TEXT: BIB   |   AUDIO: MISLR - MISC - DAVIS - FOCHT   |   VIDEO: BIB - COMM

HELPS: KJS - KJV - ASV - DBY - DOU - WBS - YLT - HEB - BBE - WEB - NAS - SEV - TSK - CRK - WES - MHC - GILL - JFB

King James Bible - Acts 15:39

---

SEV Biblia, Chapter 15:39

Y hubo tal contenci�n entre ellos , que se apartaron el uno del otro; y Bernab� tomando a Marcos, naveg� a Chipre.

---

Clarke's Bible Commentary - Acts 15:39

Verse 39. The contention was so sharp between them] For all this sentence, there is only in the Greek text egeneto oun paroxusmov; there was therefore a paroxysm, an incitement, a stirring up, from paroxunw, compounded of para, intensive, and oxunw, to whet, or sharpen: there was a sharp contention. But does this imply anger or ill-will on either side? Certainly not. Here, these two apostles differed, and were strenuous, each in support of the part he had adopted. "Paul," as an ancient Greek commentator has it, "being influenced only with the love of righteousness; Barnabas being actuated by love to his relative." John Mark had been tried in trying circumstances, and he failed; Paul, therefore, would not trust him again. The affection of Barnabas led him to hope the best, and was therefore desirous to give him another trial. Barnabas would not give up: Paul would not agree. They therefore agreed to depart from each other, and take different parts of the work: each had an attendant and companion at hand; so Barnabas took John Mark, and sailed to Cyprus: Paul took Silas, and went into Syria. John Mark proved faithful to his uncle Barnabas; and Silas proved faithful to his master Paul. To all human appearance it was best that they separated; as the Churches were more speedily visited, and the work of God more widely and more rapidly spread. And why is it that most men attach blame to this difference between Paul and Barnabas? And why is it that this is brought in as a proof of the sinful imperfection of these holy apostles? Because those who thus treat the subject can never differ with another without feeling wrong tempers; and then, as destitute of good breeding as they are of humility, they attribute to others the angry, proud, and wrathful dispositions which they feel in themselves; and, because they cannot be angry and sin not, they suppose that even apostles themselves cannot. Thus, in fact, we are always bringing our own moral or immoral qualifications to be a standard, by which we are to judge of the characters and moral feelings of men who were actuated by zeal for God's glory, brotherly kindness, and charity. Should any man say there was sin in this contention between Paul and Barnabas, I answer, there is no evidence of this in the text. Should he say, the word paroxusmov, paroxysm, denotes this, I answer, it does not. And the verb paroxunomai is often used in a good sense. So Isocrates ad Demosth. cap. xx. malista d� an paroxunqeihv orecqhnai twn kalwn ergwn? "But thou wilt be the more stirred up to the love of good works." And such persons forget that this is the very form used by the apostle himself, Heb. x. 24: kai katanowmen allhlouv eiv paroxusmon agaphv kai kalwn ergwn? which, these objectors would be highly displeased with me, were I to translate, Let us consider one another to an angry contention of love and good works. From these examples, it appears that the word is used to signify incitement of any kind; and, if taken in a medical sense, to express the burning fit of an ague: it is also taken to express a strong excitement to the love of God and man, and to the fruits by which such love can be best proved; and, in the case before us, there was certainly nothing contrary to this pure principle in either of those heavenly men. See also Kypke on Heb. x. 24.

---

John Gill's Bible Commentary

Ver. 39. And the contention was so sharp between them , etc.] About this matter; Barnabas insisting on it, that John Mark should go with them, he being a relation of his; and in whose favour it might be urged, that his mother Mary was an excellent good woman, who had received the saints into her house, in a time of persecution; and that it should be considered, that this her son was but a young man, and could not be thought to have that courage, resolution, constancy, and solidity, as older professors and ministers; and that his crime was not very heinous, and should be overlooked. Paul, on the other hand, opposing his going with them, as a very unworthy person, because he had behaved so cowardly, and had shown such a coldness and indifference to the work of the ministry, and had so shamefully left them; and thus they disputed the point till there was a paroxysm between them, as is the word used: they were irritated and provoked by one another, and were so warmed and heated on both sides, that they departed asunder one from another ; thus as soon almost as peace was made in the church, a difference arises among the ministers of the word, who are men of like passions with others; and though it is not easy to say which was to blame most in this contention; perhaps there were faults on both sides, for the best men are not without their failings; yet this affair was overruled by the providence of God, for the spread of his Gospel, and the enlargement of his interest; for when these two great and good men parted from one another, they went to different places, preaching the word of God: and so Barnabas took Mark and sailed unto Cyprus ; (See Gill on � Acts 13:4�).

---

Matthew Henry Commentary

Verses 36-41 - Here we have a private quarrel between two ministers, no less than Pau and Barnabas, yet made to end well. Barnabas wished his nephew Joh Mark to go with them. We should suspect ourselves of being partial, an guard against this in putting our relations forward. Paul did not thin him worthy of the honour, nor fit for the service, who had departe from them without their knowledge, or without their consent: see ch 13:13. Neither would yield, therefore there was no remedy but they mus part. We see that the best of men are but men, subject to like passion as we are. Perhaps there were faults on both sides, as usual in suc contentions. Christ's example alone, is a copy without a blot. Yet we are not to think it strange, if there are differences among wise an good men. It will be so while we are in this imperfect state; we shal never be all of one mind till we come to heaven. But what mischief the remainders of pride and passion which are found even in good men, do in the world, and do in the church! Many who dwelt at Antioch, who ha heard but little of the devotedness and piety of Paul and Barnabas heard of their dispute and separation; and thus it will be with ourselves, if we give way to contention. Believers must be constant in prayer, that they may never be led by the allowance of unholy tempers to hurt the cause they really desire to serve. Paul speaks with estee and affection both of Barnabas and Mark, in his epistles, written afte this event. May all who profess thy name, O loving Saviour, be thoroughly reconciled by that love derived from thee which is no easily provoked, and which soon forgets and buries injuries __________________________________________________________________

---

Greek Textus Receptus

εγενετο 1096 5633 V-2ADI-3S ουν 3767 CONJ παροξυσμος 3948 N-NSM ωστε 5620 CONJ αποχωρισθηναι 673 5683 V-APN αυτους 846 P-APM απ 575 PREP αλληλων 240 C-GPM τον 3588 T-ASM τε 5037 PRT βαρναβαν 921 N-ASM παραλαβοντα 3880 5631 V-2AAP-ASM τον 3588 T-ASM μαρκον 3138 N-ASM εκπλευσαι 1602 5658 V-AAN εις 1519 PREP κυπρον 2954 N-ASF

---

Vincent's NT Word Studies

39. The contention was so sharp (egeneto paroxusmov). More correctly, there arose a sharp contention. Only here and Heb. x. 24. Our word paroxysm is a transcription of paroxusmov. An angry dispute is indicated.

Barnabas. The last mention of him in the Acts.

---

Robertson's NT Word Studies

15:39 {A sharp contention} (paroxusmos). Our very word paroxysm in English. Old word though only twice in the N.T. (here and #Heb 10:24), from paroxunw, to sharpen (para, oxus) as of a blade and of the spirit (#Ac 17:16; 1Co 13:5). this "son of comfort" loses his temper in a dispute over his cousin and Paul uses sharp words towards his benefactor and friend. It is often so that the little irritations of life give occasion to violent explosions. If the incident in #Ga 2:11-21 had already taken place, there was a sore place already that could be easily rubbed. And if Mark also joined with Peter and Barnabas on that occasion, Paul had fresh ground for irritation about him. But there is no way to settle differences about men and we can only agree to disagree as Paul and Barnabas did. {So that they parted asunder from one another} (hwste apocwrisqenai autous ap' allelwn). Actual result here stated by hwste and the first aorist passive infinitive of apocwrizw, old verb to sever, to separate, here only and #Re 6:4 in the N.T. The accusative of general reference (autous) is normal. For construction with hwste see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 999f. {And Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus} (ton te barnaban paralabonta ton markon ekpleusai eis kupron). Second infinitival clause ekpleusai after hwste connected by te. The same participle is used here minus sun, paralabonta (second aorist active). Barnabas and Mark sailed out (ekpleusai from ekplew) from the harbor of Antioch. this is the last glimpse that Luke gives us of Barnabas, one of the noblest figures in the New Testament. Paul has a kindly reference to him in #1Co 9:6. No one can rightly blame Barnabas for giving his cousin John Mark a second chance nor Paul for fearing to risk him again. One's judgment may go with Paul, but one's heart goes with Barnabas. And Mark made good with Barnabas, with Peter (#1Pe 5:13) and finally with Paul (#Col 4:10; 2Ti 4:11). See my little book on John Mark (_Making Good in the Ministry_). Paul and Barnabas parted in anger and both in sorrow. Paul owed more to Barnabas than to any other man. Barnabas was leaving the greatest spirit of the time and of all times.