Sermon 27

Dealing With Differences Of Perspective

Acts 15:35-41

After the Jerusalem conference, Paul and Barnabas returned to the church at Antioch, their sending church. According to verse 35 they stayed for a while "teaching and preaching the Word." But for the Apostle Paul, the church at Antioch was not a parking lot; it was a launching pad. Paul was never content to just settle down to a comfortable ministry. He was always looking for open doors of opportunity to get the gospel to those who had never heard.

One of the things that we have to fight and resist is that tendency to settle for comfort. In some ways, DBC is a pretty comfortable place. The people here are nice, the setting is pleasant, the music is lovely. We can get together and talk about our faith in God. We can just get so comfortable with our Christianity that we never stretch ourselves. We must never forget that God has not called us to be comfortable. His call is for us to go into the world and preach the gospel to every creature. In his book, The Great Omission, Robertson McQuilken writes, "In a world in which nine out of every ten people are lost, where three out of every four never heard and one of every two cannot hear, the church sleeps on."

Paul took that commission literally. In this text, he a Barnabas make plans for the second missionary tour. The trip was to include a follow-up of the places where they had traveled on the first tour, v. 36. While they agreed on the importance of the trip, they disagreed on the composition of the "team", vs. 37-39b.

Luke, in writing this, doesn't leave it out; he doesn't revise the truth, nor gloss over them - he simply reports the facts. What is missing from this report is the emotion. I suspect that these verses have a significant amount of pain in them.

Here were two dedicated men who had just helped bring unity to the churches, purity to the gospel message and clarity to the missionary vision, and yet they could not settle their own disagreements.

Two Perspectives

The issue over which these two men divided was whether or not to take John Mark with them.

The Barnabas Perspective, v. 37. Barnabas thought that they should take John Mark. Barnabas was a real people oriented person. His whole ministry was one of encouragement to individuals. Actually, Barnabas wasn't his real name. His real name was Joses. But he was nicknamed Barnabas by the early church because the meaning of that named described the character of this man. They called Joe - Barney which means "son of consolation (comfort; encouragement)." Barney was an encourager, the kind of guy who would come along side of you and cheer you on. He believed in people which helped people to believe in themselves. In Acts 4, he believed in the church, sold a piece of property and gave the entire profit to the church, (vs. 36-37). In Acts 9, Barney believed in Paul when no one else believed in him. He hung out with Paul and personally introduced him to the apostles, (vs. 26-27). In Acts 11, he went and found Paul in Tarsus and took him to Antioch (vs. 22-25). He saw the potential in both the place and the person and had the sense to know that they needed to be together. He was such an encourager. I thank God for people like that in my own life. Several of them go to this church. Every church has some of them. In my first church, the Barnabas was a man named Sylvester Cope. Bro. Cope had gone to the church where I grew up in Cincinnati. In fact, his wife had, for a brief time, babysat for me when I was a pre-schooler. He retired and moved to Mt. Vernon. Twenty years later, I became his pastor. He would sit on the front pew of the church and just beam. He would nod his head and say Amen. He was very sensitive to my needs. And he always had the biggest, most sincere compliment that you could think of. One day he said, "Billy Graham hadn't got anything on you. You ought to be preaching to 1000's. I'm so glad that you are preaching in our church. How did we ever get you?" Talk about encouragement! And he did that with everybody - the singers, the young people, the musicians, the ushers. He was a big factor in the growth of that church.

That was the kind of person that Barnabas was. And here, we find him wanting to help John Mark recover from a previous failure. He was ready to give John Mark an opportunity to serve the Lord and to prove himself.

There is another factor for Barnabas. According to Colossians 4:10, Mark was Barnabas' sister's son. Mark was Barney's nephew. There was family ties involved. And it's hard to be objective when there is blood involved. Blood is thicker than water.

That was the Barnabas perspective.

The Paul Perspective, v. 38. Paul was just as adamant that they not take Mark. After all, on the first missionary journey, John Mark had deserted them to return home (13:13) and this was a sign of weakness. The ministry was too important and the work too demanding to enlist someone who might prove unreliable.

Which one was right? I'm curious. Offhand - how many of you think that Barnabas was right? How many of you think Paul was right? Had I been in their shoes, I'm guessing that my vote would have been on the side of ... Paul.

But, I going to tell you which one was right. Ready? Here it is! They were both right! There is some sense in which both Paul and Barnabas were right. Paul was an apostle and Barnabas was not. It would have been right for Barnabas to submit to Paul's apostolic authority. Furthermore, if Paul lacked confidence in the reliability of Mark, then this was sure to hinder the effectiveness of the team. Further, the church affirmed Paul's position in verse 40 when they "recommended" them. (The same thing is not said about the Barnabas / John Mark arrangement). Paul was right. But Barnabas was also right. Later, Paul himself attested to the value of Mark. (Read Colossians 4:10-11; II Timothy 4:11). Barnabas was also right.

Paul looked at John Mark and asked, "What can he do for the work of the Lord?" and that is an important consideration. Barnabas looked at John Mark and asked, "What can the work of the Lord do for him?" which is an equally important consideration. Both questions are important in the Lord's work. Paul looked at the big picture and Barnabas looked at the individual, personal picture. There is always a point of tension here. A president faces this when determining whether to engage an enemy in war. Is this good for the interests of the nation? It will cost individual lives. Sometimes pastors face leadership decisions that will be good for the ministry of the church but potentially hurtful to some person. Sometimes, for example, some ministry slot in the church needs to vacated by one person and replaced with a new person. You face the dilemma of doing what is best for the church's ministry vs. being sensitive the feelings of the individuals involved. Paul, in this instance, seemed to be looking at the big picture. Barnabas was sensitive to the individual person. Barnabas, because of his dynamic people skills was not as oriented toward achieving some goal as he was toward helping one person. After all, the Lord's work is the "people business." Can you see the point of tension. Depending on one's perspective, both have a sense of being right. The key is balance. The difficulty is achieving the proper balance between the big picture and the individual.

In the case of Paul and Barnabas, what, perhaps, began as a discussion, became a "sharp contention", not a mild matter but so sharp that "they departed asunder one from the other."

I do not think that there friendship ended, at least, the Bible does not give any indication to that effect, but the only solution was for these friends to divide the territory and separate.

We might think that this is tragic. Sharp contention, unresolved issues, friends separated. But differences of opinion should not end friendships, no matter how strong those opinions are, particularly among Christians. It isn't Christian, it isn't spiritual, to allow a difference of opinion to negatively affect a friendship. It is carnal. It is the flesh. It is pride. It is stubbornness. It is selfishness. It is defensiveness. It is from the devil and it is a sin for brothers to become enemies over differences of opinion. Christians are to permit each other the privilege of a different opinion, a different perspective without it damaging or destroying the relationship. Keep in mind, that this difference wasn't doctrinal, nor was it personal in the sense of an offense; it was more philosophical.

I believe that this story actually ends beautifully. Now, instead of 1 missionary team there are 2, instead of 2 missionaries there are 4. The workmen change, but the work of the Lord goes on unhindered. We don't hear much of the ministry of Barnabas of this (in fact, not at all again in Acts - but that's just because the Holy Spirit directed Luke to follow the ministry of Paul). Paul makes mention of Barnabas in in Galatians as he writes about the Jerusalem conference. Also, he speaks of Barnabas Corinthian letter, commending his commitment to the gospel, 9:6,12. In Colossians, Paul affirms the ministry of Barnabas, 4:10.

And Mark - well, it was a good thing that he got a second chance. In fact, as we have mentioned, according to Colossians 4:10-11 and Philemon 24, at some point in time he became Paul's fellow worker and comforter. Among Paul's last written words are a affirmation of the value to the work of the Lord, II Timothy 4:11. And, better still, he wrote the Gospel According To Mark!

What started off as a potentially bad situation ended nicely. It is a reminder to us that God uses imperfect people to accomplish His work. Our limited perspectives and humans imperfections are good reasons for us to depend on the grace of God, for (II Corinthians 3:5) "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God."