They spoke more than Aramaic and Greek. The people were amazed because those who first spoke in tongues were Galilaeans (Acts 2:7). According to Acts 4:13, when Peter and John were brought before the high priest and the kindred of the high priest (Acts 4:6), Peter and John were considered unlearned and ignorant.
So on Day of Pentecost, all who were gathered there were confounded (Acts 2:6) and they were all amazed and marvelled (Acts 2:7) because they heard these unlearned and ignorant Galilaeans speak in our own tongue, wherein we were born(Acts 2:9).
Parthians, and medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, (Acts 2:9).
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes (Acts 2:10).
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God (Acts 2:11).
Actually no, they didn’t. Unlearned and ignorant doesn’t equate to not being able to converse in another language. They were Hellenized Jews and also merchants of sorts (fishermen who presumably sold their catches) - no reason to think they weren’t familiar with Greek. If indeed, Peter traveled to Rome, he would have spoken Greek, not Latin.
If you examine the list you have above, there is not one language mentioned; in fact, nowhere in the entire Pentecost narrative is any one language ever mentioned by name. The list is of geographical places, various lands. If you look at the actual lands mentioned, they are specifically the lands of the Jewish Diaspora. The Diaspora can be divided between eastern and Western. The lands of the Western Diaspora had been Hellenized for centuries; Greek had long replaced any languages formerly native to those lands. So, many lands, only one language native to those lands. Something akin to say America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and England – many countries, but only one language: English (not an exact analogy as there are many ‘native’ language still spoken in these places, but you can kind of get the gist). Eastern Diaspora was Aramaic speaking. Jews in these countries were like any other immigrant people today, even here in America. They lived in ethnic communities, preserved their language as their cultural and religious identity much the same as say Spanish communities in the US do. Sure, many speak English in varying degrees, but the language at home is Spanish. Same with the Eastern Diaspora – sure, some spoke the language native to the country they were living in, but their ‘mother tongue’, the language used at home, the language they were born into, was Aramaic.
So, if the list does not describe linguistic diversity, why was it even included? Also, why were two major lands of the Diaspora seemingly conveniently ‘left out’ (Syria and Cyprus)?
The most prevalent school of thought by far is that the list was placed in the narrative for political reasons (with Syria purposely omitted, and the nations/territories listed in a very specific order). Indeed, this list from Luke, as one writer puts it, “is anti-Roman political propaganda witch advocates kenotic politics at its finest.”
Expanding on this idea in great detail is a paper written by a Martin Hengel of Tübingen University.
Rather than try to paraphrase from them, I’ve included the links to the articles below so the reader may see them in their entirety:
the john 3:30 group: Luke’s List of Nations, Acts 2:9-13
https://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/bbr/BBR_2000_b_01_Hengel_IoudaiaGeography.pdf
The "actual ability of speaking" in tongues is the gift of holy spirit which is given to every believer at the time he/she is born again.
The ability to speak a foreign language (the Biblical meaning of ‘speaking in tongues’) does not require one to be born again.
When the one and the selfsame Spirit energizes within the believer, the manifestation is the result. According to Acts 2:4, the Spirit gives the utterance.
The Spirit may indeed
inspire one what to say, but not the language used to say it in.
I wanted to clarify that the purpose of manifestation of tongues is not preaching or teaching. The Lord Jesus Christ gives the gift ministries for that purpose (Eph 4:11).
Yes, he may give the gift of ministries, but when one is ministering to either foreigners or in another country, s/he will need to learn the language spoken (‘speak with new tongues’).
Glossa does mean a language - never said it wasn't. The Spirit gives to our spirit a language to speak forth and that language is not known by the speaker.
Except, no matter how you slice and dice it, modern tongues is just not language.
When looking at ‘Corinthians’, one must keep in mind that, when you really get down to it, it’s simply a letter written by Paul in response to various issues happening in Corinth.
Being a multi-cultural and multi-lingual international crossroads city strategically situated on not one, but two seas (Aegean and Adriatic, I think), everyday communication in general must have been a pain; Greek was the language of Corinth and the “English” of its day. Most merchants would have spoken it in varying degrees, but it was probably not uncommon to walk down a main street and hear ten different languages in the matter of several hundred yards.
It’s unfortunate that we do not have a copy of the original ‘letter of complaint’ sent to him – I’m pretty sure it would instantly clear up the whole issue of “tongues”.
One can kind of imagine that section of the letter sent to Paul – “Hey, we have a situation here. When we’re trying to have a public worship, we got a bunch of foreigners attending that start praying aloud in their own languages – no clue what they’re saying, but it’s really disrupting the entire service. Please advise.”
One has to wonder if, in a very eloquent manner, Paul is sending him back a sort of “Captain Obvious” response: “Have them pray that they can learn enough Greek to make themselves understood so everyone can benefit; but obviously that’s not going to happen overnight. In the meantime, try and find an interpreter (again, so everyone can benefit), but if one can’t be found, tell him to keep quiet and pray silently so as not to cause any disruption.”
Throughout this passage in the letter, Paul is calling for clarity and understanding – something that in the main gathering places in a city such as Corinth, was probably an exception rather than the norm.
When it’s looked at in a more historical, real-life context, there just isn’t anything there that doesn’t refer to problems with real languages in a real-life situation.
