When Christians Don’t Agree

Rev. Mark C. Alvis, Union Congregational Church — Epiphany IV, January 28, 2007

Click here for PDF Format

Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.” Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches (Acts 15:36-41 NIV).

I have to admit that I am a little nervous about preaching a message entitled “When Christians Don’t Agree” just before our annual congregational meeting. But I am an expository preacher, and Acts 15:36-41 is our text this morning. As we come to the close of chapter 15, we should pause and remember that Paul and Barnabas had been working together for a number of years now. In Acts 11 it was the joint labors of Barnabas and Paul that set a firm foundation for the church at Antioch in Syria, which became one of the strongest, most influential churches of its day. Next we saw, in Acts 13, that God Himself paired these two men together for the first missionary journey. Working side by side, they endured dangers, hardships, and persecutions in order to make Christ known. Their gifts, their temperaments, their dedication complemented one another and wonderfully extended the kingdom of God on earth.

Even when Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch after their first missionary journey, they teamed together to help turn the tide against the Judaizers, who were insisting that Gentiles be required to become Jews in order to be saved. Paul and Barnabas were a tremendous team.

Nevertheless, this morning we are going to see these two close friends — two dedicated servants of Christ — come to an impasse, a disagreement that caused them to part ways. Let’s read Acts 15:35-41:

Some time later [after the Jerusalem Council] Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.” Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

In this passage we see a plan; a problem; and a settlement. First, the plan. Paul approached Barnabas about going back to the churches they had established during their first missionary journey. The purpose of the trip would be to strengthen these congregations and prepare them for the Judaizers, who would undoubtedly seek out these Gentile churches. Galatians 6:10 gives Christians a priority in our service to others: “Therefore as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.” Revisiting these existing churches ultimately led to the establishing of other churches and would come to be known as the second missionary journey. Paul and Barnabas understood a very basic truth. If local churches are strong, then outreach to the lost will be strong. If local churches become weak, then evangelism will be weak. Acts 15:35-36, tells us that Paul and Barnabas stayed at Antioch quite awhile before taking on this new assignment. Why? They made sure that the home base at Antioch was settled and strong before going out to strengthen the other churches they had planted.

Think about this: What if Paul and Barnabas had taken off for their second missionary journey before the problem of the Judaizers was resolved? It would have been disastrous! If the congregations at Antioch and Jerusalem were confused and divided over the issue of circumcision, they would have spread confusion and division among the rest of the churches.

The United States has been the greatest missionary sending nation on earth for a number of years now. This is beginning to change, as our churches have become more influenced by our culture and our culture has become more lawless and immoral. Quite frankly, during the last 20 or 30 years churches in America have had very little moral impact upon our culture, which leads us to an important question: If the brand of Christianity currently being practiced in the United States is not impacting our culture for Christ, is it worth exporting to other countries?

I believe the moral condition of the United States is hurting the cause of freedom for Muslim nations much more than our so called “bad military plan” in Iraq. Many of the Muslim nations do not want our kind of government because shrewd and influential people have twisted our freedoms and used them as a licence for immorality and perversion. Our television and movie industries often represent the United States to the rest of the world. No wonder some of the Muslim countries are fighting tooth and nail not to have the freedoms being practiced in the United States — abortion on demand, gay pride parades, young people living together apart from marriage. I Peter 2:13-16 says:

Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to . . . the king . . . to governors, who are sent by him [God] to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men [men who say that freedom of speech demands the right to produce pornography]. Live as free men [it is a gift from God], but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God.

To have limited civil government, which God laid out for Israel, requires citizens to practice self-government or self-control under God. Our culture is presently demanding the freedom to ignore God’s Ten Commandments. The moral vacuum this creates requires an enormous amount of civil government to try to keep order among lawless people. We reject the Ten Commandments and live under 20 million civil laws.

If churches in the United States do not start producing society-changing Christians who can model and teach basic biblical truths concerning civil government and self-government, then the church will continue to be culturally irrelevant — and millions of Muslims will not want our depraved culture to ruin their nations. The United States is a generous people, but we have lost our moral compass, the Bible, and desperately need to get it back.

Let’s summarize. The purpose or plan of the second missionary journey was to strengthen the churches that had already been established from the labors of the first missionary journey. We now come to the problem recorded in Acts 15:37-38: “Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work.”

If you remember from Acts 13:13, Mark was the guy who left them high and dry in Perga of Pamphylia. He tucked tail and ran just as they were having to face the most dangerous roads in Asia Minor. It was also about this time that Paul had become dreadfully ill. We are not certain as to why Mark deserted them — he may have just been homesick for Jerusalem — but most commentaries point out that Paul and Barnabas started their first missionary journey by going to the Jewish synagogues at the towns they entered. If the gospel was shared with Gentiles, it was with the God-fearing Gentiles who attended the synagogues and were acquainted with Old Testament Law. Mark’s struggle may have begun in Acts 13:7, when Paul shared the gospel with Sergius Paulus, the pro-consul at Cyprus, who was a Gentile and not a God-fearer. He did not know Old Testament Law and ceremonies. It may have been Mark’s conviction that a Gentile could not become a follower of Christ without first cleaning up his life through proper training and obedience to Old Testament Law. Mark deserted the team in Acts 13:13.

Why would Barnabas want to take Mark with them to minister primarily to Gentiles after what he pulled on the first missionary journey? It may be that, when Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem concerning the teaching of the Judaizers, Barnabas stayed at the home of his cousin Mark. During this time at Jerusalem, through the counsel of Barnabas and the discussions of the Jerusalem Church, Mark had a change of mind concerning the Gentiles and the gospel.

According to Proverbs, the sign of a wise man is not that he never makes a mistake, but that he learns from his mistakes. And wasn’t it just like Barnabas, the “son of encouragement,” to believe that Mark had really changed? After all, wasn’t it Barnabas, in Acts 9:26-27, who believed in Paul when no one else did? One of the marks of true forgiveness is when we allow the person who wronged us back into our lives.

Now let’s look at the situation from Paul’s vantage point. Paul considered this follow-up visit to the Gentile churches to be of critical importance. Could they afford to jeopardize their mission by taking along someone who had proven unsuitable before? Mark had not lived up to his word. Broken commitments are what damage friendships, marriages, churches and societies. The only way damaged relationships can be mended is for repentance and forgiveness to occur. Repentance alone is not enough to mend a relationship, if the person wronged does not forgive. Forgiveness alone is not enough to mend a relationship, if the person who did the wrong does not repent. Is there good reason to believe that Mark had repented? Yes. His wanting to go with them demonstrated his desire to make up for his wrong. Am I saying that Paul did not forgive? No. After all, Paul is the one who wrote Ephesians 4:32, “Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.” We also read in Acts 15:40 that Paul and Silas left with the blessing of the Church at Antioch. I do not believe that church would have given Paul their blessing if he had refused to forgive a brother who had sincerely repented.

Paul had forgiven Mark. The issue is that Paul was convinced that Mark was not cut out for this particular work. Why try to make him fit into a ministry for which he was neither suited nor gifted? Who was right? Barnabas or Paul? The church at Antioch offered no judgment on the matter. Neither should we.

How was this impasse settled? Both Barnabas and Paul remained committed to the plan; but instead of remaining together, they decided to divide up the churches and each take along some new helpers to train in the work. Neither Paul or Barnabas walked off in a huff and quit the ministry. They were not so fragile that they couldn’t disagree without falling apart or losing their friendship. As a result, both men followed their strong convictions on this matter, and both were used of God.

How do we know they stayed friends? Because a few years later Paul refers to Barnabas, in I Corinthians 9:6, with the highest of regard. What about Paul and Mark? The love and trust that existed and grew between them is demonstrated in II Timothy 4:11, when Paul writes Timothy from prison saying, “Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry.”

What are the lessons we can learn from this experience? (1) It teaches us that even mature Christians can at times deeply disagree. If it does happen, our primary concern should be that God’s reputation not be marred and that His plans not be neglected. Remember, there was a second missionary journey and it was blessed of God. Paul and Barnabas were still on the same team — God’s team.

(2) We must learn that we can disagree with another person’s thinking and not have our love or respect for that person affected. And in the same way, other people should have the freedom to disagree with us without our taking it as an attack on our character or integrity. If another person’s ideas are morally wrong, then it is an indication that his character has become flawed. Neither Paul or Barnabas had any character problems.

(3) There is also a wonderful lesson here concerning mistakes and failures. Mark experienced a genuine failure in his life on that first missionary journey. He deserted Paul and Barnabas. The Bible doesn’t sugar-coat that. But, friends, the fact that Mark experienced a defeat did not make him a failure. He repented and learned from his mistake. And then he went on to become the kind of man that Paul wanted around him when important work was to be done.

This church has been existence for about 150 years. Have mistakes been made during that time? Certainly. Does that mean this church is a failure? We will only be failures if we refuse to own up to our mistakes or refuse to forgive those who truly repent. Would you please bow your heads with me?

Sermon text ©2007 Mark C. Alvis
Bible text © as applicable