Author: Charlie Garrett

Nifty looking building. Virginia.

Friday, 3 March 2023

Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question. Acts 15:2

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The previous verse told of the Judaizers coming to Antioch and telling the brethren that unless they were circumcised, they could not be saved. With that remembered, it next says, “Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them.”

The first word, translated as dissension, stasis, was used concerning Barabbas in Luke 23:19 and translated as insurrection or rebellion. It is the etymological root of our current word, stasis, which is used at times to refer to a civil war. The sides were drawn up and there was no agreement to be found between them. Paul will say to the Galatians these words –

“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? ² This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? ³ Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? ⁴ Have you suffered so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain?” Galatians 3:1-4

The answer to the question for the Galatians to consider was obvious. They had heard the gospel, they had received the Spirit, and they were saved. Why would they need to then be circumcised if God had accepted them as they were? But as would happen later in Galatia, this is what the Judaizers were trying to get those believing Gentiles in Antioch to do. Obviously, Paul and Barnabas would not budge an inch. The Spirit had accepted the Gentiles as they were. Unless the Spirit was fickle and the giving of the Spirit was not a sound guarantee, there was nothing necessary to be added to His work.

The next word, translated as dispute, zétésis, is translated elsewhere as controversy, speculation, and so on. It signifies “a searching.” The YLT translates it as disputation. It is as if they had set forth a formal debate in order to settle the matter. They presented why they believed what they believed in order to convince others. But a resolution was not forthcoming. Hence, “they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem.”

This is the logical avenue to take in this case. There was an unresolved dispute, the apostles had been set forth as those who were to speak on behalf of the Lord, and so the matter would rightly be elevated to them. Paul, even though appointed an apostle, would certainly have agreed to this because he knew that:

1) God is not fickle. He had called Paul to this ministry and had given him sufficient instruction to know that what he was doing was right and appropriate. As this is so, He would not suddenly call out Paul’s stand as incorrect and requiring amendment.

2) The Lord had approved of the actions of Paul and Barnabas through “signs and wonders” (Acts 14:3, etc.). Thus, He would certainly be among the apostles to support the work that had already begun and which was approved by Him.

3) At whatever point in the timeline it had actually occurred, the conversion of Cornelius and those with him was prior to this time. The Spirit had come down upon those Gentiles without any hint of law observance. Peter and those with him were witnesses to this fact and he would have to acknowledge this, thus making a logical and indisputable defense for Paul’s position.

Along with this, Albert Barnes provides further reasons for why these Judaizers would also surely be happy to have a trial in Jerusalem. He says –

——————–

(1) That Jerusalem would be regarded by them as the source of authority in the Christian church, as it had been among the Jews.
(2) most of the apostles and the most experienced Christians were there. They had listened to the instructions of Christ himself; had been long in the church; and were supposed to be better acquainted with its design and its laws.
(3) those who came from Judea would not be likely to acknowledge the authority of Paul as an apostle: the authority of those at Jerusalem they would recognize.
(4) they might have had a very confident expectation that the decision there would be in their favor. The question had not been agitated there. They had all been Jews, and it is certain that they continued as yet to attend in the temple service, and to conform to the Jewish customs. They might have expected, therefore, with great confidence, that the decision would be in their favor, and they were willing to refer it to those who resided at Jerusalem.

——————–

These points are validated by the next words, which note that they were going up to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders.”

If the Lord had established a New Covenant and there was a new direction in the redemptive events taking place among the people, it would be appropriate to go to the body that was designated by Him to conduct the affairs of that body. There would be no need to go to the stewards of the Mosaic Covenant because they had missed the train on what God was doing. And so, it was to the body who were assigned to the affairs of the New Covenant that the men went up to Jerusalem “about this question.”

The word translated as question is zétéma. It is found four times, only in Acts. It is from the same root as the word translated above as dispute. This refers to the underlying idea behind the dispute. It is intended to probe the principle at stake. In order to obtain a resolution, the matter will be fully explored and contemplated.

Life application: God provided revelation to the people under the law as He saw fit. An explanation of this was given as the first words of Hebrews were penned –

 “God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, ² has in these last days spoken to us by His Son.” Hebrews 1:1, 2

This was needed during the time before and during the law. The reason for this is that the Old Testament was not yet complete. Prophets spoke to instruct the people. But the words of many of them were recorded. Eventually, the Old Testament was complete and the prophetic word ceased. The time after the final words of the Old Testament were received is known as the intertestamental period.

With this body of literature complete, the people waited for the Messiah. God again spoke to the people at the time of the coming of John the Baptist. However, the record of that is found not in the Old Testament, but rather the New. The Old Testament stood as its own witness and it was sealed as complete.

With the coming of Christ and the completion of His work, God moved among the people once again. This, as in the completion of the Old Testament, would eventually end. With the completion of the New Testament, there is – like during the intertestamental period – no longer a need for the prophetic word in visions, dreams, or other various ways.

And so, we must each question where we will set our doctrine. Is it in the completed canon of Scripture or are we still seeking out more information? The surest way to run off course is to deviate from what God has conveyed to us in His word. Israel continuously failed to discover this, and the church in large part has failed to pay heed. Be content that God has provided all we need to rightly conduct our affairs and know what He expects as He has detailed in Scripture. Hold fast to the word! The apostles have spoken and the word is compiled.

O God, it is such a blessing to our souls to know that Your word is written and that it is sufficient for us to know what You expect of us. We can easily ignore those who claim a word from You today, knowing that we have THE WORD from You. With this knowledge, we are sure to be kept from going astray. Thank You for this precious gift. Amen.

Welcome? We’re done with Vermont. Turning around now. Next stop, Washington.

Thursday, 2 March 2023

And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Acts 15:1

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

Acts 14 ended with a note that Paul and Barnabas stayed in Antioch with the disciples for a long time. What becomes certain now at the start of Chapter 15 is that their doctrine was noticed by the Judaizers and spoken against. Gentiles had begun to enter the church and yet remained uncircumcised. That is evident by noting Luke’s opening words of the chapter which begin with, “And certain men.”

The word “men” is inserted. They are identified by an indefinite masculine pronoun. It could rightly be translated, “And some.” Inserting men is fine because the pronoun is masculine, but Luke is certainly being imprecise, demonstrating that these were people with no standing or authority to do what they will do. He does not identify them as “brethren,” nor does he describe any ranking or authority as he did in Acts 6:7 (for example) when he said –

“Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.”

What is meant by this is that these priests, the stewards of the Law of Moses, had placed themselves under a new authority. They had gone from Moses to Christ. As for these men now being mentioned by Luke, no names are given, implying that they are just a group of men with obviously no authority to direct matters. This is in contrast to Paul and Barnabas who are called apostles in Acts 14:14, even if Barnabas’ apostleship was temporary and under the authority of the church at Antioch. Of these unnamed men, Luke says that they “came down from Judea.”

Rather, the verb is an aorist participle, “having come down from Judea.” Because of the use of the participle, one thought will lead to the next. For now, it is noticeable that it doesn’t say that they were from Jerusalem, of the Levites, of the priests, or sent by the apostles. There is no hint of any authority at all, whether in the church or of the leadership of Israel. Instead, these men – seemingly converted to Christianity – were merely from Judea without any recognizable qualifications. And even if they once had standing, such as the priests mentioned above from Acts 6, they have no recognizable standing with the church. All that is given is that they have come from Judea. And yet Luke next says, “and taught the brethren.”

Imagine someone coming from Washington DC, a nobody with no authority at all, who knocks on your door and says, “I am here from Washington DC to explain to you why you cannot possess a gun.” Will you listen to him? What authority does he actually possess? This is what Luke is trying to get his audience to think about by the way he has structured his words.

Some people, who obviously have no authority at all, have been introduced into the narrative. Luke has not even called them “brothers” as is so often the case in Acts. The only thing that identifies them is that they are from Judea. And yet, they are now teaching a congregation without recognizable authority. And what do they say? Luke next records their words as, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”

Rather, the Greek more poignantly states the matter using negatives – “If you are not circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you are not able to be saved.” There is a mark of total exclusion in their words. And more, they don’t simply say, “If you are not circumcised, you cannot be saved.” Rather, they say, “According to the custom of Moses.”

This is not an identifier with Abraham as the father of the Hebrew people as recorded in Genesis 17. Rather, it is an identifier with the Law of Moses received at Mount Sinai. In other words, these few words, spoken by these anti-Christian Judaizers, heap the entire Law of Moses, with all of its many rules and regulations, directly on the shoulders of the Gentile believers.

With no standing other than where they were from, these unnamed have thrown the congregation into an uproar. It is true that Moses was told by the Lord before the introduction of the law that those who participated in the Passover were to be circumcised, as is recorded in Exodus 12:44-48. However, that was later codified into the law itself in Leviticus 12:3 for all born under the law. Thus, this supposed teaching of these unidentified men has set aside the grace of Christ and brought the Law of Moses back to the main center of attention.

Life application: In the example above concerning someone coming from Washington DC, it is obvious that the place where he came from does not give him any authority at all. He is a nobody that has no power. And yet, because of where he is from, you might say to yourself, “I’d better listen to this guy. He is from D.C. and so he must know what he is talking about.”

Now transfer that exact same thought to your life in Christ and see if you, or someone you know, are guilty of making the same error in the past. Have you ever turned on the TV or the internet and seen someone who is from Israel (or simply some Jew) tell you that you shouldn’t be eating pork or that you must support Israel in order to be saved? If not, this may sound ridiculous to you, but both of these teachings are heard among the Judaizers of today.

Maybe you heard from someone who is in the Seventh Day Adventists say that unless you observe the Sabbath you cannot be saved. Have you been told by someone in the Church of Christ that you must be baptized in the Church of Christ in order to be saved? Have you ever heard that unless you are under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, you can’t be saved? Each of these is a claim made by people today.

The list goes on and on of people claiming what saves and that if you don’t do what they tell you then you cannot be saved. Who are these people? What authority do they possess? The only source we have for such matters today is the Bible. It is the authority by which God has spoken out these matters and there is no other. This is because it is the word of the Lord through His chosen prophets, apostles, and authors.

If the word does not agree with what they say, then they are false teachers. And this goes directly to the heart of whether extra-biblical revelation is still given today. Because if it is, then the Bible is not the final source for such matters, and we are left in a sea of absolute chaos.

The Seventh Day Adventists believe that Ellen G White, their founder, received extra-biblical revelation. Likewise, Mormonism makes the same claim concerning Joseph Smith. The Roman Catholic Church believes it has authority over the word and it accepts that extra-biblical revelation is valid. People believe Jesus speaks to them in dreams and visions. If we accept one word of extra-biblical revelation, then we must accept them all because there is no standard to determine which is true and which isn’t, because the authority of the Bible is not absolute.

Think these things through. Either God has spoken and that is it, or we have no sure word by which to guide our lives in Christ. Be grounded in the word, reject anyone who teaches contrary to what the word says, and ignore anyone who claims a dream or vision from God. People like that have been around since the very beginning of the church and they are still out there today. The challenge of Acts 15:1 is the first main internal challenge the church faced, and the church is still facing it to this day.

Lord God, how evident it is that we need to know what the word says. Without that, we are possibly placing ourselves under the whims of anyone who claims some type of authority that is not granted by You alone. Your word is truly to be our guide, and so may we be competent in our pursuit of knowing it more from day to day. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

Pointed thing. Vermont landscape.

Wednesday, 1 March 2023

So they stayed there a long time with the disciples. Acts 14:28

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The previous verse detailed the first coming together of the church after the return of the apostles. They gave a report of all that God had done with them, also noting that He had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles. With that remembered, it next says, “So they stayed there.”

This refers to Paul and Barnabas. After giving their report, they remained in Antioch. With that understood, the next words are as debated as where government officials think the people’s money should be spent. Luke records that they stayed there “a long time.”

The Greek reads, “no little time.” The indefinite nature of the words leave much to be guessed at. Without knowing how long the missionary journey was, there is no way to know how long the stay after it could have been. Some think this stay was a year, others say two or three or even five. Some say the missionary journey was probably two years. Others say the methodical nature of Paul would mean it was as much as four.

As usual, Barnes provide his thoughts, they are as acceptable as any other, remembering that the duration of the missionary journey would change the length of the stay now recorded –

“If the transactions recorded in this chapter occurred, as is supposed, about 45 a.d. or 46 a.d., and the council at Jerusalem assembled 51 a.d. or 53 a.d., as is supposed, then here is an interval of from five to eight years in which we have no account of them. Where they were, or what was their employment in this interval, the sacred historian has not informed us. It is certain, however, that Paul made several journeys of which we have no particular record in the New Testament, and it is possible that some of those journeys occurred during this interval. Thus, he preached the gospel as far as Illyricum, Romans 15:19. And in 2 Corinthians 11:23-27, there is an account of trials and persecutions, of many of which we have no distinct record, and which might have occurred during this interval.” Albert Barnes

No matter what, they didn’t just stay in Antioch and pick flowers. Rather, the verse and the chapter end with the words, “with the disciples.”

This obviously could allow for Barnes’ thoughts because it might be that one was with the disciples constantly while another traveled, or they each came and went as they decided. Nothing is specifically stated and so those matters cannot be known. However, those in Antioch were instructed and built up in the Lord. But what is more than probable is that during this time many Gentiles began to join the church.

The precedent had been set on the missionary journey and it meant that Gentiles could come in, joining the church, and not even need to be circumcised. This thought then will establish the basis for the opening verses of Chapter 15.

Life application: We cannot be dogmatic about what is left unstated. Inferences can be made, but unless there are set parameters in the surrounding text, our guesses are only that. In the case of the indeterminate time mentioned in this verse, we must not be overly dogmatic about our viewpoint. This is true with other points of doctrine as well.

There is a set and specific amount of information to derive our theology from. Quite often inferences must be made, and that is fine. And more, the more we know the rest of the word, the better our inferences might be. But if they cannot be pinned down exactly, we should always note that what we state is inferred. In this, we will be responsibly conveying the truth of the matter to those we instruct.

In all things, let us not purposefully twist or distort what Scripture says to form an opinion. The word is too precious to allow that to occur. Eventually, all things will be revealed. Until that day, certain things will remain undetermined.

Lord God, thank You for the chance to contemplate things that are not explicitly stated in Your word. We can form conclusions and modify them as we consider other things that come to mind. There is no end to the chance to grow in this precious word because of this. It is alive and it feeds our minds. The more we study it, the more our minds will grow in the knowledge of who You are and of what You are telling us. Thank You for this precious word! Amen.

Super cool overpass. Vermont.

Tuesday, 28 February 2023

Now when they had come and gathered the church together, they reported all that God had done with them, and that He had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles. Acts 14:27

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

In the previous verse, Paul and Barnabas had left Attalia and returned to Antioch from where they had begun their missionary journey. Having now arrived, it says, “Now when they had come and gathered the church together.”

Luke omits any details between arriving on the ship and the gathering of the church. The effect is to show the importance of the event and to give a sense of immediacy, even if the two arrived on a Wednesday and the church didn’t meet until Saturday or Sunday. In this, he is highlighting the mission and not the life of the missionaries.

It is this same congregation that had sent them forth with fasting, prayers, and the laying on of hands in Acts 13:2, 3. It is unknown if letters were sent back to the church or if this is the first time any word concerning them had come since John’s departure in Acts 13:13. With their return, however, there would be excitement to hear what the Lord had done through them, knowing that it was the Holy Spirit who originally called for them to be sent.

Once the church was gathered together, it next says, “they reported all that God had done with them.” Rather, the verb is imperfect, saying, “they were reporting all that God had done with them.” They probably started right from the beginning as they arrived downriver at Selucia and just kept talking the audience through the entire journey.

Of certain note would be the animosity of the Jews along the way concerning the message of Jesus being the Messiah. And yet, there was also another remarkable detail that would hopefully bring great encouragement to the church, but which may also have brought a measure of concern or even jealousy to a portion of it. That begins to be seen in the words, “and that He had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles.”

There is no article before “door.” It more closely reads, “and that He had opened to the Gentiles a door of faith.” The meaning is obvious. Unlike the Jews who were required to circumcise, even before the introduction of the Law of Moses, the Gentiles were not given such a requirement. This then once again set Israel’s circumcision apart as a cultural identity, but not a requirement for salvation. It is the state in which Abraham was admitted into fellowship with God in Genesis 15, before he was circumcised –

“And behold, the word of the Lord came to him, saying, ‘This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir.’ ⁵ Then He brought him outside and said, ‘Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.’ And He said to him, ‘So shall your descendants be.’
⁶ And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.” Genesis 15:4-6

Circumcision was mandated for this covenant group of people years later in Genesis 17. Eventually, it was mandated under the Law of Moses. But the Gentiles had now been admitted apart from circumcision, and thus, apart from the Law of Moses and without the cultural identifier of physical circumcision.

In addition to this, the term “a door of faith to the Gentiles” brings in an entirely new dynamic that has not yet been seen, demonstrating that the missionary trip was not “to the Gentiles” in the minds of the church, only in the mind of God. The evangelism of Paul and Barnabas never noted Gentiles on the island of Cyprus. Not until Sergius Paulus called for them to speak was any contact with the Gentiles noted. Rather, only preaching in the synagogues was.

This was such a remarkable event that it was deduced at that time that this is when Saul’s name was changed in the narrative to Paul. The purpose of his apostleship was apparently becoming clear to him.

Upon arriving on the mainland, it wasn’t until Acts 13:46 that Paul and Barnabas exclaimed to the Jews, “but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.” It can be seen that this was the defining transitional moment when it was realized what God was doing and why these two had been sent. A door of faith had been opened to the Gentiles and these men were there to usher them through it via their preaching.

This will become perfectly evident as Chapter 15 begins and the word of these events reaches the ears of the Judaizers. What occurs there and after will become the basis for the writing of the book of Galatians.

Of the term “door of faith,” Charles Ellicott notes the following –

“This is noticeable as the first occurrence, as far as the chronological order of the books of the New Testament is concerned, of a very characteristic phrase. It would seem to have been a favourite metaphor of St. Paul’s (comp. 1Corinthians 16:1; 2Corinthians 2:12; Colossians 4:3), and comes in here, probably, as a fragment from his speech. From this point of view it is interesting to note the recurrence of the phrase in Revelation 3:8, both St. Paul and St. John, representing as they did different sections of the Church (Galatians 2:9), agreeing in the thought that the door of the Father’s house was now opened wider than it had ever been before, and that no man might shut it.”

His words are well stated and they, again, demonstrate that the door is faith and that it is referring not to Jews of the end times. Rather, it is an offering to Jews and Gentiles during this dispensation known as the church age. The Law is fulfilled in Christ, and thus works are excluded. It is faith in the accomplished work of Jesus Christ alone that allows entrance into the kingdom.

Life application: The transition of stewardship of the faith is being made from Jewish leadership to Gentile leadership in these chapters of Acts. Eventually, that transfer will be complete and the nation of Israel will be dispersed and without any standing in what God is doing in the redemptive narrative.

And yet, Jews are not excluded from what He is doing. Rather, they are on the same level as the Gentiles, as is evidenced in verses such as Galatians 3:28. Despite this, it does not mean that God is through with Israel as a nation. Rather, Paul explains that issue in Romans 9-11. As a very simple example of what is occurring, we could say that the Hatfield family is given the stewardship of an apple orchard. For a McCoy to be a part of the farm, he needs to join the Hatfield family.

However, the Hatfields eventually have their stewardship taken away from them and it is transferred to the McCoy family, but with a proviso that the Hatfields will again, someday in the unknown future, be granted the stewardship again. In the meantime, any Hatfields – still remaining Hatfields – may enjoy partaking in the stewardship transferred to the McCoys if the preconditions for inclusion are met.

This is what is happening now in the transition of stewardship from Jew to Gentile in Acts. In the past, Gentiles who wanted to participate in what God was doing under the law had to join Israel, becoming a part of them. Under the new stewardship, the commonwealth remains the same, but the stewardship is granted to a new entity. Those of Israel who do not accept the current provisions are not a part of that commonwealth, even though they are of Israel the nation. Those of the Gentiles who accept the provisions are included in the commonwealth even though they are not a part of Israel the nation.

Keep the boxes straight, understand that God is in charge, and accept that His choices in these matters are what is important. What we like or do not like is wholly irrelevant. This is God’s world, it is His offering of salvation, and we are obligated to what He is doing at any given time in the process of living through His dispensations.

Lord God, we are so thankful to You for allowing us to be a part of what You are doing in the world. You have sent Jesus Christ to save us from this life of corruption and death, giving us a new hope that we shall dwell in Your presence for all eternity. Thank You for what You have done for us, O God. Amen.

Covered Bridge. Vermont.

Monday, 27 February 2023

From there they sailed to Antioch, where they had been commended to the grace of God for the work which they had completed. Acts 14:26

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The previous verse told of the apostles preaching in Perga. That was followed by their going down to Attalia, a port on the coast. With that noted, it next says, “From there they sailed to Antioch.”

This is Syrian Antioch from which the apostles first departed in Acts 13:3. Unless this is a note of completion that ignores various stops the ship may have made, this is a direct trip even up the river to where Antioch was. It is possible the ship made stops or even completed its journey at Selucia and then the apostles traveled up the river to Antioch. The details of any such traveling are simply being left out of the record. No matter what, the record of the missionary trip is complete with these words.

With the journey home behind them, it next says that this is “where they had been commended to the grace of God.”

That was recorded in Acts 13:3 –

“Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away.”

Luke is reminding the reader that everything recorded is for the purpose of revealing what had occurred since that time and that it was a journey that these men were specifically commissioned to accomplish. They had fulfilled their assignment as witnessed by his written record. From there, it next says, “for the work.”

These words are based upon what is stated in Acts 13:2 –

“As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’”

The work they had participated in was an assignment first directed by the Holy Spirit. As God knows the end from the beginning, and as they were directed by the Holy Spirit, it can also be deduced that they were led by the Holy Spirit. Even the departure of John Mark from them is to be considered as an important point purposefully directed by the Holy Spirit to later be included in the Acts narrative by Luke.

It is this journey “which they had completed.” Their actions bear witness to their completion of what was directed. The recorded aspect of it, which is now included in the Bible, is a sufficient witness to that fact. With this note of completion, Barnabas is no longer to be considered an apostle. He was an apostle, a sent one, from Antioch, but only Paul was a sent one from Jesus. With this thought, the next verse will continue with the post-missionary journey details.

Life application: As noted in the previous verse, there are many things that may have occurred that are not recorded in the narrative by Luke. A preacher or teacher might attempt to justify divine protection of his missionaries by saying, “Do you see how God protected these two men throughout the entire journey? Neither one ever got sick on the entire trip. God will divinely protect you as well.”

This is both an argument from silence and an illogical conclusion concerning his own missionaries’ coming travels. For all we know, Barnabas was prone to sea sickness and was sick for the entire journey anytime he was on a ship. Paul may have eaten something bad in Iconium and been in bed for five days. We have no idea about such things, and we should never come to faulty conclusions based on what is not said.

There are times when what is not said is telling, but those things must be logical inferences that are in accord with the surrounding text. We must always be very careful to not insert fallacious thinking into the Bible. Rather we should only deduce what is right and logical. As an example, it says this in Deuteronomy 16:11 –

“You shall rejoice before the Lord your God, you and your son and your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, the Levite who is within your gates, the stranger and the fatherless and the widow who are among you, at the place where the Lord your God chooses to make His name abide.”

It is notable that the wife is missing from the list. Moses says you, your son, your daughter, your male servant, your female servant, the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, but nothing is said of the wife.

What seems obvious is that this is not saying that the wives were to stay home and take care of the pets. Rather, it is a way of acknowledging her importance within the household. The words take the reader back to the very beginning of man’s time on earth –

“And Adam said:
‘This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.’
²⁴ Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:23, 24

Rather than being an oversight by Moses, it appears he is reiterating the fact that the man and his wife are one. In mentioning him, she is implicitly mentioned as well. Therefore, there is no reason to include her in the list. It would be unthinkable for him to observe the feast without her. Thus, all were to attend, including the unstated wife. This is a logical deduction that is supported by the previous biblical narrative, as well as other such passages.

Let us always be attentive to what the word is saying, what the word is not saying, and what can be logically deduced from the omissions and what cannot be. The word is too important to manipulate or twist for our own agendas or perverse desires.

Exalted Heavenly Father, we have a pure and precious word that has been granted to us to lead our lives and direct our feet. Help us to treat it with the utmost care and never twist what is presented into something other than what You intend for us to see. Help us to be responsible in this manner. Amen.