CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 15:36. Some days (as in Acts 16:12; compare ἡμέραι ἱκαναί, Acts 9:23) might be weeks or months. After.—Subsequent to the departure of Judas or Judas and Silas from Antioch. In visit our brethren substitute the for “our.” How they do?—I.e., how they fare, spiritually. The clause requires an antecedent supplement, and see.
Acts 15:37. Determined.—ἐβουλεύσατο. The oldest MSS. have ἐβούλετο, wished, which some consider a correction, with a view of softening down the altercation between Barnabas and Paul (Alford and Hackett).
Acts 15:39. The contention was so sharp between them.—Better, there arose a severe contention. If the incident described in Galatians 2:11 had occurred in the days preceding this contention (Alford, Lechler, Conybeare and Howson) that incident would help to explain the hotness of the dispute between the two missionaries; but it seems improbable that such a reaction in favour of Judaism as that scene at Antioch represents could have taken place so soon after the decision at Jerusalem (Hackett). They departed asunder one from the other.—Not in friendship, but in service. Barnabas.—Not named again in Acts, but reported by one tradition to have proceeded to Milan, and died as first bishop of its Church; and by another to have spent some years in Rome and Athens. Took Mark, who afterwards gained Paul’s esteem (Colossians 4:10; 2 Timothy 4:11), and sailed to Cyprus, his native city (Acts 4:36), where, according to the second of the above traditions, he suffered martyrdom. The authenticity of the well known Epistle of Barnabas cannot be defended.
Acts 15:40. That Paul and Silas, on setting forth, were commended by the brethren to the grace of God suggests that the Church at Antioch espoused the side of Paul, as no similar commendation appears to have been given to Barnabas and Mark.
Acts 15:41. Confirming the churches.—Not candidates for admission to, but those already in, them (Acts 14:22). Of the founding of these churches in Syria and Cilicia no account has been preserved, but they most likely dated from the time of Paul’s visit to those regions (Acts 9:30; Galatians 1:21). One of these churches was probably located at Tarsus.
HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 15:36-40
The Second Missionary Journey Commenced; or, the Separation of Barnabas and Paul
I. Paul’s proposal to Barnabas.—
1. To what it referred. The initiation of a second missionary journey, for the purpose of visiting the brethren—i.e., the young converts in every city in which, on their previous tour, they had preached the gospel—and inquiring into their spiritual condition. Not only must the work of spreading the gospel never stop, but the equally important business of edifying and building up those who have been converted must never be neglected. A true pastor will not only labour to bring souls into Christ’s fold, but will watch with assiduity and care over such as are already in.
2. When it was made. Some days after the return to Jerusalem of Judas and Silas (Acts 15:33), or of Judas alone (see “Critical Remarks”), and after their own evangelistic activity at Antioch had continued for some time, though how long remains uncertain. Perhaps the commencement of this second journey should be dated A.D. 51.
3. How it was received. Obviously Barnabas assented to the proposal, though it had been mooted by Paul rather than by himself. Of jealousy on Barnabas’s part not a trace appears. Though probably older than Paul he appears to have recognised, with equanimity and satisfaction, Paul’s superior genius and greater fitness to be a leader. That they quarrelled before the proposal could be carried out was, doubtless, to be regretted. But meanwhile it may be noted that the cause of that quarrel was nothing connected with the subordinate position of Barnabas.
II. Paul’s contention with Barnabas.—
1. Quite simply it arose. As great contentions often do.
(1) Barnabas very naturally wished, as before, to take along with them John Mark, his kinsman (Colossians 4:10)—probably for his own sake, as having a liking for his relative as well as a desire for his society, and probably because Mark, having got over his home-sickness, or, having laid aside his early feeling of offence (see on Acts 13:13), was once more desirous of resuming active service in the cause of the gospel.
(2) Paul, on the other hand, demurred to the proposal of Barnabas, probably because he had not been able to sympathise with Mark’s motives for going back on the previous occasion, and because he was not yet assured of Mark’s stability and courage. It is, however, pleasing to observe that Paul susequently took a kindlier view of the young man (2 Timothy 4:11), and even accepted him as a companion in travel (Colossians 4:10).
2. Very hotly it blazed. The contention became so sharp that the two missionaries felt obliged to separate. Barnabas’s kinship with, and affection for, the young man would not allow him to yield. Paul’s judgment as to the unlikelihood of a fickle character like Mark being of much use in the mission field determined him to hold out. Which was right is not clear. If Barnabas had Christian feeling on his side, Paul had Christian reason. Most likely both erred in exhibiting temper and in not trying to understand each other’s view of the case. Had they done this, and omitted to do that, they would surely have come to some amicable arrangement.
3. Exceeding peacefully it ended. As they could not agree, they let the matter drop, and took each his own independent course. What a pity they had not done this before the quarrel! It would have saved an unpleasant episode in the history of both.
III. Paul’s separation from Barnabas.—“They parted asunder the one from the other.”
1. Not in perfect friendship. There is some reason to suspect that they were a trifle displeased with one another. All the more likely if this occurred shortly after the rebuke which Paul administered to Peter for conduct of which Barnabas also had been guilty. Yet that the present rupture did not permanently estrange the good men appears from the way in which Paul afterwards alludes to Barnabas as a Christian teacher worthy of the fullest confidence of the Churches (1 Corinthians 9:6).
2. But in Christian service. Neither of them retired from his work as a Gentile missionary, as modern Christian workers often withdraw from service altogether when they quarrel with one another. Both continued to labour in the cause of the gospel, but each pursued his own path. Barnabas, taking with him Mark, sailed to his native Cyprus on a missionary tour, thus following the track of his first journey with Paul; Paul, choosing as a companion Silas, who must by this time have returned to Antioch (Acts 15:33), started on a similar journey over the old route, only approaching it from the opposite end, travelling to Derbe and Lystra through the Cilician gates.
3. And with the prayers of their brethren. Although it is only of Paul that it is written that he was “commended by the brethren to the grace of the Lord,” it is hardly to be supposed that Barnabas would be allowed to depart without the prayers of his fellow-Christians. To infer that he was, because the Church had taken sides in the quarrel and decided for Paul as against Barnabas, is to ascribe to the Church quite an unworthy part. Better far let it be said that Luke has omitted to record anything of the Church’s attitude towards Barnabas, and confined himself to what was done in the case of Paul—not because Barnabas was left to go his way alone and unsympathised with, but simply because Paul was the hero whose future fortunes it was Luke’s object to trace.
Learn.—
1. That good men are, unhappily, not above quarrelling, though they should be.
2. That when good men do quarrel, they should study to go asunder rather than come to blows.
3. That God can overrule even the quarrels of good men, for good.
4. That Churches should never send forth missionaries without commending them to God’s grace.
5. That ministers and missionaries should not neglect the work of confirming young converts.
HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Acts 15:36-40. Four Valuable Lessons.
I. For Christian preachers.—Never to desist from their holy work of converting sinners and edifying saints.
II. For Christian friends.—Never to contend with one another, except in love and Christian activity.
III. For Christian workers.—Never to grow weary in well-doing, but to be steadfast and immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord.
IV. For Christian Churches.—Never to omit praying for both ministers and missionaries.
Barnabas, Paul, and the Lord.
I. The forbearing love of Barnabas was good.
II. The holy severity of Paul was better.
III. The wisdom of the Lord, converting all things into good, was best.—Gerok.
Acts 15:36. Pastoral Visitation.
I. A necessary part of ministerial work.—Christ’s sheep and lambs have not merely to be gathered into the fold, but also to be carefully fed and tended (John 21:15-17).
II. A kindly display of Christian sympathy.—If it betokens an amiable and brotherly disposition to ask after each other’s welfare (Exodus 18:7), much more does it do so to inquire after each other’s spiritual progress.
III. A profitable form of religious service.—Like mercy, “it blesses him that gives and him that takes.” It benefits those who are visited and them who visit; it contributes to the spiritual upbuilding of both.
Acts 15:39. The Quarrel between Barnabas and Paul illustrates—
I. The imperfection of good men.
II. The danger of success. even for eminent Christians.
III. The grace of God in making the wrath of men to praise Him.
The Quarrels of Good Men—
I. Are of more frequent occurrence than they ought to be.
II. Are less deeply lamented than they should be.
III. Are seldom healed as quickly as they might be.
IV. Are more tenderly dealt with than they deserve to be.
V. Are sometimes productive of more good than they promise to be.