Acts - Lesson 25

Last time we ended with Paul and Barnabas back in Antioch after the Church Council in Jerusalem. They delivered the letter from James to Antioch along with two believers named Judas and Silas who were sent by the Apostles. The Church in Antioch – the mixed congregation of those who were previously Jews, God fearing Gentiles, or Pagans were built up and continued to grow in Christ.  

Acts 15:35 … But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also.

At this point Paul and Barnabas had been together for a considerable period of time and in a number of difficult circumstances. They obviously were good traveling partners and were able to work together under the anointing of the Holy Spirit. I think it is fair to say that Paul was being motivated, along with Barnabas, by the Holy Spirit to return and provide additional preaching, teaching, and pastoral support to the churches they had established.

Acts 15:36-41 … And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

So Barnabas and John Mark headed for Cyprus while Paul took a believer called Silas and headed into Syria and Cilicia. They took an overland route to return to the area they had ministered to on the first missionary journey. The Gospel had been spreading while Paul and Barnabas were not there since there were churches to strengthen in Syria and Cilicia on the way to their first mission field.

These were real men and they had real personalities. I think sometimes we idealize the 1^st Century believers and think they sat on a spiritual mountaintop without ever making a mistake or having difficulties. Paul was in a difficult struggle for the truth of the Gospel. Barnabas was a valuable aid to him in his ministry but the struggle of the role of those who came from gentile backgrounds was a difficult struggle. Paul indicates that Barnabas had waffled on the subject in Antioch along with Peter.

Galatians 2:13-14 … And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”

The combination of John Mark’s bailing out in the first missionary journey and Barnabas not sticking tight with Paul on the issue of Gentile circumcision may have combined to push these two apart. However, God sends out two missionary groups. Barnabas headed out on the same path that they took before and headed for Cyprus. The tradition is that he ministered there until he died. We don’t get historical details on the entire set of missionary trips that took place but we know that John Mark is eventually helping Paul again. So relationships were restored and I imagine that they saw God bless both trips and realized that maybe they should have considered two trips in the first place.

Acts 16:1-5 … Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions that had been reached by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem. So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily.

After Syria and Cilicia they moved into Galatia and ministered at Lystra and Iconium again. Paul found a young man named Timothy and this is the first time we hear about Timothy in the book of Acts. One thing about Paul is that he always keeps the underlying motive clear in regard to the Gospel. Timothy’s father was a Greek and his mother was a Jew. Even if you ignore the skills that Timothy had, you still note that he would be useful on the mission field because he could relate to both Jew and Greek effectively. So Paul, because of Timothy’s Jewish background, circumcises Timothy to remove a stumbling block in ministry to Jews. Nobody was saying that Timothy needed to be circumcised to be saved. This was a cultural adaptation that didn’t mean anything with regards to righteousness. If you can’t see how Paul looks through the symbol to the motive on this issue then Paul’s actions will seem confusing. At one point Paul says, “For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God (1 Corinthians 7:19). At another point Paul says, “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you (Galations 5:2).

We have a really hard time keeping focused on the heart motive. We are like 1^st century Jews who looked at a behavior and often ignore any indication of the heart motive in approving or disapproving of an action. Paul, by the work of the Holy Spirit in his life, knew that it was the motive that mattered. Timothy didn’t think he was getting any more righteous by being circumcised. Paul didn’t think Timothy was getting any more righteous by being circumcised. They knew that God had neither commanded it nor forbidden it. This was adiaphorous and they made a choice to facilitate their ministry to the Jews.

This is an important concept for life in the Church. If someone is more comfortable doing or not doing a particular thing that is neither commanded nor forbidden by God then they get to do it. This is a rule against both antinomian (against the law) and neonomian (new legalism) behavior. The moral law of God rules our behavior. Jesus made that clear. The ritual law is laid aside because Christ fulfilled it.

Antinomian points of view are generally first heart issues and later become manifested as obvious disobedience to the moral law. Antinomian heart issues can be bought out by a perceived neonomian attitude or legalism. I know a woman who gets a can of beer and mows her grass on a riding lawnmower on Sunday as folks are going to church. She considers herself a Christian and I’ll just leave it at that. She isn’t violating any moral law by mowing her grass and drinking a beer. She thinks she is offending the neonomians who drive by and that is her desire and that is a violation of the moral law. She is seeking to offend a weaker Church member. So she is sinning but not in the way a drive by neonomian might think.

A neonomian point of view can creep into the Church more easily. We could even see the folks exposed to this woman's behavior teaching in their church that anyone who drinks beer or mows their grass on Sunday is a sinner and going to hell. At that point the neonomians are sinning. You can’t teach that. It isn’t Scripture. In fact, in our society, people observe a day of rest in various ways on various days. Even if you consider mowing the grass with a riding lawn mower to be work then perhaps someone observed Monday or even the Sabbath (Saturday) as a day of rest. Getting drunk is a sin but drinking a beer isn’t a sin. If an alcoholic drink was a sin then Jesus was imperfect, we don’t have a savior, and me may as well all go home right now. I’ve lived among people who thought I was sinning by drinking coffee (actually all hot drinks). I don’t think a person who avoids coffee is sinning and I’m not sinning by drinking it. It is adiaphorous – except perhaps for those who give themselves nerve problems by overdoing it.

Because sin is a heart issue and your circumcision is to be of the heart, you can understand why Paul would say circumcision doesn’t matter at one point and even circumcise Timothy and at another point indicate that he wishes those who teach circumcision would emasculate themselves (Galatians 5:11–12).

In other words, you never do anything that would cause a weaker brother to stumble. You always have the highest respect for the moral law in your life and even stop doing anything that causes you to wonder if you are honoring and glorifying God (that might include not mowing your grass on Sunday). However, you never teach as a command or prohibition something that isn’t contained in the moral law because if you do that then you have clearly sinned (Deuteronomy 4:2). In fact, in response to Psalm 119 we can each also seek to understand the ritual law and to see the beauty of the ritual law in foreshadowing Christ.