BIBLE CHARACTER: Barnabas
Playing the Second Fiddle well…..
The well-known Baptist preacher of the nineteenth century, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, said: “It takes more grace (or skill) than I can tell to play the second fiddle well.” His statement may need explaining. In a full orchestra there are many instruments, including a number of violins which are also known as fiddles.
The leading violin player is the most important in the group and is known as the first violin (or fiddle). The second violin plays a subordinate role and is less noticeable in the performance. However, the player of this instrument must possess skill as well as a measure of restraint. He or she must respect the first violin player and must accept the fact that the second violin does not occupy as important a role. To play the second fiddle well means recognizing that your role may actually enhance the performance of the first fiddle player. The second fiddle player is not striving to be noticed by playing louder than anyone else in his section of the orchestra. He is content to be regarded as second best.
Barnabas illustrates C.H. Spurgeon’s comment perfectly. He was a gracious man and was prepared, almost unnoticed, to slip from leader to being second in command. His name is first mentioned in Acts 4, and he features in the narrative until Acts 15. There are also a few brief references to him in 1 Corinthians, Galatians, and Colossians. We can learn many helpful lessons from this humble man who “played second fiddle” to the apostle Paul.
A GENEROUS MAN
Acts 4:32 describes the unity of the early believers and the care they displayed to one another. No poverty was evident among them, “for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold” to the apostles for distribution wherever there was need (4:34,35 KJV). One example is given to us – a man by the name of Joses (possibly a form of Joseph) who was a Levite from Cyprus. Not only did he sell his land; he also brought the money from the sale to the apostles in order for them to distribute it as they saw fit. This characteristic is important to keep in mind as we consider later events in the life of this man. His open-handed generosity is set in contrast to the deceit of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) who wanted to look good before others but acted dishonestly. Although introduced as Joses, the man whose life we are considering was known to his acquaintances by another name – Barnabas, or “son of consolation” (4:36). Literally Barnabas means “son of prophecy” and suggests one bringing messages of encouragement. His initial generosity was certainly an encouragement to the apostles and to the poor believers who benefitted from his kindness!
The next reference to Joses is found in Acts 9, and again we see how he lived up to the meaning of his new name (Barnabas) which is used from this point onwards. While journeying to Damascus on a mission of destruction, Saul of Tarsus had been converted. After spending some time in that city witnessing for the Lord, Saul experienced persecution from the Jews and received death threats. To save his life he was forced to escape to Jerusalem where he endeavoured to join the believers. However, they were wary of Saul as they knew his past and did not think it safe to receive him. One man did not distrust Saul – and that man was Barnabas. He “took him, and brought him to the apostles,” declaring how he had met the Lord on the road and had been converted (9:27). Barnabas did not question Saul’s integrity but confirmed to the believers that he was a changed man who had already been preaching boldly in Damascus.
Saul must have been greatly encouraged by Barnabas. Imagine how frustrated he must have felt when nobody seemed to believe his testimony. Barnabas, speaking on his behalf, made all the difference. In a similar way we may be able to give encouragement to a new believer.
SEEKING SAUL
The third reference to Barnabas is found in Acts 11. By this time the Gospel had spread and many souls had come to believe on the Lord Jesus (11:21). Antioch had become a great centre for evangelism, but concerns had been raised in Jerusalem where the leaders were Jewish. They wanted to be certain that a true work of God was taking place among the Gentiles. How could they be sure? They decided to send Barnabas to investigate. “He was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith” (11:24). They knew therefore that Barnabas would bring them an accurate report. True to the meaning of his name, Barnabas “was glad” when he saw evidence of the grace of God at work in Antioch and encouraged the new believers “that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord” (11:23). His desire for them was that they might continue in the things of the Lord.
However, Barnabas was a man of vision who could recognize what needed to be done. As he assessed the situation he knew that the new believers needed teaching – and he also knew someone who could help them. That person was Saul. Leaving Antioch, Barnabas travelled overland (a distance of approximately 150 miles) to Tarsus, seeking Saul who had evidently returned to his home town. After finding him the two of them returned to Antioch where they devoted a whole year to teaching the believers who were known as Christians (11:26). Perhaps Barnabas was aware of Saul’s potential and wanted to see his friend’s gifts develop. Whatever the reason may be, Barnabas was able to work in co-operation with a colleague. He did not want to make a name for himself by doing all the preaching at Antioch. This fact also teaches us a valuable lesson.
After spending the year at Antioch, Barnabas and Saul travelled to Jerusalem. The church in Antioch had been made aware of an impending famine and determined to send relief to the impoverished believers in Judea. (There was a severe famine in AD46.) Barnabas and Saul were the chosen men appointed to carry the gifts to Jerusalem. It is interesting, in passing, to note that the Lord’s servants are referred to here as “Barnabas and Saul” (11:30). Not long afterwards the order was reversed, signifying perhaps that Saul had become the leading figure of the two. After fulfilling their mission they returned from Jerusalem to Antioch, this time accompanied by Barnabas’ nephew, John Mark. (Acts 12:12 and Colossians 4:10 explain the relationship: Barnabas and Mary were brother and sister, and Mark was Mary’s son.)
SEPARATED FOR SERVICE
The believers in the church at Antioch were concerned to know the Lord’s will. As they fasted and prayed, the Lord revealed that Barnabas and Saul were to be “separated” (set apart) for the work to which He was calling them (13:2). Both of them were commended for the ministry that lay ahead and sent forth by the Holy Spirit, initially heading for Cyprus from where Barnabas had originated (13:3,4). Both men were listed among the “prophets and teachers” in the church (13:1), so evidently the work before them was of that nature. John Mark accompanied them on the journey. The Greek word describing John Mark and translated “minister” in Acts 13:5 literally means an under-rower – one who took the oars of the boat and rowed under the supervision of another. This was a great opportunity for the younger man to be part of a team, “learning the ropes” as we might say. Barnabas, the encourager, probably wanted to see his nephew make progress spiritually. Taking him along was very much like he had done earlier in seeking out Saul.
When opposition was encountered from Elymas the sorcerer, Saul (now also known as Paul) rebuked him in the power of the Spirit (13:8-10). This appears to have been a transition point in the ministry, for we read of “Paul and his companions” leaving Paphos (13:13). Not only did Paul’s name change; he now appeared to be the leader. At about this time John Mark left them and returned to Jerusalem. No reason is given for his departure. Perhaps he had a special interest in Cyprus from which his uncle had come and did not wish to travel elsewhere. Could it be that he resented the fact that Paul had replaced Barnabas (who was his relative) as the leader? Whatever caused him to return to Jerusalem resulted in Paul and Barnabas going their separate ways later on.
ONGOING SERVICE
Paul’s leadership was demonstrated at Antioch in Pisidia where he, rather than Barnabas, addressed the congregation in the synagogue (13:14-16). After Paul’s sermon many of the listeners “followed Paul and Barnabas” and learned more of the truth. Both men “persuaded them to continue in the grace of God” (13:43). Here again we see evidence of Barnabas encouraging others. Earlier he had been described as a man full of the Holy Spirit (11:24); in the face of fierce opposition he and Paul now boldly confronted their opponents before shaking the dust from their feet as they left (13:46,51). This deliberate act indicated that Paul and Barnabas had discharged their responsibilities faithfully and were leaving those who had rejected the message to their own devices.
A journey of about 80 miles brought Paul and Barnabas to Iconium, before they travelled on to Lystra and Derbe. The opening part of Acts 14 describes the occasion when Paul was presumed dead in Lystra after being stoned, but God miraculously raised him up again. Their journey brought them back to Antioch, the city from which they had initially been commended. Sensing a responsibility to those who had commended them in the first place, Paul and Barnabas gathered the church together and gave a report of their work. God had truly “opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles” (14:27). Notice that the emphasis was upon what God had done rather than upon what His servants had done.
PROBLEMS ARISE
Legalism was a real problem in the early Church. Believers from a Jewish background found it difficult to abandon some of the demands of the law which were now unnecessary. While Paul and Barnabas were in Antioch, teachers from Judea visited the area and began to teach that circumcision was a necessary part of salvation (15:1). The debate was evidently quite heated and did not result in any agreement between the two opposing parties. It was therefore determined that Paul and Barnabas should return to Jerusalem to discuss the problem with the apostles there (15:2). This may be the occasion described by Paul in Galatians 2 – though Bible commentators differ on this point.
In Galatians 2:13 Paul revealed the severity of the disagreement which had arisen, for even Barnabas for a time was carried away by the strong views of the separatists who had taught that Jews and Gentiles should not eat together.
Thankfully the disagreement (whenever it took place) was resolved, and Paul and Barnabas were commended by the church leaders in Jerusalem to take the Gospel to the Gentiles (Gal.2:9). The visit to Jerusalem, recorded in Acts 15, ended amicably. James the apostle summarized the situation and instructed that a letter should be sent back to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, explaining the responsibilities that Gentile believers should accept. As Barnabas was the better known of the two in Jerusalem his name was written first, but both men were respected as those who had hazarded their lives in the service of the Lord Jesus Christ (15:25,26). Neither of them had engaged in “risk assessment” which we may have heard about in industry today! They were both prepared to take risks as they continued in the service of the Lord, seeking to glorify Him.
After returning to Antioch with the letter, Paul and Barnabas continued for some time, “teaching and preaching the word of the Lord” (15:35). Shortly afterwards a disagreement arose. Paul wanted to revisit the places where they had been before, to see what progress the new believers were making. Barnabas supported Paul’s idea but thought it would be good for John Mark to accompany them again. Although the young man had left them on their previous journey, Barnabas probably considered him a little older and wiser and more reliable now. Paul, however, opposed the idea. John Mark had deserted them before; might he not do it again? Great opposition had been experienced on the earlier trip in a number of places. No doubt Paul thought it might be too arduous for the young man. The contention was so sharp between them that Paul and Barnabas went their separate ways. Paul took Silas with him and travelled through Syria while Barnabas departed for Cyprus (where he probably had family connections) with John Mark (15:36-41).
As we consider the rift between these two men who had both served the Lord so faithfully we might wonder what went wrong. Which of them was to blame? Perhaps it would be fair to say that neither of them was entirely innocent. It is all too easy to show special favours to our relatives, and Barnabas may not have acted impartially. On the other hand Paul might have been slightly harsh. John Mark had failed, but failure need not be final. Wisdom is needed to know when to entrust someone who has previously failed with further responsibility. Time must be given for them to prove themselves – but how much time? Paul and Silas were “recommended by the brethren” for their ministry (15:40), but there is no record of any similar recommendation being given to Barnabas and John Mark.
Rather than pinning a greater share of blame upon Barnabas, perhaps it would be better to view the outcome differently. Sad though the disagreement is, the positive result was that two “teams” of workers went out to two different areas. Although he disappears from the sacred record at this point, perhaps the Lord over-ruled and blessed the ministry of Barnabas too.
ALL IS WELL
Before concluding this article there is one enlightening statement to ponder. We have already mentioned Colossians 4:10 where Paul refers to John Mark and encourages the believers to receive him if he arrived. That would suggest that Paul had no bad feelings about him – even if he did not want him as a travelling companion earlier. Although we cannot be certain exactly when Colossians was written, it was certainly after the events described in Acts 15. But 2 Timothy 4:11 leaves us in no doubt. In that verse Paul described Mark as “profitable to me for the ministry” and encouraged Timothy to bring him. If there had been any animosity, it certainly existed no more.
Barnabas did play the second fiddle well. He was generous, humble, and ready to advance the cause of others. He had no intention of building an empire for himself. Like all of us he was not perfect, but valuable lessons from his life shine out and teach us today.