Acts 15:36-41 meaning

Acts 15:36-41 sets the context for Paul’s second missionary journey. Paul and Barnabas had recently returned to Antioch from Jerusalem with a letter written by the apostles and elders there. The letter once and for all explained that Gentile believers did not need to become circumcised or follow the Mosaic Law to be justified in God’s sight. Justification before God comes by the free gift of God secured by the death of Jesus on the cross (John 3:14-15). 

However, the Gentile believers were told that they would do well to make sure that they do not consume food or blood that was offered to an idol, and to keep themselves sexually pure. Those things are essential for walking by faith in God and rejecting the ways of the world. This letter was received by the Antiochian Gentiles with joy. Paul and Barnabas continued their residency there in the church at Antioch as preachers.

But now, Paul’s thoughts turn to Cyprus and Galatia, where he and Barnabas had planted churches on their first missionary journey:

After some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brethren in every city in which we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are” (v. 36).

After some days could mean literally only a few days, but it may be a general “After some time…” or “Later on...” It was Paul’s idea, evidently, to go check up on the churches they had planted on their first missionary journey. He said to Barnabas, proposing a return journey to visit the brethren in every city, every new church composed of believers in Jesus, where they had proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are. This would include cities like Salamis and Paphos on the island nation of Cyprus, and cities like Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe in the Roman province of Galatia (a part of modern-day Turkey).

There had been enemies in just about every city where they preached, so the question probably weighed on Paul’s heart whether or not the church communities were prospering, or had fallen apart due to persecution. He wanted to find out. Earlier in Acts, Peter had gone on a similar check-up visit to various new churches in Samaria and Galilee, and in cities west of Jerusalem and along its coast (Acts 9:31-35, 38).

Barnabas agreed with Paul about the journey, but here is where the two separate as ministry partners. The reason was that Barnabas wanted to take John, called Mark, along with them also (v. 37).

John Mark had accompanied Paul and Barnabas on the first leg of their missionary journey in Acts 13. He went with them through the island of Cyprus, but when they made port in Perga, in the south of the province of Pamphylia (part of modern-day Turkey), John hopped on a ship headed for Israel:

“Now Paul and his companions put out to sea from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia; but John left them and returned to Jerusalem.”
(Acts 13:13)

John Mark was Barnabas’s cousin, and Barnabas seemed to want to give him a second chance. Or, he possibly did not think it was necessarily wrong of John Mark to opt out of the missionary journey part of the way through. Barnabas’s name “Barnabas” was a nickname given to him by the apostles, meaning “Son of Encouragement” (Acts 4:36-37). This infers he is a magnanimous, friendly, generous man, and wants to include his cousin on this journey. 

Paul is apparently more critically-minded and pragmatic. His opinion of John Mark’s reliability is low:

But Paul kept insisting that they should not take him along who had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work (v. 38).

He kept insisting that John Mark should not come. He would not back down from this position. From Paul’s perspective, John Mark had deserted them. John Mark had done something harmful to the mission journey. He was like a soldier who had deserted his post. John Mark had not gone with them to the work. We might say that Paul saw John Mark as a quitter, and he did not want to have a quitter as a teammate. 

John Mark had traveled all throughout Cyprus with them, which is no small island (it is the third largest in the Mediterranean Sea). But he did not go with them through Pamphylia and Galatia, which was likely the longer portion of the journey, and certainly the more trying portion of the journey. John Mark did not share in this work because he wasn’t there. Paul probably expected him to desert them again. If he had a ministry partner, it needed to be someone he could depend on.

This became an enormous issue between Paul and Barnabas:

And there occurred such a sharp disagreement that they separated from one another (v. 39).

We can imagine Barnabas saying something to the effect of, “Listen, Paul, I stood up for you in Jerusalem when no one else trusted you. I brought you to Antioch. I give people second chances and you benefited from that. Why won’t you give John Mark a second chance?” (Acts 9:26-28, 11:22-26).

But Paul would not budge. He kept insisting that John Mark was unreliable. This sharp disagreement between the two of them ended their partnership. 

Barnabas and Mark bought passage on a boat and sailed away to Cyprus (v. 39), which is where Barnabas was originally from, and where John Mark had helped on the first missionary journey. 

Luke takes no sides but simply reports what happened. Barnabas is not cast in a negative light. However, he does not write about Barnabas again for the rest of the book of Acts. This is likely because Luke’s purpose in writing Acts is to validate Paul’s authority as an apostle and his gospel message as being in keeping with the teachings of Jesus and of the other apostles. Luke was a ministry companion of Paul, and likely witnessed first-hand the intense opposition Paul faced. 

Paul’s teaching was slandered by the competing Jewish “authorities” (Romans 3:8). Paul’s authority was questioned (1 Corinthians 9:3, 2 Corinthians 10:8). The competing Jewish “authorities” countered Paul’s message, and thus threatened the gospel of grace. They sought to overthrow the simplicity of the gospel and replace it with a system of religious observance (Galatians 3:3, 5:3). Luke’s account of events in Acts validates Paul as a true apostolic authority as well as demonstrates that his gospel of grace is the true gospel. 

Tradition says that Barnabas was killed in Salamis, Cyprus, in 61 AD, eleven or twelve years after breaking ministry with Paul. Although Barnabas plays no further role in Luke's account, Paul mentions him again in a positive light in 1 Corinthians 9:6. 

They probably reconciled, for both men were committed to the preaching of the gospel. But they never again would travel and teach together. Thus, it would seem that this parting worked together for good, as now there are two mission teams rather than one (Romans 8:28). 

Barnabas seems to have continued to preach the good news of Jesus until his death. And eventually, John Mark would become someone Paul would rely on as a “useful” “fellow worker” (Philemon 1:24, Colossians 4:10, 2 Timothy 4:11). This could have happened through a reconciliation with Barnabas. This second chance given by Barnabas to John Mark in Cyprus might have been a defining moment for him to grow and persevere. Thus, we can see the giftedness of Paul and Barnabas working together for good, even though they did not always agree on tactics. 

According to early church tradition, John Mark is the scribe for the Gospel of Mark, which he wrote as record of the testimony and memories of the Apostle Peter. In spite of his fickleness on the first mission journey, John Mark would grow to be a faithful aide to Paul and the spread of the gospel.

Since Barnabas and John Mark went to Cyprus, Paul saw no need to go there. He set his sights on Galatia (Acts 16:1), but his route was different this time. Rather than sailing to the port of Perga on the southern shore of Pamphylia, Paul journeyed by foot on the Roman roads which led through Syria and Cilicia. He did not go alone, but chose Silas and left. 

Silas was one of the prophets from Jerusalem whom the elders and apostles had sent to Antioch to read their letter and maintain trust and harmony between the Gentile and Jewish believers. After a while, the church of Antioch gave Silas permission to go back to Jerusalem, but he felt called to remain in Antioch (Acts 15:34). This seems to be the reason why the Spirit wanted him to stay in Antioch, so that he could accompany Paul on this second missionary journey, knowing that Paul would lose his ministry partner, Barnabas. The text does not overtly say this, but the pieces are there to surmise it.

Paul and Silas were sent on their way with the favor and prayers of the Antiochian church: being committed by the brethren to the grace of the Lord (v. 40). This contrasts with the unceremonious description of how Barnabas took Mark and sailed away to Cyprus. Again, this could be simply because Luke’s focus is on telling Paul’s story. 

But in the text, Paul’s exit is given more fanfare. Perhaps the church was in agreement with Paul, or perhaps Luke is emphasizing that Paul was setting out on this second missionary journey with the church’s full support, despite the disagreement with Barnabas. 

The latter seems more likely, since Barnabas is not spoken of negatively, and since Luke’s primary goal is to validate Paul. Perhaps here Luke was emphasizing that a) Barnabas left first and b) Paul had the full support of the church at Antioch. This may have been an effort to blunt any possible criticism that Paul broke fellowship with Barnabas and therefore his authority was not legitimate. 

Paul and Silas went traveling through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches (v. 41). Antioch was the capital of the Roman province of Syria, so the fact that Paul and Silas strengthened churches in Syria shows that other churches had been planted beyond Antioch. 

The province of Cilicia was home to the city of Tarsus, where Paul grew up and spent some time in safety away from Jerusalem, because some had plotted to kill him (Acts 9:3 - 11:25). There is no mention of Cilicia or churches in Cilicia prior to this chapter, Acts 15, so it can be concluded that Paul preached the gospel in his hometown of Tarsus during his stay there, and formed a church. 

Paul and Silas probably took copies of the letter from the Jerusalem Council to read to these churches, because the letter was addressed “to the brethren in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the Gentiles” (v. 23). Part of Paul’s activity strengthening the churches in these regions was to resolve the false teaching that circumcision was necessary to be saved, which had troubled the Gentiles. They could rest in the promises and peace of God by following the Holy Spirit and not worrying about becoming circumcised or committing to follow Jewish rituals in order to be saved. As the Apostle Peter stated at the Jerusalem Council: 

“And God, who knows the heart, testified to [the Gentiles] giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us [the Jews]; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith…we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”
(Acts 15:8, 9, 11)

Paul states this same truth in his letter to the Galatian believers,

“So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith…There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
(Galatians 3:26, 28)

Paul and Silas are now fully underway on Paul’s second missionary journey. In Galatia, Paul will next add Timothy as a new team member.