PAUL AND BARNABAS
Acts 15:36-41, “And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. 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;
And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.”
I think that in reading our Bible we get in far too big a hurry, and we miss much of the benefit of what we are reading. This passage is a case in point. We are apt to read it and pass on, without realizing what a momentous occasion this was in the lives of Paul and Barnabas. This was a watershed moment in their lives.
Paul had never had another friend like Barnabas. Most people never do. Very few people are willing to come to the aid of someone—in spite of all opposition—as Barnabas did for Paul. When Paul had literally nobody to stand up for him, Barnabas came to his aid. And he did it over and over. But now their friendship suffers a blow from which it seems never to have recovered. And what a tragedy that was for both of them.
To understand the significance of what happened in the passage before us, we need to go back to the beginning. The first we read of Barnabas is in Acts chapter four. “Neither was there any among them that lacked; for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles’ feet; and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation, a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet,” Acts 4:34-37.
This is the first we hear of Barnabas. Notice that Barnabas was from Cyprus. We will have use for that later on.
The first we hear of Paul is in chapter seven in connection with the stoning of Stephen. “Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him; and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul. And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep. And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him. As for Saul, he made havoc of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison,” Acts 7:57-8:3.
At this time Paul is simply referred to as “a young man whose name was Saul.” He later changed his name to Paul. A few verses later we find him making havoc of the church. He got his first taste of Christian blood when he held the coats of those who stoned Stephen, and he never lost that appetite until that day on the road to Damascus when he was cut down by a light from heaven. He was on his way to Damascus intending there to arrest Christians, and bring them back bound to Jerusalem to be punished.
“And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem, Acts 9:1,2.
The way Luke describes him, “breathing out threatenings and slaughter,” Paul sounds like a mad dog looking for his prey. He intended to bring these Christians back bound unto Jerusalem to be punished. What a sight that procession must have been, I cannot imagine Paul took a little handful of men with him intending to invite the Christians to follow them to Jerusalem. If that had been the case, those Christians, no doubt, would have told them they preferred to stay right where they were, and perhaps Paul and his buddies should go back to Jerusalem and leave them alone. You can be sure that he had a large company of officers and soldiers with him. He would have had enough to bring his prisoners whether they wanted to come or not.
And going on such a mission, they were probably marching in military fashion, and singing such marching songs as soldiers sing when they march. I am not particularly well acquainted with soldier’s marching songs, but I have heard enough of them to know that they are not really the kind of songs we sing in church. In Psa. 69:12, the Lord said, by way of prophecy, “I was the song of the drunkards.” Drunkards sang their dirty little rhymes, mocking him, as they drank themselves into a stupor.
Considering the circumstances of his trial and crucifixion, you can imagine some of the lyrics to those songs. They had beaten him in the face until he did not look like a man (Isa. 52:14). They spat in his face (Matt. 26:67). They took a whip and literally plowed his back (Psa. 129:3; Isa. 50:6; John 19:1). They denied him the modesty of his own clothing as he hanged on the cross (Matt. 27:34). All of that provided ample fodder for their dirty little rhymes. That mockery revealed their hatred for the Lord and for his followers.
But imagine that column of soldiers, if you will, marching along, singing their dirty little marching songs, setting in rhyme what they intended to do to these Christians when they got their hands on them. Paul is marching along with them “breathing out threatenings and slaughter” against the Christians. Hatred filled the air.
If the Christians of that day had been looking for a new preacher, I cannot think of a more unlikely prospect than Paul. He referred to himself as the “chief of sinners” (1 Tim. 1:15). I have often referred to that as Paul’s subjective opinion of himself. He thought of himself as the chief of sinners. But it was more than that. Paul’s subjective opinion was firmly grounded in objective fact. He truly was the chief of sinners. The Lord and his church did not have a more bitter and determined enemy than he was. He intended, if he could, to sweep the church off the face of the earth, and he intended to wipe the name of Jesus Christ from the pages of history. But God had other plans. God intended to take this chief of sinners and make him a witness for the very gospel he was trying to destroy.
There comes a light from heaven, “above the brightness of the sun.” Paul is cut down to the ground, and there is a voice from heaven, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me.”
“And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man,” Acts 9:3-7.
This is one passage, like many others, that skeptics seize on to insist the Bible contradicts itself. We are told that “the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man,” vs. 7. In chapter twenty two, verse nine, we read, “they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.” Skeptics just love comparisons like this. They are sure that when Luke wrote chapter twenty two, he could not remember what he wrote in chapter nine.
But the problem is not with the Bible; the problem is with the skeptics and their sloppy scholarship. There is no contradiction. The Bible always means what it says, and it always means exactly what it says. In chapter twenty two we are told that “they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.”
They heard Paul when he said, “Who art thou, Lord.” They did not hear the Lord when he said, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me.” The Lord was not talking to them, and there was no need for them to hear what he said. They heard Paul speaking to the Lord; they did not hear the Lord speaking to Paul, and that is what Paul said, “they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.”
You have had a similar experience if you ever heard anybody talking in his sleep. You can be sure that in his dream he heard somebody talking to him, and he was talking back. You heard him, but you could not hear the voice he heard in his dream. Paul was not dreaming; but he did hear a voice that nobody else heard.
“And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple,” vs. 26.
After his Damascus Road experience, and after Ananias had preached to him, and he was baptized, Paul preached to the Christians in Damascus. When he came to Jerusalem, he “assayed to join himself to the disciples.” I understand the word join to indicate that he wanted to place his membership in the church at Jerusalem. But they were afraid of him; they did not believe him.
Can you blame them? When he was last in Jerusalem, he had persecuted Christians viciously. He had them arrested, and beaten, and by his own testimony, when they were put to death he gave his voice against him (Acts 26:10). Perhaps, these disciples had relatives who had been stoned to death at Paul’s direction. Some of them may have been arrested and beaten themselves. No wonder they were suspicious of him.
Except for the apostles, he had driven the Christians out of Jerusalem (Acts 8:1), and the last they heard of him he was on his way to Damascus, intending to do the same there (Acts 9:1). Now he is back in Jerusalem telling them he wants to join their church. If something like that happened in our day, it is hard to imagine any church who would want to receive him.
It was at this point that Barnabas first came to Paul’s defense. “But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus,” vs. 27. Barnabas stood up for Paul when nobody else would, and when it is reasonable to think that many of them would have preferred that he did not. These Jerusalem Christians were just ordinary people like you and me, and I can imagine that I would have a hard time putting it out of my mind that somebody had had me arrested and beaten. You can be sure that some of them were annoyed at Barnabas for defending Paul.
It is hard to imagine the disciples at Jerusalem were ever entirely at ease with Paul. Human nature is as it has always been, and if there were disciples who had been arrested and beaten at Paul’s direction, or if they had friends and relatives who had been, it is easy to imagine they were never entirely able to put that out of their minds. He might preach with ever so much light and power, but those thoughts must have lingered in their minds.
Later when some of the churches had gathered an offering to assist the church at Jerusalem, they sent it by Paul and Barnabas. But even though they were bringing much needed assistance, Paul was uncertain whether (considering he was the one bringing it) the brethren would be willing to accept it. He expressed that concern in his letter to the Romans.
“ Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me; That I may be delivered from them that do not believe in Judea; and that my service which I have for Jerusalem may be accepted of the saints,” Rom. 15:30,31.
He was afraid there were some Christians in Jerusalem who would rather starve than receive anything he brought. So Barnabas was doubly courageous to come to Paul’s defense.
It is not entirely clear whether they actually allowed Paul to place his membership in the Jerusalem church, but we are told that, “he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.” They did allow him to meet with them and keep company with them.
Even that was not going to last. “And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him. Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus,” vss. 29, 30.
The Jews “went about to slay him,” and they, the apostles, “sent him forth to Tarsus.” It was only natural they would send him to Tarsus. He had grown up there; he probably had relatives who would take him in. They sent him, no doubt, for his safety; but they must have had their own welfare in mind as well. Paul had been the rising hope of the Jews. They had hoped he would be the one who would put an end to these Christians. Now he was preaching for them. To the Jews, he was a traitor, and no one is hated more than a turncoat. The rage of the Jews against Paul knew no bounds, and as long as Paul was around, he put the other disciples in jeopardy. That must have played a part in their thinking when they made arrangements to send him to Tarsus.
The Bible does not say how long Paul was in Tarsus. Tradition says it was about two years; but tradition is wrong about as often as it is right. We have little idea how long he was there. Regardless of how long it was, imagine, if you will, how Paul must have felt. He had been the rising hope of the Jews. He said himself that he had “profited in the Jew’s religion….above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers,” (Gal. 1:14). He was their hero.
If you will allow me to digress for a moment, notice that he said he excelled in the Jew’s religion. He did not say he excelled under the Law Service. There is an enormous difference. The Jew’s religion still retained the forms of the Law Service, but during their stay in Babylon they had stripped out the very heart of the law and replaced it with the commandments of men (Matt. 15:9), principles and doctrines they learned in Babylon.
The expression Jew’s religion appears twice in the King James Version of the Bible, and both times it is translated from the Greek word judaismo (Judaism). We should never allow ourselves to think Judaism is a form of Law Service, or that it any way resembles the Christian religion. Judaism is the religion of Babylon wrapped in forms borrowed from the Law of Moses.
Back to our subject. Paul was brought up in Jerusalem and trained at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Gamaliel looms large in Jewish history; till this very day he is respected and quoted by Jewish writers. When persecution broke out against the Christians, Paul was clearly the leader. No other name is mentioned as a leader in that persecution. That persecution broke out when Paul held the coats of those who stoned Stephen to death, and it ended with Paul’s experience on the Damascus Road. He was clearly the leader.
The last the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem heard of Paul he was on the road to Damascus with authority to arrest Christians and bring them back bound to Jerusalem. The next they heard he was preaching the faith which once he destroyed. Can you imagine how furious they were with him. They were furious enough that they intended to kill him if they could, and they tried every way they could to do it. Any gratification Paul had received from the Jew’s religion, was long since past. He was hated by those whose praise once meant so much to him.
By nature, Paul had a huge ego. It is clear that when persecution broke out against the Christians, he seized the reins and led the charge. That takes somebody with a high opinion of himself and his own opinions. During much of his ministry Paul manifested a commendable, humble spirit. But even after his Damascus Road experience, he still had that oversized ego to contend with, and it would come out from time to time. When he and Silas had been beaten in Philippi and spent a night in the dungeon, the magistrates sent word to let him go (Acts 16:35,36). But Paul’s ego came into play. He refused to leave until the magistrates came and apologized for the way they had treated him. It takes some kind of pride to make such a demand at a time like that.
He tells us God gave him a thorn in the flesh, lest he should be “exalted above measure” (2 Cor. 12:7). If he had not had such a huge ego, that thorn in the flesh would not have been necessary. He worked all his life to bring his pride under control, and it can be shown that he had much success in doing so, but it was there, nevertheless. That ego must have made the loss of his prestige among the Jews all the more painful.
Not only was he hated by the Jews, he was distrusted by the Christians. They did not believe he was a truly a disciple (Acts 9:26). With his track record, why should they? They thought it was some kind of trick. For all that time he was distrusted by the Christians and hated by the Jews.
Can you imagine how he must have felt during that time in Tarsus—hated by those Jews who once idolized him, and distrusted by the Christians he wanted to preach to and keep company with. If ever there was anybody who felt like his world had come to an end, it was Paul during those years at Tarsus.
In the meanwhile, the disciples at Jerusalem had heard of new converts at Antioch. They were interested in the work there, and they sent Barnabas to go as far as Antioch to find out about the work. The Bible can say more in three or four words than you and I can say in a paragraph. Those three words, as far as, are significant.
The Bible does not tell us they instructed Barnabas to stay away from Paul, or if they even hinted at it; but as far as seems to indicate just that. He was to go as far as Antioch. Paul was at Tarsus; that was much farther than Antioch.
Whether they spelled it out or not, Barnabas must have gotten the message. Barnabas did as he was told—and then he did more. He went to Antioch and learned about the work there. Then he went to Tarsus to look for Paul. There is no way to know how hard it was to find Paul. Tarsus was no country crossroads; it was a bustling city. And I doubt that Paul was making himself easy to find. After all, the Jews were looking for him intending to kill him. But however long it took to find Paul, Barnabas found him—and he brought him back as far as Antioch. It took some kind of courage to go looking for Paul after he had been instructed to go as far as Antioch.
The Bible does not make it entirely clear whether Paul was ever able to join himself to the disciples at Jerusalem. That is, we can never be sure whether he was ever a member of the local church in Jerusalem. But he did succeed in placing his membership in the church at Antioch. We are told that Paul and Barnabas were in the church at Antioch (Acts 13:1). He did not simply attend, he was in the church—he was a member there. And it was the Antioch church that called for his and Barnabas’ ordination (Acts 13:2,3).
It was Barnabas who vouched for him when he first came from Damascus to Jerusalem; it was Barnabas who went looking for him, and brought him back to Antioch. Barnabas may already have been a member at Antioch, or he may have placed his membership there when Paul did. At any rate, he was a member there when he and Paul were ordained. Barnabas looked out for Paul, when, so far as we are able to discover, no one else did. Paul had never had another friend like Barnabas.
Later there was a serious problem in the Antioch church. Peter had been the first to preach the gospel to the gentiles; but when he got back to Jerusalem, he was called on the carpet for it (Acts 11:2,3). Before they had visitors from Jerusalem he had eaten with gentiles in the church at Antioch (Gal. 2:12). Why should he not; he was the one who first preached to the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius (Acts 10). But when certain came from James, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them of the circumcision.
Notice two things. We are told that these visitors “came from James.” They came from Jerusalem, but it does not say it that way. We are told they “came from James.” Paul leaves little doubt that Peter was afraid of James. At the council meeting at Jerusalem, in Acts chapter fifteen, Peter, Paul and Barnabas all had their say, and it does not seem to have swayed the people. But when James said what he had to say, he began, “My sentence is….” and that settled the matter. James was clearly the most influential apostle in the Jerusalem church. When he spoke that ended the discussion. Peter had been called on the carpet at the Jerusalem church once, and he was not anxious to repeat that experience.
Also notice that these Antioch brethren withdrew themselves, not because the feared the Lord and wanted to do what was right. Rather, they were afraid of “them of the circumcision.” Their motive was all wrong.
Gal. 2:11, “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.”
Can you imagine how terrified that little church must have been. These were not just two local preachers; these were two apostles. Paul says he “withstood him to the face….before them all” (Gal. 2:14). That must have been a sight. These two powerful men challenging each other in front of the church. More than that, Paul says Barnabas was “carried away with their dissimulation” vs. 13. I doubt that very many of those reading this little booklet often use the word dissimulation, but there is another word you do use.
I usually try to stay away from the original language as much as possible. I don’t want to be judgmental, but sometimes I get the idea that preachers go to the Greek to impress people as much as anything. But sometimes the original Greek can be a benefit. This is one of those times. The word that is translated dissimulation is hypocrisei. You don’t have to read Greek to know what that word means. Change the final epsilon iota (ei) to y, and the word becomes hypocrisy. That is what dissimulation means. It means to pretend what you do not really believe. Paul was charging these dissidents with hypocrisy. I have experienced some heated conferences in my time, but I have never experienced anything like that.
Barnabas had stood with Paul in the most difficult times, but on this occasion, even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation. Perhaps his patience was wearing thin. Perhaps he had reached the limit of his patience.
Later Paul says, “At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me . . . . . notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me….and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion,” 2 Tim. 4:16,17. Get the picture. Paul challenged Peter, this powerful apostle “before them all”—before the church of his own membership. More than that, he charges all of them with dissimulation—hypocrisy. If ever a preacher placed himself at risk, Paul did in that conference. But he finally carried the day.
Notice that he said, “At my first answer no man stood with me.” Obviously he responded more than once. It was only at his first answer that he stood entirely alone. He finally carried the day, and it was established that Gentiles have the same right to church privileges as the Jews. But it had to be a harrowing experience. No wonder he later referred to it as being “delivered out of the mouth of the lion.”
The Antioch Church determined that they should go to Jerusalem about the matter, and it appears that in the Jerusalem meeting Paul and Barnabas were in agreement. At least, no mention is made of a difference between them at that time.
Paul made his defense before the Jerusalem brethren, and he carried the day. The Jerusalem Church sent a letter to the Antioch Church which said essentially what Paul had told them in the Antioch conference.
Paul and Barnabas were still together at that time. After all, they went back a long way—but that relationship was not going to last.
Acts 15 36-41, “And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. 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; And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.”
We often refer to that event, but I do not think we often realize what a significant occasion it was. Barnabas had stood by Paul in good times and bad. He had stood up for him when nobody else would, and when it seems they strongly hinted that he should leave him alone.
When the Jerusalem church was so suspicious of him, and would not accept that he was a true believer, Barnabas vouched for him, and persuaded them to, at least, keep company with them.
When he was all alone at Tarsus, and no doubt feeling to be totally forsaken, Barnabas went looking for him and found him, even though it seems clear the brethren at Jerusalem did not give him the least encouragement in the effort.
Once he had found him in Tarsus, he brought him back to Antioch, and Paul was permitted to place his membership in the church there. Paul’s persecution of the church was mainly centered around Jerusalem, and it was likely he would not encounter as much resistance at Antioch as he had faced at Jerusalem. It is hard to imagine what a close and tender relationship he and Barnabas must have had. We have a special place in our hearts for those who have befriended us when it seemed we did not have many, if any, friends.
But that sweet and tender relationship was not going to last. Paul and Barnabas had been traveling and preaching together for years. Now, Paul suggests they retrace their tracks and “visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do,” Acts 15:36. That sounds like a great suggestion—to visit old friends and renew old acquaintances.
But there is a problem. Barnabas wants to take John Mark with them. John had started with them once before, but he turned back at Pamphilia, and Paul held that against him. He was so incensed at John for turning back that he wanted no more to do with him Barnabas insisted that John be permitted to go. Paul insisted just as vigorously that he was not going to go. Paul’s ego was coming out again.
“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; And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches,” verse 39. One was just as determined as the other. They parted and went their separate ways, and we find no record of their ever so much as seeing each other again.
There is more to the story. Very often people claim to be contending about one matter when something entirely different is at the root of the conflict. Sometimes they are ashamed of what they are really upset about, so they come up with something that sounds better.
Mark’s turning back at Pamphylia was not the entire source of the conflict. There is more church trouble rooted in family connections than any other thing. In Col. 4:10, we read of “Marcus, sister’s son to Barnabas.” This was Barnabas’ sister’s son Paul was rejecting, and Barnabas did not take well to criticism of his kinfolks.
Again, that is not the entire story. In verses 39-41, we read that, “Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus, and Paul chose Silas and [they]….went through Syria and Cilicia confirming the churches.” We noticed early on that Barnabas was from Cyprus (ch. 4:36), and that Paul was from “Tarsus, a city in Cilicia” (ch. 21:39). After they separated, they each went to the area where he grew up. They had been on the road for years, and they may very well have both been home-sick, and neither would yield to the other.
It may also have been the case that Barnabas had hazarded his own welfare in Paul’s defense, until finally his patience had worn thin. After the conflict at Antioch and Jerusalem this may have been the straw that finally broke the camel’s back.
Two lessons emerge. One, church conflicts are usually more complex than they appear to be; there are often unspoken conflicts below the surface and out of sight. The other is that we need to be very careful in our dealing even with our best friends. Sometimes a rash moment can undo years of sincere and honest devotion.
There is still another side to the story. There is no record that Paul and Barnabas ever traveled together again, but before he came to die, Paul entirely changed his mind about John Mark.
In 2 Tim. 4:6, Paul wrote “I am now ready to be offered and the time of my departure is at hand,” etc. That was written just before he died, or at least, he thought he was about to die. Then in verse 11 he wrote, “Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.” He had totally changed his mind about Mark. Later he wrote in Philemon, “There salute thee Epaphras, my fellowprisoner in Christ Jesus; Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellowlabourers.”
The final lesson is that even the best of us can go very wrong when we presume to judge others. John Mark was clearly a more honorable person than Paul was willing to admit when he disputed with Barnabas. In spite of Paul’s harsh judgment of him, Mark finally caught up with Paul, he put the past behind him, and he was one of the few who stayed with him and saw after his needs till the very end.
How valuable are faithful friends and how careful we ought to be in our dealings with them. Such friends as Barnabas are not easy to find. They are not easy to regain, and impossible to replace.
So far as the record goes, Paul and Barnabas never traveled together again. In fact, we do not find a record of their ever seeing each other again. What a tragic end to one of the closest and most tender friendships we read about in the Bible. How sad that they would allow their difference of opinion about a fellow minister to poison their friendship.
THE END