The Antioch Model

What does a good disciple maker need? Sound theology? Yes, but he or she also needs to be an encourager. Disciple makers should be known for stirring up others to faith and good works (Heb 10:24). They need to care for the hearts of people as well as helping them know the facts. Consider how other believers see you. Is it more likely that an encounter with you makes them think, Yes! I need that guy or gal to speak to me right now or, Oh no, here comes the cold-water committee? Make it your daily aim to encourage others to persevere in the faith.

Verse 24 says more people were “added to the Lord.” This shows that Barnabas’s discipleship efforts apparently involved helping to equip and encourage lay evangelists to share the gospel with their friends. And while Barnabas must have been thrilled with God’s grace in Antioch, he needed help to keep up the work of discipling all the new believers. This, in fact, is a common problem leaders face when their churches grow. They are concerned about how best to disciple everyone, and it’s not a job that can be done without help. In the case of Barnabas and his work among the Antioch believers, another disciple maker is needed. Wisely, Barnabas enlists Saul’s help.

Barnabas goes to find Saul, with whom he had spent time previously (9:27). He knew of Saul’s calling to be an apostle to the Gentiles (9:15-16). He knows of Saul’s bridge-building capacity; the man could communicate to diverse groups and was well informed about Scripture. Barnabas knows Saul is just the man to instruct this world-reaching congregation.

I find it interesting that when Barnabas could have made a name for himself by becoming the leader of the new church, he humbly shared the load with a man whose teaching gifts were superior. He strategically recruited someone who could help him in the work at Antioch. Soon the Acts narrative will shine more on Saul/Paul than Barnabas, as we will read not of “Barnabas and Saul” but of “Paul and Barnabas” in chapter 13.

Later we read about more teachers in this church (13:1). Paul and Barnabas together provided more instruction to them (15:35). Here Luke makes a point to say Barnabas and Saul “taught large numbers” (11:26).

Teaching is a critical component of disciple making. Listening to music alone won’t mature new believers. Neither will merely attending church services. Christians need to know and learn how to apply the Scriptures (Matt 28:18-20; 2 Tim 2:2). Each of us needs faithful instruction in God’s Word.

So how long did Barnabas and Saul encourage and instruct in Antioch? They dedicated a year of their lives there. And the believers they taught patiently and persistently learned, being prepared for future missions to other cities.

The believers in Antioch didn’t call themselves Christians. Rather, they were “called Christians.” This title only occurs here, in 26:28, and in 1 Peter 4:16. In each case it’s a term outsiders use. The saints in Antioch so identified with Jesus that fellow Gentile observers called them “little Christs.”

This, then, is another turning point in the history of Christianity. The followers of Jesus were so different from the culture around them that citizens had to develop a third classification of people—something new beyond the Jew or Gentile distinction. Where once the world saw Christians as Jewish followers of Jesus the Nazarene and assumed they followed some divergent form of Judaism, something changed. Clearly the followers of the Way, comprised of people of all cultural backgrounds, weren’t Jews. But because some of them had converted from Judaism, they weren’t exactly Gentiles either. People from all sorts of nations were worshiping together. This unified group represented a third “race” of people (Peterson, Acts of the Apostles, 356). The Christians were a new humanity.

Even today some assume that one’s religion is based on one’s ethnicity, social class, or family, but the Antioch followers of Jesus showed the world something beautifully different about Christianity. The church in Antioch was like an embassy of the kingdom of God. Its people gave the world a picture of what Jesus’s kingdom, when fully consummated, will look like one day. These individuals of different backgrounds displayed unique values, showed a unique way of life, and preached a unique message. They didn’t just blend into the culture. They were different, and modern Christians should be described similarly.

What made the teaching of Barnabas and Saul so different from the teachings of other religions of the day? How could it break through social barriers to establish such unity amid such diversity? It comes down to their single-minded focus. They preached and taught the gospel as Jesus instructed. They saw themselves and the other believers as sinners saved by grace alone through faith in Christ alone. There is no ground for superiority and elitism in the Christian faith. Christ’s followers are all about him.

Acts 11:27-30; 12:25

This section closes with a glimpse into the hearts of the Christians in Antioch. They display sacrificial mercy and generosity to those in need. They displayed the fruit of salvation in doing good works—especially to those of the household of faith (Gal 6:10). They committed to both word and deed ministry, as they were no doubt instructed to do by Barnabas and Saul.

In an event recorded in chapter 21, Agabus prophesies that a famine will impact the entire empire. This famine would be the result of the flooding of the Nile River in AD 45. The harvest of Egypt, breadbasket of the region, was damaged greatly by the flood. This sent grain prices skyrocketing throughout the Roman world for years, including in Judea (Witherington III, Acts of the Apostles, 368). The prophetic word spoken by Agabus gave the Christians an opportunity to show support for those in Jerusalem. In Acts 11 the Antioch Christians give, according to each person’s ability, and they send the gift with Barnabas and Saul. We read about the completion of the mission in chapter 12:

After they had completed their relief mission, Barnabas and Saul returned to Jerusalem, taking along John who was called Mark. (v. 25)

Consider a few notable characteristics of this mercy ministry.

The famine hasn’t taken place yet when the disciples determine to send relief. Yet, embracing Agabus’s prophecy by faith, the Christians seem more concerned with preparing aid for others than they are with hoarding personal supplies in preparation for the hardship to come. They put others before self.

This is a great reminder that we must not only do mercy ministry when we think we’re financially stable and secure. We need to begin now—even if that means starting small. It’s important that we show mercy to this broken world as we can, “according to [our] own ability.”

The church doesn’t ask, How much will it cost? They simply give as much as they can. This kind of generosity shows that the gospel has transformed them (cf. 2 Cor 8:9).

The church determines to care for another group of believers—one that’s different from them in culture and ethnicity and one that’s located a good distance away from them. Such partnership among churches is rare today. The Antioch church delivers the offering to the “elders” of the Jerusalem church; this is the first mention of the term elders in Acts (11:30). Both churches belonged to Jesus, so the people were brothers and sisters. The Antioch church gave a tangible expression of this solidarity through their gift.

We must remain mindful of the needs of other congregations around the world. We need to assist them in word and deed as we hear about their struggles. Despite the geographical or cultural distances that sometimes separate us from them, we are brothers and sisters with all who are in Christ. We’re fellow Christians.

Darrell Bock says of this Acts passage, “This summary could hardly do a better job of showing a vibrant church at work” (Acts, 419). May the Lord grant us grace to experience such vibrancy!

Acts 13:1

I would like to point out two more ingredients of this missional church.

First, we must reflect on the example of diversity in the leadership of the church in Antioch. There was a group of “prophets and teachers” who apparently served like a group of elders; I’ll call them the Antioch Five. Luke doesn’t provide definitions and distinctions for their roles, but he does give us a sense of their diversity.

Barnabas was a Cyprian Jewish believer (4:36). Simeon was called Niger; his name means “black” or “dark.” Most believe he was from Africa (Stott, Message of Acts, 216). Lucian came from “Cyrene,” that is, North Africa. Manaen, who was brought up in Herod’s court, related to the royal upper class; he was either a foster brother or relative of Herod Antipas. And then there was Saul, who was a Jewish believer. He would have brought an academic, professorial dynamic to the group.

This leadership reflected the membership of the church. The congregation’s diversity would no doubt shock some, but it would have attracted many to the Savior. Diversity within the church, in fact, has an attractional dimension to it. Outsiders from everywhere could have imagined themselves joining the Antioch congregation, knowing that it welcomed all sorts of people and could communicate the Scriptures to those of many nationalities and backgrounds.

This leadership would have also had an important missional dimension. These leaders surely saw things differently at times, but their diversity likely enabled them to be more creative and effective in reaching their city and in ministering to their people than if only one rank or class of men was leading the church.

The concept of worldwide missions was born in this diverse group. It shouldn’t surprise us (Keller,Evangelism, 106).

Acts 13:2-3

We should follow the Antioch model of sending missionaries to the nations. John Stott reminds us of the uniqueness of the upcoming mission trips of Paul and his companions: “All the time the action has been limited to the Palestinian and Syrian mainland. Nobody has yet caught the vision of taking the good news to the nations overseas” (The Message of Acts, 215). But that changes as Luke tells us how world missions began. The whole church was involved in worship and fasting when the Spirit directed Barnabas and Saul to this new work. The church then blessed and affirmed these men as they sent them off. Three transferable lessons emerge regarding this episode.

You don’t get the sense that the setting of verses 2 and 3 was some special prayer meeting; it was the normal routine. The believers in Antioch were a worshiping and praying community. The fact that they were fasting indicates they were praying with expectancy and deep dependence on God.

True spiritual leaders don’t run with their own ideas; they seek God in dependent prayer. These men are remarkably gifted, yet they’re fasting! Churches that impact the world exalt Jesus passionately and seek him in prayer dependently and expectantly. The story begins in prayer, and then after Barnabas and Saul are selected, the believers pray again. This church’s actions were drenched in prayer.

Churches need to avoid both individualism and institutionalism (Stott, The Message of Acts, 217–18). This story doesn’t suggest Paul had a “God told me to go to Spain” idea totally detached from any reference to the church (individualism), but neither does it show us that the church followed a mechanical decision-making process devoid of prayer and the Spirit, which often exists in bureaucratic systems (institutionalism). The Spirit gave the word (we aren’t told how), and then the congregation affirmed this mission. Missionaries are directed by the Spirit and are sent and supported by the church. Ultimately, churches—not boards, organizations, or seminaries—send missionaries. We don’t see the mighty apostle ever operating apart from community. Saul was a man directed by the Spirit, united with the church.

Notice who is set apart for this missionary journey: Barnabas and Saul. This means the Antioch church is stepping out in an act of faith and making a sacrifice. They are willing to give away key leaders in obedience to God and for the good of others. Jesus loves churches that think beyond themselves.

These two high-capacity leaders are set aside for this work, even though the nature of the “work” isn’t described here. Theirs was somewhat like Abraham’s calling in that what they were commissioned to do was vague (Gen 12:1). While the calling itself is clear, the work and its location aren’t (Stott, The Message of Acts, 217).

This chapter reminds us that we must continue to send high-capacity leaders and to support their work. That’s what missionary churches do. And as we follow this pattern, we will reflect—albeit dimly—the missionary heart of the Father, who sent heaven’s best, Jesus Christ, for the good of the nations (Azurdia, “The Antioch Paradigm”)! “God had only one Son, and He was a missionary,” said David Livingstone. The Father sent that Son that we may be saved, and now he sends us that others may be saved (John 20:21). Let’s imitate our missionary Father and his missionary Son by sending out others for the advancement of the gospel.