This past Sunday my home church, Willow, spent the evening studying and meditating on Acts 15:36-16:5. The discussion was so right and insightful, I felt compelled to finalize my thoughts through processing and writing. Here was our text:

And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions that had been reached by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem. So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily.

One of the very first observations from last night was concerning how it seems like Paul was being, at best, unkind and, at worst, rude. Paul decided to not take Mark because he left early in the first missionary journey. We are left to speculate why he left, but contextually we can have a fair guesses. Acts 13 tells the story of Paul’s punitive miracle wherein he spoke and

“Immediately mist and darkness fell upon [the false prophet], and he went about seeking people to lead him by the hand.”

Mark ran off after this powerful and jarring event took place most likely because he was scared. Luke actually uses the Greek word “apostanta” for the word “departed” in v38. This is the same word used in Luke 8:13 when Jesus describes how some people will “fall away” from the faith after coming to faith in Jesus. Furthermore, apostanta is where we get our word “apostate” meaning a person who renounces a religious position. Luke’s description of Mark’s decision here is not to be taken lightly as Paul’s opinion and Luke’s choice of words are extremely negative.

Yet, Barnabas still chose to take Mark and this results in a division between Paul and Barnabas. Why did Barnabas take Mark and Paul take Silas? Barnabas is known to be the uncle of Mark, which leads us to understand a certain level of commitment to Mark. Paul doesn’t seem to have this same connection. Barnabas is interested in developing a missionary, Paul is interested in planting churches. Yet, not all is lost as Paul will eventually refer to Mark as his son in 1 Peter. It could appear that Paul isn’t being unkind or rude, but that he knows the task entrusted to him and he needs to assemble his team accordingly.

So why Silas and why Timothy? I’d like to make a case that it resides on the sholders of authority. The decision to take Silas is simple: Acts 15 records the highly disputed topic concerning the circumcision of the Gentiles, which Silas and Paul were present for. Taking Silas allowed for Paul to have someone to back up his claims, being one who was

“commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord.”

Furthermore, Timothy presented a completley unique opportunity. Luke intentionally records Timothy’s racial diversity; Timothy is bi-racial and multicultural. Timothy is the perfect person to take on the coming journey.

Timothy’s father was a gentile and his mother was a Jew, Timothy had a foot in both yards. Timothy, in a way, would have the ability to talk to Jewish believers as well as Gentile believers. Yet, the grand confusion comes when Paul circumcises Timothy. So much energy and effort went into Paul and Barnabas arguing against gentile circumcision, yet the first thing Paul does is circumcise Timothy. I’d argue the answer lies in the level of authority. If Paul asked Timothy to accompany him in proclaiming to the Gentiles that circumcision wasn’t necessary for faith, he’d need to be one who had the clout to say that. Luke writes he was circumcised

“because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.”

Timothy’s company had the potential baggage of skepticism and debate solely due to this topic. If Paul and Timothy’s message was going to be one of freedom from circumcision, then both Timothy and Pual needed to be in the position to have credibility surrounding their words. Therefore, Timothy needed to do whatever necessary to have the stature to preach this message. By Timothy being circumcised, it allowed him the authority to proclaim, “You don’t need to be circumcised for faith in Jesus.” Timothy words of freedom, if uncircumcised, could have been easily discredited as words from one who was trying to avoid circumcision. It is similar to the Christian who has abstained from drinking having clout to say it is permissible for Christians to drink. The Christian who is holding a beer in his hand doesn’t have as much authority (if any) to bless the practice of drinking. (I’m not making a case for or against drinking). Or the Christian who forgoes the extravegent lifestyle to be able to say simplicity and/or spending is optimal. It is the one who forsakes the pleasures or ease who has credibility to advocate for such pleasure or ease. Timothy forgoes not having to be circumcised in order to preach this message. This is an excellent illustration of Paul’s writing,

“To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews.”

This begs the quest of our life, is our lifestyle and decisions allowing us the space and authority to say what needs to be said to those we serve. Does our life back-up our words or deflate them? May we be a type of Christian whose lives don’t betray our words.