The Discipleship Dodge

In this post, we find Steven Furtick, once again, tirelessly running through any snippet of scripture possible in order to justify his actions:

(ACTS 2:42) They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

Did you catch it?  They devoted themselves.  Who devoted themselves?  The new believers!  Nobody devoted them to the teaching.  They had to do it for themselves.  The apostles taught with authority, clarity, and consistency.  But the burden of discipleship rested primarily on the new believers, not the leaders of the church.

Gee, had Pastors for the last several centuries realized this, they could have saved much time trying to make disciples. Just dunk a load of people in an above-ground pool, and let them fend for themselves.

Of course, that becomes problematic when you read Matthew 28:19:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

If Steven is right, this verse must be speaking to non-disciples, and Jesus is telling them to make themselves disciples.

Wait…Jesus was actually speaking to the Apostles?

This is the danger of taking one word out of one verse, and trying to build doctrine around it. The vast majority of the time, you are going to get it wrong.

Like this.

And this.

And this.

Is the Word of God not worth the extra effort it would take to get it right more often?

If not fame, then what?

I’ve argued against overusing the phrase To make Jesus famous. What, then, could we replace it with?

How about To make Jesus known?

1. It describes evangelism and discipleship equally well. Fame is too heavily biased towards presenting Jesus to the unsaved and leaves the family of faith in the cold. By emphasizing knowledge, we acknowledge both the need to fish for men and to feed Jesus’ sheep.
2. It demands that we offer the world substantive truth. Fame thrives best in a world of happiness, glitz and glamor. While Jesus brings joy, he also places demands on us that our unregenerate human nature recoils from. Knowledge lets us present all facets of Jesus’ nature.
3. It focuses on individual responsibility. Fame is a collective quality; once I’m aware of someone, that person can’t become more famous in my life. Fame only increases when someone else also thinks of the famous person. Knowledge exists on an individual level and can increase over time.
4. It better describes the relationship between the divine and me. Fame made some quality of Christ dependent on me. Knowledge reverses that dynamic. Jesus is all and in all, complete, perfect, infinite. My knowledge of Christ can improve or deteriorate, but neither state affects his nature. He is the rock that I throw myself against and on. It is my responsibility to know him, and by his grace he has given me all the tools I need to do that. It’s the church’s responsibility to introduce me to Jesus through the logos he’s left us.

What do you think?