I would ask that you join me in the book of Acts, chapter number 15, as we continue our journey through Luke's narrative of the early days of the Christian church. Acts, chapter number 15. Acts 15 is full of controversy and conflict. In the early part of Acts 15, Luke recorded the controversy that arose over the question of what one must do to be saved. You remember that there were certain men that taught that one must be circumcised in order to be saved. Acts 15, verse number one. And so to address the issue, a church council convened in Jerusalem to defend and clarify or define the grace of God, the gospel of grace from those legalistic Judaizers. Here now in the latter part of Acts 15, Luke recorded a conflict that arose between Paul and Barnabas over John Mark. Paul and Barnabas were preparing to take a second missionary journey and Barnabas wanted to take John Mark along, but Paul did not. Verse 39 explains that the contention became so sharp that Paul and Barnabas actually parted company, each going their own way. Now, we would agree that the controversy in the early part of Acts 15 was necessary. It is always necessary to defend the gospel, to earnestly contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints, Jude verse three. But the second conflict in this chapter, the conflict in the latter part of Acts 15, now it puzzles our minds and it polarizes our thinking. Why did Paul and Barnabas differ so greatly? And why were they so stubborn? What was the big deal? And why did Luke have to record these things for us and scar the reputations of these great men of God? Of course, ultimately, this morning, we want to know who was right and who was wrong. After all, that's what matters, isn't it? From Acts 15, verses 36 to 41, I've prepared a message titled, How to Fight Right. How to Fight Right. Now, a couple words of disclaimer as we begin. First, anytime I hear a how-to sermon, or I see a how-to book, I immediately become cynical. And perhaps you do the same. I recently saw a book, How to Pay Zero Taxes. I saw another book how to learn a foreign language in 10 days. Really? But this morning I asked that you would indulge me this how to fight right another word of disclaimer. I do not believe that the biblical authors original intent in recording this episode was to teach us about conflict resolution. However, this morning, I would like to take this text and use this narrative as a springboard to teach you, to instruct you in the art of conflict resolution. And this message will become somewhat topical, I admit. But I hope you'll find the teaching to be very practical for us this morning. Let's pause briefly for a word of prayer before we begin. God above, we thank you so much for the privilege we have now to open your holy word and to read the scriptures and to study them. We know, Lord, that all scripture is profitable. And so we claim that promise and we eagerly anticipate what you might teach us from this text. What I pray that you would give us insights and understanding and that we might go from this place with practical application and how we might live for you better in Jesus name, I pray. Amen. After Paul and Barnabas returned from the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 verse 30, they continued their practice of preaching and teaching at their home church in Antioch, there in verse 35, but in time, or after some days, verse 36 says, Paul made a proposal that they, that him and his ministry colleague there, Barnabas, take a second missionary journey together. However, Paul's proposal was not that they take a an additional or different missionary journey, but rather a rerun of the first missionary journey. Their purpose was not so much for the evangelism of the lost in places that they had never been, but rather for the edification of the saints in the very same places they visited on their first missionary journey in chapters 13 and 14. In fact, if you look at verse 36, the text says to visit our brethren in every city where we have preached. And some weeks ago, we discussed how that the Great Commission demands more than making converts, but rather making disciples. And for that reason, at the end of their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas actually retraced their steps on the way home to strengthen the believers. The end of chapter 14. And with that very same goal in mind, now Paul and Barnabas are excited about taking a second missionary journey to go back and visit those people and visit those places and strengthen the believers. And I think that if we could eavesdrop on their conversation, I'm sure they talked about each city and each convert remembered on the island of Cyprus when Sergius Paulus trusted Christ. Yes, I remember that. Or remember also that that time in Lystra with the people trying to worship us like like God, like the Greek god Zeus or Hermes. Or do you remember that time in Derby when we were nearly stoned to death? But praise the Lord. Remember, all of those believers sprinkled throughout the cities in Asia Minor where we visited and on and on, the remembrances might have gone. And after some reminiscing, I suppose that their conversation turned to the logistics of the pending trip, when they would leave and what supplies they would need to take and the specifics of their itinerary, how long they would be gone. And both were excited about the prospect of seeing those new believers, those early church converts, In each place, visiting the assembly, strengthening the churches, and I imagine we can hear them talking, but there is one part of their conversation that is recorded for us there in verse 37. Barnabas was determined to take with them John called Mark, or John Mark. The problem is in verse 38. Verse 38, but Paul insisted, Barnabas was determined in verse 37, Paul in verse 38 is insisting that they should not take with them the one who had departed from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. You remember how that in the first missionary journey, there were three that set out from the city of Antioch of Syria. There was Paul Barnabas and John Mark. However, in Acts 13, 13, John Mark departed or abandoned the missionary team and went back to his hometown of Jerusalem, where his mother was. Perhaps it was because John Mark was homesick or perhaps the travel conditions were too difficult, or perhaps the danger was too threatening, or perhaps he didn't have a heart for the work. But at any rate, John Mark left Paul and Barnabas early on in that first missionary journey. So here in our text, the conversation between Paul and Barnabas turned to conflict. The dialogue turned to disagreement. Barnabas wanted to take John Mark. Paul said, no, we tried that before he quit on us. Barnabas responded, he's my cousin and he's grown up a lot since then. And Paul answered, no, he can't be counted on. And besides, he wasn't with us when we visited all those people and all those places and back and forth the conversation or the conflict, the dialogue or the disagreement went. Until each man had dug in his heels, making his own case, verse number thirty nine, then the contention became so sharp. That they parted from one another. What do you do with this? At first read, this appears to be so juvenile. Like children on the playground who can't agree on what game to play, so each goes their own way and plays their own game. At first read, this appears to be so unfortunate. Even these great men of God can't get along. Even these great men of God can't work together. They have to separate. What hope does that leave for us? And at first read, this appears to be so selfish and sinful. Each man was stubborn and wanted his own way. And ultimately, we want to know who was right and who was wrong here at the end of Acts 15. Now, we could say that Paul was right. In fact, many Bible commentators will side with Paul. They contend that Paul had the apostolic authority to make the call in this case, and Barnabas should have complied. They would also point to the prominence of Paul throughout the rest of the book of Acts, where Barnabas just kind of disappears from the scene. They note that in verse 40, if you're looking at the scripture there, it was Paul who was commended by the brethren to the grace of God. It was not Barnabas, perhaps maybe proving that Paul was in the right in this case. On the other hand, there are many that would say that Barnabas was right. They contend that Paul was holding a grudge. From the wrongs suffered back in Acts 13 when John Mark abandoned the missionary team, Paul was unwilling to forgive John Mark. Paul was acting in selfish pride and he didn't have a heart to give John Mark a second chance and restore him like Barnabas did. Those that would contend that Barnabas is right point to the fact that at the end of his life, Paul finally did have a change of heart, and he admitted that John Mark was profitable or useful for the ministry, and he asked John Mark to come to him in 2 Timothy chapter 4. John Mark became the author of one of the four Gospels. John Mark was a close associate of the Apostle Peter. And all of this perhaps proves that Barnabas was right. And so this morning, we have an interpretive decision to make. And we're going to make that decision right now. We have to choose sides. So in true democratic fashion, I will ask for a show of hands. All right. No better than that, let's let's go with a voice vote in respect of Robert's rules of order. All in favor of Paul signify by saying aye. OK, all in favor of Barnabas, will you please say aye? Oh, boy. Okay, how many of you agree with me? Say aye. That was just a few. This week in your Home Bible Fellowships, I want you to work on this question. Luke gives us just a brief, a brief portion of text that describes the episode and really leaves that question unanswered. But perhaps with some extra diligent study this week at your home Bible fellowship, you might come to greater consensus. But this morning, although it may sound politically pathetic, I propose to you this morning that maybe neither was wrong. Our depraved imaginations immediately assume that the sharp contention in verse 39 was carnal and sinful. We immediately assumed that insults were hurled, and each were selfishly and stubbornly attacking the other, and each refused to concede to the other. There was a huge personal fallout here, and this whole scenario is a scandal. But could it be, maybe possibly, could it be that the separation was providentially positive? not just in the income, I'm sorry, in the outcome. The outcome actually was multiplication by division. Instead of one missionary journey, there will now be two missionary journeys as we continue to study the Book of Acts. But could it be that this is providentially positive in the process? Both men agreeing to disagree and adopting a strategy of compromise, a strategy to divide and conquer. And so this morning, in a topical way, I would like to submit to you that there is a way to fight rights. And let me tell you how these ideas are really not original with me. I credit a man by the name of Bob Deffenbaugh for some of these thoughts. But let me present to you some correct characteristics of this conflict, I've given you a lot of blank space to record these ideas in your notes this morning. Number one, Paul and Barnabas kept the problem private. These are some principles that we might use to make application this morning. Paul and Barnabas kept the problem private. There was a personal disagreement between Paul and Barnabas and they dealt with it privately. There is nothing in the text to suggest that they got on the phone and they rallied all of their friends in gossip. There is nothing in the text to suggest that Paul and Barnabas slandered each other to others or played politics among the people by making the matter public and getting others involved in creating a church crisis over their personal disagreement. But it appears that it perhaps was preserved as a private matter. And many times there are personal differences between us in this place. And if there are personal differences, keep them that way. visit with one another and acknowledge the disagreement, but do not recruit other people to do battle for you. Or else a lot of damage can be done. Paul and Barnabas kept the problem private. Number two, Paul and Barnabas, I believe they did not take the problem personally. They did not take the problem Personally, and I'm not minimizing the intensity of the disagreement, and I'm not suggesting there was no hurt involved, but I don't know that we should read this as a falling out. There is nothing in the scripture text that suggests they had a loss of love or respect for one another. There's no sign of alienation or bitterness between the two. In fact, to the contrary, really, in 1 Corinthians 9, verse 6, Paul wrote approvingly of Barnabas's ministry. And many times we are tempted to take disagreements with one another as personal attacks. I am prone to that. If you disagree with my idea or my perspective, I sometimes feel like you're attacking me. But I need to suppress that imagination. Let us be careful not to attack one another with our differences or not interpret another's differences as a personal attack. This is often the case in our pastoral staff meetings. Every Monday morning, your pastors meet together, we pray together, and we discuss the matters of the church, and we have different ideas. in different opinions and perspectives. And by God's grace, we most often come to consensus. But that isn't that we're attacking one another. It's healthy and there's safety in a multitude of counselors there. Paul and Barnabas kept the problem private. They did not take the problem personally. Number three, they came to a mutual resolution. They came to a mutual resolution and each man stuck to his position and to his convictions. But they did find a resolution and that resolution or that that solution was, of course, separation. They would go on two different missionary trips. You see, the Bible asks the rhetorical question, how can two walk together unless they be agreed? And so it was decided that they would divide and conquer. And there was a legitimate case to be made by each side. And so, was it possible to actually accommodate both sides? And we will see the fruit of that in the coming weeks as we study the book of Acts. In essence, it's what we would call compromise. Now, let's be careful here. Regarding the controversy in the early part of Acts 15, there should be no compromise. When the issue at hand is one of absolute truth, the definition of the gospel, We do not compromise. However, the conflict in the latter part of Acts 15 could allow for some compromise. It was a disagreement or division over logistics and practice. Which led to number four, Paul and Barnabas did not make this a biblical issue. They did not make it a biblical issue. Many times when Christians differ. We try to make our case by citing scripture. Have you ever done that? And you gather together your proof texts, your favorite Bible verses, and your opponent gathers their favorite Bible verses. And you use Bible verses as weapons of war. And you make everything a biblical issue. Be careful to remember that the difference between a Bible precept and a Bible principle and a personal preference. And don't make your personal preferences Bible issues, this was not a matter of obedience, it was not a matter of disobedience. We ought to fight for the Bible precept, but be willing to acknowledge when something is a personal preference. Number five, Paul and Barnabas were responding according to their spiritual giftedness. They were responding according to their spiritual giftedness, no. Who, other than Barnabas, would we expect to come alongside John Mark and give him a second chance? Who, besides Barnabas, would we expect to encourage John Mark? After all, Barnabas was given the name Barnabas by the apostles in Acts 4 because of his spiritual giftedness. He was an encourager. And so it's natural, if you will, spiritually natural, if you will, for Barnabas to be the one to take John Mark along with him. On the other hand, who but Paul would we expect to come down hard on failure? Right? After all, Paul was the Iron Man of ministry and missions. He was no nonsense, black and white. And I'm so glad that there is this type of diversity in the body of Christ. In fact, even here at Fourth Baptist Church, there are many of you who are like Barnabas, and we love you for that. You are kind and gracious and long suffering and caring. And then there are others of you who are like Paul and we endure you or tolerate you. You are no nonsense, tough and adversity, you are willing to say what needs to be said, even when it's not popular. And the reality is that we each respond differently, don't we? Paul and Barnabas were two very different individuals. We've already observed that in the book of Acts and each responded to this matter consistent with what I'm calling their spiritual giftedness. You might use the terms personality or temperament or or others. Number six, Paul and Barnabas, I believe, both ministered to John Mark. I believe both men. had a very specific ministry to John Mark. Consider this. Knowing that Paul would not take him on the next missionary journey surely had an impact on John Mark. What do you think was going through John Mark's mind? Perhaps John Mark was saying to himself, Paul doesn't trust me. Paul doesn't think I'm dependable. I abandoned him once because I was afraid to go on. And he thinks that I will do it again. Paul is not convinced that I even have a heart for ministry. John Mark saying in his own mind, I will prove to Paul that I'm a changed man or I've grown a lot. At the same time, Barnabas was willing to invest in John Mark and risk taking John Mark along. And I'm sure that that that was an encouragement to John Mark. And in John's mind, perhaps he's saying, Lord, thank you for Barnabas. Thank you for this man who will who give me another chance and who is so gracious and supportive. And I believe that each in their own way, Paul and Barnabas ministered to John Mark. Had an impact upon him. Number seven, Paul and Barnabas acted in cooperation, not in competition. They acted in cooperation, not in competition. Many times. Partners in ministry have separated. To pursue the very same ministry in the very same place. trying to influence the very same people for themselves. That is not what took place here in Acts 15, but rather the separation allowed each man to go to different places to serve the Lord. And separation does not solve the problem, only compounds the problem if there is a spirit of competition. and not cooperation. And you often see this when a church splits and one pastor takes a group of people across the street and plants another church. What is that? And so you have Fourth Baptist Church on the south side of 55 and you have Fifth Baptist Church on the north side of 55. Paul and Barnabas acted in cooperation, not in competition. Number eight. Paul and Barnabas demonstrated great wisdom going forward in their ministries. They demonstrated great wisdom. Barnabas, and catch this now, Barnabas did not take John Mark into the dangerous areas of Asia Minor or Galatia for frontline evangelism, but rather Barnabas took John Mark to Cyprus, where John Mark had served successfully in the past. And also, Barnabas took John Mark to a ministry of edification to existing churches. I think that was a wise move. On the other hand, Paul moved on to new areas of evangelism of unreached cities with the gospel. And because Paul and Silas, Paul's new missionary partner, Paul and Silas were both Roman citizens, they had greater access to and protection from the civil authorities in the cities they went to. I think Paul demonstrated great wisdom in his treatment then later of the young Timothy. Remember Timothy, perhaps who had some of the very same weaknesses that young John Mark had? And Paul wrote to Timothy, let no one despise your youth. Paul wrote to Timothy, be an example of the believers, because Timothy, God has not given us the spirit of fear. And could it be that Paul, going forward, operated with greater wisdom because of this circumstance here? Here's the conclusion of the matter. There are many, many more insights and observations that we might make from this account, but what is the takeaway for us this morning? I conceded early on that I don't believe the authorial intent of Luke was to teach us about conflict resolution. I think Luke was simply capturing a small little episode in the life of Paul and Barnabas that explains why Paul and Silas went this way and Barnabas and John Mark went the other way. I think that's all that this little narrative is doing. But I do think it can serve us well to consider how we handle disagreements. And the reality is that we will not always agree with one another in this place. How do we handle those disagreements or that conflict? As much as lies within us, we should live peaceably with all men. We ought to defer to one another in humility. We need to die to self, put others first. There's so many Bible principles that would help us to govern these relationships. But if and when there is a disagreement, there is a way to fight rights. And by the grace of God and in the providence of God, I think Paul and Barnabas actually did okay. But I'll allow you to beat that around this week in your home Bible fellowships and perhaps come to a conclusion. Let's pray. Lord God, we thank you so much for this brief portion of Scripture text that reminds us that even great men of faith at times disagree. The Lord, it appears to us that you used this sharp contention in the life of Paul and Barnabas to actually divide and conquer so that the gospel could go further than it would have with Paul and Barnabas alone. What I pray that you would help us as believers in this place to know how to fight right when if and when there are disagreements that we might honor you in spite of them. Give us the mind of Christ.