Grace Watch

Bibles in turn to first Peter. Those are the chuckles of grace. And let me interpret for those
of you who are not in on it. Several weeks ago, we allegedly
finished first Peter or so I thought. Yesterday I was driving with
Emily and Cambria headed to the mountains and they were talking
about nightmares and perhaps we’ve all had the nightmare and
they were recounting their version of it where you know you tumble
out of bed and you’re falling and you catch yourself and you
jerk or you’re falling off a ladder or the roof or some high place
and so we talked about various nightmares and what they might
mean and those kinds of things and then I recounted to them
a couple of my own pastoral nightmares. One pastoral nightmare that I
have recurringly, too frightening to not tell you about, because
one day I fully expect to stand up here and experience it. And
that is getting up here and realizing that I don’t have any notes.
It’s a recurring nightmare. I literally wake up and I realize
that I’ve just dreamt this dream again. And I quickly run downstairs
and double check my notes. There’s another pastoral nightmare
that I have, maybe not so literally, but one that does haunt me. And that is the the tendency
that that pastors and preachers have of skipping over difficult
parts. Now, mind you, lest you immediately
move to take a vote on me. I didn’t do this on purpose.
I just felt that, you know, we had given first Peter a full
treatment and verses 12 through 14 were kind of superfluous and
we could kind of move on with God’s blessing. So I thought. And so the haunting began several
weeks ago. And I kept coming back to these
verses and mulling them over. And, you know, I didn’t I honestly
wasn’t avoiding verse 14. Greet one another with a holy
kiss. I’ll see to it that Trey is at the back door to demonstrate
at the end. There are difficult passages
and some would even say this is merely a closing greeting
and And that’s exactly where my heart was, at least up until
a couple of weeks ago. And then just having a number
of brothers come and preach and sitting there and having the
time to continue to mull over these verses. And it was almost
like I couldn’t get away from them. And then our dear brother,
a gracious surprise last week, came and talked to us from Acts
20 about the whole counsel of God. And then I knew what the
Lord wanted me to do is to go back and finish first Peter.
And that’s where. That’s where we find ourselves
this morning. Peter. And the great apostle
Paul. had a couple of companions that
figure very prominently in this closing passage, a man named
Silas and a man named Mark. And you will see among them an
interplay that only Scripture would record. Only Scripture
would record the relationships, the intimate relationships as
they’re played out among us for all time. We’ll look at Peter and we’ll
look at Paul and we’ll look at Silas and Mark. What I prayed
about a moment ago is this tendency that we have to look so critically
at others, and that’s what I began to see in the closing verses
of this passage. What was important to me was
not only the whole counsel of God, but the truth that all Scripture
is inspired. And profitable and that even
the most and we’ve come to passages before where so seemingly obscure
and mundane. When you begin to look and meditate
upon the truths that are announced there, you begin to see that
God has something even in those mundane verses to teach us. And such is the case with this
so-called Closing greeting, if you would, I want to pick up
in first Peter chapter five and we’ll look at verses 12 to 14.
There is the passage there in your bulletin in its entirety
with places for notes. Through Sylvanus, our faithful
brother, for so I regard him, I have written to you briefly.
Exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it. She who is
in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you greetings. And
so does my son Mark. Greet one another with a kiss
of love. Peace be to you all who are in Christ. As I said a moment ago, and as
we prayed, there is this tendency to look and to see only what
the human eye can see, to see the frailties, the failings,
the faults, the sinful tendencies, the irritating idiosyncrasies
in our brothers, and to neglect to look for the work of God in
their lives. And I mean it that way. I think
that there is a positive neglect in our lives to actively look
for the work of God in our fellow believers. Part of it is just
plain jealousy. You know, we don’t want to see
anything better in them because then that’s convicting to us.
Part of it is just a dullness to spiritual things that we don’t
even know what a godly guy looks like anymore. But there is this tendency, and
that’s why I entitled the passage Grace Watch, acknowledging God’s
work. in others lives, looking for
God actively at work. I mean, we’ve seen it. We know
that it’s theologically true that God is the one that began
salvation. God is the one that chose them. God is the one that initiated
salvation in their lives. God is the one that redeemed
them through Christ. And we saw commensurate with
that that God is the one doing the work of sanctification. And
yet, by virtue of what we observe and acknowledge, you’d never
know it. We never acknowledge there goes a prayerful saint.
There goes a humble brother. We so rarely acknowledge the
manifold grace of God active and evident in other people’s
lives. And I’m not even suggesting that that’s what Peter did intentionally
here. I will suggest at the end of
this that I think Peter was so changed by God’s grace that he
didn’t even have to set out intentionally. Now, what can I say about Savinas?
Now, what positive little note can I throw in there about Mark?
I do think that Peter’s life was so changed that he couldn’t
help see the incredible grace of God active and alive in people’s
lives. And I’m not saying that you never
do so. I know that occasionally I recognize
some abundant work of God in a saint’s life. But what I am
saying is that we need to do it far more. We need to rejoice
in those things. We need to give God His credit.
We need to rejoice in what He’s doing in other people’s lives.
and acknowledge that and commend them, not because of what they
have done, but because of what God has done in and through them.
It’s a forgotten grace. Acknowledging God’s work in others’
lives. I will go on to suggest that
you can see these eternal graces that you will be able to see
the temporal graces, graces that are at work in the here and now.
And you will see graces that are perpetual, that are there
here now and they will continue on through eternity. And mind
you, this is just a simple man’s outline. I am not suggesting
in any way that, you know, there’s there are graces that are only
in eternity past and have no relevance to the here and now,
because they do, as we’ll see. I’m not suggesting that those
that are in the here and now just stay in the here and now.
But what I am saying is that each one seems to have a focus
at a particular point in time. Notice, Peter, first of all,
recognizes the work of grace in temporal integrity, temporal
integrity. Look at verse 12 through Sylvanus,
our faithful brother, for so I regard him. I’ve written to
you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of
God. Stand for a minute. Now, there
was part of me that the preacher in me that wanted to go again
to this passage, and I’m not even saying that I won’t necessarily.
But I was chatting at the door last week. regarding our brother’s
message. And I was just acknowledging
to him that several weeks ago I alluded to and just kind of
briefly treated Acts 20. And my brother, Jim Mark, came
by and said, you don’t treat anything briefly. But we have. And that’s true. We have. I think
I’ve done now 60 plus sermons in Peter, whereas last time we
did the last time I preached that I did 26. So hang on to
your hats if I ever take up first Peter again. But Peter, even
I think he even says this rather tongue in cheek, I’ve exhorted
to you briefly. I mean, he knows that this is
not the compendium. This is not the final word on
the work of grace, but this is hardly a little note. This is
a substantial epistle. I’ve written to you briefly,
exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God
and what he means by that is everything that he’s written
up to this point from chapter one, verse one through chapter
five, verse eleven. It’s all of it. This is the true
grace of God and what He taught us about salvation and what He
taught us about sanctification and suffering and how those things
interplay. That is the true grace of God.
And He says He exhorts them firmly. Stand firm in it. But the most
beautiful thing of this passage is that He points up to them
one who already is. Your faithful brother, Silvanus.
Let’s look at Silvanus for a moment. And if you’re using the NIV,
you’re already, I suppose, being helped. You know my, not dislike,
I can’t even think of a word to characterize my thoughts on
the NIV. It just, they try to help us.
They try to do all of our thinking for us, does the NIV. And in
this particular case, they end up, you know, pretty accurate. Because they end up translating
Silvanus as Silas. And that’s true. They are one
in the same, but he’s referred to as both names. And I believe
in Scripture a lot of times there’s a purpose to that. I’m not so
certain that it’s a big deal here. But Silvanus was referred
to not only as Silvanus, but also as Silas, just as Saul and
Paul. same person referred to as different
by different names, Peter and Cephas and others in Scripture,
as you know. There’s a purpose to that. So, Venus, Peter often called
him such, is equated and identified with Silas from the book of Acts. They are one in the same people. Silvanus was simply another name
for Silas. Silas was a shortened version.
Silas, you know, was the one that traveled with Paul and often
appeared in his letters. And for this, for this particular
letter functioned as Peter’s amanuensis or secretaries. We’ll
see in a minute. Now, if you’re struggling with
that whole concept of how do you get Silas out of Silvanus?
I mean, I asked myself this same question over the years. How
do you get Bob out of Robert? You know, I remember when I was
a little kid, there was a president that they called Jack, but his
name was John, but they called him Jack. How do you get Trey
out of Truman? That’s how you get Silas out
of Sylvanus. We discover from him that he
was one of the leading men among the Christians at Jerusalem.
Silvanus was high. He was head and shoulders above
those in Jerusalem. And he was seen as a leader.
In fact, they classed him with Paul and Barnabas. And Judas
Barsabbas there in Acts 15.22. And as such, he ended up being
appointed to one of the most important services in the apostolic
times, as we’ll see in a moment. He was sent in Acts chapter 15.
Why don’t you go ahead and turn to Acts chapter 15. We’ll take
a minute and just kind of review a little bit. In Acts 15, verse 22, it says,
Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole
church, to choose men from among them to send to Antioch with
Paul and Barnabas, Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading
men among the brethren. These men were seen for their
lives and their knowledge of the word as leaders. Later on
in 1532, it calls Silas a prophet. In 1534, Silas is seen remaining
at Antioch there in the midst of Paul’s journey. He accompanies
Paul on his second missionary journey in Acts 1540. We’ll see that again in a moment
with regards to Mark. Paul chose Silas and left. being
committed by the brethren to the grace of the Lord. In Philippi,
he’s seen in Acts chapter 16 and others, but that’s his ministry
as it relates to Paul. And we’ll go on again, but he
did have a relationship with Peter even before he met Paul.
And for that, flip back a couple of chapters to Acts chapter 12.
There’s a beautiful scene that plays out in Acts chapter
12, verse 25. Acts chapter 12, beginning in verse
12 through verse 25. It says that when he realized this,
he went to the house of Mary, the mother of John, who was also
called Mark, where many were gathered together and praying.
When he knocked at the door of the gate, a servant girl named
Rhoda came to answer. And when she recognized Peter’s
voice because of her joy, she did not open the gate, but ran
in and announced that Peter was standing in front of the gate.
They said to her, you are out of your mind, but she kept insisting
that it was so and saying it is his angel. But Peter continued
knocking. And when they had opened the
door, they saw him and were amazed. But mentioning to them with his
hand To be silent, he described to them how the Lord had led
them out of prison and he said, report these things to James
and the brethren. Then he left and went to another
place. Now, when day came, there was no small disturbance among
the soldiers as what became of Peter inherited search for him
and not having not found him, he examined the guards in order
that he be led away to execution. Peter here in chapter 12, that
is the beginning, rather, of Peter’s ministry with Silvanus. And we’ll pick that up in a minute. I’ve grabbed the wrong reference. If you would bear with me as
I turn. Let’s pick up pick up Silvanus’s
ministry in Acts chapter 16. Acts chapter 16 and I’ll come
back to that passage in a moment. All right, in Acts chapter 16,
they’re conducting their ministry and it says that it happened
as it happened that as we were going to the place of prayer,
a slave girl having a spirit of divination met us who was
bringing her master’s much profit by fortune telling. Following
after Paul and us, she kept crying out. These men are bond servants
of the most high God who are proclaiming to you the way of
salvation. She continued doing this for
many days, but Paul was greatly annoyed and turned and said to
the spirit, I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come
out of her. And it came out at that very
moment. But when her master saw that their hope of profit was
gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace
before the authorities. And here you have Silas acquainted
with the most difficult period of Paul’s ministry there. Pick it up in verse Let’s pick
it up in verse 20. And when they had brought them
out to the chief magistrates, they said these men are throwing
our city into confusion being Jews and are proclaiming customs,
which it is not lawful for us to accept or observe being Romans.
The crowd rose up together against them and the chief magistrates
tore their robes off them and proceeded to order them to be
beaten with rods. When they had struck them with
many blows, they threw them into prison, commanding the jailer
to guard them securely. And he, having received such
a command through them in the inner prison and fashioned their
feet in the stocks. But about midnight, Paul and
Silas were praying and singing hymns of praise to God, and the
prisoners were listening to them. And suddenly there came a great
earthquake so that the foundations of the prison house were shaken
and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains
unfastened. When the jailer awoke and saw
the prison doors open, drew his sword and was about to kill himself,
supposing the prisoners had escaped. But Paul cried out with a loud
voice saying, Do not harm yourselves, for we are all here. And he called
for lights and rushed in, trembling with fear. He fell down before
Paul and Silas. And after he brought them out,
he said, sirs, what must I do to be saved? This same Silas
was he was left at Berea. Acts chapter 17 records. That
Paul and Silas were part of a great ministry there. He we find him
later with Paul at Corinth. And even as Paul begins his epistle
writing campaign in later days, he often will mention Silas as
a very crucial part of his work. Consider 2 Corinthians 1.19,
the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by
us, by me and Silvanus and Timothy. First Thessalonians, he’s writing
to them in verse one. Paul, Silvanus and Timothy to
the church of the Thessalonians. Same thing in the second Thessalonians. In fact, after that, suddenly
we never hear of Silvanus in relation to Paul’s ministry.
But he is here and attendant in Peter’s ministry. And it seems
that at some point there was a shift, not a breach, just a
shift. to where Sylvanus began a new
phase of ministry in service to Peter. What I want to point out is that
what Peter characterizes Sylvanus as. He just says simply he is
our faithful brother. He recognizes God’s work of grace
in him. And he simply calls him faithful.
Now, one might say, This is merely a commendation that was very
common with those with whom you sent a letter, right? Receive
him. He’s a good guy. We might say
it in those terms. Paul certainly did it in Romans
16. I commend you to our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the
church, that you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy
of the saints, that you help her in whatever manner she may
have need of you. Ephesians 6.21. that you may know about my circumstances,
how am I doing? Tychicus, the beloved brother
and faithful minister in the Lord, will make everything made
known to you.” But Peter was not one to play with words. Neither is Paul. When they commend
them, they’re doing so with integrity. They’re saying, I am propping
him up. I’m setting him before you as
an example of faithfulness. Certainly, those who carried
letters would also bring news of the writer of the letter,
possibly even function as an interpreter. You needed to know
somebody that you could trust. So, Venus was just such a man,
he stood in close relation to those churches in Asia. He had
taken over oversight of them after Paul’s departure. Afterwards,
he went to Peter and went to serve with Peter, by whom he
is now sent back with them with this epistle. Anytime this word is used of
an individual in the New Testament, this word faithful, it means
that they are to be relied on for a particular mission or purpose. Peter was setting before them
Silvanus as a model of fidelity to the truth of God’s Word, to
the church, to God Himself, certainly to Peter, This was a faithful
man who was not only able, but he was responsible. He was reliable. He had integrity. And what I’m
suggesting to you is that Peter looks at him and it’s simple
for him to acknowledge that. It’s simple and purposeful to
point out that this is a man of great faithfulness and integrity. Here’s how Scripture uses the
word. Paul used it in Colossians 1.17
of Epaphras. Our fellow bondservant who is
a faithful servant of Christ on our behalf. I mean, could
you desire anything greater to be written on your tombstone
than that? A faithful servant of Christ. Colossians 4.9 Onesimus, our
faithful and beloved brother. Tychicus, our beloved brother
and faithful servant and fellow bondservant. So was or such was Silvanus. He was a man who did what he
said. He was a man that you could entrust with great responsibility
and know that it was in good hands. And Peter sets Silvanus
before them in such plain terms. Through Silvanus, our faithful
brother, for so I regard him. I have written to you briefly.
This is how faithful Silvanus was. Peter used him as a letter,
communicating as it were, as a conduit for the Holy Spirit,
God’s word. communicating to Silvanus to
faithfully write down what he was communicating for all time. This is a tremendously faithful
man. And rather than just exhorting
them to stand firm in the true grace of God, to exemplify great
faithfulness themselves, Peter sets before them a graphic example
called Silvanus. Peter here not only recognizes
the work of grace in temporal integrity, but secondly, he recognizes
the work of grace in eternal predestination. This is that
eternal grace that he recognized that certainly has its roots
in eternity past, but it does have temporal effects and future
as well, doesn’t it? Look at verse 13. This is a hard
one. She who is in Babylon chosen
together with you sends you greetings. Oh, good. And a number of questions
jump out on our paper. First of all, who is she? Who
is she? Secondly, why not just call her
by name? You talk to us about Sylvanus,
you’ll tell us about Mark. Why not tell us who she is? And what is this Babylon? What
Babylon are you referring to, Peter? Are you in now Babylon? And finally, why reintroduce election here
at this point in Peter’s epistle? Number of great questions. Let’s
take them. one at a time. First of all,
I want to take them a little bit out of order. To which Babylon
is Peter referring? To the original Babylon? That maybe he just happened to
stop by the original Babylon, the Babylon of Chaldea on the
Euphrates, where Saddam used to have a couple of houses. Is
that the Babylon to which Peter refers? Because the historical
Babylon at that time, the Babylon of the Old Testament was a city
in ruins. Peter likely never visited there,
and if he did, he certainly wasn’t referring to it here. Literally
speaking, if Peter mentions Babylon, if you want to get woodenly literal,
you would have to say he’s talking about that place, that Babylon. It was big enough. It was a notable
place, certainly from historical perspectives. It was reasonable
to assume that the apostles might have gone there, although that’s
not recorded. Many Jews were known to be dispersed
into that area, and so it would have been a fruitful place for
ministry. But I don’t think that’s the
right answer. I don’t think that’s the place that Peter refers to.
There was another Babylon that was on the Nile in Egypt. Is that the Babylon to which
Peter refers that somehow there’s a lady there that wants to say
hello? This little Babylon was merely a military outpost and
not a place at all frequented by Jews, not a place at all likely
to be a place of ministry for the apostles. Why on earth would
Peter refer to that? But there’s a third option. And this was the historical perspective
or the historical interpretation all the way up to and to a degree
through the Reformation. That what Peter is referring
to here is Babylon was Rome. And he’s using a euphemism for
a set and specific purpose, as we’ll see in a moment. Catholics
preferred that Peter referred to Babylon or Rome as Babylon
here because that meant, and there’s no big debate here, that
Peter was ministering in Rome and therefore undergirded their
argument that Peter was the first pope. So Catholics love this
argument. And because of that, the reformers
quickly shied away from it. Oh, no, perhaps Peter wasn’t
referring to Rome as Babylon here. They moved away from that
position. But if you think of the facts,
the way the byword Babylon came into existence and the way that
it’s used in many other places, it is a reasonable argument.
The flaunting wealth, said one, the oriental vices of Rome were
sufficient to recall Babylon. In other words, it was a very
nice place to say, and we might even say today it’s Vegas like,
right? And you would know immediately
what I mean by that. Christians would have understood this veiled
reference. Now, granted, the book of Revelation
is written much after this. But the writer there in the book
of Revelation refers just almost axiomatically to Rome as Babylon,
doesn’t he? And it is used euphemistically
there. Fallen is Babylon the Great. And over and over again,
Revelations 14, 8, Revelation 16, 9, Babylon the Great, 17,
5, 18, 2, 18, 10, 18, 21, over and over again, it’s Babylon,
Babylon, Babylon. Peter, in doing this, simply
drew on Old Testament tradition where Babylon represented those
that were opposed to God. It’s exactly what you have in
Isaiah 13 and 14. In this particular passage, just
like in Revelation 17 and 18, Babylon just designates Rome
itself the enemy of God. And in that sense, if the Roman
Catholics did their homework, they wouldn’t so much like this
reference. The Babylon, the mention rather here of Babylon just constitutes
another reminder that believers are exiles in their present situation. Peter couldn’t even refer to
it by name because the persecution was so hostile. Peter, if he’s there, likely
about A.D. 65, there’s every reason to believe
and to understand why he wouldn’t make reference to Rome if he’s
sending an epistle from there, especially if he’s making reference
to people in it. Now, mind you, the woman to whom
Peter refers is not the same woman to whom John, the writer
of Revelation, is referring to. This is a good and godly woman
that Peter is referring to, not the woman that is mentioned in
the book of Revelation. So, who is the woman? There were
some that did many gyrations over this whole subject and wrestled
with who she could be. And there were a number of curious
suggestions. One said that it was the local
church in, quote unquote, Babylon, Rome, and that Peter was trying
to protect them. And rather than outing them,
he said, the church in Babylon, wink, wink, you know who I’m
talking about. There are many faithful saints
here that I don’t want to be persecuted. Perhaps Peter, on
the other hand, was talking about some beloved Christian woman
that was well known to those to whom he was writing. And he
was trying to protect her in similar terms. That’s possible. The one particular woman that
comes immediately to mind was the favorite of interpreters
was that it was Peter’s wife. And that’s what I believe. I
believe he was talking about Peter’s wife. Peter was married.
Something that does irreparable damage to the idea that Peter
was the first pope and the popes and priests are not to marry
because Peter was married. It’s referred to in Scripture
a number of times. Matthew 18 or 814, 1 Corinthians 9 5. The natural way to interpret
this passage is to take this as being Peter’s wife. Peter
didn’t want her endangered unnecessarily. And so he merely says, she who
is in Babylon, wink, wink here in Rome with me ministering. Chosen together with you sends
you greetings. To me, that’s the most natural
way to take that, and if you take it that way, It makes sense
with the persecution the way it was intensifying all the time.
Peter was careful not to endanger not just the Roman Christians,
but including this woman who I believe was his wife. Having
written the letter from Rome, as one said, Peter did not want
his manuscript discovered and the church or the woman mentioned
or his wife, as I believe, to be persecuted even more. What an easy place to get to
Peter, right? Capture and imprison his wife.
Certainly, Paul or Saul, before he was regenerated, went about
persecuting the church, men and women. It was a very common practice. Therefore, he made no mention
of Rome, leaving any curious and hostile authorities ignorant
that this letter originated in their imperial capital. The person
he’s referring to is his wife ministering with him in Rome,
and he merely sends a greeting. So it’s not the woman mentioned
in connection with Babylon in Revelation, rather, it is Peter’s
wife protected under the symbolic use of Babylon used for Rome. But there’s a curious thing that
he acknowledges about her, especially to people who knew her and loved
her. He reminds the readers, those
to whom he’s writing, that she is chosen together with them. They certainly knew this. But
perhaps there had built up in their minds some elitist mentality
that those who went about ministering or certainly pastors wives were
somehow better than the rest. And I believe what Peter does
here is rejoice right along with them as he mentions election. And that is the word there that
she is chosen together with you. She’s no better than you. She’s
no worse than you. There’s no one of us that’s better
than another. None of us owes anything of our
salvation to our own lives. It’s merely the manifold grace
of God looking down and recognizing a sinner and sealing them out
for eternity. It was an encouragement to the
saints that Peter is writing here. The epistle begins in the
same way it ends now with the same thing that Peter started
with the consideration of this humbling doctrine of election. that their salvation had everything
to do with God, that it was rooted in eternity past by divine election
and that Peter’s wife was no different than them. What a beautiful
way to refer to the manifold grace of God in others lives.
This is my brother, one of the elect. It immediately brings
up all those images of the fact that we don’t deserve to be standing
in heaven, but we were chosen. There was nothing that God saw
in me, but were chosen. Peter’s wife was no different
than them. And this was just another creative way for Peter
to point up naturally. This just flowed from his heart.
The manifold grace of God at work and active in other people’s
lives. Certainly, We will recognize Silvanus’s
integrity in heaven. We certainly will enjoy the effects
of our eternal predestination. We do so now and we will enjoy
it in eternity. But there is a third observation
here in this passage. Peter recognizes not only the
temporal integrity of Silvanus and the eternal predestination
of his own wife, but thirdly, the perpetual affection of Mark. This is an interesting one here. Mark, let’s just stand back and
observe. Mark was also called John in
a number of places. He was the son of a lady named
Mary, as we will see. is the passage that I read a
moment ago from Acts. A woman named Mary who lived
in Jerusalem, whose house was a meeting place for the earliest
church. This is where Peter went when he was released from prison.
It was to her house that he turned when he and Silas were released. His mother’s house in Jerusalem
was the place to which Peter frequented. This mark Not only was the son
of this Lady Mary, who was a cousin of Barnabas, Paul tells us. It’s
called the cousin of Barnabas. Because of that, with great confidence,
you begin to piece all these things together, that this is
the John Mark of whom we read in Acts 12, 12. This is the same Mark that was
with Peter. They are one in the same. A Roman
name blended together with a Hebrew name and one often substitutes
for the other. It is suggested that like his
cousin Barnabas, John Mark was possibly a Levite. He certainly
was a godly man or a man familiar with the scriptures and desirous
of serving and growing in his knowledge of God. But we begin
to see him as a co-worker of Paul and Barnabas from Jerusalem. In Acts 12, 25, we just simply
Scripture simply point out that Barnabas and Saul returned from
Jerusalem when they had fulfilled their mission, taking along with
them John, who was also called Mark. Here we have this simple
man, just kind of glossed and barely introduced to us here
and there. In fact, in Acts 13, go ahead
and turn back to Acts because we’re going to take another brief
course, brief tour. In Acts 13, verse 5, it just
refers to John as a helper. He certainly wasn’t an apostle.
They don’t put him up as such. They don’t call him an amanuensis
or a writer Anything else? They just say that he’s a helper
in very general terms. This word was used of subordinate
officers, a lot of times of an inferior class. The suggestion
is that maybe Mark went as some kind of a personal attendant
to the apostles, but he was certainly a godly man. And we know that
he was used of God for more noble purposes. In Mark, they got not only a
helper, but a fellow believer who likely had the gift of exposition
and helped in many, many ways. In addition to taking care of
Peter and Paul and others and maybe arranging routes and providing
meals, managing the business, they also had a guy that could
ably teach the scriptures. But you know of Mark, John Mark,
And what we know of him is what we’re so critical of. What we
have such a tendency to do is recognize in others the fault
and forget about the grace. And the beautiful thing about
the close of this passage is Peter has forgotten all about
the fault. And he recognizes only the grace. But in order
that we can do the same, look at Acts chapter 13, rather Acts
chapter 15, skip ahead. What sets this up? They took
along John as their helper, remember? And in Acts chapter 13, verse
13, it records simply these words. Listen. Paul and his companions
put out to sea from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia, but
John left them and returned to Jerusalem. There’s no indication
of a split. There’s no indication of an argument.
baffles my mind the extent to which some will go in characterizing
what took place, what the argument was about. It just says that
John left. And we know from later verses
that this was a disruption to Paul’s ministry and an irritant
to him that this was not good. It was not. It did not certainly
have Paul’s blessing on it. And that’s where we pick up in
Acts chapter 15. Look at verse 36. After some days, Paul said
to Barnabas, let us return and visit the brethren in every city
in which we proclaim the word of the Lord and see how they
are. What a noble purpose. Barnabas wanted to take along
John called Mark, along with him also. But Paul kept insisting
that they should not take him along who had deserted in Pamphylia
and had not gone with them to the work. This was a fault. This was a failing in Mark’s
life. And Paul saw it as such. And
Paul wanted to stand on principle and say, we put our hand to the
plow. He turned his back on it. We
cannot take him again. Now, if you want to get a lively
discussion going, just throw this out as a means of discussion
among your next little Christian gathering. With whom do you side? Magnanimous and forgiving Barnabas?
Or Paul, rooted and grounded in principle, always produces
a lively little debate. And there occurred such a sharp
disagreement that they separated from one another. This is Paul
and Barnabas, the son of encouragement. Such a sharp disagreement that
they separated from one another. And Barnabas took Mark. He took
Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus. But Paul chose Silas
and left being committed by the brethren to the grace of the
Lord. Now, some have made a lot of those words and they say we
never hear anything of Barnabas’s ministry, nothing of Mark in
that Cyprus ministry. We hear a lot about Paul. I don’t know how much that you
can make about that. There was a sharp division and they left
and Paul And Silas began traveling around through Syria and Cilicia,
strengthening the churches. Mark was the subject of the division
between Paul and Barnabas. Later, as we saw, he accompanies
obviously accompanies Barnabas here to Cyprus, but later suddenly
we find him with Paul. or at least familiar to Paul
and beloved to Paul. Somehow, somewhere, someway,
years down the road and emotions calmed. Paul simply
wrote this about Mark in 2nd Timothy 4.11. Only Luke is with
me. Pick up Mark and bring him with
you. For he is useful to me. And here
you see the softening of the well-principled man. And I believe that Mark and Paul
had a meeting. They had to have had some kind
of meeting to discuss this breach. And perhaps there was repentance.
Certainly there was prayer and there was forgiveness and there
was restoration. Because this is the same Mark
that wrote the gospel. who wrote under the direction
of Peter in Rome for use in the Roman church that Paul had such
an affinity for as well. We know he’s the gospel writer,
but history attests to that as well. Irenaeus wrote Mark also
the disciple and interpreter of Peter delivered to us in writing
the substance of Peter’s preaching. Mark wrote, just as Peter dictated
to him. The four accounts of the Gospels,
even though differing in details, agree in bringing Mark constantly
see him in close personal relationship with Peter. Papias reports from
John the Elder that Mark was the interpreter of Peter, recording
in his gospel the facts related to him by Peter. This is the
same Mark. What this tells me is that ministry
upon a failure or a struggle or a fault isn’t necessarily
over in its entirety. There are certainly standards
that would prohibit a man from continuing his pulpit ministry.
But in this particular case, just like in so many people’s
lives, we have this tendency to write off John Mark. That
he’s practically become a byword to the church if all you read
is Acts 15, isn’t it? But what was Peter’s perpetual
affection? What did Peter recognize in him?
He calls him my son. I mean, is there anything more
dear and precious than to refer to someone in these terms? See,
Peter knew John Mark before Paul did. And when he calls him his
son, he alludes to the fact that he was perhaps instrumental in
bringing this young man to Christ. He sat in the Bible study with
him. He was there when he repented. He was there when he was baptized.
He was there when he saw him begin to grow in grace. Certainly,
he commended him to be dispatched with Paul. But one simple breach,
one glitch like that, Peter wasn’t ready to set him aside entirely. And I believe Peter was probably
instrumental in restoring him to the ministry. That term son
just denotes a close and affectionate familiarity. Is there anything
closer among men? It was a designation that he
was as the apostles spiritual son, that fatherly love, And
all this, all this acknowledgement in the
work of God and of grace in others lives from the very one who is
in on this little discussion, Lord, who will be greatest in
the kingdom? And Jesus corrected them then.
And I believe Peter stood corrected. And over the years, God’s grace
began to minister in his heart to where he began to look out
and say that we are all the greatest. There is the very divine work
of God actively at work in our lives, and that’s what Peter
did. As I said, I don’t believe Peter did this by way of example
so that we can now, you know, as if Peter was saying, do as
I do. Peter was just doing what came
natural to him, looking and recognizing the abundant grace of God in
the lives of believers. And my question to you is, what
do you see? Perhaps even better than that, what do you look for?
What are you looking for in your brothers and sisters in Christ?
Are you looking for perfection? Or are you looking for those
early springs of grace? but subtle change in the heart,
that repentance, that love for spiritual things,
that beginning of growth and grace. Isn’t that what we should
look for? Let’s pray. God, we’re so humbled by Your
Word that this man, this simple fisherman, without even trying to so convicts
us by the way that he lived. By his simple acknowledgment
of your gracious work in the lives of these people, change
us, Father. Help us to be changed as Peter
was changed and to have our eyes opened to the manifold grace
of God at work in others. Help us to see and acknowledge
and rejoice in what you are doing in others lives, just as you’re
doing so in ours. We thank you and we praise you
in Jesus name. Amen.