Acts 15, Part 3
Notes
Transcript
36 And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” 37 Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. 38 But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. 39 And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. 41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
The world is full of conflict, and most conflict is by far selfish and evil. However, there is an honest conflict, an honest holding of different opinions. This passage is an excellent study of the latter, that is, of honest conflict.
1. The cause of honest conflict (v. 36–38).
2. The sad result of honest conflict: division and loss (v. 39).
3. The good result of honest conflict: God overrules—two mission teams were sent forth (v. 39–41).
Cause of Honest Conflict
Cause of Honest Conflict
36 And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” 37 Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. 38 But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work.
Note two significant points.
1. Honest conflict arises from a genuine concern. The concern is not personal, not selfish, not self-serving. The conflict does not exist because a person is …
• exerting his authority
• trying to get his own way
• resisting change
• maintaining tradition
• seeking his own purposes
• jealous of the other person
• seeking to keep things as they are
This very fact is clearly seen between Paul and Barnabas. Paul was the person who made the suggestion to revisit the mission churches, and Barnabas agreed. He was just as determined to go as Paul was (v. 37). They both had a genuine concern for the Lord’s mission. In fact, the concern was as deep as it could be. They were both determined to visit “every city where [they had] preached the word of the Lord.” Their concern was all-embracing, not willing that any should be left untouched or slighted in the ministry.
The point is that each man was as concerned as the other. Their concern for the Lord’s work was genuine.
2. Honest conflict arises from a genuine difference, a difference that focuses upon how best to carry out the mission of the Lord. This is critical to see.
⇒ The difference was not over the mission. Every believer is to be concerned and committed to the mission of the Lord, to visit his brothers in “every city were [he has] preached the word of the Lord.” Every church is to be exhorted and helped in every way possible in every generation. The difference cannot and must not be in the mission. If it is, then the conflict is not honest; it is false and selfish.
⇒ The difference was over method, how to best carry out the mission.
This difference is clearly seen in what happened to Paul and Barnabas.
a. Barnabas believed the best way to accomplish the task was to take Mark along. This fact is evident from three things.
⇒ First, Mark had failed and disproven himself once (see note 6—Acts 13:13).
Now Paul and his companions set sail from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia. And John left them and returned to Jerusalem,
Barnabas never would have insisted on Mark going along unless he knew Mark had recommitted his life—not insisted as strongly as he did. The Greek says he stuck to his insistence. Note something else as well: Mark desperately wanted to go; wanted Barnabas to continue to take a stand for him. Apparently Mark felt strongly that God wanted him to be a missionary and he wanted a second chance. He wanted a chance to redeem and prove himself. Barnabas, the son of consolation, the great servant of God who was always reaching out to help those under attack even as he had Paul, reached out to help another young disciple (Acts 9:27; 11:25–26).
⇒ Second, Barnabas loved Paul dearly. He had been a spiritual father or brother to Paul, more so than anyone else, and he had witnessed God gifting Paul to take the lead in worldwide evangelism. Barnabas rejoiced in all he had witnessed as God had matured and used Paul. Barnabas never would have opposed Paul unless he was convinced he was right.
⇒ Third, Barnabas had already been wrong once in differing with Paul (cp. Gal. 2:11–13). When Peter came down to Antioch to visit the church, he joined right in, fellowshipping and eating with the Gentiles. But some of the Judaizers who came down later criticized Peter; and Peter withdrew from eating with the Gentiles. The conflict had become so sharp that even Barnabas was affected and withdrew from eating with the Gentiles. Just when this happened is unknown, but the heavy weight of Scripture is that it had happened before the second missionary journey began.
The point is this: Barnabas would not be opposing Paul over taking Mark unless he genuinely differed, being thoroughly convinced of his position.
b. Paul differed with Barnabas. Very simply, he believed that a deserter was a poor example for young churches who needed to be strengthened.
Again, the point to see is this: the conflict between Paul and Barnabas was honest. From the Scripture, both men were as determined as they could be to carry out the mission of the Lord. The only question was how best to do it; in their particular case, who was really needed to do the job most effectively?
Thought 1. As long as men are on the earth, there will be conflict. There always has been and always will be. Tragically, the conflict is usually selfish. The believer must always search his heart and make sure his differences with others are pure, completely unselfish.
Conflict is never good; it is always bad. But when we hold honest differences, being thoroughly convinced of God’s leadership, conflict cannot be avoided. When this happens, each party has to move on, trusting the Lord to take charge of the other party and to work all things out for good.
Sad Result of Honest Conflict
Sad Result of Honest Conflict
39 And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus,
Three results are seen in the experience of Paul and Barnabas, results that are tragically too common.
1. There was “sharp contention” (paroxusmos). The idea is that of differing to the point of suffering pain. Contrary to the picture usually painted of the conflict, the picture seems to be that both men were hurting. The difference was sharp and both hearts were cut deeply. Each man was thoroughly convinced that he was right before the Lord; therefore, each argued strongly for his position. This does not mean that they were cutting each other with sharp and ugly words. This is important to note, for sharp words should never be spoken among believers. But the opposing positions and convictions cut and hurt both hearts. They loved and respected each other, and their sharp conflict seemed irreconcilable. There seemed to be no solution.
2. There was the loss of each other. This fact is often forgotten, but should not be. The two men loved and respected each other, greatly so. Few men ever mean to each other what Barnabas and Paul meant to each other. When Paul needed help, Barnabas was the only believer who stepped forward to help him. Barnabas was the spiritual brother or father to Paul. Barnabas had taken Paul under his wings and …
• stood up for him against all other believers (Acts 9:27)
• nurtured him in the faith and ministry (Acts 11:25–26)
• seen God bless his efforts, moving Paul to the forefront in carrying the gospel to the world (Acts 13:9; 13:14–16)
Paul owed so much to Barnabas, he would never have allowed the conflict to divide them unless he was thoroughly convinced he was right. And Barnabas loved Paul so much the same was true of him. The conflict was an honest conflict, but the results were tragic. Two dear brothers, so strong in the Lord and so caring for each other, were splitting up their ministry. Their only hope was that God would overrule and show the one who was wrong that he was mistaken, forgiving him and continuing to use him just as effectively as before.
The question naturally arises: Who was wrong? The answer is not known with absolute certainty. But Paul evidently misjudged. And the church’s failure to commend Barnabas and Mark was apparently a tragic failure.
⇒ Mark did redeem himself. He is later seen serving with both Paul and Peter (Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11; Phile. 24; 1 Pt. 5:13).
⇒ Paul spoke affectionately of Barnabas, acknowledging his great ministry in writing to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 9:6).
Thought 1. A believer is to make every effort possible to avoid conflict. He is to do all he can to live and serve in peace with his Christian brothers and sisters.
Thought 2. When a believer becomes aware that he was wrong, he needs to acknowledge it and correct it as much as possible. Just think: Mark was the author of the Gospel of Mark. What a friend Barnabas was! What a helper to those who were cast aside as both Paul and Mark were by other believers! How much of Mark’s ministry and Paul’s ministry and how much of the Gospel of Mark is due to Barnabas and his faithfulness in making a true disciple out of both men? What a servant of the Lord!
Good Result of Honest Conflict
Good Result of Honest Conflict
40 but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. 41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
God was able to overrule in the conflict between Paul and Barnabas, for both men had honest differences of opinion. They were not selfish, neither did they have ulterior, corrupt motives. They both loved God with all their hearts and were called according to God’s purpose.
Note the good results.
1. A deserter was reclaimed and set aflame: Mark.
2. A new disciple and a great minister was born: Silas (see Deeper Study # 1—Acts 15:32).
3. Two mission teams were now sent forth. Barnabas and Mark went to Cyprus, the native country of Barnabas.
Paul and Silas went into Syria and Cilicia, the native country of Paul (Acts 15:41).
There are three factors seen here.
a. Paul was hurting within his heart, hurting deeply. He and Barnabas, his dearest friend and companion in the ministry, had split up. And they had separated because of a sharp difference. They just could not agree on how to proceed, whether Mark should be taken or not. Nothing could be done about it. The difference was an honest difference, but it still hurt, for the men loved and respected each other deeply and had served together for so many years. The pain must have been almost unbearable for both men. But note something: Paul continued on, just as Barnabas did (Acts 15:39). As difficult as it was, they continued on. They were not sitting around devastated, wondering why the difference had happened to them. Discouragement and depression could have easily set in. But Paul fought such feelings off and marched forth, faithful and true to his Lord and His call. He faithfully threw himself into the ministry of his Lord.
From this point on, Luke, the author of Acts, concentrated on the ministry of Paul. Nothing else is said about Barnabas or the apostles.
b. Paul travelled through Syria and Cilicia, his own home area. He was travelling by land instead of sea as he did on his first mission journey. God, of course, led Paul to take this route. There was probably a practical reason. Very simply, there is no place like home when a person’s heart is hurting. In addition to this, it had been somewhere around ten years since Paul had been able to return home. Remember Paul’s first extended ministry after his conversion was throughout his home region. He had spent eleven years there. Most of the churches throughout the region were probably due to his ministry during those eleven years.
The point is twofold.
First, God knew that being in his home area among the very first churches of his ministry would help heal Paul’s heart, a heart that had suffered so much and was yet to suffer so much. God had to provide some release for His dear servant to be able to continue on.
Thought 1. Note how God takes care of His hurting servants when they are faithful to their call and ministry. Paul is a dynamic example in continuing on despite being bombarded with setback after setback.
Second, Paul’s heart ached to visit the churches of his home district. It had been about ten years since he had seen and exhorted them. It was now time to check on their welfare and see how they were doing (Acts 15:36).
c. Paul’s purpose was to confirm the churches. The word “confirm” (episterizon) means to strengthen; to establish; to support; to stabilize; to make strong; to lead someone to prop upon or lean upon. Paul’s purpose was to support and to teach the churches …
• to lean upon and to prop their lives upon Jesus
• to be stable and strong in the Lord’s teachings
• to be strengthened and established in their lives and witness
Leadership Ministries Worldwide. 2003. The Acts of the Apostles. The Preacher’s Outline & Sermon Bible. Chattanooga, TN: Leadership Ministries Worldwide.
