The Greatest Apostolic Dispute
Knowing Your Apostles — Part 4
This is a fun, lighthearted series intended not necessarily to teach, but to spark conversation. Consider this an open invitation to share what you know, like, dislike, or simply find interesting about any of the apostles. This is a judgment-free zone, so feel free to share your thoughts and opinions.
Series Fourth Question
The third question of this series is: Was Paul wrong to reject Mark?
My Answer: Yes
I believe the apostle Paul was wrong to reject Mark. This is my opinion, and you may disagree. You don’t have to accept my conclusion, but I want to explain why I believe Paul was wrong.
First, let’s review what Scripture records about the three men involved: Barnabas, Paul, and Mark.
A Few Biographical Facts
Barnabas
Barnabas’ birth name was actually Joses (which I suspect is a variant of Joseph). He was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36). The name Barnabas, meaning “Son of Encouragement,” was given to him by the apostles. I suspect this was not only because of his selfless act of selling his land and giving the proceeds to the early church (Acts 4:37), but also because they recognized that quality as an inherent part of his character.
After Paul’s conversion, it was Barnabas who introduced him to the apostles and the church in Jerusalem. The believers there had initially rejected Paul, fearing he was still the man who had persecuted them (Acts 9:26–27). Scripture doesn’t tell us how, but Barnabas had evidently become convinced that Paul’s conversion was genuine.
The apostles also held Barnabas in very high regard. When they heard about the growing church in Antioch, it was Barnabas whom they sent to investigate (Acts 11:22–24). He later departed for Tarsus to find Paul and brought him back to Antioch, where the two ministered together as leaders.
Scripture describes Barnabas as:
“...a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith.”
— Acts 11:24
Keep all of this in mind, because I believe what we’ve learned so far about Barnabas becomes pivotal in understanding the dispute that later unfolded between him and Paul.
One interesting nugget you may not have heard before: Barnabas, along with Apollos, has long been one of the two leading candidates proposed as the author of Hebrews. While the book itself is anonymous and Scripture never identifies its author, Barnabas has been a prominent suggestion throughout church history.
Lastly, in case anyone questions whether Barnabas was an apostle—he was. Acts 14:14 explicitly refers to both Barnabas and Paul as apostles.
Paul
Paul is already well known, so I won’t spend much time on his biography.
He was born in Tarsus of Cilicia and raised as a Pharisee. He studied under one of the most respected Jewish teachers of his day—Gamaliel.
A zealous defender of Judaism, Paul fiercely persecuted the church until his dramatic encounter with the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9). From that moment on, he was never the same.
Paul was unquestionably an apostle. He repeatedly identified himself as one in his letters, and Scripture also explicitly recognizes both Paul and Barnabas as apostles (Acts 14:14).
Paul wrote thirteen books of the New Testament.
Mark
Mark’s mother’s name was Mary, and it was to her house that Peter went after an angel released him from Herod’s imprisonment (Acts 12:1–12).
We know him as Mark, but that was actually his last name (Acts 12:12). John was his first name, which is why he came to be known as John Mark.
He was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians 4:10), and their stories actually parallel one another in their association with the apostles.
Mark was not an apostle, but he was one of the four Gospel writers and the author of the Gospel of Mark.
Background of the Dispute
Barnabas and Paul were leaders in the church at Antioch (Acts 13) when the Holy Spirit sent them to preach to the Gentiles (vv. 2–3). One of the first places they visited was Cyprus, Barnabas’ hometown, and Mark accompanied them as their helper (v. 5).
One of the notable events of this first missionary journey took place at Paphos on the island of Cyprus, where they encountered a Jewish sorcerer and false prophet named Bar-Jesus, also called Elymas (vv. 6–12). Paul famously struck him with blindness because he tried to prevent the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, from coming to faith.
Another nugget: scholars believe that the conversion of Sergius Paulus was why Paul, who until then was known as Saul (his birth name), came to be called Paul, in keeping with a Roman military tradition in which Roman generals adopted the names of important cities they conquered.
From Paphos they sailed to Perga, and it was there that Mark left them and returned to Jerusalem (v. 13). Although Scripture doesn’t tell us why he left, I wonder if he was simply homesick or seasick. The journeys to both Cyprus and Perga were by ship.
The Dispute
Barnabas and Paul completed this first missionary journey at the end of Acts 14 and returned to Antioch, where they had begun, and remained there for a long time — v. 28.
The time between this first missionary journey and the second was when Barnabas and Paul went up to Jerusalem to consult the apostles and elders on the matter of circumcision. I previously referenced this story in Part 3, The Skeptic Who Became an Apostle.
Following the resolution of the controversy over circumcision in Acts 15, Paul asked Barnabas that they should go back and visit the places where they had been on the first missionary journey — v. 36. Barnabas wanted to take Mark along — v. 37; apparently, he had returned to Antioch. Paul did not think it was wise, since he had previously deserted them in Pamphylia — v. 38.
They had such a heated disagreement that Barnabas sailed for Cyprus with Mark, and Paul chose Silas and left to go visit the believers.
My Opinion
It may seem that Barnabas chose family over his relationship with Paul, and there could be other undertones at play. However, I believe Barnabas knew or saw something about Mark that Paul did not—namely, that Mark was not an unreliable person.
The biblical record bears this out. He was highly regarded by the apostle Peter, and even later by Paul, who had previously rejected him.
Peter calls him “son” while Mark was with him in Babylon — 1 Peter 5:13.
He is subsequently found alongside Paul on multiple occasions (Colossians 4:10; Philemon 1:24). Paul later writes of him:
“Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful to me for ministry.”
— 2 Timothy 4:11
Some scholars believe Paul wrote 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy 15–18 years after his disagreement with Barnabas over Mark, near the end of his life.
This is the same Paul who earlier thought it was not wise to take Mark along. Yet here he acknowledges Mark’s usefulness. We do not get to hear Barnabas’ side of this story, but this stands as a clear endorsement and reversal of Paul’s earlier judgment.
This is, for me, the strongest argument for believing that Paul was wrong to reject Mark at that earlier point.
The object lesson I take from this is that we must be careful not to be quick to dismiss or reject people, and certainly not on the basis of a single failure (real or imagined) or disagreement. I believe this aligns with Paul’s own words:
“We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.”
— Romans 15:1 (ESV)
Your Turn
You don’t have to agree with my analysis because it is only my interpretative inference. If you believe Paul was right or have other ideas, I would love to hear your thoughts.
Your answer doesn’t have to be as long as mine—feel free to share in the comments.