Sabbath: The Second Missionary Journey
Image © Pacific Press from GoodSalt.com
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 16, Rom. 3:28, Gal. 2:16, Acts 17, 1 Cor. 1:23, Acts 18:1-10.
Memory Text: “Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not be silent. For I am with you, and no one is going to attack and harm you, because I have many people in this city”, (Acts 18:9-10, NIV).
Back in Antioch, Paul and Barnabas nurtured the church and engaged in further evangelistic work. This was seemingly the last time they worked together, as a sharp disagreement led to their separation. The reason for Paul and Barnabas’s disagreement was Mark, Barnabas’s cousin (Col. 4:10). When Paul invited Barnabas to return to the places they had evangelized in their previous journey, Barnabas wanted to take his cousin along, but Paul was against it because of Mark’s past failure (Acts 13:13). Paul and Barnabas’s separation, however, was turned into a blessing, because in dividing their efforts they could cover a wider area than they had first planned. Barnabas took Mark and returned to Cyprus, Barnabas’s homeland (Acts 4:36). Meanwhile, having invited Silas to join him, Paul went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches there. Before coming to Antioch the first time, Paul had spent several years in Tarsus (Acts 9:30; Acts 11:25-26). Now he had the opportunity to revisit the congregations he had established there. Nevertheless, God’s plan for him was much greater than Paul first conceived.
Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, September 1.
(35)
Paul and Barnabas had a sharp disagreement and decided to go separate ways. Disagreement, even among committed Christians, is a fact of life, unfortunately. And I am glad that this little vignette has been included in scripture. Even when all concerned are committed Christians there are still going to be disagreements, even to the extent that sometimes we have to go our separate ways.
We are not told much about the resolution of this dispute, except that Mark gets four more mentions in Paul's epistles indicating that he was valuable to Paul. One reference specifically mentions him as Barnabas's cousin, and another Paul calls him "Mark, my son", as a term of respect. That sounds like a good outcome to me.
We perhaps need to think about the issue of disagreement in our own community of believers. If we have a disagreement, is it sometimes best to walk away from an argument? When should we call, "Time Out!" on a disagreement?
So, I can disagree with you to the point that we can agree to disagree, and that I can do this while I still 'love' and respect you as my brother/sister in Christ?
Yes, but notice the issue that was disagreed over, which was not a fundamental belief. I have heard too often that "we must agree to disagree" from those teaching falsehood from the pulpit in our churches. This we are not to "agree to disagree" upon. The dispute between Paul and Barnabas was personal, and did not affect the teachings of the church or divide the meaning of scripture. Paul goes on to counsel Titus on how to deal with heresy in the church, which does not allow agreement to disagree while remaining a fellow believer. Notice that God did not "agree to disagree" with Nadab and Abihu over what fire to bring before the Lord, nor with Adam and Eve on choosing their own will in conflict with their Creator's statute. It was this spirit of compromise that led to the papal church and the dark ages it brought upon the world, and this same spirit threatens the church today.
Yet, if needing to "reject" a heretic, Love and respect will remain in all who reflect Jesus fully in their life.
First, we must believe that we have been divinely appointed by God to be His representatives on this planet. That must get in our spirit. We must believe that we have been appointed by God to be His Royal Ambassadors to carry on the mission of Jesus Christ. Anything less than that makes us stagnant.
Is it enough to believe that we are divinely appointed? Aren’t there many who believe they have been divinely appointed but have not?
What does God mean by “… I have many people in this city.” Acts 18:10. Do they belong to God? When did they become His, if so.
God here is reminding Paul that among the many sinners in the city, God has many who are his people and are yearning to hear his message and a call to repentance to come to him. Hence despite the potential difficulties, Paul had a job to do to bring the message of Christ to them. God was always with him to guide and protect him.
The Bible cannot explain every detail . A lot went on behind the scenes we read about. It was real life.
Kenny, read what Jesus says in John 10:16.
Why did Paul appease the Jews by circumcising Timothy Acts 16:3?
Paul did circumcise Timothy so as NOT to hinder his work in the area of a mix of Jews and Gentiles, by having a partner who was uncircumcised because his partners father was Greek and his mother was Jew. Paul did not want any reason for the Jews to interfere with his work, when it was something he could defuse beforehand by circumcising Timothy. As we learned last week after Christ paying the price on the cross, physical circumcision was not necessary to carry on a covenant with God. A covenant is now acknowledged by circumcision of the heart. Your word have I hid in my heart, that I may not sin against Thee. Psalms 119:11. Romans 2:29. Hebrews 8:8-12. Jeremiah 31:33-34. Therefore Timothy’s circumcision had nothing to do with his salvation but rather simply to carry on the Lords work as peacefully as possible. James 3:18.
Paul conceded to Jewish prejudice in this compromise with Timothy. Does this mean we must get a tattoo if wishing to witness to those who wear them? Did Jesus ever demonstrate such a manner of working? I'm not sure what to think of Paul's action as far as being an example to follow. How far does one take this spirit of compromise to disarm prejudice and preach the gospel to sinners?
I am too much of a coward to get a tattoo but I have seen a converted tattoed bikie and his tattooed wife witness to people I would not even dream of approaching. They could talk to other bikies in their language in a way that was completely foreign to me. Remember, Jesus became man and was nailed to the cross in order to save us. That was worse than any tattoo.
But, Maurice, the reality of Jesus' death for the world's salvation did not have to be the cross. Jesus was destined to die for the world's sins no matter what and if the spiritual leadership of Jesus' day had accepted Him, He would have just gone into Temple and taken the place of either the Passover Lamb or the Lord's Goat on The Day of Atonement and laid down on the altar to die there and three days later risen to start His Kingly and Priestly Ministry there in Israel and also His Gospel Ministry too. He accepted the cross because he was rejected for what he truly was and is: The Creator, The King of Kings, The Lord of Lords, The High Priest, and The Redeemer of the world.
That wasn't the point Pete. God became man to save us. It was the humility that is an example to us.
Yes, the example of Jesus is clear, but nothing in His life catered to pride, even in appearance. Also, Timothy's experience was not ungodly. But the example of bikers reaching bikers is a good illustration of how the efforts of one will become the efforts of many, perhaps better suited to reach the otherwise unreachable. This is God's plan, and it will work if we act our part in it.
Paul asmonishes us to become Seventh-day-Adventist to the Seventh-day-Adventist, that we might win Seventh-day-Adventist who are under the law. 1 Corinthians 9:20. Now this is not a persecution of my own faith, I was just illistrating the need for ‘an SDA tattoo’.
Had a disagreement not arisen between Paul and Barnabas, one wonders if there would have been a second missionary journey.
1) They kept the disagreement among themselves. Did not call on the council to solve their problem.
2) Their disagreement was not biblical (doctrinal). How often, when two Christians differ, they try to sanction their actions with texts of Scripture. Each party in the dispute gathers up a collection of proof texts.
3) Barnabas had a spiritual gift of mercy. He was accepting of Paul. He was accepting of Mark.
4) Paul's negative response must have impacted Mark to be faithful in the ministry.
5) They did not compete for supremacy by working in the same place. Barnabas took Mark, and went to Cyprus. Paul to Silas, and went in the opposite direction.
Missionary teamwork for God's ministry is under control and direction from the holy spirit of Jesus(Acts 16:7). John Mark, on other hand, failed to join the first ministerial work of Paul it might be the dictates of the holy spirit for in the right time should John Mark will soon ready and equiped for ministerial works,(2 Tim.4:11).
Interesting that the resolution of the dispute is not mentioned and later scriptures suggests reconciliation. However its so unfortunate that when people in the present church fight over personal preferences there is a always an attempt to besmirch and hamstrung the other party and donate them to Satan. We might need to learn a few lessons here.