WHEN THE DAY of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.
5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: “Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11(both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” 12Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?”
13Some, however, made fun of them and said, “They have had too much wine.”
Original Meaning
THE SECOND CHAPTER OF ACTS introduces three of the most important keys to the entire book: the fullness of the Spirit (vv. 1–13), the evangelistic ministry of the church (vv. 14–41), and the community life of the believers (vv. 42–47). Each of these keys will occupy a full study in this commentary.
The fulfillment of Christ’s promise of the Holy Spirit appropriately takes place during a Jewish harvest festival, Pentecost (v. 1). This term (derived from the Gk., pentecoste, fiftieth) comes from the fact that the festival is celebrated on the fiftieth day after the Passover.1 It was one of the three Jewish pilgrimage festivals, when individuals were to appear before the Lord with gifts and offerings (Ex. 23:14–17); it celebrated the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest.2 It is appropriate that the event that was going to propel the gospel to the ends of the earth took place at a time when people from the ends of the earth were in Jerusalem.
We are not supplied specific details of the house (see v. 2) where the followers of Jesus met, neither are we told who was included in the “all” that were together when the Spirit descended (v. 1). Some manuscripts add “the apostles” here, but these are secondary manuscripts. The great fourth-century Bible expositor, John Chrysostom, thought that the one hundred and twenty of 1:15 were there,3 and this view is popular today.
The wind and fire that accompanied the gift of the Spirit (vv. 2–3) are common biblical symbols for the activity of the Spirit. The Greek and Hebrew words for “Spirit” can also mean “wind” and “breath.” In the valley of dry bones, wind and breath come and give life to dried-up bones. After that the Lord said, “I will put my Spirit in you and you will live” (Ezek. 37:1–14). According to Jesus, the blowing of the wind “illustrates the mysterious operation of the Spirit in effecting new birth”4 (cf. John 3:7–8). In both cases the wind was a symbol of regeneration.
In the prediction of baptism with the Holy Spirit by John the Baptist, the wind (by implication) blows the chaff away (Luke 3:16–17). This is a symbol of judgment. Similarly, fire in this same prediction, which burns up the chaff, is a symbol of judgment. In other words, like the coming of the gospel message (2 Cor. 2:15–16), the coming of Spirit means life to some and judgment to others (as we will see with Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5:3, 9).
Moreover, fire is also a symbol of the powerful presence of God, as both the fire at the burning bush (Ex. 3:2–5) and the pillar of fire at night (Ex. 13:21–22) indicate.
The separation of the tongues of fire “to rest on each of them” (v. 3) “seems to suggest that, though under the old covenant the divine presence rested on Israel as a corporate entity and upon many of its leaders for special purposes, under the new covenant, established by Jesus and inaugurated at Pentecost, the Spirit now rests on each believer individually.”5 This does not negate the importance of the corporate relationship with God, as Paul’s letters amply demonstrate. But from now on, the corporate arises out of a personal relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. This is in keeping with the prediction through Jeremiah that in the new covenant the law will be written on the hearts (Jer. 31:33).6
Two things happened to the disciples after the Spirit came: They “were filled with the Holy Spirit” and “began to speak in other tongues” (v. 4). The “tongues” are different from those described in 1 Corinthians 12–14 because, unlike there, “God-fearing Jews” from the Diaspora were able to understand what was being said. They exclaimed, “We hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” (Acts 2:11). The gift of tongues generally seems to have been used for praising God (see 1 Cor. 14). But this particular manifestation of the Spirit, in languages understood by the people, was most appropriate here since those who heard it were eager to listen to the preaching of the gospel. At the start of what may be called “the era of the Spirit,” he assisted in the work of witness in a way that depicts the gospel going to the ends of the earth. The sign fit in with the Spirit’s role in enabling the church’s worldwide witness (Acts 1:8). As a result, about three thousand people were “added to their number that day” (2:41).
Those who heard the praise of God in their own languages were devout Jews7 “from every nation under heaven” (v. 5). The list of nations given in verses 9–11 suggests that Luke “was speaking, as the biblical writers normally did, from his own horizon, not ours, and was referring to the Graeco-Roman world situated round the Mediterranean basin, indeed to every nation in which there were Jews.”8
The Greek for “staying in Jerusalem” could lend itself to the interpretation that only residents of Jerusalem are intended since these words are often used for permanent habitation. Howard Marshall has argued, however, that this expression does not need to exclude pilgrims from outside the holy city, especially since “residents of Mesopotamia” are mentioned in 2:9.9 True, there would have been many Jews of the dispersion resident in Jerusalem, seeing that “it was the wish of pious Jews of the dispersion to spend their last days on the soil of the holy land and to be buried there.”10 But there is also evidence from Josephus and others that large numbers of pilgrims came to Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost.11
In amazement the people point out that those who are speaking are “Galileans” (v. 7a). “Inhabitants of Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a backward locale (cf. Acts 2:7), peculiar first of all because of its dialect (Matt. 26:73), in which laryngeal sounds were swallowed.”12 Once again God had broken earthly stereotypes of greatness and chosen people not held in high esteem in society in order to lead in a historic event (see 1 Cor. 1:26–31). Three times we are told that the disciples spoke in the people’s “own language” (cf. vv. 6, 8, 11).13 This refers to the vernacular languages of the people rather than to the Greek that the Jews of the dispersion would have known.14
Verses 12–13 give the two reactions of those who heard the faithful proclamation of God’s word by the apostles. Some were touched and wanted to know more, asking, “What does this mean?” (v. 12). Others rejected the message and ridiculed what was said, indicated by the allegation, “They have had too much wine” (v. 13). The word translated “wine” means “sweet wine,” which is normally “new wine.” Yet this was not the time of the year for new wine. Some have suggested, therefore, that Luke was making a historical error here.15 Bruce, however, points out that “there were means of keeping wine sweet all the year round” and even quotes an ancient recipe that gives a method of doing this.16
It is surprising that, in the face of such a spectacular miracle, some should mock what they saw. But as we will see below, this is in keeping with the theology of rejection that is clearly present in Scripture. As J. A. Alexander points out, however, “it was this frivolous aspersion, rather than the serious inquiries of the devout Jews, that gave occasion to the great apostolical discourse which follows.”17
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF Pentecost. The experience of Pentecost is the key that unlocks the book of Acts. But what does it say to us today? (1) Note that, strictly speaking, this was not the birthday of the church. Richard Longenecker points to the fact that the word “church” (ekklësia) takes several different meanings in the Bible. If we take it to mean “the body of Christ” and “an instrument of service” used by God for his redemptive purposes, then the church was in existence before Pentecost. Longenecker goes on to explain what did become new. (a) “The relationship of the Spirit to the members of the body of Christ became much more intimate and personal at Pentecost (. . . John 14:17).” (b) “At Pentecost a new model of redemption was established as characteristic for life in the new covenant—one that, while incorporating both individual and corporate redemption, begins with the former in order to include the other.”18 Pentecost made religion into much more of a personal experience with Christ through the Holy Spirit than before.
(2) Pentecost also signaled that we as believers have a new power for ministry. In our study of 1:1–11 we saw the importance of the Holy Spirit for Christian ministry. There are many parallels between Luke’s description of the beginning of Christ’s public ministry in Luke 4 and the beginning of the church’s public ministry in Acts 2.19 We must have God’s anointing if we are to serve him (cf. comments on 1:1–8). Related to this is the fact that Pentecost brought to the church a new power for witness. Christ predicted this in 1:8, and Luke demonstrates the truth of this through the mighty wind and fire, the miraculous speech, Peter’s fearless message, and the unprecedented response to his message. The rest of the New Testament gives other ways in which the Spirit’s power is manifested in our lives (e.g., Rom. 8, which describes how the Spirit gives us victory over sin and life to our mortal bodies). But the great emphasis of Acts is the power we receive to proclaim the gospel.
(3) Pentecost also signals the breaking of barriers that have separated the human race since Babel, with the formation of a new humanity in Christ. In other words, Pentecost reverses what happened at Babel. In fact, as Conrad Gempf has shown, something greater happened. In a reversal of the scattering that took place at Babel, the Jewish pilgrim festivals, like Pentecost, brought people from the far corners of the earth to worship God. What is new here is that from now on, people would not need to come back to some central place to worship God—and in the Hebrew tongue. Rather, they could go to the far corners of the earth and worship God in their own languages. Moreover, people no longer need to build up to the heavens in search of the significance they lost when they were thrown out of the garden of Eden. God has now sent his Spirit down to us and lifted our experience to a new level of significance. “Babel and Eden are not ‘undone’ as much as they are redeemed and their negative effects nullified.”20
Pentecost, then, tells us that we, today, can have an intimate experience of God and can manifest power in ministry. Moreover, the barriers that divided the human race have been broken so that a new humanity is on the way to being created.
Tongues as a sign. It seems clear that speaking in tongues was a regular, if not the usual, sign of the coming of the Spirit in Acts (2:4; 10:46; 19:6). But the sign mentioned in Acts 2 seems to be different to that discussed in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14, for the language there was not understood by the people. Peter Wagner reports of several missionaries who have been given this gift of speaking in the unknown tongue of the people among whom they were ministering.21
In light of its three occurrences in settings where people received the Spirit, it is not surprising that many consider tongues to be the necessary sign of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Yet the fact that many who give obvious evidence of being filled with the Spirit have not spoken in tongues should make us wary of insisting on tongues as the necessary sign, especially since nowhere in the Bible is it clearly stated that tongues must accompany Spirit baptism. Note that the tongues many refer to as the sign of their experience in the Spirit is of the unintelligible type described in 1 Corinthians 12–14, not the understandable tongues described in Acts 2. It is, however, a gift that has lifted many Christians to a new level of intimacy, joy, and power in their experience of God. Over this we should rejoice.
The reality of rejection. We expressed surprise that so clear a demonstration of God’s power as that which took place at Pentecost could have elicited a mocking response (v. 13). But rejection of the gospel is a theme found throughout Acts. Beginning with the story of Judas’s defection in the chapter 1, this theme appears in all but chapters 3 and 10—two chapters that give incomplete stories completed in chapters 4 and 11 respectively and which contain the rejection theme. Therefore, it is important for us to anticipate rejection and not be disillusioned when it comes. If everyone is pleased with what we do, we have probably not been truly faithful to God. The gospel and God’s truth are so radically different to the thinking of the world that those who follow him should expect some to oppose them.
The form the rejection takes in our passage is significant, because it presents a common approach to God’s message. In the face of unmistakable evidence of God’s power, some attribute it to wine! Jesus encountered a similar type of criticism when his opponents said he was doing his miraculous work through the power of Beelzebub (Mark 3:22). This ridicule occasioned a severe discourse by Christ on the nature of his enemies’ unbelief, climaxing in his statement about the unforgivable sin (3:23–30).
The Bible contains an advanced theology of this type of rejection, especially relating to Jewish rejection of God’s message. When God called Isaiah, he told him that not only would some reject his message, but some would also be confirmed in their chosen path of blindness and rebellion because of his message (Isa. 6:10):
Make the heart of this people calloused;
make their ears dull
and close their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts,
and turn and be healed.
Jesus himself indicated that some would respond to his parables in this way (Matt. 13:11–15). According to Paul, the apostles are “the smell of death” to some and “the fragrance of life” to others (2 Cor. 2:16). Thus, when rebellious people in Acts 2 see the Pentecostal phenomena and hear Peter preach, their rebellion is intensified. Their mocking response reminds us that whenever we follow God faithfully, we will face rejection.
Contemporary Significance
INTIMACY WITH GOD and joy in worship. As noted above, Pentecost has opened the door for us to have an intimate and supernatural experience of God. To many, however, even within the evangelical fold, Christianity is restricted to entering the kingdom through a rational acceptance of the truth of the gospel, followed by their labor to live according to the Bible. This is indeed an important ingredient to Christianity. But Pentecost and its working out in Acts tells us that there is “something more.” The greatest contribution of the Pentecostal movement (and the Wesleyan Holiness movement that preceded it) is that it gave back to the church the importance of a subjective experience of Christ through the Holy Spirit in one’s personal life and in corporate worship.22 At Pentecost, when the disciples were filled with the Spirit, they began “declaring the wonders of God” (v. 11). When we sense, through experience, that “God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us” (Rom. 5:5), our hearts are filled with joy, and this joy expresses itself in praise.
Singing, of course, is one of the supreme expressions of our joy over the intimacy we have in Christ. Just as love songs express the joy of human love, Christian songs express the joy we have in our love relationship with God. John Wesley has said, “Singing is as much the language of holy joy as praying is of holy desire.” Paul connects singing directly with the fullness of the Spirit in Ephesians 5:18–20, presenting it as an outflow of such fullness: “Be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord” (NASB). “Speaking,” “singing,” and “making melody” are participles in the Greek related to the imperative, “be filled.” Christians, then, must constantly seek to recapture what Pentecost signified: vibrant intimacy with God and joyous worship that ensues from it.
The Reformed tradition has emphasized the majesty of God and the awesomeness of worshiping such a great and transcendent God. This key biblical emphasis, it is true, may be lacking in some branches of the Pentecostal movement. But the great contribution of the Pentecostal movement was to bring back the heart and soul into worship, especially into Western Anglo-Saxon worship (Afro-Caribbean worship seems to have been able to preserve this in a most meaningful way).
One danger of an emphasis on subjective experience in worship, however, is that it can satisfy people so much that they neglect important Christian disciplines of day-to-day life, such as striving after personal and social holiness and mastering the Scriptures. It is possible for Christians to worship God with what seems to be deep intimacy on Sunday, and then to behave in unchristian ways in their workplaces on Monday (e.g., adopting unethical business methods and exploiting labor). They concentrate so much on subjective experience that they neglect the hard work of pursuing a Christian mind that informs their lives and vitally influences the decisions they make and the way they behave.
Yet this abuse of something good should not cause us to refrain from seeking it. Nor must we think that using our minds in worship and devotion is in some way superior to using the heart. Paul serves as a powerful example of a thorough Christian intellectual who also had ecstatic, subjective experiences with God (e.g., 2 Cor. 12:1–6). In fact, the great truths of the gospel on which a Christian intellectual meditates can be the springboard for spiritually and emotionally uplifting experiences, as the doxologies in Paul’s letters indicate (Rom. 11:33–36).
A heartening feature in the recent revival of vibrancy in worship is that it has not been confined to groups generally characterized as Pentecostal or charismatic, with whom it originated. In most renewal movements in the history of the church, what began as a distinctive of one group soon went mainstream and raised the quality of life in the entire church. One of the most meaningful and joyous experiences of worship I have had was at the Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, pastored by a well-known Reformed preacher, John Piper, who has written extensively from his Calvinistic perspective. What especially thrilled me at this service was observing how the Calvinistic emphasis on the transcendence and majesty of God was harmonized with the Pentecostal emphasis on intimacy with God and vibrancy in worship.
I must add here that many evangelical churches are now emphasizing the entertainment aspect of worship by having well-rehearsed performances at their worship services. Top quality music and drama does befit the worship of our supreme and glorious God. The detailed and extensive instructions in the Old Testament regarding worship (e.g., in Exodus and Leviticus) give evidence of the fact that God does desire beauty and quality in worship. But while quality can be an expression of spirituality, it can never be a substitute for it. All Christians should give due attention to having quality in worship. But more importantly they must ensure that the Holy Spirit has ample opportunity to fill the service with the sense of God’s presence and to lead the people to a deep experience of God. I fear that sometimes what we aim at is to entertain people through our quality. This can be an effective means of attracting people in our entertainment-oriented society, but it should never so consume our efforts that it becomes a substitute for seeking God’s fullness in worship, as reflected in the Pentecostal experience in Acts.
Experiencing Pentecostal power today. We have said that the heart of the power of Pentecost in Acts is power for ministry. This power, however, is not the power of a magician that can be called up according to the will of the Christian. In fact, even in the era of the Spirit, Christians are susceptible to frustrating experiences of many kinds (Rom. 8:18–25), over which they have no power. As I write this book, I have to submit to five-to eight-hour power cuts each day, which severely curtails my writing plans. But that is the lot of everyone in our country, from which I cannot immune myself. We suffer, we feel weak and get sick, we have sorrow, and finally we die. But in our ministry there will be power. A dear friend I know was used powerfully in the area of the miraculous during a time when his wife and, for a time, he were sick physically.
The way the power of Pentecost for ministry is expressed in our lives depends, among other things, on the spiritual gifts we have received (see 1 Cor. 12). Believers do not have all of these gifts accessible to them all the time. This is particularly true of the power to perform miracles; those who have that gift will also be given the faith that enables them to pray boldly for a miracle. But those who do not have the gift of miraculous powers can still pray in faith during times of need and be surprised to see God answer their prayers. At its heart, the power of Pentecost is an experience of the immediacy of God. God is indeed with us, and we can experience his nearness and powerful enabling to minister in the Spirit.23
The breaking of barriers. We have already seen that Pentecost overcame the effects of Babel. We saw how when the disciples praised God, they did not do so in the Greek language, which most of the people knew. Instead, they praised God in the vernacular dialects of these people. The significance of this work of the Spirit, in a world torn by cultural disharmony, has been presented powerfully by British Baptist pastor Roy Clements.24 He notes how important to people their culture is. Different movements have tried to create a single world order, but in doing so, “they are implicitly imperialistic, involving the domination of one culture over another.” Even with Islam, the unity that is forged is dominated by Arab culture and language.
But, as Clements goes on to way, “culture refuses to be dominated in that way.” He asks: “Is there a power that can unify the divided nations of the earth without subjugating them? Is there a way of making people one, without at the same time making them all the same?” To which he answers: “It is precisely that sort of unity which the Holy Spirit brings. And he declares his intention in the matter right at the beginning, on the day of Pentecost, by the miracle he performed.”
Clements’ point is that
the Pentecostal tongues were a pointer to the way in which the Holy Spirit was going to break down social barriers and create an unprecedented kind of internationalism. Unlike the imperialisms of men, the Spirit had no ambition to homogenize the peoples of the world into a uniform Christian culture.
Instead, the Spirit created “a new kind of social identity altogether”—the “fellowship of the Holy Spirit.” Thus, in the book of Acts we see the growth of “one church in diverse cultures.” All of this looks forward to the day when there will be a “a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb” (Rev. 7:9).
Pentecost, then, gives us a hint of how the revolutionary breaking of social and other barriers by the gospel will work out in practical life. The implications are immense. As we take the gospel to the peoples of the world, we should not expect people to subject themselves to a language like English (which is today what Greek was in the first century). We need to learn the heart language of people and to share the gospel with them in that language. All the advances in technology are no substitute to the hard work of identifying with a culture and learning to understand and appreciate its distinctives—hard work indeed in a culture that values efficiency so highly and tries so hard to eliminate frustration.
Yet while we work hard to present the gospel in culturally appropriate ways, we should never isolate any Christians from the church in the rest of the world. We must show them that they are part of a large worldwide family, who share a deep unity in diversity that will outlast all human barriers until we go to our heavenly home, where people from all cultures will be at home.
Most of the members in the church my wife and I attend are converts from Buddhism. They usually find translations of Western hymns difficult to sing. When I lead worship in church, I try to use at least one hymn translated from English, though I usually choose a hymn that fits our style of music, where the drum is the most important instrument. The reason for choosing a translated hymn is so that our people will realize that they are part of that worldwide family called “the body of Christ.” We have a westernized English language congregation that meets in our church as well. And we regularly have combined services. These are difficult services to plan; they call for hard and creative thinking if we want to avoid boredom. But the risk is worth taking, given the need to affirm that we are one despite our cultural differences. All of this applies to the multicultural societies in the West too.
The use of “Galileans” to help usher in the era of the Spirit is also a sort of breaking of barriers. It shows that when God chooses to do something marvelous, he does not necessarily wait till a person high in earthly esteem comes along. He does use such people, of course, as we see with God’s using Paul. But he is not limited to them. The key to usefulness is the fullness of the Spirit, and the Spirit can bring life to anyone he chooses, provided that he or she is open to this enlivening.
We who live in this era of the Spirit should develop the dual discipline of disregarding the social and economic background of people when thinking of their potential and of looking at them through the eyes of faith. We must envision the possibilities of grace in their lives as the Spirit exercises his power over them. This difficult discipline is challenged by the prejudices we imbibe from our cultures and by the humiliation we receive when people we believe in fail to live up to their potential. But it is fed by the unmistakable evidence from Scripture and from history that God can use people, whom the world wrote off as useless, to be his mighty servants.
Are tongues for today? We have argued that tongues was probably the key sign of the filling of the Holy Spirit in Acts, but that the Scriptures do not suggest it was the inevitable sign of this filling. Is speaking in tongues valid for today? Some answer this with a firm “No,” based on Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 13:8–10: “But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away . . . but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.” Many of them claim that tongues ceased with the close of the apostolic age25 or with the completion of the canon of Scripture.26 Numerous scholars have countered the arguments for this “cessationist” view.27 In my estimation, the strongest case can be made for the view that the “perfection” that will make tongues and prophecy unnecessary will be achieved when Christ returns. Tongues has not disappeared from the church after the apostolic age. Note the conclusion of church historian Cecil M. Robeck Jr.: “Speaking in tongues has always been in the Church, although with varied levels of expression and acceptance.”28
Unfortunately, tongues has been the focal point of much division in the church, especially since the Pentecostal movement burst onto the scene at the turn of this century. Far too many have taken one of two extreme positions: that all Christians should practice this gift, or that no members of their group or church should practice it. We should beware of both charismania (an overemphasis on charismatic gifts) and charisphobia (a fear of charismatic gifts), and always ask ourselves this question: Do I have all that God wishes for me to enjoy? We must leave it to God to give us what gifts he desires for us. Though it is legitimate to ask God for gifts we would like to have (1 Cor. 12:31; 14:1), we should not insist on receiving gifts that the Lord (who sovereignly decides what gifts to give us [1 Cor. 12:11; Eph. 4:7]) has not assigned to us.
Responding to rejection. There can be no doubt that if we proclaim God’s truth today, we too, like Jesus and the first disciples, should expect rejection and misrepresentation. Jesus said, “Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also” (John 15:20). When people reject what we say, our tendency is to ask, “What is wrong with me?” While that is always an appropriate question to ask, it is also important to remember that there will always be people who reject God’s message. If we do not remember this, we may become so upset by such people that our ministry to the receptive will also be affected.
As a youth worker I sometimes speak at evangelistic gatherings, where some in the audience are not only hostile to what I am saying but also poke fun at it. Once I had a section of the audience start clapping a minute or two after I started, indicating that it was time for me to stop! I must try to not permit such reactions to deprive others of the life-giving message of Christ that I am presenting.
Such rejection can also make us bitter. We reason: “After all I am sacrificing to share the good news with these people, look at the way they treat me. They are unworthy of my love.” We might end up hating them and becoming bitter inside. This can especially happen after we face mockery, which is often more painful than outright rejection. For when people reject what we say, we know that at least they have considered us important enough to merit a serious response. Mockery, however, indicates that we are being treated with disdain. We must learn the discipline of anticipating such responses and of refusing to let them make us bitter and discouraged.