Teaching Them to Obey All Things:

A View from the Matthean Account of the Great Commission

Michael J. Wilkins

Back in the 1960’s, prior to my conversion to Christ, I was a drill sergeant in the Army, training men and women for combat roles in Vietnam.  Before long, it was my turn to be sent to Vietnam.  After serving for a year with an airborne infantry combat unit, I came back a very different kind of person, and I was a very different kind of drill sergeant.  I had much the same content as I trained new men and women, but that year in combat changed the way that I applied the content to their training.

In analogous fashion, I come to you by invitation with two background elements that I hope will contribute to the theme of this book:  “Teaching Them To Obey All Things.”  First, my academic and research interest has focused on Jesus and His disciples, the theme of master-disciple relationships in antiquity, and Matthew’s gospel.  I have spent much of the past twenty years studying and writing on these themes.^[1]  Second, I have over twenty years of “combat” experience in the pastorate, evangelism, and mission teaching that helps me to understand the application of my research.  So I come to you as one who is passionate about this theme of making disciples who are taught to obey all things that Jesus instructed the original disciples.

The Question in Fulfilling the Great Commission

Recently, I have been called into a variety of settings as a consultant to missiologists, educators, and pastors who are committed to fulfilling the Great Commission of Matthew 28.  These groups have settled themselves into the task, and have marvelous strategies for accomplishing their objectives. 

I enter the discussion not as one to critique their methods, but rather as one who hopes to help clarify their objectives in the light a biblical theology of discipleship.  As simplistic as this may sound, the most basic of all questions needs to be reexamined.  I could put the most basic question this way, What is a “disciple,” how does one become a disciple, and how does this relate to “discipling” and “discipleship”?  And especially, in the light of our theme—“Teaching them to obey all things”—we need to ask specifically, whom are we teaching to obey what?

For example, Sherwood Lingenfelter elsewhere in this book assesses the relationship between the Christian University and the Church, asking the question whether they were “Prisoners of Culture or Partners for the Great Commission?”  It is a marvelous paper, but one of my criticisms in its development related to his use of terminology.  Significant for the underlying thesis of his paper is his concept and use of the terms “convert” and “disciple,” and further, the use of the expressions “world evangelization” and “making disciples.”  At one place he states:  “Within that same context the local community invites new believers to join in an adventure of pilgrimage, which serves to transform those converts into disciples of Jesus Christ.”  In another place he discusses the relationship between, “The Church, the University and Culture,” by asking the question:  “How can and should these two institutions, united in their commitment to Jesus Christ and to His mission, partner in the task of world Evangelization and making disciples?”

Some underlying assumptions here need to be given strict attention.  We see here what is a widely held use of terminology (especially in older parachurch circles) that suggests there is two-stage process in the Christian life: a person becomes a Christian (convert), and then at a later stage of commitment becomes a disciple.  So articulated, a convert, when committed, becomes a disciple; a person who is evangelized later is made into a disciple.

However, this perspective does not seem to square with the intent of the Great Commission: we are to make disciples of all nations, not make disciples of Christians.

On the other hand, Lingenfelter states later in the same paper,

The task for university and church, then, is to lead the next generation to conversion and transformation in the Lord Jesus Christ.  Conversion occurs when people hear the gospel, understand it, and receive Christ; transformation occurs when people engage the universal Word of God, and follow the Living Word to become like Christ.

This statement is an excellent description of the relationship between conversion and growth, but my question to him was, how does this square with your earlier statement and understanding of “making disciples”?  There seems to be a confusion of concepts, which can lead to a confusion of methods.

In another fascinating study, entitled The Missionary Movement in Christian History, Andrew Walls attempts to draw an analogy to Christian disciple making in ancient rabbinic models.  He looks to the ancient rabbis, such as Rabbi Johannan ben Zakkai, for whom a “disciple” was a “student” who was in training to become a “rabbi” (Walls 1996:49-50). However, Jesus himself said to his disciples that they were not to be called “rabbi,” since they will always be disciples of Jesus (see Mt 23:8-12).  So, Walls’ comparison of Rabbi Zakkai’s disciples to Christian discipleship is only a partially appropriate analogy.

We all need a clearer historical perspective of master-disciple relationships generally in the ancient world, and then how Jesus’ form of discipleship was continuous and yet discontinuous with those other forms.  In Jesus’ distinctive form of discipleship, a disciple is always becoming more fully a disciple, which indicates that every disciple is in the process of discipleship. When Walls (and others) speaks of world evangelization and making disciples, he seems to make a distinction between those expressions.  Actually, they both address the beginning point of conversion, but how does that relate to “discipleship”?  “Discipleship” is the on-going process of growth as a disciple.  How does that relate to “making disciples”?  One could accurately speak of world evangelization and discipleship, if one does not separate “making disciples” from discipleship.  There is much fuzzy use of terminology, as we will now see.

Discipleship Models

            A disciple of Jesus—a phenomenon simple to appreciate, yet incredibly complex to comprehend fully.  In the last thirty-plus years, actually since the end of World War II, a virtual flood of discipleship studies has swept over the church.  Yet people may be more confused now than ever.  The reason?  No consensus reigns in understanding what Jesus was doing, and what we should be doing, in making disciples.  What is a disciple of Jesus?  What should we be like as disciples?  Who are to be the objects of discipleship? 

            Different answers are given to those questions today.  As we look at the various responses, we can see several models of discipleship that result from those who have studied the biblical data.  While some diversity is to be found within each model, distinct characteristics mark each one.  I have isolated five models here (Wilkins 1992 and 1997).  Each view of discipleship has both strengths and weaknesses.  Which of the following discipleship models represents your own understanding of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus?

Disciples are Learners

            Some suggest that a disciple is a learner who follows a great teacher.  They suggest that the term “disciple” refers to one who puts himself / herself under the teaching authority of a great teacher, but that it has no reference to whether or not the person is a Christian (E.g., Ryrie 1989; Blauvelt 1986:41; Wuest 1966:25). For example, one author suggests the following general definition for a “disciple”:  “a follower of a teacher and his teachings, involving, in Bible times, traveling with that teacher wherever he went” (Ryrie 1989:155).  Another author states,

The word merely refers to one who puts himself under the teaching of someone else and learns from him. . . .  In the case of the word ‘disciple’ the context must rule as to whether the particular disciple mentioned is saved or unsaved, not the word itself (Wuest 1966:25).

            This view is instructive because it emphasizes the early linguistic relationship between the noun “disciple” and the verb “learn.”   Further, this model emphasizes the fact that a variety of different kinds of followers were called disciples.  In the gospels we find that a disciple may be a believer in Jesus Christ, or may be a follower of someone else, such as John the Baptist (Jn 1:35) or the Pharisees (Mt 22: 15-16).^[2]  This model also indicates the historical development of the “disciples” of Jesus within His earthly ministry.  At an early point in Jesus’ ministry, people became “disciples” of Jesus even though it was revealed later that they were not believers.   

            This model has two basic difficulties.  In the first place, the Greek term for “disciple” (maqhthV) is used in Scripture in a manner different than simply to designate a “learner.”  For example, the followers of John the Baptist are more like adherents to the prophet and the movement surrounding him than students of a teacher.  The second difficulty appears when we note the normal use of the term disciple in the book of Acts.  In Acts the term is normally used without any qualifiers simply to designate “Christians.”  For example, Acts 11:26 says simply “the disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.”  The disciple appears to be more than simply a learner.

Disciples are Committed Believers.

            Several others suggest that a disciple is a committed Christian, a believer who has made a commitment to follow Jesus and obey his radical demands of discipleship (See Coppedge 1989:40-42; Eims 1978:61ff, 83ff, 181-188; Henrichsen 1974:18, 40; Hodges 1981:36-45; 1989:67f., 87; Kuhne 1978:15; Ortiz 1975:9; Pentecost 1971:14; Powell 1982:11-12; Sanders 1962:108-109). One author answers one of our original questions by saying, “What is a disciple?  A disciple is one who follows Jesus Christ.  But because we are Christians does not necessarily mean we are his disciples, even though we are members of his kingdom.  Following Christ means acknowledging Him as Lord; it means serving Him as a slave” (Ortiz 1975:9).  Another author similarly asserts that “there is a vast difference between being saved and being a disciple.  Not all men who are saved are disciples although all who are disciples are saved.  In discussing the question of discipleship, we are not dealing with a man’s salvation.  We are dealing with a man’s relationship to Jesus Christ as his teacher, his Master, and his Lord.” (Pentecost 1971:14).

            This discipleship model emphasizes Jesus’ radical challenge to count the cost of discipleship.  It points to the small group of disciples who followed Jesus and emphasizes that when they left all to follow Jesus they became models of a higher spiritual calling.  It compares Jesus’ disciples with the crowds around Him, and concludes that the difference lay in responding to Jesus’ call to commitment.  The beginning point of discipleship, therefore, was commitment.  This model suggests that there are two levels within the church today:  disciples and ordinary believers.  A disciple is a more committed Christian than the average Christian.  This model of discipleship is quite widespread, being found in several different forms.

            This model also encounters difficulties.  One difficulty lies in the interpretation of Jesus’ discipleship messages and the spiritual nature of the audiences to whom He directs His messages.  For example, when Jesus gives a message directed to the “crowds” which calls them to count the cost before they become His “disciples” (Lk 14:25-33), or when He tells the rich young ruler to go give all his riches to the poor before he can enter into eternal life (Mt 19:16-22), what is the spiritual nature of the crowds?  of the ruler?  Are they already believers or not?  What is the meaning of the message?  Is it a call to deeper commitment, or a call to salvation? 

---

^[1] For extended discussion, see Wilkins (1988; 1992a; 1992b; 1992c, 1995, 1997). See also the forthcoming volumes on Matthew’s gospel: Wilkins (n.d.a; n.d.b )

^[2] A variation on this view suggests that discipleship was appropriate to Jesus’ day, while people could follow Him around physically.  However, today, since Jesus has ascended to heaven and believers can no longer follow Him physically, it is inappropriate for us to speak of ourselves as disciples.  See for example Rickards (1976:5-18 and Fisher (1972).

Next>>