 |  |
Hebrews. In the Gospels the three references relate to Barnabas, and are translated
"insurrection" and "sedition", the word in each case being associated with "murder"
(Mark 15: 7; Luke 13: 19, 25). In Heb. 9: 8, the same word is translated "standing" in
the passage: "While as the first tabernacle was yet standing." It is obvious, of course,
that this passage has nothing to do with sedition or insurrection, but it is useful in
drawing attention to the basic meaning of the word. Stasis is derived from the verb
istemi, "to stand". The underlying idea is that of "making a stand", but like most things
human, the word deteriorated and came to mean in most cases "uproar" (Acts 19: 40),
"dissension" (Acts 23: 7, 10), or "sedition" (Acts 24: 5). We can verily believe that
the Apostle would most gladly have "lived peaceably with all men" (Rom. 12: 18), but
the sacred cause of truth outweighed all personal considerations, and the apostle of grace
and peace earned for his faithfulness the unenviable titles:
"A pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world,
and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes" (Acts 24: 5).
The "dissension" at Antioch was two-fold. On the part of the apostles, it arose out of
their stand for the truth of the gospel, while on the part of their opponents, it was due to
their subversive views in connection with the law.
The word "disputation"--suzetesis derived from zeteo, to seek--is also of mixed
meaning. While every "Berean" must necessarily be a "seeker" after truth, and must
certainly "question" any proposition put before him, the tendency of human nature is to
abuse this attitude, and the general use of the word is in an evil sense in the Epistles. In
I Timothy we read of "interminable genealogies which minister questions" (I Tim. 1: 4);
and of the ignorant pride that "dotes about questions" (I Tim. 6: 4). In II Timothy we
read of "foolish and unlearned questions" that gender strife (II Tim. 2: 23). The Apostle
could write out of a full experience when he warned Timothy of the evil tendency of
these things.
To return once more to the main narrative of our passage--it soon became evident that
if the questions under discussion were ever to be settled, something more authoritative
must be introduced. The Apostle Paul needed no rule from Jerusalem for himself, but the
Judaisers in the Church rejected his authority, and suggested that the matter should be
taken to Jerusalem, thinking probably that the case would go in their favour, especially as
James was known to have very strict views with regard to the law.
"They determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to
Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question" (Acts 15: 2).
When we compare the record of Acts 15: with Paul's own testimony in Gal. 2: we
get the same facts presented from two different angles. Luke merely says that "certain
other of them" accompanied Paul and Barnabas, but Paul tells us specifically that they
were accompanied by Titus, an uncircumcised Greek believer. Luke says: "They
determined that Paul and Barnabas should go up", while Paul writes: "I went up by
revelation." There is, of course, no discrepancy here. A rather similar case occurs in
Acts 9: 30 and 22: 17, 18. In the earlier passage we read: