The life of this saint of God affords useful lessons in the way of warning, as to our place of service to the Lord. There is room for all. We are joints and bands, each having his own place in the body: but “God hath set some in the Church.” He has His own sovereign way of dealing. He chooses what instruments He pleases. We cannot patronize Him nor His workmen, but must be contented, nay, thankful, to be hewers of wood and drawers of water if He so pleases. Barnabas—son of consolation,—so named by the apostles during the first movements at Jerusalem, appears before us as a Levite, from Cyprus, selling his land and laying the price at the apostles’ feet. Doubtless he was in the fervor of first love, and in the happy sense that God could and would supply all his need “according to the riches of His glory by Christ Jesus”—a real contrast with Ananias and Sapphira, who, wanting a name for themselves—to be thought better of than they deserved—retained a part of the price of their land. But the Holy Ghost was equal to the emergency. If such things had been allowed, the Church would have been full of hypocrites; their death ensued as a warning to others.
The next mention we have of Barnabas is in Acts 9:27, when by his influence he persuaded the distrusting Church at Jerusalem to receive Paul, and from this time be appears to have appreciated the rich gifts of Paul, and accordingly hiving come down from Jerusalem to Antioch, and seen the great work going on there among the Gentiles, he went to Tarsus to seek for Saul, desiring him to have part in it. From this time until their quarrel and separation—a period of about 15 years—they labored conjointly. Just before going to Tarsus (Acts 11:24), be is called “a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith.” On their several journeys together his name in the earlier ones precedes Paul’s, Acts 11:30;12. 25; 8:2. After the return of John Mark to Jerusalem, 13:13, Paul’s name is nearly always first mentioned (9:14 and 15:12 and 25 being the exceptions), for his gifts of speech and marvelous energy were beginning to tell, and thus to indicate who was to be the leader among the Gentiles. In Acts 15:37, we have the quarrel and separation. It is noticeable that as John (Mark) had returned, unable to bear the trial, to Jerusalem, where it would appear (Acts 9:31), things were tolerably quiet, so Barnabas went home to Cyprus, and we bear, except incidentally, no more of him. No prayers of the Church accompanied him, and no companion, whilst Paul chose Silas, and was commended on his way by the Church. We easily gather by these two facts, viz., the silence of Scripture as to the further course of Barnabas, and his departure alone to Cyprus, on whose side the Lord was; but we must not rest on the quarrel or the causes of it; the quarrel was only a symptom to indicate the purposes of God concerning He was to take his place, and not Barnabas, as the great Apostle of the Gentiles, and ever after—very probably he knew it before (comp. Gal. 1:2)—he is seen as that brilliant light—a real exhibition in his own person of death and resurrection, a pattern for us to follow, as indeed he followed Christ. But not only this (for every individual Christian is called to the same self-denying course), but a public officer or apostle chosen of God to his office: compare Rom. 15:15,16,17; Eph. 3:2; Col. 1:25. This he very well knew, but oh! how mildly and patiently he used his power. (2 Cor.)
But to return to Barnabas. He had to fall into his own place. He had not been separated from his mother’s womb (Gal. 1:15) and endowed with particular qualifications suitable to Paul’s office—grace is not gift in the full meaning of the word. Goodness characterized him, but in the case of his nephew, and in that of dissimulating in the matter of the Jewish believers at Antioch, we see that his goodness needed the balancing power of firmness and decision. The trials that the Church was heir to needed a firmer hand, and, speaking after the manner of men, a stouter heart. This quarrel then denoted who was to have the “care of all the churches”—thus we need not judge the character of Barnabas severely. It is likely that the cup had been a bitter one to him. Peradventure he had been in the way of patronizing Paul, and that with all his goodness he could not bear the thought of a second place.
But as to the future both of him and John Mark, there are some interesting notices. It admits of no doubt that the latter fell into the mind of God concerning the place of Paul, as well as that be was strengthened by the Lord for a place of distinguished service. Twice afterward is he mentioned, first to the Colossians (4:10) as sister’s son of Barnabas, and whom they were to receive as if hitherto there had been an hindrance; secondly, as being “profitable to Paul for the ministry,” (2 Tim. 4:11) the very thing which he had set out for originally, (Acts 13:5) but had failed in. (Acts 15:38.) What an encouragement does his history afford to a weak soul, and what restoring grace is there in our head, Christ.
Also be it recorded to the honor both of Paul and Barnabas that we may reasonably hope their differences were not prolonged; for the quarrel took place in Asia before our great apostle had visited Europe at all; and yet in 1 Cor. 9:6 a letter to a European Church, Barnabas is familiarly mentioned as if known to them. Moreover (although we must no rely too much on such a source,) tradition has generally affirmed that the brother (2 Cor. 8:18) sent by Paul, “whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the Churches,” was Barnabas. If so, how delicate was the mention’ of the sending. There is preserved a letter said to be by him, not admitted into the canon of Scripture, but we have no other commemorative mark of any office which he had, or any further mention of him. —W. W.