Tzephanyahu Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,625 Content Per Day: 0.79 Reputation: 2,033 Days Won: 1 Joined: 09/10/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 Shalom brothers & sisters, I have a question which I don't believe has an answer in scripture. However, I'm hoping someone might have an insight or read something in a non-canonical letter etc. John Mark, as mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, is thought to be the same Mark who wrote the Gospel. If that's the case, we can assume God was with him. His associate, Barnabas, was also a good man blessed with the Spirit. Now, there is a separation between Paul and Barnabas who must have been close friends, as Barnabas was the one who convinced the Apostles to accept Paul! The separation was over John Mark (see Acts 14:37-40). This separation is described as be one of "sharp contention". We don't hear from Barnabas or John Mark after this and the narrative then focuses on Paul. You could argue that Luke wrote it like this to continue the story on Paul, which was his intention. But you could also argue that the Spirit wanted to preserve Paul's story for future generations. My question is, what do you think caused the contention? Do you think it was from the Spirit to spread them out? Or was it from men? From Paul's letters, he doesn't seem to be the one to shun a brother unless that brother had turned dramatically from the faith. But this was John Mark and Barnabas stood in his corner... Any thoughts, insights, or non-canonical writings on the matter welcome. Love & Shalom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneLight Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.24 Reputation: 9,760 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 First, this is found in Acts 15:37-40, and the reason why is stated in verse 38 - John called Mark left them and returned to Jerusalem instead of continuing in the work they had to do. I cannot find why Mark decided to leave them and return to Jerusalem, but it did not set well with Saul, as we read in the verses you selected. Acts 15:38 But Paul insisted that they should not take with them the one who had departed from them in Pamphylia, and had not gone with them to the work. Acts 13:13 Now when Paul and his party set sail from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia; and John, departing from them, returned to Jerusalem. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayne Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 105 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 3,803 Content Per Day: 1.29 Reputation: 4,779 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/31/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 The problem that rose up between Barnabas and Paul is outlined in Acts 15:36-39. Paul wanted for him and Barnabas to revisit the cities where new believers were. That was fine with Barnabas and Barnabas wanted to take John Mark. Paul was adamant that John Mark NOT go because John Mark had "deserted them" back in Pamphylia. I think [just my opinion] that Barnabas was stubborn about wanting to take John Mark for two reasons: John Mark and Barnabas were cousins. [I was just reading this this morning in Colossians 4 - what a timely coincidence!!] Perhaps blood is thicker than water. And I just looked up some initial verses where Barnabas is introduced and I completely had forgotten that Barnabas was just a nickname. His real name was Joseph. He was called "Barnabas" by one of the Apostles and the name means "Son of encouragement". Acts 4:36. Perhaps Joseph "Barnabas" wanted to encourage his cousin, John Mark, to get back into the work of evangelizing the Gentiles. So you have Paul viewing John Mark as a defeated deserter. And you have Barnabas viewing John Mark as a defeated, but future leader. This is what they argued over. So, Barnabas take John Mark - and it's worth noting that he takes him right back to the same place where he quit. I find that sermon worthy! And Paul takes up Silas. Both teams are used by God. And in future references, Paul speaks highly John Mark. He tells the church of Colosse to welcome John Mark and in 2 Timothy he tells Timothy to bring Mark with him as Mark is "useful" to him. This is towards the end of Paul's life. One can only assume - a making up between them all happened. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who me Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 17 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,298 Content Per Day: 1.73 Reputation: 1,685 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 59 minutes ago, Tzephanyahu said: what do you think caused the contention? As one light has said, they quarreled over taking John Mark again, Paul didn't want him, while Barnabas thought he had potental and took him on a different trip. Later in 2tim4:11 Paul is asking for Mark. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tzephanyahu Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,625 Content Per Day: 0.79 Reputation: 2,033 Days Won: 1 Joined: 09/10/2018 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 18, 2019 45 minutes ago, Jayne said: The problem that rose up between Barnabas and Paul is outlin Shalom Jayne, Thank you very much for that answer. That was very interesting information! I'm most grateful sister. Thank you all who replied, I appreciate it. Love & Shalom 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GandalfTheWise Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 24 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,459 Content Per Day: 0.60 Reputation: 2,377 Days Won: 2 Joined: 08/23/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Tzephanyahu said: Any thoughts, insights, or non-canonical writings on the matter welcome. I've wondered if it was God's way of getting their attention that it was time to part ways and have separate ministries. Scripture fairly clearly lays out Paul's main calling as being preaching the gospel through the Roman empire and not mostly sticking around Antioch as an elder. In contrast, Barnabas seems to have had much more of a pastoral and leadership type of ministry, perhaps more suited as primarily being a pastor in Antioch. Most of Barnabas' actions recorded in Acts seemed based around building up and encouraging individuals (including Paul) and the church rather than in outreach. Paul spend quite a bit of time in Barnabas' sphere of influence and encouragement. Perhaps, this was now the time God was pushing Paul to move out of his comfort zone and strike out without the support of Barnabas. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtletwo Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 35 Topic Count: 1,192 Topics Per Day: 0.19 Content Count: 7,264 Content Per Day: 1.19 Reputation: 15,710 Days Won: 194 Joined: 07/15/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Jayne said: This is towards the end of Paul's life. One can only assume - a making up between them all happened. @Jayne I sure hope so. I always love a happy ending. Thanks for your contribution to this thread. Fascinating stuff. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tzephanyahu Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,625 Content Per Day: 0.79 Reputation: 2,033 Days Won: 1 Joined: 09/10/2018 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 18, 2019 13 minutes ago, GandalfTheWise said: I've wondered if it was God's way of getting their attention that it was time to part ways and have separate ministries. Shalom Gandalf, Very interesting. If that is indeed the case then it puts a new spin on divisions in fellowships. The scripture doesn't say either Paul or Barnabas was right, but both are respected to go their own way. Yet, they kept their fellowship, as you and Jayne pointed out - that's the lesson for us ultimately. I guess the Spirit may need to shake up relationships if their love can make them less effective for God, although just for a while... Fascinating though, that this disagreement is included in Acts. Love & Shalom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtletwo Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 35 Topic Count: 1,192 Topics Per Day: 0.19 Content Count: 7,264 Content Per Day: 1.19 Reputation: 15,710 Days Won: 194 Joined: 07/15/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said: My question is, what do you think caused the contention? Do you think it was from the Spirit to spread them out? Or was it from men? @Tzephanyahu This was a most interesting topic. My instinct (opinion only) is that it was actually both. When I've read it, it strikes me as some hard feelings there. What is so awesome about God is that He can take bad things and work them together for good (Romans 8:28) Or as Joseph told his brothers who betrayed him...they had meant it for evil but God, for good. Hallelujah! The Lord was determined that the gospel be spread and scripture says that He doesn't let man thwart His plans...even when the nations conspire against Him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tzephanyahu Posted February 18, 2019 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,625 Content Per Day: 0.79 Reputation: 2,033 Days Won: 1 Joined: 09/10/2018 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 18, 2019 Amen @turtletwo!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts