Robert
2024-11-18 16:03:06 UTC
“And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder
one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;”
(Act 15:39, KJV)
[contention] Greek: paroxusmos (G3948), an incitement; a stirring up. It does
not necessarily imply anger or ill will, as proved by the only other place
this word is used (Heb 10:24). They differed and were set in the plan each
adopted. Paul was determined because of righteousness, thinking it best for
the work of the Lord. John Mark had failed (Act 13:13), and Paul thought he
could not be trusted again. Barnabas was determined because of love for a
relative. His love led him to hope for the best. Barnabas would not give up
and Paul would not change, so they agreed to disagree taking different parts
of the work. Mark proved so faithful that even Paul later wrote for him (2Ti
4:11). In Christ two can differ and not manifest bad tempers. The way it
worked out, two parties instead of one accomplished more work than would have
been done otherwise.
Regarding Mark aka John Mark. There was nothing to forgive either.
“Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in
Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem.” (Act 13:13,
KJV)
[departing from them returned to Jerusalem] John Mark for some reason,
perhaps because of homesickness, left them to go home. This was why Paul
refused to take him on the second journey (Act 15:36-41). Later, however,
Paul asked for him (2Ti 4:11).
What is odd is that after Barnabas and Paul split up, Barnabas was never
heard about.
As to Barnabas, earlier on Barnabas had a weakness in the flesh,...
“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because
he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with
the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself,
fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled
likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their
dissimulation.” (Gal 2:11-13, KJV)
Barnabas was carried away with the Hypocrisy like Peter, because of other
Jewish Believers who erred by catering to the idea that following Jesus was
to be a mixture or subset of Judaism.
Bottom line here is that Paul held nothing against John Mark, and just felt
that he was not up to the task at hand. Nether did he hold anything against
Barnabas, because after the bought of hypocrisy that Barnabas exhibited, he
and Paul ministered together greatly and with power.
So those that would teach that Paul needed to forgive John Mark for
something, dwell in error.
one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;”
(Act 15:39, KJV)
[contention] Greek: paroxusmos (G3948), an incitement; a stirring up. It does
not necessarily imply anger or ill will, as proved by the only other place
this word is used (Heb 10:24). They differed and were set in the plan each
adopted. Paul was determined because of righteousness, thinking it best for
the work of the Lord. John Mark had failed (Act 13:13), and Paul thought he
could not be trusted again. Barnabas was determined because of love for a
relative. His love led him to hope for the best. Barnabas would not give up
and Paul would not change, so they agreed to disagree taking different parts
of the work. Mark proved so faithful that even Paul later wrote for him (2Ti
4:11). In Christ two can differ and not manifest bad tempers. The way it
worked out, two parties instead of one accomplished more work than would have
been done otherwise.
Regarding Mark aka John Mark. There was nothing to forgive either.
“Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in
Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem.” (Act 13:13,
KJV)
[departing from them returned to Jerusalem] John Mark for some reason,
perhaps because of homesickness, left them to go home. This was why Paul
refused to take him on the second journey (Act 15:36-41). Later, however,
Paul asked for him (2Ti 4:11).
What is odd is that after Barnabas and Paul split up, Barnabas was never
heard about.
As to Barnabas, earlier on Barnabas had a weakness in the flesh,...
“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because
he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with
the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself,
fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled
likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their
dissimulation.” (Gal 2:11-13, KJV)
Barnabas was carried away with the Hypocrisy like Peter, because of other
Jewish Believers who erred by catering to the idea that following Jesus was
to be a mixture or subset of Judaism.
Bottom line here is that Paul held nothing against John Mark, and just felt
that he was not up to the task at hand. Nether did he hold anything against
Barnabas, because after the bought of hypocrisy that Barnabas exhibited, he
and Paul ministered together greatly and with power.
So those that would teach that Paul needed to forgive John Mark for
something, dwell in error.
--
All messages with alt.atheism in the headers are now filterd out beginning
10/19.So posting to aa will in effect filter all your messages from being
read by me. Thus you are KF'ing yourself. VBG
All messages with alt.atheism in the headers are now filterd out beginning
10/19.So posting to aa will in effect filter all your messages from being
read by me. Thus you are KF'ing yourself. VBG