Bible Gem 1649 – How Did Paul and Barnabas Understand Lycaonian if they Didn’t Speak it? (Acts 14:11-18)

When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in their local dialect, “These men are gods in human form!” They decided that Barnabas was the Greek god Zeus and that Paul was Hermes, since he was the chief speaker. Now the temple of Zeus was located just outside the town. So the priest of the temple and the crowd brought bulls and wreaths of flowers to the town gates, and they prepared to offer sacrifices to the apostles. But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard what was happening, they tore their clothing in dismay and ran out among the people, shouting, “Friends, why are you doing this? We are merely human beings—just like you! We have come to bring you the Good News that you should turn from these worthless things and turn to the living God, who made heaven and earth, the sea, and everything in them. In the past He permitted all the nations to go their own ways, but He never left them without evidence of Himself and His goodness. For instance, He sends you rain and good crops and gives you food and joyful hearts.” But even with these words, Paul and Barnabas could scarcely restrain the people from sacrificing to them.

Acts 14:11-18

Paul and Barnabas have moved into a region where they spoke a different language or dialect. It is unlikely that Paul and Barnabas knew the language. We are told in verse 11 that the people were speaking in the Lycaonian language. How is it that Paul and Barnabas knew how to speak this little known language used in a backwater region of the Roman empire? Thus one must ask how did communication take place between Paul and Barnabas and the crowd in Lystra? Especially when people were getting excited and talking in their own mother tongue.

Why are there two translations of Acts 14:14:-

1. “when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard what was happening. . .”
2. “when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of what was happening . . .”

A few of you responded to my challenge in Gems 1648 with comments like “I am not sure whether it makes any difference ‘heard what was happening’ and ‘heard of what was happening’. The intention is clear ‘they heard’! Others of you I suspect were too busy to even think about such things. You are happy to just hear the conclusion.

Heard (1) :

• (EMTV) But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard this, they tore their garments and rushed in to the crowd, crying out
• (GNB) When Barnabas and Paul heard what they were about to do, they tore their clothes and ran into the middle of the crowd, shouting,
• (LITV) But Paul and Barnabas, the apostles, hearing, tearing their garments, they sprang into the crowd, crying out,

Heard of (2) :

• (AMP) But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their clothing and dashed out among the crowd, shouting,
• (ISV) But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting,
• (NASB) But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out

Just what is going on here? There is a subtle variation among these translations to which we need to pay attention.

The difference between these two approaches is important to note. Did the communication take place directly (heard) or indirectly through another person or persons {heard of}. I.e. It was reported to them rather than them hearing directly. Most commentators take the point of view that Paul and Barnabas didn’t understand themselves because they didn’t speak the language. Thus they needed to be told what was happening by others in the crowd who then interpreted the words and the subsequent actions to them. Thus they argue there must have been a delay between when the words were spoken and when Paul and Barnabas finally clicked as to what was going on around them. The versions which opt for “heard of” or “heard about” imply it was a second hand reporting of the meaning of what was said in Lycaonian. The versions which choose the plain meaning of “heard”, imply they were hearing directly what was said rather than hearing about it. The same construction is used in Acts 13:48. This verse is rightly translated “when the Gentiles heard this (directly) . . . It is never translated “heard of” or “heard about” in any translation. So why translate the same construction “heard of” or “heard about” in Acts 14:14? Ah because an assumption is made that Paul and Barnabas couldn’t possibly have understood what the crowd were saying. It was only as preparations were being made for the sacrifice that they came to understand the significance of what was happening.

Notice some of the other variations for handling the meaning:

• (CEV) When the two apostles found out about this, they tore their clothes in horror and ran to the crowd, shouting:
• (ERV) But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, understood what the people were doing, they tore their own clothes. Then they ran in among the people and shouted to them:
• (GW) When the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard what was happening, they were very upset. They rushed into the crowd
• (NLT) But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard what was happening, they tore their clothing in dismay and ran out among the people, shouting,
• (MSG) When Barnabas and Paul finally realized what was going on, they stopped them. Waving their arms, they interrupted the parade, calling out,

“Found out about this”, through someone else telling them what was said and what preparation were being made.

“Understood what the people were doing“, “heard what was happening”, suggests it was only when Paul and Barnabas understood the significance of the preparations being made, they had not understood just from the words alone.

“Finally realized what was going on“. Implies the realization of the interpretation of the people’s action had taken a while to dawn on Paul and Barnabas and it was only as it became clear that they had to rush forward to stop the action.

• What did you make of it all?
• What conclusions did you come to about what actually happened there in Lystra?

What Luke wrote tells us plainly that Paul and Barnabas heard and understood what was said by the crowd in the Lycaonian language. Now how did they do that if they did not know the Lycaonian language? My friend Tim sent me B. Ward Powers’ paper on the background to this event analyzing the question as to whether Paul and Barnabas understood directly or indirectly. Powers suggests we have a parallel here in Acts 14 with the events of Acts 2:7-11. Powers’ conclusion is that each time the gospel was preached in the Book of Acts in situations where the hearers spoke a variety of different languages, the gift of tongues was operative to aid the communication process. The nature of the gift of tongues in these cases was not a non-human language understood only by a select minority of people but something akin to what happened at Pentecost where the disciples were speaking in a human language which was heard by the hearers as their own tongue. I handled the two-fold nature of that miracle when I covered that passage in Acts 2. The miracle took place not only in the tongue of the speaker but also in the ear of the hearer. Powers argues surely we have the same phenomenon happening here in Lystra. Ward Powers suggests “the most probable scenario to be drawn from the text itself is that Paul and/or Barnabas did understand the Lycaonian language because of possessing the gift of tongues. They were not however immediately privy to the decision of the priest of Zeus . . . to respond to the mood of the crowds and to set in place the preparations for the sacrifice. It was when they heard this (because they did understand Lycaonian) that Paul and Barnabas took immediate action to halt the impending sacrifice. . . The significant factor in their success was that they were yelling at the crowds in their own mother-tongue.”

Powers makes a strong case for the fact that most commentators come to a consensus that the missionaries, Paul and Barnabas didn’t know and understand Lycaonian and therefore conclude that understanding must have come from others needing to relay the meaning to them. Or by their own interpretation once Paul & Barnabas had witnessed the preparations being made and finally realized what was happening at which time they took action. Powers quotes F. F. Bruce who wrote “The apostles evidently did not at first understand what the crowds were saying, and realized it only when they saw the preparations that followed.” This only after the preparations had reached an advanced stage and their intentions had become evident to the eye.

I totally agree with Ward Powers that the gift of tongues was in operation here. Luke didn’t need to spell it out but subtilely draws comparisons between Paul and Peter. We will deal with that in the next Gem. I prefer to give you the first step in this analysis first to give you both a chance to digest it and/or to make your comments and ask your questions before we move on to draw it all to a conclusion.

I have learned over the years that there is often treasure buried in a Bible verse with which I conclude I am familiar and consider nothing else could be mined from it.

Ian Vail

When dealing with the Bible, always be prepared to be surprised.

Ian Vail

The commentators and experts in the Law often miss little gems because their minds are set on certain standard interpretations.

Ian Vail

Be prepared to weigh up and evaluate new perspectives on what most consider is a closed case.

Ian Vail

Be bold enough to consider what Luke has written for us and simply weigh up the words on the page for yourself.

Ian Vail

Then ask the Holy Spirit to point out the things you should take notice of.

Ian Vail

When you prohibit failure you kill innovation.

Paul Scanlon