As we walk through the letters to the church of Revelation 2 & 3, we have discovered both Pergamum and Thyatira having similar problems. Both of them are answered, in part, by the ruling from the Council of Jerusalem found in Act 15. Here the Church is trying to define the deal breaker for this new understanding of walking with God. It turns out that it is not about traditions and ceremonies, i.e. circumcision. But rather, it is about the devotion of our hearts. Whom do I worship?
Do I worship the almighty, creator God or do I worship something else? The truth is, it can be hard to prove simply by looking at one’s life. We can do outward things but the gaze of our heart is the real issue. For this reason, Jesus comes with laser eyes (Rev 2:18, 23). He searches our hearts. He goes beyond outward observances and sees what we really love. He sees what idols hold our attention. This discussion gives us a filter for who we should join ourselves to in our mission to bring God’s Kingdom to earth. Do we co-labor with the “Jezebel” of Rev 2:20 or not?
In this study we find that this issue is raised in the Acts 15 text. Immediately after the Council of Jerusalem we find Paul and Barnabas in a “sharp dispute” (V 36-41). They have a blow up over a guy named John Mark. Barnabas wants to work with him and Paul does not. It gets so bad that they go separate ways. Then the issue is over. The story seems weird. Why is it here? Is Acts simply a news account of everything that happened or is it a story with a purpose? I had a professor who said something like, “the book of Acts is the story of Jesus continuing in His mission through the Church in the midst of internal and external opposition.” This is a case of internal opposition. People struggle to get along. This particular incident is not condoned or denied. It just is. Yet, Jesus continues His mission through the church. And now He does it with two missionary teams instead of one!
There are times that we find we can no longer work with someone else. It isn’t a deal breaker issue as far as the legitimacy of the faith, we just simply cannot work with them, follow them, or co-labor with them. It’s okay. A failure that we often see is when we choose to malign them because of the issue. Sometimes we fail by moralizing our preferences. And so the Baptist hate the Methodists, etc… Notice that Paul does not malign Barnabas or vice versa. They just go separate ways.
It is worth noting that later on Paul speaks highly of both Barnabas (1 Cor 9:6) and John Mark, even requesting that John Mark join him in ministry (2 Tim 4:11). Can I disagree with others and still consider them valuable? Can I disagree without maligning? Do I moralize my preferences, making them deal breakers?