Now, let’s go back to the discussion I was having with God over the Great Commission passage in Matthew’s gospel. Although I was very familiar with the King James Version’s rendering, to “teach all nations,” I was also aware that most modern translations use the wording “make disciples of all (the) nations” (Bible in Basic English, American Standard Version, Montgomery’s New Testament, Darby’s Translation, New King James Version, Revised Standard Version, World English Bible, Twentieth Century New Testament, Weymouth’s New Testament) or simply “disciple all the nations” (Young’s Literal Translation). Earlier I expressed concern about the fact that we have felt that discipleship had to be relegated to a specifically trained group of teachers or trainers. In trying to unravel what Jesus meant by His directive to disciple the nations, I felt that I should check to see if there were any specific truths I might discover by investigating the Greek word used in the text. The first thing I found was that the word is used very sparingly in the verbal form in the New Testament.
In fact, it is found only three other times in addition to Matthew 28:19. In Matthew 13:52, the verb is used to speak of a scribe who has been so well instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven that he is able to bring forth out of the treasury of his knowledge things new and old—things that were taught to him and things that he perceived on his own. In Matthew 27:57, the term is used to describe Joseph of Arimathaea who was so well taught concerning Jesus that he was willing to jeopardize his position on the Sanhedrin Council by siding with the man they were executing and to give up his valuable tomb for a man considered a criminal by the leading authorities of the time. In Acts 14:21, the word is used to describe the instruction that Paul gave to the believers in Lystra. Apparently, he was only there for a short period, yet the foundation he laid was sufficient to sustain the believers and proved to be the seedbed out of which sprang Paul’s great protégé, Timothy.
The limited references to the verb didn’t reveal much about the actual process itself; rather, it revealed more about the end result of having been through the process. The obvious end product of the process was a believer who was well grounded in his faith and understood it well enough to give his own insights rather than to just repeat the teachings of his instructor. Those individuals who were described as having gone through this process were solid and unshakable in their conviction and dedication to their faith. Joseph of Arimathaea, for example, was willing to put everything on the line—his present position and his eternal destiny—because of what had been instilled in him through this process of discipleship. Those individuals at Lystra who went through even a short version of this discipleship process were not only stable believers but also reproducing believers who were able to pass on their faith to a new generation in such young trainees as Timothy.
Ironically, through studying the verb I learned more about those individuals who have been through the process than I did about the process itself, and I learned much more about the process itself by studying the passages that use the noun that refers to those who have been through the process. The first thing that I learned was that the process involves a strong personal commitment between the master and the disciple. As I read the story of Jesus and His disciples, I saw that they essentially lived together—traveling from place to place together, sharing meals, and living through personal traumas and even squabbles together. The next thing that became obvious was that the discipleship relationship is expected to be the highest commitment in the life of the person going through the process. Jesus described this dedication: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26) “And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:27) “So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:33)
One of the aspects of the discipleship process that I found most intriguing was the apparent teaching method Jesus used with His disciples. Let’s join in with Jesus and His disciples on the day He shared with them the Parable of the Sower:
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them. Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. (Matthew 13:10-18)
From this passage, it becomes apparent that Jesus chose to speak to His disciples in story form in order to separate those who had a real heart for the gospel from those who didn’t have that genuine inner hunger for the truth. Jesus chose not to give facts and figures that everyone could understand. Rather, He related stories with intrinsic messages and symbolism. For those who already had the kingdom of God inside them, the hidden meaning about the kingdom was readily awakened when they heard the stories. To those without the kingdom of God inside them, the message remained alien. Evidently, the high level of commitment that Jesus demanded from those who would be His disciples and the intertwining of their lives proved that these chosen ones genuinely had the kingdom already resident inside them and that they could, therefore, comprehend the essence of the story.
In Mark’s account of the story, Jesus used some especially revealing wording when talking with His disciples about the use of parables, “And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?” (verse 4:13) When He asked if they knew the story, He used the term eido, which comes from the root word for “to see,” suggesting that disciples should have the revelation or insight about the parable; but when He asked how they planned to know all other parables, He switched to the term ginosko, meaning to understand through experience. When Jesus had the discussion with the disciples as to why He continually used parables, He said that it had been given to them the ability or privilege to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, using the term ginosko, referring to understanding through experience. Yet, when He spoke of the outsiders, He used the term suniemi, referring to understanding that comes from putting the pieces together. In other words, if you are already experiencing the kingdom of God, you’ll have insight into what the parables are communicating; if the kingdom of God is not already inside of you, you’ll not be able to put the puzzle together to see the full picture.
At this point, the picture begins to crystalize that the discipleship process is not so much a teaching of doctrine as it is an awakening of what God has already placed inside the disciple. With this thought in mind, let’s look at how Jesus taught His disciples to go about spreading the gospel:
After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come. Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest. Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves. Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by the way. And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house. And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again. And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. (Luke 10:1-7)
Notice that the passage we so often quote in context of raising up missionaries and evangelists, “The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest,” is right in the center of His directive for the disciples to go out on their mission. He was not sending them to the churches where they could recruit evangelists and missionaries, but to places where He had not yet been—to the mission field itself. Perhaps we have too often isolated this message from its context and have, therefore, missed the major emphasis of Jesus’ words. As the disciples were to go out to minister, they were directed to be in constant prayer for someone else to be raised up to continue the ministry. The disciples were not to go out with the anticipation of bringing in the harvest singlehandedly; rather, they were to go out with the anticipation of seeing other harvesters raised up. In other words, they were to expect that they would duplicate themselves through their mission. Next they were not to anticipate bringing in huge harvests as much as they were to look for some specific individuals whom Jesus labeled as the sons of peace in each community. Once they found these specific individuals, they were to enter into their homes and not wander around the neighborhood. In essence, they were to settle in on one individual household and invest in that home the way Jesus had invested in them—eating, sleeping, working, playing, laughing, and crying with them—until the knowledge of the kingdom of God that was inside those individuals was brought to full fruition. I’m certain that this approach did not preclude them from doing mass evangelism any more than Jesus had to give up ministering to the multitudes in order to disciple His chosen twelve. If we look into the life of Paul, we see this pattern at work when he focused on Lydia’s household while ministering to the whole city of Philippi and when he joined in with Aquila and Priscilla in their tent making business while ministering to the whole city of Corinth. When Paul entered Corinth, the Lord spoke to him that He had “much people” in the city. (Acts 18:10) This revelation came before the city was evangelized, indicating that there were many sons and daughters of peace in the city waiting to be revealed.
Notice how Paul so focused on his relationship with certain individuals that he essentially adopted them as his own spiritual sons: Timothy (Philippians 2:19-22, I Timothy 1:2, II Timothy 2:1), Titus (Titus 1:4), and Onesimus (Philemon 1:10). Peter also had this same kind of intimate relationship with John Mark. (I Peter 5:13)
Before we jump too quickly at some “New Age”y idea about awaking “the god within,” let’s take just a minute to look at a couple passages from the scripture to get a clear biblical perspective. In Romans chapter one, Paul explained that he was not ashamed of the gospel because he understood how it could bring salvation to those who would walk by faith and that God actually revealed Himself more clearly to those who exercised their faith as they moved from one level of faith to the next. He then added a sad explanatory note that people would choose not to walk by this faith and would, therefore, reject the gospel and become increasingly aware of the judgmental wrath of God rather than His righteous grace.
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (verses 16-21)
Later in the same book, Paul slipped in one little thought that can help us get a clearer understanding of the dynamic of what he was explaining in chapter one. In verse three of chapter twelve, he explained, “God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.” Every man has an initial deposit of faith; therefore, every man is susceptible to the gospel. However, if it is only those who decide to walk by that faith who will receive the revelation of the righteousness of God, then it would be only those who could be classified as “sons of peace”—the Lydias, Aquilas, and Priscillas in the nations we are to disciple.
From these passages, we are able to gather some insight into how Jesus intended for us to disciple the nations. Our first focus should be to find a son or daughter of peace in the area and begin to invest our lives in that individual and his or her family. The biblical example was to essentially move in with the family. In most cultures today, this would not be practical; however, we need to make ourselves totally available and totally vulnerable to this son or daughter of peace and his or her family. Essentially, we are to instill into them who we are as much as what we believe. Paul wrote of Timothy, saying that he had fully known his doctrine and his manner of life. (II Timothy 3:10) Raising up believers is not just a matter of teaching them what we know, but also letting them know what we are. The end goal would be that we could say to them as Jesus said to His disciples, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” (John 14:9) Perhaps this is what Jesus intended when He told the disciples that they would be witnesses (Luke 24:48, Acts 1:8) rather than sending them out to do witnessing. At the same time, we should continue to evangelize among the general populace, hoping to encounter even more sons and daughters of peace. In both of Luke’s accounts of the Great Commission—one found in his gospel and one recorded in the book of Acts—the idea that Christians are to be witnesses is found.
And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:48)
But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. (Acts 1:8)Matthew 24:14 confirms that this witness element of the gospel will go throughout the whole world before the Lord’s return. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
The interesting point here is that we are called to give reports of what we have experienced just as a witness in a court case is called upon to tell what he has seen or heard. The important point is that we don’t confuse our role with that of the Holy Spirit. We are witnesses, simply telling what we have experienced firsthand. (I John 1:1-3) Our role is not to convince anyone to believe or accept what we are testifying about. It is the work of the Holy Spirit as the attorney to convict and convince them to believe and respond to our testimony. Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would reprove the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8), using a Greek word that literally means to cross-examine. In a court of law, the attorneys have the role of asking questions of the witnesses to prompt them to give testimony as evidence that they (the attorneys) can later use when presenting their cases. This is the interaction of the roles of believers and the Holy Spirit. He prompts us to tell things from our own experience, and then He works in the hearts of the listeners to make our testimonies affect their lives. It is through this process that we are able to engage the sons and daughters of peace that we encounter.
Sons and daughters of peace are often exactly the ones we would expect. For example, Barnabas—even though we really never meet him prior to his conversion to Christ—seems to be exactly the kind of person we (and, hopefully, God) would choose as our representative. He was from a religious background (Acts 4:36), he was generous (Acts 4:37), he was willing to go out of his way to use any influence he had to help others (Acts 9:27), and he was levelheaded enough to be willing to meet and discuss issues with those of differing opinions even though he was unmovable in his convictions (Acts 15:2). Even when he had to stand his ground so firmly as to part ways with Paul, he was gracious enough to take John Mark under his wing and nurture him to the point that Paul eventually asked for him to be brought back to him (Acts 15:36-41, II Timothy 4:11). One major quality of sons and daughters of peace is faithfulness, a quality that is repeatedly mentioned in the context of discipleship. (Matthew 25:21, 23; Luke 19:17; II Timothy 2:2; Titus 1:5-16; Revelation 17:11)
On the other hand, we see one startling truth about the son of peace concept in the life of the Apostle Paul. Sometimes the son of peace will actually turn out to be the most unlikely candidate. Saul of Tarsus, who was “breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1), would certainly have not been my most likely choice for the son of peace who was to bring the gospel—not to just one city or nation, but to the whole Gentile world and multitudes of Jewish background as well. It was his dramatic encounter on the road to Damascus that turned his life around, but I suspect that there had been a long process in his life that actually led up to this encounter. We can find a number of clues in his testimony that indicate that the kingdom of God was already inside of him just looking for a way to get out.
First of all, we see that Paul was interested in theology. He grew up as a freeborn Roman citizen (Acts 22:28) in the city of Tarsus, which he called “no mean city,” indicating that it was far above the average city of his time (Acts 21:39). Indeed, it was a major center of commerce, education, and military power. With the excellent education evidenced by the quality of his writings, his Roman citizenship with all its privileges, plus the strong ethic his Jewish upbringing afforded him, Paul would have been a success in any field he chose to pursue: business, military, academics, etc. Yet, he chose to abandon all of those lucrative possibilities and give himself to the study of theology at the rabbinic school of Gamaliel in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3), a career that rendered him so little financial security that he had to augment his livelihood by making tents (Acts 18:3). As a personal disciple at the feet of Gamaliel, Paul was under the tutelage of a scholar who is recognized even today as one of the ten greatest rabbis in Jewish history.
Next we see that Paul was very bothered by what he considered heresy; that is why he was zealously persecuting the church. (Acts 9:2) He was adamant that the Christian movement, which he considered to be a blasphemous perversion of the Jewish faith, be crushed to death before it had a chance to spread its infectious heresy any further. He even had a role in the first martyrdom in the history of the Christian faith. (Acts 22:20)
Third, it is abundantly clear that he had the ability to teach and expound doctrine. His eloquence and clarity in expressing even the most complex concepts are evidenced through the record of his sermons and speeches in the book of Acts and in the written legacy left to us in his epistles. I find it interesting that he never quoted from his mentor Gamaliel and that he rarely made allusions to any of the other scholars he would have studied, suggesting that he had such a thorough personal grasp of the material that he didn’t need to quote from other teachers’ insights. Apparently, what had happened in his life was that all the formal training he had received had served more to bring the kingdom of God inside him to the surface rather than to merely teach him what others thought to be the truth.
A fourth indicator that suggests that the kingdom of God may have already been latent inside Paul is that he had relatives who were in the faith before him. In Romans 16:7, he mentioned his kinsmen Andronicus and Junia who were notable among the apostles. In verse eleven, he also mentioned another relative, Herodion. Although we know nothing more about Andonicus, Junia, and Herodion or Paul’s relationship with them, it doesn’t take much imagination to assume that the ever-inquisitive mind of this brilliant scholar had tried to process what he was hearing about, possibly directly from these relatives.
The fifth indicator that I see suggesting that Paul was a person of peace with the kingdom of God already inside him is found in the story of his conversion. When he encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus, he immediately called Him, “Lord.” (Acts 9:5, 9:6, 26:15) Before Jesus even identified Himself to Saul, something inside the persecutor erupted with the proclamation that he was in the presence of the Lord. As soon as Jesus introduced Himself, Saul was faced with a dilemma: his spirit recognized that Jesus was the Lord, yet all his religious training and theology told him that Jesus was the biggest heretic to have ever appeared on the Israeli landscape. Paul immediately accepted what his spirit man told him because the kingdom of God was already active inside him even though every indication in his external experience blatantly opposed it. Paul’s next step was to go into isolation in Arabia to seek reconciliation between his spiritual revelation and his traditional theological training. Because he knew that the Old Testament was truly God’s infallible Word, Paul had to find a way to reconcile what was in the scripture with what he knew to be true about Jesus. He had to unravel the scriptures from all the interpretations in which they had been entangled—interpretations that, until now, he felt to be true and accurate. Apparently Paul knew that he needed to make this spiritual journey on his own, unguided by other’s biases. Therefore, he resisted the apparently logical option of seeking counsel from the recognized leaders in the church. (Galatians 1:17) Paul returned from Arabia with a personal revelation of his own, not a parroted repertoire of others’ teachings. In the isolation of the desert, he had gone through a discovery process that led him to an inalterable conviction of the doctrines he was to live by and minister to others.
Paul became a son of peace when the kingdom of God that had been bottled up inside him found its full expression and meaning in the simple revelation, “Jesus is Lord.” Until he came to that revelation, the same force that later became his impetus to spread the gospel around the world was only a misdirected frustration looking for meaningful expression. Until that force inside of Paul found its true meaning, it drove Paul to extremes in the opposite direction. The same is often the case in modern-day sons and daughters of peace. Until they find meaning in their lives, they may be criminals, social activists, religious radicals, political extremists, or opinionated fanatics.
The Bible gives a few hints as to how we are to recognize sons and daughters of peace when we encounter them. Jesus recognized Nathanael as a son of peace as soon as He saw him under a fig tree. (John 1:47-50) The significance of this illustration is that the Jewish rabbis made a practice of sending their students to do their recitations under a fig tree. Apparently, Nathaniel was studying the scripture when Jesus first noticed him. The fact that Nicodemus risked his reputation as a leader in the established religion of the day by coming to see Jesus secretly at night proved that he was sincerely seeking the kingdom of God—proof that he was a true son of peace. (John 3:1-2) When Jesus came upon the woman at the well (John 4:4-26), He identified her as a daughter of peace who would immediately spread the message to all the men of Samaria (verses 27-42). The very fact that this woman continued to bounce from man to man even though it had cost her her reputation and acceptability in the city proved that she was desperate for love and would not stop looking no matter how much her quest would cost her. Jesus understood that it was more than just physical love she needed; she was on a quest for divine love because the kingdom of God was already trying to invade her heart. In Luke 9:57-62, we read the story of three individuals who volunteered to join the disciples but were not accepted because they were not sons of peace. In each case, Jesus could see that they had other kingdoms established in their hearts. Whether it was money, family, or any other earthly pursuit, their self-absorbed motivations disqualified these men from being sons of peace and, therefore, candidates for discipleship. Certainly, it was because Jesus only focused His discipleship efforts on those individuals who truly displayed the qualities of sons of peace that He was able to say at the end of His ministry that all except one of them were faithfully preserved in the faith. (John 17:12) When the multitude turned away from Jesus because they felt that His teachings were too difficult, the true disciples stayed because they realized that no one else had word of life, a solid indicator that they were sons of peace. (John 6:60-71)
These sons and daughters of peace may come from any walk of life. As we have already noted, there could be blue-collar workers (Aquila and Priscilla), business owners (Lydia), religious leaders (Paul), social outcasts (the woman at the well), political leaders (Publius), beauty queens (Esther), and wealthy socialites (Barnabas). We can easily add to that list IRS agents (Matthew and Zacchaeus), housewives (Mary and Martha), students (Daniel and Samuel), ranchers (David and Moses), fishermen (Peter, James, and John), and any other position in life—including yours!