KJV: Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
YLT: and others mocking said, -- 'They are full of sweet wine;'
Darby: But others mocking said, They are full of new wine.
ASV: But others mocking said, They are filled with new wine.
| Ἕτεροι | Others |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: ἀλλοιόω Sense: the other, another, other. |
|
| δὲ | however |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: δέ Sense: but, moreover, and, etc. |
|
| διαχλευάζοντες | mocking |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: διαχλευάζω Sense: to mock, deride, jeer. |
|
| ἔλεγον | were saying |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: λέγω Sense: to speak, say. |
|
| ὅτι | - |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ὅτι Sense: that, because, since. |
|
| Γλεύκους | Of new wine |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Neuter Singular Root: γλεῦκος Sense: the sweet juice pressed the grape, sweet wine. |
|
| μεμεστωμένοι | full |
|
Parse: Verb, Perfect Participle Middle or Passive, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: μεστόω Sense: to fill, be full. |
|
| εἰσίν | they are |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: εἰμί Sense: to be, to exist, to happen, to be present. |
|
Greek Commentary for Acts 2:13
Old verb, but only here in the N.T., though the simple verb (without δια dia) in Acts 17:32. Χλευη Chleuē means a joke. [source]
Sweet wine, but intoxicating. Sweet wine kept a year was very intoxicating. Genitive case here after μεμεστωμενοι εισιν memestōmenoi eisin (periphrastic perfect passive indicative), old verb μεστοω mestoō only here in the N.T. Tanked up with new wine, state of fulness. [source]
Of a different class. The first who commented on the wonder did so curiously, but with no prejudice. Those who now spoke did so in a hostile spirit. See on Acts 2:4. [source]
From χλεύη , a joke. Only here in New Testament. [source]
New wine ( γλεύκους ) [source]
[source]
Lit., “sweet wine.” Of course intoxicating. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Acts 2:13
From χλεύη , a jest. Only here in New Testament, though a compound, διαχλευάζω , mock, occurs, according to the best texts, at Acts 2:13. The force of the imperfect, began to mock, should be given here in the translation, as marking the outbreak of derision. In this remarkable speech of Paul are to be noted: his prudence and tact in not needlessly offending his hearers; his courtesy and spirit of conciliation in recognizing their piety toward their gods; his wisdom and readiness in the use of the inscription “to the unknown God,” and in citing their own poets; his meeting the radical errors of every class of his hearers, while seeming to dwell only on points of agreement; his lofty views of the nature of God and the great principle of the unity of the human race; his boldness in proclaiming Jesus and the resurrection among those to whom these truths were foolishness; the wonderful terseness and condensation of the whole, and the rapid but powerful and assured movement of the thought. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
Imperfect active of χλευαζω chleuazō a common verb (from χλευη chleuē jesting, mockery). Only here in the N.T. though late MSS. have it in Acts 2:13 (best MSS. διαχλευαζω diachleuazō). Probably inchoative here, began to mock. In contempt at Paul‘s statement they declined to listen further to “this babbler” (Acts 17:18) who had now lost what he had gained with this group of hearers (probably the light and flippant Epicureans). But others (οι δε hoi de). A more polite group like those who had invited him to speak (Acts 17:19). They were unconvinced, but had better manners and so were in favour of an adjournment. This was done, though it is not clear whether it was a serious postponement or a courteous refusal to hear Paul further (probably this). It was a virtual dismissal of the matter. “ It is a sad story--the noblest of ancient cities and the noblest man of history--and he never cared to look on it again” (Furneaux). [source]
Paul changes from participle to adjective. Old adjective, rare in the N.T., like μεστοω mestoō to fill full (only in Acts 2:13 in N.T.), stuffed full of (with genitive). Five substantives in the genitive (πτονου phthonou envy, as in Galatians 5:21, πονου phonou murder, and so a paronomasia or combination with πτονου phthonou of like sounding words, εριδος eridos strife, as in 2 Corinthians 12:16, κακοητιας kakoēthias malignity, and here only in N.T. though old word from κακοητης kakoēthēs and that from κακος kakos and ητος ēthos a tendency to put a bad construction on things, depravity of heart and malicious disposition. [source]
I. Passages Relating to the Gift of Tongues. Mark 16:17; Acts href="/desk/?q=ac+10:46&sr=1">Acts 10:46; Acts 19:6; 1 Corinthians 12:10, 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 13:1; 14. Possibly Ephesians 5:18; 1 Peter 4:11. II. Terms Employed. New tongues (Mark 16:17): other or different tongues ( ἕτεραι , Acts 2:4): kinds ( γένη ) of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:10): simply tongues or tongue ( γλῶσσαι γλῶσσα , Acts href="/desk/?q=ac+2:4&sr=1">Acts 2:4; Acts 10:46; Acts 19:6; 1 Corinthians 14:2, 1 Corinthians 14:4, 1 Corinthians 14:13, 1 Corinthians 14:14, 1 Corinthians 14:19, 1 Corinthians 14:27): to pray in a tongue ( προσεύχεσθαι γλώσσῃ , 1 Corinthians 14:14, 1 Corinthians 14:15), equivalent to praying in the spirit as distinguished from praying with the understanding: tongues of men and angels (1 Corinthians 13:1). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- III. Recorded Facts in the New Testament. (1.) The first recorded bestowment of the gift was at Pentecost (Acts href="/desk/?q=ac+10:44-46&sr=1">Acts 10:44-46. (3.) Certain disciples at Ephesus, who received the Holy Spirit in the laying on of Paul's hands, spake with tongues and prophesied, Acts 19:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- IV. Meaning of the Term “Tongue.” The various explanations are: the tongue alone, inarticulately: rare, provincial, poetic, or archaic words: language or dialect. The last is the correct definition. It does not necessarily mean any of the known languages of men, but may mean the speaker's own tongue, shaped in a peculiar manner by the Spirit's influence; or an entirely new spiritual language. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- V. Nature of the Gift in the Corinthian Church. (1.) The gift itself was identical with that at Pentecost, at Caesarea, and at Ephesus, but differed in its manifestations, in that it required an interpreter. 1 Corinthians 12:10, 1 Corinthians 12:30; 1 Corinthians 14:5, 1 Corinthians 14:13, 1 Corinthians 14:26, 1 Corinthians 14:27. (2.) It was closely connected with prophesying: 1 Corinthians 14:1-6, 1 Corinthians 14:22, 1 Corinthians 14:25; Acts 2:16-18; Acts 19:6. Compare 1 Thessalonians 5:19, 1 Thessalonians 5:20. It was distinguished from prophesying as an inferior gift, 1 Corinthians 14:4, 1 Corinthians 14:5; and as consisting in expressions of praise or devotion rather than of exhortation, warning, or prediction, 1 Corinthians 14:14-16. (3.) It was an ecstatic utterance, unintelligible to the hearers, and requiring interpretation, or a corresponding ecstatic condition on the part of the hearer in order to understand it. It was not for the edification of the hearer but of the speaker, and even the speaker did not always understand it, 1 Corinthians 14:2, 1 Corinthians 14:20-23,. It therefore impressed unchristian bystanders as a barbarous utterance, the effect of madness or drunkenness, Acts 2:13, Acts 2:15; 1 Corinthians 14:11, 1 Corinthians 14:23. Hence it is distinguished from the utterance of the understanding, 1 Corinthians 14:4, 1 Corinthians 14:14-16, 1 Corinthians 14:19, 1 Corinthians 14:27. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- VI. Paul's Estimate of the Gift. He himself was a master of the gift (1 Corinthians 14:18), but he assigned it an inferior position (1 Corinthians 14:4, 1 Corinthians 14:5), and distinctly gave prophesying and speaking with the understanding the preference (1 Corinthians 14:2, 1 Corinthians 14:3, 1 Corinthians 14:5, 1 Corinthians 14:19, 1 Corinthians 14:22). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- VII. Results and Permanence. Being recognized distinctly as a gift of the Spirit, it must be inferred that it contributed in some way to the edification of the Church; but it led to occasional disorderly outbreaks (1 Corinthians 14:9, 1 Corinthians 14:11, 1 Corinthians 14:17, 1 Corinthians 14:19 1 Corinthians 14:26-28, 1 Corinthians 14:33, 1 Corinthians 14:40). As a fact it soon passed away from the Church. It is not mentioned in the Catholic or Pastoral Epistles. A few allusions to it occur in the writings of the fathers of the second century. Ecstatic conditions and manifestations marked the Montanists at the close of the second century, and an account of such a case, in which a woman was the subject, is given by Tertullian. Similar phenomena have emerged at intervals in various sects, at times of great religious excitement, as among the Camisards in France, the early Quakers and Methodists, and especially the Irvingites. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
Late word from προπητης prophētēs and προπημι prophēmi to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter 1 Corinthians 14). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God‘s message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Discernings of spirits (διακρισεις πνευματων diakriseis pneumatōn). Διακρισις Diakrisis is old word from διακρινω diakrinō (see note on 1 Corinthians 11:29) and in N.T. only here; Romans 14:1; Hebrews 5:14. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called “gifts” today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1 Timothy 4:1; 1 John 4:1.). Divers kinds of tongues No word for “divers” in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, γενη genē) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (1 Corinthians 14:4) and was intelligible to God (1 Corinthians 14:2, 1 Corinthians 14:28). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (1 Corinthians 14:13): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern “tongues,” but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See notes on Acts 2:13-21; notes on Acts Acts 10:44-46; and note on Acts 19:6. The interpretation of tongues (ερμηνεια γλωσσων hermēneia glōssōn). Old word, here only and 1 Corinthians 14:26 in N.T., from ερμηνευω hermēneuō from ερμης Hermēs (the god of speech). Cf. on διερμηνευω diermēneuō in Luke 24:27; Acts 9:36. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it. [source]
No word for “divers” in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, γενη genē) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (1 Corinthians 14:4) and was intelligible to God (1 Corinthians 14:2, 1 Corinthians 14:28). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (1 Corinthians 14:13): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern “tongues,” but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See notes on Acts 2:13-21; notes on Acts Acts 10:44-46; and note on Acts 19:6. The interpretation of tongues (ερμηνεια γλωσσων hermēneia glōssōn). Old word, here only and 1 Corinthians 14:26 in N.T., from ερμηνευω hermēneuō from ερμης Hermēs (the god of speech). Cf. on διερμηνευω diermēneuō in Luke 24:27; Acts 9:36. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it. [source]
Present passive indicative of καταλαλεω katalaleō for which see 1 Peter 2:12 with εν ωι en hōi also. Peter may be recalling (Hart) his own experience at Pentecost when the Jews first scoffed and others were cut to the heart (Acts 2:13, Acts 2:37). [source]
Purpose clause with ινα hina and the first aorist passive subjunctive of καταισχυνω kataischunō old verb, to put to shame (Luke 13:17; 1 Peter 2:6).Wherein ye are spoken against (εν ωι καταλαλειστε en hōi katalaleisthe). Present passive indicative of καταλαλεω katalaleō for which see 1 Peter 2:12 with εν ωι en hōi also. Peter may be recalling (Hart) his own experience at Pentecost when the Jews first scoffed and others were cut to the heart (Acts 2:13, Acts 2:37).Who revile Articular present active participle of επηρεαζω epēreazō old verb (from επηρεια epēreia spiteful abuse), to insult, in N.T. only here and Luke 6:28.In Christ (εν Χριστωι en Christōi). Paul‘s common mystical phrase that Peter has three times (here, 1 Peter 5:10, 1 Peter 5:14), not in John, though the idea is constantly in John. Peter here gives a new turn (cf. 1 Peter 2:12) to αναστροπη anastrophē (manner of life). “Constantly the apostle repeats his phrases with new significance and in a new light” (Bigg). [source]