But after certain days Paul said to Barnabas, Let us return now and visit the brethren in every city where we have announced the word of the Lord, [and see] how they are getting on.
Paul's next journey starts with a look back. He wants to return to the towns he and Barnabas had already reached. Writers treat his plan as a model of pastoral care. They also note, with sorrow, that this good plan ended in a painful split between two devoted men.
One writer sets two callings side by side: one goes out to new places, the other goes back. He works from an older translation, which reads "Let us go again."
The evangelist is responsible to preach the gospel in the regions beyond, as long as there are regions still to reach. In the same way, the pastor is responsible to "go again and visit his brothers," as long as there are brothers to visit. The evangelist forms the vital link. The pastor keeps that link and makes it stronger… The evangelist's business is to call out the brothers; the pastor's business is to look after them.
The word "again" carries his point. One visit does not settle the matter.
It does not matter how often you may have been there before. It may be once or twice or three times. That is not the question. "Let us go again" is the motto for the pastoral heart, because there is always a need for the pastoral gift.
The same writer shows how wide this question runs — and where it must stop.
"How they are" in public, in society, in private. "How they are" in doctrine, in their associations, in their walk. "How they are" spiritually, morally, in their relationships — "how they are" in every way. Remember this well. Seeing how our brothers are must never turn into a curious, prying, gossiping, busybody spirit. That spirit wounds and does not heal; it meddles and does not mend.
Behind the travel plan is something no one can see. Where the word has been received, a real link joins that place to Christ.
Faith can see a most beautiful link of divine sympathy between the heart of Christ in heaven and "every city" where "the Word of the Lord" has been preached and received. This is as true now as it was then… Christ has His eye on every city, every town, every village, every street, every house that has received His Word. It is an eye that shines with deep interest and glows with tender love.
Most people know Paul as a preacher. This verse shows the other half of his heart. One writer hears in it a care that goes past the moment someone believes.
The words of verse 36 breathe the spirit of a true pastor, who desires to see how the believers are getting on. The welfare of their souls is the great point before him. The sad thing was that this excellent plan led to a break between these two devoted servants of the Lord.
Barnabas wanted to bring John Mark. Mark had left the work partway through the first journey, and Paul refused to take him. One commentator states plainly who was right.
There should be no question that Barnabas was wrong and Paul was right in this painful difference. A principle was at stake. The Holy Spirit chose to record it as a lasting warning, even though it exposed the failure of a greatly blessed witness of Christ… On the one hand, what could have seemed more gracious than Barnabas wanting to give his cousin a fresh chance to wipe out the past disgrace?
Another writer asks why Scripture records the quarrel at all.
The Spirit of God takes good care to record this. It needed to be noted. It should act as a warning. It should also prepare the minds of God's children for this: even the most blessed men may have their difficulties and differences.
One commentator weighs both men's judgment. He also notes how the record ends for each of them.
Barnabas may have felt that his nephew would grow stronger if he came along this second time. Paul clearly did not think Mark was ready yet. Later Paul speaks of Mark as useful to him for the ministry (2 Tim. 4:11), but at this point he had a different opinion… It is sad that we read nothing more of Barnabas after this, though we do read of Mark.
- Preach. The evangelist forms the link, calling people out where the word of the Lord is preached.
- Return. The pastor's work keeps that link alive — "again" means as often as there are brothers to visit, not once and done.
- See. The question covers doctrine, company and walk, in public and in private — but never as prying or gossip.
- Care. Christ's own eye rests on every place that has received His word — town, street and house.
- Restore. The Spirit recorded the dispute over Mark as a warning: even the most blessed men differ. Yet Paul later called Mark useful for the ministry.
And Barnabas proposed to take with [them] John also, called Mark;
John Mark had walked off the job once, and now Paul and Barnabas could not agree about giving him a second chance. Why was Barnabas set on taking him, why did Paul refuse, and why does Scripture record the quarrel at all?
The argument was about Mark, and his record so far was poor. One writer traces how far the damage from his retreat reached:
The writer of the Gospel of Mark was that "John called Mark" (Acts 15:37). He failed in his service while he was with Paul and Barnabas on their first missionary journey. Later he became a bone of contention between them. First he failed himself. Then he became the occasion of further failure in men greater than himself.
Barnabas had real affection behind his proposal, and Mark was his relative. One writer weighs that love, and points to an earlier slip of Barnabas's that gave Paul more reason to be firm:
You would expect Barnabas to be ready. But he proposes to take Mark with them, and Mark had failed them on the earlier journey, at the very start of what was the real work. Here was love too, no doubt, but as to his sister's son, too purely human. Paul is unwilling. Feelings run very hot between them, and this separates two men who had been so close until then… Barnabas had failed also, just before this, as we learn from Galatians, following Peter's example on the Jewish question; and this would naturally add to the seriousness of the matter in Paul's eyes.
Paul's objection was not about Mark's place among believers. It was about fitness for a hard and public service:
No one touched John Mark's right to fellowship, with any or all of its privileges. No one forbade him to preach where he pleased over "the field." No one wished to close his mouth in the assembly, whether in Antioch or Jerusalem or anywhere else. But after his failure it was quite another thing to put him forward again before there was proof that he had recovered. That service was prominent and weighty, as honourable as it was full of difficulty. How could a runaway who was not yet restored urge the disciples to continue in the faith?
The man Paul chose instead makes the contrast plain:
Paul wants someone who had not drawn back from the work. He wants someone who had not given up the place of a stranger, taken for the work's sake, to go back to his own home… Paul takes Silas and departs. Silas had preferred the work to Jerusalem, instead of Jerusalem to the work.
When the two parted, only one of them went out with the united backing of the believers:
Barnabas was loved. But it seems plain that at this moment he failed to carry the conscience of his brothers and sisters with him. Paul, on the other hand, again received that mark of united recommendation to the grace of the Lord, and Silas with him. He and Barnabas had enjoyed the same thing on their first mission to the Gentiles from Antioch.
After the parting, Barnabas himself drops out of the story:
Barnabas is a kindly man. His affections are now ruffled, though they are surely mixed with a gracious desire that the young man may recover himself. He shows most of all the impatience that hurries him off with his nephew to his native land; and we lose him from the history.
Scripture could have passed over this episode. That it does not is itself the lesson:
The Spirit of God takes good care to record this. It needed to be noted. It should act as a warning. It should also prepare the minds of the children of God for this: even the most blessed men may have their difficulties and differences. We must not be too cast down if we meet with anything of the kind. I do not say this to make light of such disagreements in any way; but sadly, we know that these things do happen.
The man refused here does not stay refused. Later Paul himself sends for him:
Luke alone remained with Paul. Then Paul gives a direction that holds a very precious instance of restoring grace: "Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry." Mark, once unfaithful, was restored.
- Failure. Mark left the work early, and that one retreat later hurt not only himself but two men greater than he was.
- Affection. Barnabas wanted to restore his relative. That was love, but love too purely human to see the case clearly.
- Fitness. Paul never questioned Mark's place among believers. He questioned putting an unproven man into a service full of hardship.
- Silence. Paul and Silas went out commended to the grace of the Lord. Scripture records nothing of the kind for Barnabas.
- Restoration. The man refused here is the man Paul later sends for as useful for ministry — and the one who wrote the Gospel of Mark.
but Paul thought it not well to take with them him who had abandoned them, [going back] from Pamphylia, and had not gone with them to the work.
The plan was simple: revisit the churches and see how they were doing. It broke down over one name. Paul would not take John Mark, who had deserted the team in Pamphylia. The clash grew sharp enough to split two men the Spirit had once sent out together.
Paul's refusal settled one question only: whether to give Mark this job again.
In Acts 13:5 John Mark was counted worthy to be associated with Paul in the ministry. In Acts 15:38 he was disapproved, but in 2 Timothy 4:11 he was again acknowledged as a profitable servant. Now, Mark was just as truly a child of God, a saved person, a believer in Christ, when Paul rejected him as a co-worker. He was the same man when Paul first accepted him, and the same when Paul at last restored him to confidence. In no case was the question of John Mark's personal salvation raised. It was altogether a matter of fitness for service.
Mark lost nothing else — not his place among believers, not his freedom to preach.
No one interfered with John Mark's right to fellowship or to any of its privileges. No one wanted to shut his mouth in the assembly, whether in Antioch or Jerusalem or anywhere else. But it was quite another thing to put him forward again after his failure, before his recovery was proved. That service was public, weighty, honourable, and full of difficulty.
Barnabas wanted to give his relative a second chance. One writer sees warm feeling put where loyalty to the Master belonged.
John Mark had grown weary of the labour, scorn, and opposition of the first apostolic journey from Antioch. Paul refused to work with him again until Mark proved his devotion of spirit beyond dispute... Here Barnabas, sadly, thought more of his relative than of the Master. He confused kindness with grace and brushed aside the wise and holy warning of Paul. From then on he drops out of notice, both he and his work, in the divine record that tells the story.
Paul and Mark had not been looking at the same thing. And one writer does not leave Paul blameless.
Paul only thought of God, Mark of the circumstances; but that is not how difficulties are overcome. It is possible that the flesh showed itself in Paul; but at any rate he could not boast of being in the right... At bottom Paul was right, and the hand of God was with him. Still, harshness was unnecessary. Even where the purpose of the heart is right, the flesh may very soon show itself.
This quarrel could have gone unrecorded. It did not.
The Spirit of God takes good care to record this. It needed to be noted. It should act as a warning. On the other hand it would also prepare the children of God to see that even the most blessed men may have their difficulties and differences. We must not be too downcast if we meet with anything of the kind. I do not say this in any way to make light of such disagreements, but sadly we know that these things do arise.
The split was permanent, and Luke's wording hints at which man the believers at Antioch stood behind.
The sharp contention between the two fellow workers ended in their separating — never, as far as we know, to work together again... Luke notes that Paul chose Silas as his companion, and that the brothers commended Paul to the grace of the Lord. Nothing of the kind is said about Barnabas. So it seems that the church at Antioch fully endorsed Paul's judgment about Mark's conduct.
Years later Paul brought Mark back — into the very service he had once failed in.
Paul had been deeply grieved by Mark's desertion in the early days. It even led to a break with Barnabas (Acts 15:37-40). But the healing goodness of God had long since wiped that out... Now he goes further. He puts Mark back into close personal service beside him — the very thing in which he had failed at the start. In nature a breakdown is beyond repair; not so where grace prevails.
Notice who was later chosen to write about perfect service.
It is beautiful and gracious that Mark should be the one chosen to set the unfailing, perfect Servant before us. He was the failed servant who shrank back from the work he had put his hand to (Acts 15:38). But afterwards he recovered, and through grace he was made useful (2 Tim. 4:11). What comfort for us in this!
- Failure. Mark left the team in Pamphylia and never went on to the work. He had grown weary of the labour, scorn, and opposition of that first journey.
- Refusal. Paul's refusal was about fitness for a hard mission. It never touched Mark's salvation, his place among believers, or his freedom to preach.
- Fracture. Commentators differ on the blame. One says Barnabas confused kindness with grace. Another says the flesh may have shown in Paul too, since harshness was not needed.
- Warning. The Spirit kept this quarrel on record as a warning. It also keeps us from being crushed when the best servants differ.
- Restoration. Paul later called Mark a profitable servant and gave him back the service he had failed in. He was the one chosen to set the perfect Servant before us. In nature a breakdown is beyond repair; grace repairs it.
There arose therefore very warm feeling, so that they separated from one another; and Barnabas taking Mark sailed away to Cyprus;
Two devoted servants of Christ, long partners in the same work, split over one young helper. Who was right, and what did God do with the wreckage?
The dispute was not about Mark's place among believers. It was about putting a man back into demanding work before he had proved his recovery. It was also about what Barnabas valued most.
Barnabas, sadly, in this matter thought more of his relative than of the Master. He confused graciousness with grace and brushed aside Paul's wise and holy warning... It was pointless for Barnabas to talk about his "right", or about "love" or "largeness of heart". Such pleas are often urged as an excuse with no real ground at all. Nobody touched John Mark's title to fellowship with all its privileges. Nobody forbade John Mark to preach where he pleased over "the field". Nobody wanted to close his mouth in the assembly, whether in Antioch or Jerusalem or anywhere else. But it was quite another thing to put him forward again after his failure, before he had proved his recovery. That service was public, weighty, honourable and full of difficulty. How could he take a consistent part in a testimony of hardship and danger? Everyone knew he had withdrawn so quickly, even before persecution grew hot.
Luke does not tell us who was right. He does tell us who was prayed over.
From this point Mark's name is found no more in the history of the Acts. Luke notes that Paul chose Silas as his companion, and that the brothers commended him to the grace of the Lord. Nothing of that kind is said about Barnabas. So it seems that the church at Antioch fully endorsed Paul's judgment about Mark's conduct.
Being right and being spiritual are not the same thing. Commentators agree that Paul's judgment was sound. One of them also looks at the heat behind it.
Paul was thinking only of God, and Mark of the circumstances. But that is not how difficulties are overcome. It is possible that the flesh showed itself in Paul; but in any case he could not boast of being in the right... Separation was necessary, and God had worked that out in him. Still, the bitterness was unnecessary. At bottom Paul was right, and the hand of God was with him. Even where the purpose of the heart is right, the flesh can very soon show itself.
Read the whole chapter and something is missing that marks nearly every other page of Acts.
Do you long for a reawakening of spiritual life and a revival of the Lord's work? Then notice this: in Acts 15 there is no reference at all to prayer, except at the very end of it. In every chapter of this book of gospel triumphs, apart from the fifth, prayer has its place until we reach this chapter. But here, instead of prayer, there is "no small dissension and debate" (v. 2) and "much debate" (v. 7). Saddest of all, the disagreement between Paul and Barnabas was so sharp that they separated from each other (v. 39). Prayer comes back into its own place in chapter 16, and there trophies are won for Christ, and the gospel goes on its triumphant way.
Barnabas sails to Cyprus, his homeland, taking his relative with him. Yet the outcome was not simple loss.
Here we part with Barnabas, that beloved saint and precious servant of Christ! His name is not mentioned again in the Acts... we leave it with two happy reflections. First, that it was overruled for blessing to the nations: the waters of life now flow in two streams instead of one. This, however, is God's goodness, and gives no approval to the divisions of Christians. Second, Paul later speaks of Barnabas with complete affection. He asks for Mark to come to him, having found him useful for the ministry (1 Cor. 9:6; 2 Tim. 4:11).
Paul's refusal was not the end of Mark's story.
We know how greatly Paul had grieved over Mark's desertion in the early days. It even led to a breach with Barnabas (Acts 15:37-40). But the healing goodness of God had long since blotted this out... Now he goes further. He puts Mark back in close personal service to himself — the very thing in which he had first failed. In nature a breakdown cannot be repaired. Where grace prevails it is different, for "we are more than conquerors through him who loved us" (Rom. 8:37).
- Failure starts it. Paul did not question Mark's faith. He refused to overlook Mark's earlier withdrawal from the work when choosing a travelling companion.
- Antioch backs it. The church there endorsed Paul's judgment. The brothers commended Paul to the grace of the Lord and said nothing of Barnabas.
- Flesh spoils it. Even a right purpose can turn bitter. A chapter full of debate and empty of prayer ends with two devoted servants unable to work together.
- God overrules it. The blessing flowed in two streams instead of one — which is His goodness, not an excuse for Christians to divide.
- Grace outlasts it. Paul later calls the man whose failure caused the split useful for the ministry. He puts him back in the very service he once deserted.
but Paul having chosen Silas went forth, committed by the brethren to the grace of God.
Paul and Barnabas have just fallen out over whether to take John Mark with them. Some read what happens next — the church at Antioch sending Paul and Silas off with a commendation — as an ordination service. Others say it is something quite different.
The brothers had already done this for Paul once, when they first sent him out with Barnabas from Antioch. The second time settles what it means:
Barnabas then goes his way; that was his will. Paul chooses Silas, and the brothers commend him to the grace of God — a second ordination, if ordination were the question, but it is quite another thing.
Some older translations read "the grace of God" here, where the ESV has "the grace of the Lord." Either way, the hands laid on Paul passed nothing to him:
I have no objection to laying hands on someone in this way. It claims to give neither gift nor authority, but is a simple commendation to the grace of God — and it seems this could be done again (Acts 15:40).
Only one of the two departing parties goes out with the brothers behind them:
Paul, on the other hand, received once more — and Silas with him — that mark of united recommendation to the grace of the Lord. He and Barnabas had the same mark when they were first sent out from Antioch to the Gentiles.
The absence of any such words over Barnabas is felt as loud:
The record says nothing of the kind about Barnabas now; an ominous silence prevails.
Commentators read the silence in different ways. One suggests Barnabas just left too fast: "It looks as if Barnabas left in a hurry, before the brothers had time to pray for him" (F. B. Hole).
Paul chooses his own fellow worker, and there is a pattern behind that choice:
Another point worth noticing is this. Ministry rests on the faith of the individual. Yet that does not stop a man of greater discernment from choosing someone else as his companion in the work. The Lord Himself sent His servants out two by two ahead of Him — both the twelve apostles and the seventy. Such a choice is scriptural. An assembly electing a minister of the word is something Scripture knows nothing about.
The same principle applies when a partner is pressed on us:
Barnabas may have been as wrong in taking Mark as Paul was right in choosing Silas. But the principle is clear. Choosing a fellow worker calls for spiritual judgment. Being forced to work with someone we do not think able or suitable is not according to the Lord's mind.
Barnabas wanted to take his relative along, which sounds like the kinder course. One writer weighs it differently:
Sadly, in this matter Barnabas thought more of his relative than of his Master. He mistook mere kindness for grace. He brushed aside Paul's wise and holy warning. From then on, he and his work drop out of sight in the divine record that tells the story.
Yet being right did not make the sharpness right. One writer is careful here:
It is possible that the flesh showed itself in Paul as well. In any case he could not boast of being in the right… The separation was necessary, and God had worked that out in him. Still, the sharpness was not needed. At bottom Paul was right, and the hand of God was with him. Even when the purpose of the heart is right, the flesh can show itself very quickly.
The story does not end with Mark shut out:
It is a comfort to think that in the end grace blessed Paul's faithfulness, not the weak compromise of Barnabas. Years later the Spirit led Paul to write warmly in Mark's favour (Col. 4:10-11, Philemon 24, 2 Tim. 4:11): a joy at the end greater than the sorrow of the earlier days.
- Grace, not office. The brothers gave Paul "a simple commendation to the grace of God" — no gift and no authority came from the hands laid on him.
- Grace repeated. The brothers had done the same before, so this cannot be an ordination; they can commend a man to that grace again.
- Grace unspoken. The brothers commend Paul and Silas; over Barnabas "an ominous silence prevails."
- Grace discerned. Choosing a companion in the work calls for spiritual judgment; forced partnership "is not according to the Lord's mind."
- Grace vindicated. Paul was right, though the sharpness was not needed. Years later grace brought Mark back into his letters with honour.