Acts 2 13

Acts 2:13 kjv

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

Acts 2:13 nkjv

Others mocking said, "They are full of new wine."

Acts 2:13 niv

Some, however, made fun of them and said, "They have had too much wine."

Acts 2:13 esv

But others mocking said, "They are filled with new wine."

Acts 2:13 nlt

But others in the crowd ridiculed them, saying, "They're just drunk, that's all!"

Acts 2 verses

Acts 2 13 meaning

Acts 2:13 reveals a divisive response to the miraculous speaking in tongues on the Day of Pentecost. While many were amazed and perplexed (Acts 2:12), a distinct group reacted with open ridicule, accusing the apostles and other Spirit-filled believers of being intoxicated. The core meaning conveys a dismissive and scornful explanation of a supernatural event, attributing divine power to mere human excess and loss of self-control. It highlights the natural human tendency to reject or explain away that which is beyond natural understanding, particularly when it challenges existing paradigms or appears unusual.

Acts 2 13 Context

Acts chapter 2 describes the dramatic event of Pentecost, where the Holy Spirit descends upon the disciples in Jerusalem. This marks the inauguration of the church, fulfilling the prophecies of Joel and Jesus' promise to send the Spirit. The immediate effect is that the disciples begin speaking in other tongues, which are intelligible languages recognized by the diverse crowd gathered for the feast. The scene evokes a wide range of reactions: some are amazed and perplexed, others are bewildered, and a final group, referenced in verse 13, chooses ridicule. This verse directly precedes Peter's sermon, which interprets the phenomenon as the work of the Holy Spirit, not drunkenness, thereby refuting the scornful accusation and declaring the resurrection of Jesus. Historically, accusations of intoxication were common for unusual or ecstatic behavior, providing a readily available, dismissive explanation for the naturally inexplicable. The setting of the Jewish Feast of Pentecost drew Jews from all over the Roman world, making the understanding of diverse languages particularly significant.

Acts 2 13 Word analysis

• But others (οἱ δὲ ἕτεροι, hoi de heteroi): The Greek word heteroi (ἕτεροι) specifically refers to "other different ones" as opposed to alloi (ἄλλοι) meaning "other of the same kind." This highlights a distinct group with a different opinion and reaction from those who were amazed and perplexed (v. 12). It underscores the sharp division in the crowd's response. This implies a conscious decision by some to be contrary to the spirit of inquiry.
• jeered (διαχλευάζοντες, diachleuazontes): This verb, from diachleuazo (διαχλευάζω), is a strong compound verb indicating more than just casual mockery. The prefix dia- intensifies the action, implying thoroughly or vehemently mocking, making a public spectacle of ridicule, or expressing complete contempt. It suggests a sustained and active scorn rather than a passive observation or a polite questioning. It reflects hostility.
• and said (ἔλεγον, elegon): The imperfect tense of the verb "to say" suggests that this was not a singular statement but potentially repeated or ongoing, characteristic of a group jeering in unison or continuing to articulate their derision. It emphasizes the active and prolonged nature of their scoffing.
• They are full (Μεστωμένοι εἰσίν, Mestōmenoi eisin): Mestoomai means to be filled or replete. Here it's a perfect passive participle, suggesting a state of being completely filled or saturated, indicating that they were completely under the influence of something, in this case, new wine. It’s an accusation implying utter surrender to a substance.
• of new wine (γλεύκους, gleukous): This term gleukos (γλεῦκος) specifically refers to "new wine," which is unfermented or recently fermented wine, often still sweet. In the ancient world, it was believed to be more intoxicating than aged wine, perhaps due to the rapid, less stable fermentation process, or simply because it was drunk fresh and in larger quantities during festivals. This makes the accusation particularly cutting: they weren't just drunk, but foolishly so, having imbibed too much fresh, sweet wine which quickly affected them. It also suggests impulsivity and a lack of refined taste.

Words-group analysis:

• But others jeered and said: This phrase contrasts sharply with the "amazed and perplexed" group in verse 12. It establishes two distinct reactions to the same divine event, foreshadowing the ongoing divide in how people would respond to the Gospel message. This immediate opposition is a theological and social reality in Acts.
• "They are full of new wine.": This accusation serves as a direct dismissal of the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. By attributing the visible manifestation of speaking in tongues to mere drunkenness, the mockers attempt to desacralize the event and reduce it to human folly. It represents the worldly mind's attempt to explain spiritual phenomena through purely material and debased terms. This polemic against spiritual manifestations is critical, as Peter must explicitly refute it. The choice of "new wine" rather than just "wine" adds a nuance of perceived raw, untamed inebriation, suggesting a lower form of drunkenness.

Acts 2 13 Bonus section

The accusation of drunkenness connects to a broader cultural context where ecstatic states were sometimes associated with altered mental states induced by substances or rituals in pagan cults (e.g., Dionysian mysteries). However, the disciples' speech, though appearing incoherent to the scorners, was actually comprehensible to many, discrediting the idea of mere drunken babbling. Peter’s rebuttal in Acts 2:15, "For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day," serves as a direct, rational counter-argument, highlighting that public intoxication at such an early hour (around 9 AM) was socially uncommon and improper, especially during a religious festival. This also points to the clear and purposeful nature of the Spirit's work versus the disorder of true drunkenness, a contrast emphasized by Paul later in Eph 5:18. This immediate human rejection, as a default explanation for the divine, provides an important theological boundary: the Holy Spirit's work is always ordered, purposeful, and directed towards God's glory, never towards personal debauchery.

Acts 2 13 Commentary

Acts 2:13 captures the immediate, negative, and cynical response to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. While some observed with wonder and bewilderment, this particular group responded with overt ridicule and mockery, attributing the spiritual phenomenon of speaking in tongues to simple inebriation. Their use of "new wine" suggests a specific, scornful jab, implying a crude, unsophisticated, and potent intoxication rather than refined drunkenness. This verse is crucial because it highlights the fundamental human inability or unwillingness to recognize divine intervention. When confronted with the extraordinary, humanity often resorts to derision, explaining away the miraculous with the mundane or the depraved. This accusation is precisely what Peter must address and refute in his subsequent sermon, clarifying that the events are a fulfillment of prophecy, empowered by God's Spirit, not by alcohol. It sets the stage for the Gospel message as one that is often met with both belief and rejection, even contempt, mirroring the world's reception of Christ himself.

• Example: This pattern continues today where supernatural experiences in Christian gatherings (e.g., healing, prophecy) are sometimes dismissed as emotionalism, mental illness, or charlatanism by skeptics who refuse to consider a divine explanation.