb, (Joh 1:46 .) let him fancy that he beholds one Apostle speaking to a Parthian, another to a Mede, another to an Elamite, without the help of an interpreter, as had always been done before; and let him call to mind that the Apostles addresses were not of earthly things, but of the wonderful works of God, and then let him pause and ponder over the Almighty ministry of God the Spirit! Here were no less than fifteen different nations of the earth brought together on this occasion, and all of them distinguished by a different language. And to these different nations those poor, humble, untaught fishermen of Galilee, were at once qualified to talk on the great things of God in their own mother tongue in which they were born with the greatest fluency of language! What will the Reader say to these things? What less could it be than the power of God, and the wisdom of God, speaking in them and by them to the blessed purposes of salvation? Jesus had said that his disciples should speak with new tongues. And here we see the Lord’s promise fulfilled, Mar 16:17 . And, Reader! shall not you and I depend upon the promises of Jesus?

I beg to call the Reader’s attention to one beauty as discoverable in this miracle, which perhaps in the first view may not so immediately strike him; I mean the wonderful circumstance with which God the Holy Ghost here begun his ministry, in restoring to his servants, the Apostles, the use of tongues, which was made confusion in the first instance at the building of Babel. In the early world, when the Sin of men taught rebellion against God, the Lord confounded their language. Before this, the whole earth was of one language, and one speech, Gen 11:1-9 . And it was God’s own language. It was sacred. It was divine. And no doubt it was a blessing to mankind. For it not only promoted a general intercourse and good will between man and man, but being the sacred language, it tended to preserve the knowledge of the Lord throughout the earth. But, when for sin man lost this privilege, what difficulties for apprehension must have occurred? But, who should have thought, that in the designs and stores of omnipotency, the Lord would have made this sin of man the very foundation of bringing forth greater mercy, and have made that which sprung out of evil to become the very means of greater good? And yet so it was. This miracle of enabling the Apostles to speak various languages in a moment of time, would never have had an opportunity for display, had not the tower of Babel, and the confusion of tongues taken place. So that here, as in a thousand instances beside, the Lord overrules the unworthiness of his creatures to his glory, and renders their weakness the means of manifesting his strength. Oh! the depths of the riches both of the wisdom, and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out, Rom 11:33 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Ver. 5. And there were dwelling, &c. ] Even in Jerusalem (for their ancient idolatries and latter unthankfulness) there be not to be found at this time a hundred households of the Jews. (Breerwood’s Inquiries.)

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

5 13 .] EFFECT ON THE MULTITUDE.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

5 .] De Wette maintains that these cannot have been persons sojourning for the sake of the feast, but residents : but see above on Act 2:1 . I see no objection, with Meyer, to including both residents and sojourners in the term, which only specifies their then residence.

] Not in reference to their having come up to the feast, nor to their dwelling from religious motives at Jerusalem ( , , , Chrys.), but stated as imparting a character and interest to what follows. They were not merely vain and curious listeners, but men of piety and weight.

] Not perhaps used so much hyperbolically , as with reference to the significance of the whole event. As they were samples each of their different people, so collectively they represented all the nations of the world, who should hear afterwards in their own tongues the wonderful works of God.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Act 2:5 . , probably used not merely of temporary dwellers for the Feast, but of the devout Jews of the Diaspora, who for the purpose of being near the Temple had taken up their residence in Jerusalem, perhaps for the study of the Law, perhaps to live and to die within the city walls (see St. Chrysostom’s comment on the word). They were not proselytes as is indicated by , but probably devout men like Symeon, Luk 2:25 , who is described by the same word , waiting for the consolation of Israel. The expression, as Zckler points out, is not quite synonymous with that in Act 2:14 (or with Luk 13:4 ), and he explains it as above. There is certainly no need to consider the word, with Spitta and Hilgenfeld, as an epithet added by a later editor, or to omit , as Blass strongly urges (while Hilgenfeld desires to retain this word). The word may fairly be regarded as contrasted with (Act 2:7 ). The same view of it as applied here to foreign Jews who had their stated residence in Jerusalem is maintained by Schrer, Jewish People , div. ii., vol. ii., p. 291 (note) E.T. is used generally of taking up a permanent abode as in contrast to used of temporary sojourn, and on the frequent use of the word in St. Luke, Friedrich, ubi supra , p. 39. But here it is followed most probably by not , constructio prgnans, cf. Wendt and Weiss as against W.H [117] (T.R. and so Blass in [118] ). Weiss, Apostelgeschichte , p. 36, regards this frequent use of as characteristic of the style of Acts, cf. Act 9:21 , Act 14:25 , and considers it quite inconceivable that would be changed into , although the reverse is likely enough to have happened (Wendt). , see Act 8:2 . : “ from every nation,” so R.V.; “out of,” A.V., but this would represent rather than , and would imply that they belonged to these different nations, not that they were born Jews residing among them and coming from them (Humphry, Commentary on R.V. ). , sc. . The phrase is used frequently in LXX, cf. Deu 2:25 , and in classical literature by Plato and Dem. If includes the Jews who had come up to the Feast as well as those who had settled in Jerusalem from other countries, this expression is strikingly illustrated by the words of Philo, De Monarchia , ii. 1, p. 223. The Pentecost would be more largely attended even than the Passover, as it was a more favourable season for travelling than the early spring (see Wetstein, in loco ), and cf. Schrer, Jewish People , div. ii., vol. ii., pp. 291, 307, E.T.

[117] Westcott and Hort’s The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.

[118] R(omana), in Blass, a first rough copy of St. Luke.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 2:5-13

5Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language. 7They were amazed and astonished, saying, “Why, are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8″And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born? 9″Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11Cretans and Arabs — we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God.” 12And they all continued in amazement and great perplexity, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” 13But others were mocking and saying, “They are full of sweet wine.”

Act 2:5 “devout” This term means “taking hold of something well” (cf. LXX Lev 15:31; Mic 7:2). In the case of first century Judaism, it implies a reverence toward God and the traditions of the Elders (i.e., Oral Traditions, which became the Talmud). These were pious, religious men (cf. Act 8:2; Act 22:12; Luk 2:25). This is similar in meaning to “blameless” used of Noah and Job.

“from every nation under heaven” All male Jews were strongly urged to attend the three major annual feast days (cf. Leviticus 23) at the Temple (cf. Deu 16:16). There were

1. probably pilgrims from all over the Mediterranean area who had come to Jerusalem for Passover and stayed until Pentecost

2. permanent residents who had moved from somewhere outside of Jerusalem (cf. use of the word in Act 4:16; Act 7:24; Act 9:22; Act 9:32)

This has great theological implications (cf. Mat 28:19-20; Luk 24:47; Act 1:8).

Act 2:6 “when this sound occurred” This could refer to (1) the noise of the rushing wind (cf. Act 2:2) or (2) the believers speaking in other languages (cf. Act 2:4).

NASB, NRSV,

NJB”bewildered”

NKJV”confused”

TEV”excited”

This same term is used in the Septuagint in Gen 11:7; Gen 11:9, relating to the confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel. I think Pentecost is the symbolic reversal of the nationalism begun at the Tower of Babel, first in punishment for mankind’s sinful rejection of God’s will to disperse and second for mankind’s protection from a one-world government. The Jerome Biblical Commentary, vol. 2, p. 172, further reinforces this view by the use of diameziz in Act 2:3, which is a rare term, but also used in the Septuagint of Deu 32:8 for dispersion of the Tower of Babel. Believers are no longer separated by nationality! See note at Act 9:22.

“the crowd came together” This implies that this occurred in the Temple area because a great crowd could not fit in a small upper room or in the small streets of Jerusalem.

“And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born” This may have been a miracle of hearing, not necessarily speaking (cf. Act 2:8; Act 2:11). If this many people, all speaking a different language, spoke at the same time it would be confusion. This is the theological reversal of The Tower of Babel (cf. Genesis 11).

This is the Greek term dialektos (cf. Act 2:8), from which we get the English term “dialect.” Luke uses this term often in Acts (cf. Act 1:19; Act 2:6; Act 2:8; Act 21:40; Act 22:2; Act 26:14). It is used in the sense of “language.” However, in this context, dialect may be the intended meaning. These Jews heard about Jesus in their mother dialect. This was meant to be a confirming sign to them of the truthfulness of the new message about God and its universal inclusion!

Act 2:7; Act 2:12 Notice all the different terms expressing high emotions in this context.

1. sunech, “bewildered” (Act 2:6)

2. existmi, “amazed” (Act 2:7)

3. thaumaz, “astonished” (Act 2:7)

4. diapore, “perplexed” (Act 2:12)

“Why, are not all these who are speaking Galileans” This rhetorical question (expecting a “yes” answer) was asked because of their northern accent (i.e., dialect, cf. Mat 26:73). The word “why” reflects the Greek term idou (behold), used twenty three times in Acts and Luke.

Act 2:9 “Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia” All of these groups were from the Fertile Crescent (Mesopotamia), where Abraham was called from (Ur of the Chaldees, cf. Gen 11:28) and from where Israel and Judah had been exiled (Assyrian, Babylonian).

“Judea” Why is Judea listed between two other unrelated countries? Why is it listed without the article, which would be grammatically correct? Why would it surprise people of Judea that Galileans spoke Aramaic? Because of these questions many have that supposed an early scribal error has occurred and this term refers to another nation.

1. Tertullian, Augustine Armenia

2. Jerome Syria

3. Chrysostom, Erasmus India

4. for several modern suggestions see Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 293.

Act 2:9-10 “Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia” These were groups from modern Turkey.

Act 2:10 “Egypt and the district of Libya around Cyrene” These were groups from North Africa.

“from Rome” Jewish pilgrims who were converted on this occasion may have been the origin of the church in Rome.

“proselytes” This refers to Gentile converts to Judaism who were required

1. to keep the Mosaic law

2. that males be circumcised

3. to baptize themselves before witnesses

4. when possible to offer a sacrifice in the Temple

They were present in Jerusalem because all Jewish males were required to attend the three major feast days annually (cf. Exodus 23 and Leviticus 23).

Act 2:11 “Cretans” This was a large island in the Mediterranean close to Turkey. It may have stood as a collective term for all the islands of the Aegean.

“Arabs” This would refer to the descendants of Esau. There were numerous Arab tribes spread out across the southern Near East. This list represented to Jewish people of the first century the entire known world. It may be a metaphor similar to the seventy languages of the world as a Jewish symbol of all humanity (cf. Luke 10). This same idea is expressed in Deu 32:8 in the LXX.

Act 2:12 These pilgrims recognized this special event as a sign of significance. Peter seizes the moment to answer their questions.

Act 2:13 “They are full” This is a Periphrastic perfect passive indicative, which asserts that these disciples had drunk themselves into a state of drunkenness and they remained intoxicated.

“sweet wine” One explanation of the situation was that these followers of Jesus were drunk (cf. Eph 5:18 a). How did drunkenness explain the linguistic abilities? I am sure there was also an atmosphere of excitement and joy.

SPECIAL TOPIC: BIBLICAL ATTITUDES TOWARD ALCOHOL AND ALCOHOLISM

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

dwelling. Greek. katoikeo. As in Act 1:19. Not sojourners for the Feast, but Jews of the dispersion who had taken up their abode at Jerusalem, perhaps because of the expectation of the Messiah. Compare Luk 2:25, Luk 2:38.

at = in. App-104.

devout = pious. Greek. eulabes. Only here, Act 8:2, and Luk 2:25.

men. App-123.

out of. Greek. apo. App-104.

nation. Greek. ethnos. In Acts translated twelve times, “nation”; thirty times, “Gentiles”; once, “people” (Act 8:9); and once, “heathen” (Act 4:25).

under = of those under. App-104.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

5-13.] EFFECT ON THE MULTITUDE.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Act 2:5. , dwelling) These had not come merely to Pentecost [but were regular residents], although the word, dwelling, is limited in Act 2:9-10.[9] [They had come to Jerusalem to dwell there, for this reason, as it seems, because the time for the advent of the Messiah was completed; for which reason they were desirous to be present on the spot.-V. g.]-, Jews) For no one of those present was of the Gentiles, but all were Jews of various nations.-) Understand lands. Luk 17:24, note.

[9] For they were originally Jews of the dispersion, Parthians, etc.-E. and T.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

were: Act 2:1, Act 8:27, Exo 23:16, Isa 66:18, Zec 8:18, Luk 24:18, Joh 12:20

devout: Act 8:2, Act 10:2, Act 10:7, Act 13:50, Act 22:12, Luk 2:25

under: Deu 2:25, Mat 24:14, Luk 17:24, Col 1:23

Reciprocal: Est 1:22 – according Isa 33:13 – Hear Isa 52:10 – made Eze 26:2 – the gates Eze 36:38 – as the flock Eze 47:22 – and to the strangers Dan 9:7 – near Act 4:12 – under Rom 10:18 – Have they Jam 1:1 – scattered 1Pe 1:1 – the

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

5

These Jews were dwelling at Jerusalem temporarily only. They had come there to attend the feast of Pentecost as required by the law of Moses.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

How the Multitude were moved by the Miracle, 5-13.

Act 2:5. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Dwelling. The Greek word used here (), according to classical usage, would convey the notion that the foreign Jews here alluded to were residents in the city; but the context of the passage, while fully allowing this sense, forbids us to limit it to residents merely; for the words in Act 2:9, dwellers in Mesopotamia, etc., and in Act 2:10, strangers of (or better rendered from) Rome, clearly imply that these persons still had their homes in these distant lands, and were only present for a time in Jerusalem, most probably most of them on the occasion of the festival. It includes, then, those who dwelt there permanently, and strangers on a visit to the city.

Jews, devout men. Devout men(). The fact of their having left their country to dwell in the old centre of the theocracy, in the neighbourhood of the Temple, showed they were devout men in the Old Testament sense of the word (see Chrysostom in Meyer). Some of these men, influenced by strong religious sentiment, desirous probably of being near the Temple and passing the evening of their life in the Holy City, had permanently fixed their home in Jerusalem. The general and widespread belief, that the time had now come when Messiah should appear, no doubt had influenced many of these devout men.

Out of every nation under heaven. The Jews at this time were literally scattered over the whole world. Philo tells us how the Jews were dwelling in the greater number and in the more prosperous of the cities throughout the world. Agrippa, in Josephus, says: There was no nation upon earth which had not Jews dwelling among them.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

The fame of the foregoing miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit being instantly spread abroad in Jerusalem, and there being present at that time great multitudes of Jews, who had come from all parts of Judea, to the feast of Pentecost, and also many other Jews and proselytes born in other nations, in Mesopotamia, Cappadocia, Phrygia, and Pamphilia, who were now come up to worship the true God at Jerusalem; when they heard the apostles speak in their own language, which they never understood before, the wonderful works of God, in the death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ; some of them wondered to hear illiterate men speaking all languages; others derided the miracle, and imputed to drunkenness.

Here note, 1. The wisdom and providence of Almighty God, in so ordering the first publication of the gospel, that the fame thereof, and of that convincing miracle which gave authority thereunto, might be carried unto all nations by so many eye and ear-witnesses, as were worshipping at Jerusalem at this time: For there were now sojourning at Jerusalem, men out of every nation under heaven; that is, of every nation, where any Jews were scattered at this time throughout the world, there were some particular persons come up now to Jerusalem to worship God.

Note, 2. The commendatory character given of those persons, who from their several countries came up to the house of God in Jerusalem, to worship him there; they are styled devout men: And they received from God the reward of their piety and devotion. Had they staid at home, as many of their brethren no doubt did, they had not been witnesses of so wonderful and miracle for the confirmation of their faith as now they were.

Yet note, 3. The different influence and effect which this miracle of the Holy Spirit’s descent in fiery cloven tongues, had upon the minds of the people in Jerusalem. Some were struck into an extacy of admiration and awful wonder; others (the Scribes and Pharisees probably) scornfully deride, and impute the miracle to drunkenness, saying, These men are full of new wine. A senseless slander; for though excess of wine may give a man more tongue, yet not more tongues.

O! how have the holy operations of the blessed Spirit from the beginning been slandered and blasphemed; accounted the effects of drunkenness then, of enthusiasm or melancholy now!

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

The Audience Reaction

Moses instructed that all males be present for the feast of Pentecost, so it is no surprise that Luke would say, “Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven.” Luke listed at least fifteen separate nations represented on the day of Pentecost ( Act 2:5 ; Act 2:9-11 ). “The list of geographical names shows the diversity of the people to whom the apostles spoke, the provinces and locations mentioned lying in all directions from Jerusalem and representing a cross-section of the languages spoken in the entire Roman empire” (Coffman).

The coming of the Holy Spirit was effectively confirmed by the witnesses who came together because of the sound like a rushing, mighty wind and said they heard every man in the language in which he was born. The audience did not have to be told something unusual was happening. The apostles did not have to tell everyone that they had received, or gotten, as some say, the Spirit. Those from the fifteen nations mentioned by Luke heard them speaking in their own tongues, or languages. They also saw that which Christ poured out. Their surprise at what they heard and saw moved them to seek possible explanations. Some merely wondered at the meaning of the occurrences, while others said the apostles were drunk ( Act 2:6-7 ; Act 2:11-13 ; Act 2:33 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Act 2:5-13. And there were dwelling Or sojourning; in Jerusalem, Jews Now gathered from all parts, by the peculiar providence of God; devout Greek, , pious men, from every nation under heaven Should this be taken for an hyperbole, we have other instances in Scripture of the like way of speaking; as where we read of cities walled up to heaven, Deu 1:28; and of the dread of the Jews falling upon every nation under the whole heaven, Deu 2:25. But, not to insist upon it, that the Jews were then so numerous as to have spread through all countries, so that, as we read in Josephus, (Bell., Act 2:16,) there was not a people upon earth who had not Jews inhabiting among them; the expression here can signify no more than that there were some at Jerusalem, at that time, from all the several nations among whom the Jews were dispersed. Now when this was noised abroad When this strange report came to be circulated, as it presently was; the multitude came together From all parts of Jerusalem; and were confounded Were utterly astonished; because that every man Of this large and various assembly; heard one or other of them As they addressed themselves by turns to people of a different language; speak in his own language The language he had known from a child. And they marvelled At this wonderful event; saying one to another As they conversed upon it; Behold How unaccountable is this! are not all these which speak, Galileans? By birth and country? and how hear we every man While they direct their speech to so many different people, who are here come together out of so many nations, speaking to each of us in our own tongue? Parthians, &c. The reader, who is acquainted with ancient history, needs little or no information respecting the nations here mentioned. We may observe, however, that by the Elamites, the Persians are meant, and, by the dwellers in Mesopotamia, Bishop Cumberland thinks the remainder of the Jews are intended, who had been carried captive into Assyria, first by Tiglath-Pileser, (2Ki 15:29,) and afterward by Shalmaneser, and placed in the cities of the Medes, 2Ki 17:6. And in Judea The dialect of which greatly differed from that of Galilee: Asia The country strictly so called, Asia Minor: strangers of Rome Greek, , Roman sojourners, persons born at Rome, but now living at Jerusalem. These seem to have come to Jerusalem after those who are above mentioned. All of them were partly Jews by birth, and partly proselytes. Cretes The inhabitants of one island seem to be mentioned for those of all. We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God Meaning, probably, those which related to the incarnation, life, doctrine, and especially to the miracles, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ; together with the effusion of his Spirit, as a fulfilment of his promises, and the glorious dispensations of gospel grace: or, the surprising testimonies God had given to the divine mission of Jesus, and to his being the true Messiah, the Son of God. It seems, while the apostles and other disciples were discoursing on these marvellous events, they spoke to different classes of people there assembled in such a great variety of languages, and with so much readiness and propriety, as were perfectly astonishing and unexampled, even among the most learned of mankind. And they were all amazed and in doubt That is, the pious, or well disposed were; saying one to another, What meaneth this? What can possibly be intended by this unaccountable appearance; but others mocking The unbelievers begin with mocking, thence proceed to cavilling, Act 4:7; to threats, Act 2:17; to imprisoning, Act 5:18; to blows, Act 2:40; to slaughter, Act 7:58. These mockers appear to have been some of the natives of Judea, and inhabitants of Jerusalem, (who understood only the dialect of the country,) by the apostles immediately directing their discourse to them in the next verse. These men are full of new wine Greek, , sweet wine, as the word properly signifies. There was no new wine, or must, so early in the year as pentecost; as Beza and many others have observed. Thus natural men are wont to ascribe supernatural things to mere natural causes; and many times as impudently and unskilfully as in the present case. We are informed by Plutarch, that the ancients had ways of preserving their wine sweet a great while, and such wines are known to be very intoxicating.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

5. The circumstances of the present occasion were happily suited to this wonderful display of divine power, the like of which had never been witnessed, even in the astonishing miracles of Moses and of Jesus. (5) “Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem, Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven.” The native tongues of these Jews were those of the nations in which they were born, but they had also been instructed by their parents in the dialect of Judea. This enabled them to understand the tongues which were spoken by the apostles, and to test the reality of the miracle.

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

DOUBLE MIRACLE

5-9. On this occasion an unprecedented double miracle was wrought by the Holy Ghost on not only the speakers but all the hearers. This double miracle moved like a span of cyclones through the multitude, bringing the gospel with lightning velocity and unerring intelligibility to all. On the speakers was miraculously conferred the power to speak in all of the languages represented in that vast cosmopolitan assembly. Those ignorant and unlearned men and women preached fluently in languages which they knew not. Of course they knew substantially and experimentally what they were preaching, but they did not know the words and sentences they spoke.

In their dispersions the hundred and twenty men and women, all preaching with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven, spoke in the language of the people with whom they were providentially associated. An illiterate disciple happens to encounter a multitude of people speaking the Coptic language, as they were citizens of Egypt. She preaches fluently in Coptic, though she knows not a word of it. Bartholomew happens to encounter a multitude from Rome speaking the Latin language, of which he knows not a word, yet he preaches fluently in Latin. Thus there is a thorough accommodation to all the dialect vicissitudes of that cosmopolitan audience. As Peter was the leading speaker and the Greek not only the vernacular of the apostles, but the great learned language of the world, of course he delivered that memorable introductory sermon in that language. Then the hundred and twenty, dispersing in all directions, preached with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven in the language of the people they providentially met.

But there is another hemisphere of this wonderful double miracle wrought by the Holy Ghost in unutterable mercy to expedite the inauguration of the gospel dispensation and give it a supernatural impetus at the beginning, a glorious earnest of the coming millennium, as the filling of the heart with the Holy Ghost is really the millennial reign in the soul. Now the second hemisphere of this glorious miracle was wrought on that vast multitude from every nation under heaven. The supernatural power of the Holy Ghost wrought with the multitude a qualification in each human spirit, quickening the intellect and enabling every person to hear in his own native language.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Act 2:5-13. The Effect on Outsiders.The visitation has taken place in a house, but the noise is heard, not the speaking with tongues, all over the town; a crowd collects, made up of pious and thoughtful men, Jews of various lands, now dwelling at Jerusalem. Guided to the spot they stayed there in wonder, because each of them heard these Galileans, men of rude dialect, speaking the language of the country to which he belonged. The following catalogue of countries or of peoples goes round the map from the east to Juda, then to Rome by Asia Minor and by Egypt and North Africa, then come Jews again, but as the counterpart of proselytes, not as a nation; at the end Cretes and Arabians. Not counting the Jews, nor the Cretes and Arabians, who might be put in afterwards for completeness, there are twelve kinds of foreigners; and they all hear the Christians speaking in their own language. If the linguist inquires how many languages were necessary that each of these might hear his own, the reply is that Greek was understood by the educated all over the Empire; if the people in question were all Jews (Act 2:5) Greek was enough for them all. The gift of tongues as set before us in 1Co 1:4* has nothing to do with different languages, and the speech of Peter which follows says nothing of this. The narrative is accordingly symbolical; it conveys the idea that the Gospel, now preached for the first time, was destined for all nations, and that the Spirit was able to make all nations hear and understand it. Another opinion expressed in the crowd of wondering hearers, was that the phenomenon was due to intoxication. Paul (1Co 14:27 f.) tells us that the person who exercised the gift of tongues was generally unintelligible and unedifying, and therefore should have an interpreter. The above verdict might naturally occur to unsympathetic hearers, and the early Christians might often hear it, in connexion with these ecstatic utterances (p. 648).

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 5

Out of every nation under heaven; that is, from a great many of the neighboring nations, to which the Jews had emigrated.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

The amazement of the onlookers 2:5-13

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The Jews living in Jerusalem were probably people from the Diaspora (dispersion, residing outside the land of Palestine) who had returned to settle down in the Jewish homeland. Luke’s other uses of katoikountes ("living") are in Act 1:20; Act 7:2; Act 7:4; Act 7:48; Act 9:22; Act 11:29; Act 13:27; Act 17:24; Act 17:26; and Act 22:12, and these suggest permanence compared with epidemeo ("sojourning") in Act 2:10.

"It was . . . customary for many pious Jews who had spent their lives abroad to return to end their days as close to the Temple as possible." [Note: Neil, p. 73. Cf. Kent, p. 30, n. 9.]

A list of nations from which they had come follows in Act 2:9-10. The sound that attracted attention may have been the wind (Act 2:2) or the sound of the tongues speakers (Act 2:4). The Greek word translated "noise" in Act 2:2 is echos, but the word rendered "sound" in Act 2:6 is phones. The context seems to favor the sound of the tongues speakers. Act 2:2 says the noise filled the house where the disciples were, but there is no indication that it was heard outside the house. Also Act 2:6 connects the sound with the languages being spoken. The text does not clearly identify when what was happening in the upper room became public knowledge or when the disciples moved out of the upper room to a larger venue. Evidently upon hearing the sound these residents of Jerusalem assembled to investigate what was happening.

When they found the source of the sound, they were amazed to discover Galileans speaking in the native languages of the remote regions from which these Diaspora Jews had come. The Jews in Jerusalem who could not speak Aramaic would have known Greek, so there was no need for other languages. Yet what they heard were the languages that were common in the remote places in which they had lived. Perhaps the sound came from the upper room initially, and then when the disciples moved out into the streets the people followed them into the Temple area. Since about 3,000 people became Christians this day (Act 2:41) the multitude (Act 2:6) must have numbered many thousands. About 200,000 people could assemble in the temple area. [Note: J. P. Polhill, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 118, footnote 135; Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, p. 83.] This fact has led some interpreters to assume that that may have been where this multitude congregated.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)