Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 2:6
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
6. Now when this was noised abroad ] Rather, And when this sound was heard. though not the same word as is used for sound in Act 2:2, yet is never found in the sense of a report or rumour, as is given by the A. V. It is used for crying aloud, as in the mourning at Rama and Christ’s cry on the cross (Mat 2:18), or in John the Baptist’s preaching (Mar 1:3), and of voices from heaven frequently (Mat 17:5; Mar 1:11; Luk 3:22; Act 9:4, &c.), of the sound of the wind which is used as a figure for the gift of the Spirit in Christ’s conversation with Nicodemus (Joh 3:8), and constantly of the heavenly voices in the book of the Revelation (Act 1:10, Act 5:2; Act 6:6, &c.).
The sound which was sent forth, though heard around in the city, was evidently such as could be traced to a central spot, for to the dwelling of the Apostles, led by the sound, the multitude congregated. It would need but a brief space for a crowd to assemble, and all the new comers found among the disciples, now divinely prepared to be Christ’s heralds, some who were declaring what had come to pass, and the great things which God had wrought with them, in the different languages of the lands where the strangers had been born. This was clearly not a proclamation of the wonderful works of God in some one language, which the Spirit, acting upon the hearers, caused them to appreciate as if it were their own, for in that way the gift of the Holy Ghost ought to have been described as poured out, not on the speakers but on the listeners.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
When this was noised abroad – When the rumor of this remarkable transaction was spread, as it naturally would be.
Were confounded – sunechuthe. The word used here means literally to pour together, hence, to confound, confuse. It is used:
(a)Of an assembly or multitude thrown into confusion, Act 21:27;
(b)Of the mind as perplexed or confounded, as in disputation, Act 9:22; and,
(c)Of persons in amazement or consternation, as in this place. They did not understand this; they could not account for it.
Every man heard them speak … – Though the multitude spoke different tongues, yet they now heard Galileans use the language which they had learned in foreign nations. His own language. His own dialect – dialekto. His own idiom, whether it was a foreign language, or whether it was a modification of the Hebrew. The word may mean either; but it is probable that the foreign Jews would greatly modify the Hebrew, or conform almost entirely to the language spoken in the country where they lived. We may remark here that this effect of the descent of the Holy Spirit was not special to that time. A work of grace on the hearts of people in a revival of religion will always be noised abroad. A multitude will come together, and God often, as he did here, makes use of this motive to bring them under the influence of religion. Curiosity was the motive here, and it was the occasion of their being brought under the power of truth, and of their conversion. In thousands of cases this has occurred since. The effect of what they saw was to confound them, to astonish them, and to throw them into deep perplexity. They made no complaint at first of the irregularity of what was done, but were all amazed and overwhelmed. So the effect of a revival of religion is often to convince the multitude that it is indeed a work of the Holy One; to amaze them by the display of his power; and to silence opposition and cavil by the manifest presence and the power of God. A few afterward began to cavil Act 2:13, as some will always do in a revival; but the mass were convinced, as will be the case always, that this was a mighty display of the power of God.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 6. When this was noised abroad] If we suppose that there was a considerable peal of thunder, which followed the escape of a vast quantity of electric fluid, and produced the mighty rushing wind already noticed on Ac 2:2, then the whole city must have been alarmed; and, as various circumstances might direct their attention to the temple, having flocked thither they were farther astonished and confounded to hear the disciples of Christ addressing the mixed multitude in the languages of the different countries from which these people had come.
Every man heard them speak in his own language.] Use may naturally suppose that, as soon as any person presented himself to one of these disciples, he, the disciple, was immediately enabled to address him in his own language, however various this had been from the Jewish or Galilean dialects. If a Roman presented himself, the disciple was immediately enabled to address him in Latin-if a Grecian, in Greek-an Arab, in Arabic, and so of the rest.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Noised abroad; either the miraculous winds were heard, or the report of what had happened was spread abroad.
Were confounded; either out of shame that they had slain Christ, whom God thus extraordinarily glorified; or out of admiration at so extraordinary a matter.
Every man heard them speak in his own language; probably, not that the same words spoken by the apostles were diversified according to every ones understanding, for then the miracle had been wrought in their auditors, and not in the apostles; but that the apostles did speak to every one in their proper and most intelligible language: and this was the gift of tongues, which for some time after also was continued in the church.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Now when this was noised abroad,…. Or “when this voice was made”; referring either to the sound, as of a mighty rushing wind, which came from heaven; and might not only be heard by those in the house, into which it came, but by the inhabitants of the city, as it came down from heaven; so the Arabic version renders it, “when the aforesaid sound was made”: or else to the apostles’ voice, and their speaking with divers tongues; which being heard by some, was told to others, and a rumour of it being made through the city,
the multitude came together; to the house, or temple, where the disciples were; and this multitude did not consist only of the devout Jews, before mentioned; but of others who scoffed and mocked at the apostles, and who had been concerned in the crucifying of Christ:
and were confounded; or “confused”; they ran and came together in a disorderly and tumultuous manner; the whole city was in an uproar, the assembly on this occasion was a perfect mob; their numbers were so large, that they were ready to thrust each other down, and trample one another under foot: the Vulgate Latin adds, “in mind”; they did not know what to think of things, they were so astonished at what they heard, that they were scarcely themselves; they were as persons stupid and senseless; being filled partly with shame and confusion, and partly with wonder and amazement, that these illiterate men, the followers of Jesus of Nazareth, whom they had crucified, and whose disciples they had in so much contempt, should have such extraordinary gifts bestowed on them:
because that every man heard them speak in his own language; which shows, what has been before observed, that one spake in one language, and another in another language; or the same person sometimes spoke one language, and sometimes another; so that in course, all languages were spoken by them; whence it appears, that it was not one language only which was spoken by the apostles, which men of different languages heard and understood, as if it was their own; for then the miracle must have been in the hearers, and not in the speakers; and the cloven tongues, as of fire, should rather have sat on them, than on the disciples; and these men be said to be filled with the gifts of the Holy Ghost, rather than they.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
When this sound was heard ( ). Genitive absolute with aorist middle participle. Note this time, not as in verse 1. originally meant sound as of the wind (Joh 3:8) or an instrument (1Cor 14:7; 1Cor 14:8; 1Cor 14:10), then voice of men. The meaning seems to be that the excited “other tongues” of verse 4 were so loud that the noise drew the crowd together. The house where the 120 were may have been (Hackett) on one of the avenues leading to the temple.
Were confounded (). First aorist passive indicative of or , to pour together precisely like the Latin confundo, to confound. The Vulgate has it mente confusa est. It is an old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts five times (Acts 2:6; Acts 9:22; Acts 19:32; Acts 21:27; Acts 21:31).
In his own language ( ). Locative case. Each one could understand his own language when he heard that. Every one that came heard somebody speaking in his native tongue.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
When this was noised abroad [ ] . Wrong. Lit., And this sound having taken place. Rev., correctly, when this sound was heard. The sound of the rushing wind.
Were confounded [] . Lit., was poured together; so that confound (Latin, confundere) is the most literal rendering possible. Used only by Luke and in the Acts. Compare Act 19:32; Act 21:31.
Heard [] . Imperfect, were hearing.
Language [] . Rather, dialect; since the foreigners present spoke, not only different languages, but different dialects of the same language. The Phrygians and Pamphylians, for instance, both spoke Greek, but in different idioms; the Parthians, Medes, and Elamites all spoke Persian, but in different provincial forms.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Now when this was noised abroad,” (genomenes de tes phones tautes) “Now when this came about, when the sound had been heard, and the witnessing gifts began to be spoken in every native language of Jewish dwellers in Jerusalem,” to even those temporarily dwelling there.
2) “The multitude came together,” (sunelthen to plethos) “The multitude (the mass population of Israel) came closely together,” like a herd of sheep or cattle huddling at a time of storm.
3) “And were confounded,” (kai sunechuthe) “And they were confounded, astounded, or in near shock of surprise,” with uncertainty of mind and disposition what this Holy Spirit witnessing all meant, Joh 1:11-12; Joh 5:42; Their eyes had been blinded by the god of this world, 2Co 4:3-4.
4) “Because that every man heard them speak in his own language.” (hoti ekouson heis hekastos te idia dislekto lalounton auton) “Because they of the multitude (each one) heard them speaking intelligibly in his own dialect,” in the language and dialect of his own nation, place of ethnic birth. It appears that the disciples began to obey the Lord in “being witness unto Him” as afore-commanded, Act 1:8. The witnessing was with endued power of the Holy Ghost so that each person to whom they witnessed of Jesus heard in the language or dialect of his own native land, Luk 24:49. This appears to be a fulfillment of Prophecy, Deu 28:49; Isa 28:11-12.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
6. When this was noised abroad. Luke saith thus in Greek, This voice being made; but his meaning is, that the fame was spread abroad, whereby it came to pass that a great multitude came together. For if one after another in divers places, and at divers times, had heard the apostles speaking in divers tongues, the miracle had not been so famous; therefore they come altogether into one place, that the diversity of tongues may the better appear by the present comparison. There is a further circumstance also here to be noted, that the country (and native soil) of the apostles was commonly known, and this was also commonly known, that they never went out of their country to learn (86) strange tongues. Therefore, forasmuch as one speaketh Latin, another Greek, another the Arabian tongue, as occasion was offered, and that indifferently, and every one doth also change his tongue, the work of God appeareth more plainly hereby.
(86) “ Ut peregrinas linguas discere potuerint,” so as to be able to learn foreign tongues.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(6) When this was noised abroad. . . .Better When there had been this voice, or utterance. The word for voice is never used for rumour or report in the New Testament; always of some utterancehuman (Mat. 3:3; Gal. 4:20), angelic (1Th. 4:16; Rev. 5:11), or divine (Mat. 3:17; Mat. 17:5). In Joh. 3:7 (see Note there) we find it used, in the same connection as in this verse, for the voice or utterance of the Spirit.
Were confounded.The word is peculiar to the Acts (Act. 9:22; Act. 19:32). If we were to draw a distinction between two words of cognate meaning with each other and with the Greek, confused would, perhaps, be a better rendering than confounded.
Every man heard them speak.The verb is in the imperfect. They went on listening in their amazement as one after another heard the accents of his own language.
In his own language.Another word peculiar to the Acts. (See Note on Act. 1:19.) It stands as an equivalent for the tongue in Act. 2:11, but was used for a dialect, in the modern sense of the term, as well as for a distinct language.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
6. Noised abroad Literally, when this sound occurred; not the rumour of the event, or the loud voices of the speakers, but the sound from heaven, in Act 2:2.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Act 2:6. Every man heard them speak, &c. Some commentators of note, both antient and modern, have maintained that they spoke only one language, that is, Hebrew, or Syro-Chaldaic; but that the people heard them every one in their own language. This is really making the miracle consist in the hearing, and not in the speaking, and seems so groundless, that it does not need any laboured confutation. Our Saviour promised, Mar 16:17 that they should speak with new tongues, &c. And St. Luke here plainly asserts, Act 2:4 that they did speak with other tongues, or in other languages. The same thing is either supposed or plainly asserted by St. Paul, 1Co 12:10; 1Co 12:28; 1Co 12:30 and 1Co 14:2-39. The mistake seems to have arisen from this and the 8th verse. But St. Luke did not intend to say, that any one of the apostles spoke more languages than one at a time, nor that they spoke one language, and the people heard one or many others; but his plain meaning is, that one of them spoke one language, and another another, and so on; and that different apostles addressed themselves to men of different nations at the same time; or that one apostle addressed himself to men of different nations one after another; by which means all the foreigners heard their own native language spoken distinctly and intelligibly; and not only the languages spoken, but the Christian doctrine also plainly delivered to them in their own language.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Act 2:6 . ] this sound , which, inasmuch as points back to a more remote noun, is to be referred to the wind-like rushing of Act 2:2 , to which also . carries us back. Comp. Joh 3:8 . Luke represents the matter in such a way that this noise sounded forth from the house of meeting to the street, and that thereby the multitude were induced to come thither. In this case neither an earthquake (Neander) nor a “sympathy of the susceptible” (Lange) are to be called in to help, because there is no mention of either; in fact, the wonderful character of the noise is sufficient. Others, as Heinrichs, Kuinoel, Bleek, Schulz, Wieseler, Hilgenfeld, think that the loud speaking of the inspired is here meant. But in that case we should expect the plural, especially as this speaking occurred in different languages; and besides, we should be obliged to conceive this speaking as being strong, like a crying, which is not indicated in Act 2:4 ; therefore Wieseler would have it taken only as a definition of time , which the aorist does not suit, because the speaking continues. Erasmus, Calvin, Beza, Castalio, Vatablus, Grotius, Heumann, and Schulthess take in the sense of . Contrary to the usus loquendi ; even in Gen 45:16 it is otherwise.
mente confusa est (Vulgate), was perplexed . Comp. Act 9:22 ; 1Ma 4:27 ; 2Ma 10:30 ; Herod, 8:99; Plat. Ep. 7, p. 346 D; Diod. S. 4:62; Lucian. Nigr. 31.
] annexes to the more indefinite the exact statement of the subject. Comp. Joh 16:32 ; Act 11:29 al. ; Jacobs, ad Achill. Tat. p. 622; Ameis on Hom. Od. x. 397; Bernhardy, p. 420.
] is here also not national language , but dialect (see on Act 1:19 ), language in its provincial peculiarity. It is, as well as in Act 2:8 , designedly chosen, because the foreigners who arrived spoke not entirely different languages , but in part only different dialects of the same language. Thus, for example, the Asiatics, Phrygians, and Pamphylians, respectively spoke Greek, but in different idioms; the Parthians, Medes, and Elamites, Persian, but also in different provincial forms. Therefore, the persons possessed by the Spirit, according to the representation of the text, expressed themselves in the peculiar local dialects of the . The view that the Aramaic dialect was that in which all the speakers spoke (van Hengel), appears from Act 2:8 ; from the list of nations, which would be destitute of significance; from (Act 2:10 ), which would be meaningless; and from Act 2:11 , [123] as well as from the opinions expressed in Act 2:12-13 , which would be without a motive as an exegetical impossibility, which is also already excluded by in Act 2:6 .
] not, of course, that all spoke in all dialects, but that one spoke in one dialect, and another in another. Each of those who came together heard his peculiar dialect spoken by one or some of the inspired. This remark applies in opposition to Bleek, who objects to the common explanation of . , that each individual must have spoken in the different languages simultaneously. The expression is not even awkward (Olshausen), as it expresses the opinion of the people comprehended generally, and consequently even the summary is quite in order.
[123] Where neither in itself nor according to ver. 8 can mean what van Hengel puts into it: as we do with our own tongues .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
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.
Ver. 6. Were confounded ] Or troubled, transported, amazed, and amused, , as Act 2:7 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
6 .] Whatever may mean, one thing is clear, that it cannot mean, ‘ this rumour’ (‘when this was noised abroad ,’ E. V.: so also Erasm., Calv., Beza, Grotius, &c.), which would be unexampled (the two passages cited for this sense from the LXX are no examples; Gen 45:16 ; Jer 27 :(50) 46). We have then to choose between two things to which might refer: (1) the or Act 2:2 , to which it seems bound by the past part. (compare Act 2:2 , ), which would hardly be used of a speaking which was still going on when the multitude assembled: compare also Joh 3:8 ; and (2) the speaking with tongues of Act 2:4 . To this reference, besides the objection just stated, there is also another, that the voices of a number of men, especially when diverse as in this case, would not be indicated by , but by : compare Luke’s own usage, even when the voices cried out the same thing, Luk 23:23 , , . And when he uses the sing., he explains it, as in ch. Act 19:34 , . So that we may safely decide for the former reference . The noise of the rushing mighty wind was heard over all the neighbourhood, probably over all Jerusalem.
] including the scoffers of Act 2:13 , as well as the pious strangers: but these latter only are here regarded in the and in the . . On these latter words see above on Act 2:4 . Each one heard , i.e. either various disciples speaking various tongues, each in some one only : or the same persons speaking now one now another tongue . The former is more probable, although the latter seems to agree with some expressions in 1Co 14 , e.g. Act 2:18 (in the rec. and perhaps even in the present text).
] Observe ref. Genesis.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 2:6 . : “when this sound was heard,” R.V. “Hic idem quod comm [119] 2,” so Wetstein, who compares for in this sense Mat 24:31 , 1Co 14:7-8 (2Ch 5:13 ), and so most recent commentators ( cf. Joh 3:8 ); if human voices were meant, the plural might have been expected. But the word in singular might refer to the divine voice, the voice of the Spirit, cf. Mat 3:17 ; Mat 17:5 . The A.V., so too Grotius, following Erasmus, Calvin, render the word as if , but the two passages quoted from LXX to justify this rendering are no real examples, cf., e.g. , Gen 45:16 , Jer. 27:46. : a characteristic word of St. Luke, occurring eight times in his Gospel, seventeen in Acts, and only seven times in rest of the N.T.; on the frequency with which St. Luke uses expressions indicative of fulness, see Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium , pp. 40, 102. In inscriptions the word seems to have been used not only of political but of religious communities, see Deissmann, Neue Bibel-studien , pp. 59, 60 (1897), and see below on Act 15:30 . from ( ) only found in Acts, where it occurs five times ( cf. also , Act 19:29 ), see Moulton and Geden, sub v. For its meaning here cf. Gen 11:7 ; Gen 11:9 , 1Ma 4:27 , 2Ma 13:23 ; 2Ma 14:28 ; Vulg., mente confusa est . : only in the Acts in N.T. The question has been raised as to whether it meant a dialect or a language. Meyer argued in favour of the former, but the latter rendering more probably expresses the author’s meaning, cf. Act 1:19 , and also Act 21:40 , Act 22:2 , Act 26:14 . The word is apparently used as the equivalent of , Act 2:11 , A. and R.V. “language”. As the historian in his list, Act 2:9-10 , apparently is following distinctions of language (see Rendall, Acts , p. 177, and Appendix, p. 359), this would help to fix the meaning of the word here. Wendt in revising Meyer’s rendering contends that the word is purposely introduced because , Act 2:3-4 , had just been employed not in the sense of language but tongue, and so might have been misunderstood if repeated here with . On the other hand it may be urged that some of the distinctions in the list are those of dialect, and that St. Luke intentionally used a word meaning both language and dialect.
[119]omm. commentary, commentator.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
when, &c. Literally this voice (Greek. phone) having come.
multitude. Greek. plethos. Occurs seventeen times in Acts, translated multitude, save Act 28:3, “bundle”.
confounded. Greek. sunchuno. Only here, Act 9:22; Act 19:32; Act 21:27, Act 21:31.
every man, &c. = they heard them speaking, each one.
language. Greek. dialektos. See note on Act 1:19.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
6.] Whatever may mean, one thing is clear,-that it cannot mean, this rumour (when this was noised abroad, E. V.: so also Erasm., Calv., Beza, Grotius, &c.), which would be unexampled (the two passages cited for this sense from the LXX are no examples; Gen 45:16; Jeremiah 27 :(50) 46). We have then to choose between two things to which might refer:-(1) the or Act 2:2, to which it seems bound by the past part. (compare Act 2:2, ), which would hardly be used of a speaking which was still going on when the multitude assembled: compare also Joh 3:8;-and (2) the speaking with tongues of Act 2:4. To this reference, besides the objection just stated, there is also another, that the voices of a number of men, especially when diverse as in this case, would not be indicated by , but by : compare Lukes own usage, even when the voices cried out the same thing, Luk 23:23, , . And when he uses the sing., he explains it, as in ch. Act 19:34, . So that we may safely decide for the former reference. The noise of the rushing mighty wind was heard over all the neighbourhood, probably over all Jerusalem.
] including the scoffers of Act 2:13, as well as the pious strangers: but these latter only are here regarded in the and in the . . On these latter words see above on Act 2:4. Each one heard ,-i.e. either various disciples speaking various tongues, each in some one only: or the same persons speaking now one now another tongue. The former is more probable, although the latter seems to agree with some expressions in 1 Corinthians 14, e.g. Act 2:18 (in the rec. and perhaps even in the present text).
] Observe ref. Genesis.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 2:6. , voice) concerning which Act 2:4, and also Act 2:2 treat. Comp , , Exo 4:8, the voice [intimation] of the first sign; Psa 19:3, There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard.- , the multitude) of which Act 2:5 speaks.-, was confounded) There was a variety of men, and a variety of feelings produced in their minds.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
was noised abroad: Gr. voice was made
the multitude: Act 3:11, 1Co 16:9, 2Co 2:12
confounded: or, troubled in mind, Mat 2:3
Reciprocal: Gen 11:1 – was Dan 3:27 – the princes Dan 4:1 – unto all Mar 2:1 – and it Act 9:21 – amazed 1Co 14:22 – for a
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6
When this was noised abroad. I believe the pronoun “this” refers to the circumstance as a whole, not merely to the “sound,” for the text states only that it “filled the house,” not the whole vicinity. But such a performance as happened on that occasion could not but be reported by those nearest the scene, and that would bring the multitude to the place to see “what it was all about” When they got to the place they were con founded, which means they were confused or amazed, to discover that these men could all so speak that each of them in the multitude could understand the speakers, although no two of them spoke the same tongue, whenever they used that of the country where they were born.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 2:6. Now when this was noised abroad; or better rendered, And when this sound was heard. Calvin, Beza, and the translators of the English Version have understood these words in the sense of Now when this report arose; the meaning of the Greek word, however, leads us to the right sense of the passage. When this sound, i.e. of the rushing mighty wind, was heard, no doubt, over all the neighbourhood, probably, as Alford well suggests, over all Jerusalem (Meyer, De Wette, Lange, Alford, Hackett, Gloag, adopt this sense of the words).
The multitude came together. The house (Act 2:2) may have been on one of the avenues to the temple, thronged at this time by a crowd of early worshippers (Hackett).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
6-12. “And when this sword occurred, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because each one heard them speaking in his own dialect.” The historian here seems to exhaust his vocabulary of terms to express the confusion of the multitude upon witnessing the scene. Not content with saying they were confounded, he adds, (7) “And all were amazed and marveled, saying to one another, Behold, are not all these are speaking Galileans? (8) And how do we hear, each one in our own dialect in which we were born? (9) Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites; and those inhabiting Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, (10) Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya about Cyrene; and Roman strangers, both Jews and proselytes, (11) Cretes and Arabians; we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” Not yet satisfied with his attempts to express their feelings, Luke adds, (12) “And they were all amazed, and perplexed, saying one to another, What does this mean?”