This is the second in an 8 sermon series following Greg Ogden's Essential Guide to Becoming a Disciple: Eight Sessions for mentoring and Discipling.
Is there a difference between being a disciple of Jesus and being a
Christian? One would hope not, but I
think that the way church history has played out in the Western world there is
a difference. So, let’s just take a
little walk through history according to me and I will make my case.
In the beginning, Jesus called to himself not Christians but disciples. For a Jewish Rabbi or a Greek philosopher
having a group of disciples was a common practise. A disciple is a student of a particular
teacher who stands in a particular tradition of thought. In the Greek world disciples of Plato, or
Arisotle, or Socrates, or other great philosophers each learned and in turn
taught the teachings of their great teachers to others. These disciples were usually a close-knit
group who weren’t just there to learn information, but also/more so the way of
life of the originator of those teachings.
For Jewish rabbis, the focus of discipleship involved learning the
content of the Law of Moses and how to observe it. Over the centuries great rabbinic teachers
arose giving birth to differing interpretations or authoritative
traditions. And so, rabbis would teach
their disciples these different interpretations. “Rabbi Joseph says this, and Rabbi Benjamin
says that”. There also arose very
influential rabbis with quite different interpretations of how the Law was to
be interpreted. In Jesus day there were
two primary rabbis, Shammai and Hillel.
Shammai was a very zealous, letter-of-the-Law type and it seems the
Pharisees portrayed in the Gospels were likely swayed by him. Hillel was gentler, more peaceful, and gracious
and taught the rule of love. There are
scholars who say that if Jesus was ever discipled by a rabbi, it was likely a
close disciple of Hillel. A few of
Hillel’s teachings are written down and Jesus sounds like him.
The relationship between Jesus and his disciples was different than
what was the custom among the rabbis.
First, Jesus called his disciples.
He chose them. They didn’t choose
him. Second, Jesus demanded allegiance
to himself and the in-breaking Kingdom of God, which he manifested through
healings, exorcisms, forgiving sins, teaching with authority, and even
controlling events in nature. If you
were a disciple of Jesus, as I said last week, you soon noticed that Jesus did
and said things that only God could do and say.
Third, it doesn’t appear that Jesus taught the Law per se, though he had
authoritative knowledge of it. Rather,
his disciples wrestled with who he was and learned the ways of his Kingdom. The questions “Who are you, Jesus?” and “What have
you come to do?” appear to be the primary curriculum. Personal commitment to Jesus and doing what he
said was the way you learned it. This
personal commitment to him meant rearranging the commitments of one’s life
completely around him and his kingdom, even to the extent of suffering for
him. Fourth, Jesus sent his disciples to
go and bear witness to him as the crucified and risen Lord of Creation and
spread the Gospel of the Kingdom by making disciples and he fully expected that
they would do this without excuse.
Jesus came proclaiming a Gospel, his Gospel, the only Gospel, but
yet a Gospel that is forgotten today. He
proclaimed, “The time has come. The
Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe
this Gospel.” The word for time there
means a new age. His Gospel was that a
new age, the expected age has come about, the age when God’s reign is visibly
present and active on earth. The proper
response to this Gospel is repenting and believing. Repent means a change in thinking and
doing. Ask what God wants and be
faithful to him instead of thinking and seeking the will of the unholy trinity of
“me, myself, and I”.
Heeding Jesus’ Gospel had consequences for his disciples. To be a disciple of Jesus meant accepting the
real-life, day-to-day consequences and the political fall out of Jesus being
the Messiah, the Lord and not the other powers that be. Sole allegiance to him meant Caesar, the
Roman military, Jerusalem, the priests, and all the other religions were false
lords. Allegiance to Jesus and his
kingdom in a world that was full of idol worship could cost you your trade and
get you crucified. Jesus wasn’t
exaggerating when he said “Deny youself, take up your cross and follow me”.
So, when did the word Christian come into play. It took a few years. The Book of Acts tells us that it was in
Antioch probably about 10 or so years after Jesus was raised that the term
Christian first appeared. It appears to
be a term that outsiders placed on the “followers of the Way” as they called
themselves. It also appears to have been
a derogatory term. The Greek term
“Christianous” appears three times in Acts and all three times it was people outside
the church placing a label on the followers of Christ. It was meant to be demeaning.
Interesting to note, there are a good many Bible scholars who will point out that “Christianous” isn’t the word that appears in the earliest texts of
the New Testament but rather “Chrestianous” which basically meant a
“goody-goody” or “follower of the goody-goody” reflective of the costly reality
Christians faced for renouncing the idolatry and Pagan lifestyles that pervaded
the Roman world. They say “Christianous”
is a later textual gloss from a day when the church had accepted the name
Christian.
Moving on in Western History over the first century or so of the
church “Christian” gradually became the self-referent for those who followed
Jesus. In the early 300’s the Roman
Emperor Constantine gave Christianity legitimacy and it soon became the
dominant religion of the Roman Empire.
By the Middle Ages, in Europe and Northern Africa one became a Christian
by birth, that is unless you were Muslim.
In post-Crusade Europe, if the King of your nation was Christian, you
were a Christian. Even your citizenship
was determined by the location of your Baptism.
When the Reformation came about distinctions were made as to what kind
of Christian you were not whether or not you were a Christian for “everybody”
was Christian. There were a few
movements that tried to take up the ways of the first disciples but they were
persecuted by the Christian church as fanatics.
Today, in the wake of the Enlightenment and North American
Revivalism being a Christian predominantly means one of two things. First, it is an answer to a question on a
census. A person is simply one of the
2.2 billion adherents to the Christian religion, which is one of many
religions. Second, in popular North American
culture if a person today claims to be a Christian they likely mean that they
believe/trust Jesus for the forgiveness of sins, that they are on God’s good
side because of that belief, and that they will go to Heaven when they die
provided they live a morally sufficient life.
Today people claim to believe in Jesus largely due to the benefits they
believe they receive from him, not because they have relinquished their lives
to follow him. Broadly speaking,
Christians have forgotten how to be disciples.
I would go as far as to say that when someone comes in our midst
claiming to be a disciple of Jesus we immediately presume they must be some
sort of fanatic.
The “Christian” church in North America is dying and I believe
Jesus will let that “Christian” church die.
Yet, I also believe that the church in North America that disciples people will in some form persist -- the church that proclaims
Jesus is Lord and lives like it; the church that prayerfully and humbly calls
people to come and be disciples of Jesus; the church that equips disciples of
Jesus to disciple others will be the seedbed of the church for the 21st
Century. I fully believe that it is time
we who profess to be Christians get serious about once again being his disciples. Amen.
