(2) Associated with Paul. When Paul made his first appearance in Jerusalem after his con version, Barnabas introduced him to the apostles and attested his sincerity (Acts ix:27). Though the conversion of Cornelius and his household, with its attendant circumstances, had given the Jewish Christians clearer views of the compre hensive character of the new dispensation, yet the accession of a large number of Gentiles to the church at Antioch was an event so extraordi nary that the apostles and brethren at Jerusalem resolved on deputing one of their number to in vestigate it.
(3) First Missionary Journey. Their choice was fixed on Barnabas. After witnessing the flourishing condition of the church, and adding fresh converts by his personal exertions, he visited Tarsus to obtain the assistance of Saul, who re turned with him to Antioch, where they labored for a whole year (Acts xi :23-26). In anticipation of the famine predicted by Agabus, the Antiochian Christians made a contribution for their poorer brethren at Jerusalem. and sent it by the hands of Barnabas and Saul (Acts xi:28-3o), who speed ily returned, bringing with them John Mark, a nephew of the former. By Divine direction (Acts xiii:2) they were separated to the offiCe of mis sionaries, and as such visited Cyprus and some of the principal cities in Asia Minor (Acts xiii :14). Soon after their return to Antioch the peace of the church was disturbed by certain zealots from Judaea, who insisted on the observance of the rite of circumcision by the Gentile converts. To settle the controversy Paul and Barnabas were deputed to consult the apostles and elders at Jerusalem (Acts xv :1, 2) ; they returned to communicate the result of their conference (verse 22), accom panied by Judas Barsabas and Silas, or Silvanus.
(4) Second Missionary Journey. On prepar ing for a second missionary tour, a dispute arose between them on account of John Mark which ended in their taking different routes; Paul and Silas went through Syria and Cilicia, while Bar nabas and his nephew revisited his native island (Acts xv :36-41).
At this point Barnabas disappears from Luke's narrative, which to its close is occupied solely with the labors and sufferings of Paul. From the Epistles of the latter a few hints (the only authen tic sources of information) may be gleaned rela tive to his early friend and associate. From t Cor. ix:5, 6. it would appear that Barnabas was unmarried and supported himself, like Paul, by some manual occupation. In Gal. ii:1 we have an account of the reception given to Paul and Barnabas by the apostles at Jerusalem, probably on the occasion mentioned in Acts xv. In the same chapter (verse 13) we are informed that Barnabas so far yielded to the Judaizing zealots, at Antioch, as to separate himself for a time from communion with the Gentile converts. The date
of this occurrence has been placed by some critics soon after the apostolic convention at Jerusalem (about A. D. 52) ; by others, on the return of Paul from his second missionary journey (A. D. 55). It has been inferred from 2 Cor. viii:18, 19, that Barnabas was not only reconciled to Paul after their separation (Acts xv :39), but also be came again his coadjutor; that he was the 'brother whose praise was in the gospel through all the churches.' In Colos. iv:to and Philemon, verse 24, Paul mentions Mark as his fellow-laborer, and at a still later period (2 Tim. iv:11) he refers with strong approbation to his services, and requests Timothy to bring him to Rome, but of Barnabas (his relationship to Mark excepted) nothing is said. 'the most probable inference is that he was already dead, and that Mark had subsequently as sociated himself with Paul.
(5) Personal Appearance. From the incident narrated in Acts xiv :8-12 Chrycostom infers that the personal appearance of Barnabas was dignified and commanding. When the inhabitants of Lys tra, on the cure of the impotent man, imagined that the gods were come down to them in the like ness of men, they called Barnabas, Zeus (their tutelar deity), and Paul, I lermes, because he was chief speaker.
(6) Death. The year when Barnabas died can not be determined with certainty. If his nephew joined Paul after that event, it must have taken place not later than A. D. 63 or 64. 'Chrysostoin,' It has been asserted, 'speaks of Barnabas as alive in A. D. 63.' The exact statement is this: In his Eleventh Homily on the Epistle to the Colossians he remarks, on chap. iv:to. 'touching whom ye re ceived commandments, if he come unto you re ceive him' loon rap& BapPcifia ivroXat nafloy per hafs they received commands from Barnabas.
(7) Traditions. There is a vague tradition that Barnabas was the first bishop of the church at Milan, but it is so ill supported as scarcely to deserve notice. It is enough to say that the cele brated Ambrose (born A. 1). 34o, died 307) makes no allusion to Barnabas when speaking of the bishops who preceded himself.
"It is interesting, however, to notice that the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews is at tributed to Barnabas by Tertullian (see I lEtniEws, ErisreE TO), while there is still extant an Epistle of Barnabas, which, according to external evi dence, is the work of this Barnabas, but on inter nal grounds this conclusion is now generally dis puted. (See the arguments briefly stated in liefele, Patrum Apostolicornm Opera, p. ix ff., and more fully in the same writer's Das Send schreiben des Apostels Barnabas auls neue un.ter such!, ubersetsi and erklart, Tub. 184o. Comp. also Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers.)"—G.
Hastings' Bib. Diet. (See BARNABAS, Gos