CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

The purpose of the study was to establish how discipleship could be used

effectively in assisting Pastors and Christian leaders in local churches to enhance church

growth and church establishment.This thesis will assess the forms of discipleship

practiced in the local churches to address the issues of lack of church growth and church

establishment including cause of the lack of spiritual growth among church members, the

lack of proper disciple making ministries to help and produce disciples in the local

Churches, issues of discipleship and disciple making process. The study is divided into

five chapters. The first chapter deals with the background of the problem that cites some

challenges the church in Zambia is facing despite the rapid growth of its membership.

The chapterwill further look at the experiences of the church, its ministry, practices,

activities and its rapid growth of membership. Also, the overall objective of the study.

The second chapter will discussthe concepts used in the study and the three themes:

understanding discipleship and disciple making, the forms of discipleship for the

Christian church and the role of discipleship to arrive at the heart of the matter of what

discipleship and disciple making process is all about in the Bible. This will further help

the researcher to apply these findings to the Pastors and Christian leaders in the City of

Kabwe. The third chapter will further look at the methodology used in the research that

has focused on describing and understanding the meanings and the interpretations of

pastors and Christian leaders to gain understanding on the topic of discipleship and

disciple making process. The chapter will also look at the case studyresearch design, data

analysis and interpretation and show the instruments that were used in conducting the

1
case study research and how data was collected and interpreted. Additionally, the fourth

chapter will present the discussion of the main findings of the research focusing on the

descriptive and interpretive case study research from sample found in City of Kabwe. The

study will further analyse the results of interviews and focus on the discussions

undertaken during fieldwork. Therefore, the chapter will concludewith all that will be

discussed in all the chapters of the researchgiving an overview of chapter one, two, three

and four including the suggested ways and means on how discipleship can be practiced

for church growth and church establishment. The chapter, therefore, will further give a

brief summary and critique of the findings and the suggestions for further research.

Additionally, the study will conclude with the recommendations.

1.2 Background and Context of the study

After Zambia was declared a Christian Nation by the late president Frederick

Jacob Titus Chilubain 1991, there was a rapid growth of churches in the Nation. New

churches multiplied and Christianity came alongside with prophetic ministries emphasing

so much on prophecy and brought about the prosperity Gospel with miraculous signs and

wonders. Performances like spending most of their time prophesying into people’s lives,

doing the rituals of healings and praying for people for deliverance which could take

sometimes whole day or whole night. Most of the people were more driven by these

events more than they could worship God and being trained and grow by becoming

mature Christians to disciple others. In addition, a lot of people relied more on prophets

to perform ministries than looking to God for their help. Besides, the prophetic

movement had also a lot of interdenominational meetings mostly during weekdays or

Saturdays late afternoon but sometimes also overnights in hired buildings, church

2
buildings and sometimes at the house of a church member or a Christian leader with

fluent membership from various churches and different Pentecostal Christian leaders

taking turns in leading the prayers. Their meetings were spent only in prayer and

prophecies but little or no time was spent in training people toward becoming mature

Christians. However, people from different denominations rushed to these meetings

seeking for prophecies, healing and deliverance. This resulted into “mushrooming of

churches”, the term implying that new churches have come in great numbers.

Furthermore, the Zambian local churches have generally experienced huge growth of

membership but the spiritual growth among Christians is still a matter of concern. In the

article, “changing the face of Christianity in Zambia”, Banda (2010) sees in some of the

new churches a general lack of Biblical formation and the abandonment of the holiness

ideals both in pastors and congregations. The lack of spiritual formation is one of the

reasons the majority of Zambian Christians in local churches are not growing toward

becoming mature Christians who can be reproducing disciples.

In support of spirituality as the first priority, Martin(1995 p.20) lists some realistic

principles of church growth: firstly, spiritual renewal precedes and accompanies church

growth; secondly, a correct theology precedes true growth; thirdly, growth occurs when

emphasis is placed upon presence, proclamation and persuasion evangelism; fourthly,

church growth happens when spiritual gifts are identified and employed through

significant ministries; and lastly, church growth is directly proportional to the number of

members involved in witnessing. In addition, Auken (2002) points out that it is possible

that when a church lacks spiritual health its numerical growth declines. He further states

that church health requires sensitivity to the spiritual dynamics of service, holiness,

3
outreach, and worship. As an example, the Gospel of Luke provides number of insights

into the spiritual principles of church health. In Luke 11 Jesus turned His attention to the

church of His day the synagogue and leveled a variety of charges against that church.

Jesus' charges all pointed to a sick, unhealthy church. The church was accused of being

internally corrupt, lack of spirituality, being oblivious to its own faults, getting caught up

in ego massaging and being spiritually dead.

In this research, one thing should be noticed that there is no doubt about the

importance of both qualitative (inner spiritual growth) and quantitative (the visible

numerical growth) of God’s church. There is no separation between qualitative growth

from quantitative growth. There are two sides of the same coin. According to Martin

(1995 p.20), qualitative - spiritual renewal - precedes and accompanies numerical growth.

White (1904) further point out that minor matters occupy the attention and the divine

power which is necessary for the growth and prosperity of the church and which would

bring all other blessings in its train, is lacking, though offered in its infinite plenitude.

Young (2013 p.23) argues that when we speak of church growth the important thing is

not an increase in church attendance or a large number on the church roll or merely

outward professions of faith but bringing them into God’s Kingdom. Furthermore,

Stafford (2016), senior writer for Christianity Today, quoted by Ogden (2016 pp.22-23)

asked the late John Stott how he would evaluate the enormous growth of the church since

he had been ordained sixty-one years earlier. Stott replied that the answer is ‘growth

without depth.’ And he further states that none of us wants to dispute the extraordinary

growth of the church. But it has been largely numerical and statistical growth. And there

has not been sufficient growth in discipleship that is comparable to the growth in

4
numbers. Furthermore, Barna (2001)in his research concluded that most Americans who

confess their sins to God and ask Christ to be their Savior live almost indistinguishable

from the unrepentant sinners and their lives bear little, if any fruit, for the kingdom of

God.

However, due to the current state of the church as stated above, the Zambian

church in general has failed to produce the quality of people as Disciples of Christ and to

do what Christ commanded “to make disciples of all nations”. Moreover, there is still a

challenge of Spiritual transformation among Christians in local churches. The church is

not performing to its best due to the lack of understanding the concept of discipleship and

not knowing how it can be practiced in local churches for church growth and church

establishment. Therefore, there is need to establish how discipleship can be used in

assisting Christian leaders and pastors to have effective ministry for church growth and

church establishment.

1.2.1 Understanding the Church in Zambia

Since the 1990s, new churches in Zambia have been increasing fast and have

multiplied in great numbers but most of them has been charismatic and Pentecostal

churches and with a few number from the mainline churches. Moreover, the explosion of

the increase of Pentecostal churches has not been only to Zambia but also to the whole of

Sub-Saharan Africa. Most Zambian born churches are called “Pentecostal” and they see

themselves as continuity with the older traditions of the same name. According to Harvey

(1996), Pentecostalism is the fastest growing stream of Christianity in the world today.

However, the movement is seen as a re-shaping religion in the twenty-first century.

Furthermore, Asamoah-Gyadu (2005) defines “Pentecostalism” as that stream of

5
Christianity which emphasizes personal salvation in Christ as “a transformative

experience wrought by the Holy Spirit.” Subsequent to that initial experience, such

pneumatic phenomena as “speaking in tongues,” prophecies, visions, healing, miracles

and signs and wonders have come to be accepted, valued and encouraged among

members as evidence of the active presence of God’s Spirit. Additionally, “Charismatic”

generally refers to historically younger Pentecostal independent and Para church

movements many of which function within non-Pentecostal denominations. The

expression “charismatic” itself derives from St. Paul’s reference to charismata

pneumatika, “Gifts of the Spirit,” in 1 Corinthians 12-14. Thus St. Paul uses the

expression to refer to those “extraordinary divine graces” that believers manifest on

account of their experience of the Holy Spirit (Asamoah-Gyadu, 2005).

On the other hand, from the older Pentecostal traditions, some questions are being

asked as a recent book of Banda (2009) shows warning of an emergence of a “happy go

easy” Pentecostal state of affairs in Zambia. The older Pentecostal churches saw

themselves arising out of the demanding and non-complacent Holiness-movement where

the growth of churches was accompanied by visible signs of sacrifice on the side of the

pastors. According to Banda (2009), many people risked their families by leaving their

professional careers, jobs and possessions to take up fulltime ministry. He also regrets a

general lack of biblical formation, and the abandonment of the holiness ideals both in

pastors and congregants. Onyinah (2002) further warned that the popular trends of

African Pentecostalism need to be challenged and engaged with since they may in the

long run reinforce fears in witchcraft and demon-possession instead of bringing

liberation. In contrast, if the older Pentecostal churches are expressing some irritation one

6
can imagine what is felt by the mainline churches. Some speak of an emerging

“entertainment Gospel” or a “show-off Gospel”, referring to the combination of loud

music, spectacular healings and exorcisms (readily video-taped or even televised),

extraordinary testimonies and bold assertions of faith. On the contrary, others see the new

churches feeding on fears of demons and Satanism. They warn of the danger of a

charismatic Christianity to become very inward looking and a political. They say: Satan

and problems are personalized and prayed away but the wider social forces (or

psychological dynamics) are overlooked and left intact. According to Udelhoven (2010),

others go further still and claim that people living in dire poverty are easily misled by

promises of healing or prosperity; many even prefer to speak of “sects” rather than

churches. Whatever one’s opinion about the new churches, it is no longer possible to see

in them just a development at the “margins” of Christianity. Due to its shifts in “gravity”

towards the South world-Christianity is more and more marked by what is happening in

Africa, South America and Asia which all have seen an explosion of new Pentecostal

churches. However, Mainline churches themselves have developed influential

charismatic wings and become affected by the quest of Pentecostalism. According to

Philip (2002), the mainline churches at least those in the North already today on the

margins of global Christianity and speaks of immanent shifts in the nature of world-

Christianity; others speak of the “Pentecostalisation of world Christianity”. In addition,

Onyinah (2002) reminds church of the fighting or suppressing a trend which has never

been successful and he calls on African theologians to bring reflection and analysis into

the quest of the new churches whose theology may still be incomplete. However, the best

way to do so one may add is a positive engagement with the new churches. In contrast,

7
the word “churches” Zambia is in the sense of regular assemblies, meeting in fixed places

(in an own church building, a hired classroom of a school, or a shelter near the pastor’s

house) with fixed and regular times of worship, its own name, its own pastor or pastors

and usually also with ministerial functions (baptisms, funerals) for its members. The

word church is also used in terms of a distinct Christian denomination (for example

Catholic, United Church of Zambia, etc.). Generally people in Zambia understand the

meaning of a church largely within these connotations. In this regard, they are also a

number of “fellowships” in Zambia. Sometimes the words “churches” and “fellowships”

are interchangeable. But usually a fellowship refers more to regular interdenominational

meetings mostly during weekdays or Saturdays late afternoon but sometimes also

overnight at the house of a church member or a pastor with fluent membership from

various churches and different Pentecostal pastors taking turns in leading the prayers.

Generally, in Zambia several fellowships are attended by some members of non-

Pentecostal churches (Catholics, Anglican, SDA, RCZ, etc.) who find a liking to such

informal styles of prayer yet would not really like to join a Pentecostal church. According

to Udelhoven (2010), fellowships are not “owned” by one specific church nor do they

have a name; when they attain a name, they may actually be in the process of developing

into a church. Apart from such fellowships, each church usually has its own programs for

weekday or overnight prayers. Furthermore, there are also ministries in which pastors and

Christian leaders work out their specific gifts or talents (say preaching, prophesying, or

healing in another church upon invitation, or evangelizing by going with a specific team

from house to house, or preaching in busses or in hospitals). Sometimes a ministry is the

occasion for a person to recognize his/her talents to be a pastor and subsequently start an

8
own church. The terminology used in Zambia for a church, a fellowship and a ministry

can be fluid. According to Udelhoven (2010), many churches use the term ministry in

their own name for example Jesus Harvest Outreach Ministries.

Furthermore, the issue of affiliations have great differences in Zambian local

churches. Pentecostal churches stress the local assembly as focal point, and local

assemblies are by nature rather independent. A new church may remain completely

autonomous, answerable to no-one but to its own local leadership and still regard itself as

firmly rooted within the Pentecostal tradition. The church then is marked especially by its

leading pastors and their teams around whom the church basically evolves. However,

affiliations bring the advantage of mutual support and sometimes of further theological

training in Zambia or abroad. According to Udelhoven (2010), other Pentecostal churches

in Zambia have maintained affiliations to the United States, Germany, U.K., Nigeria,

Tanzania, South Africa and to Korea and othersare affiliated to the EFZ and ICOZ within

Zambia.

Additionally, a collection of doctrine can be found in Zambian churches if one

compares churches like Pentecostals and Charismatics, the Catholics, SDA, New

Apostolic, Jehovah Witnesses, the different Zion churches, or the Zambian born Mutima

church (which venerates a Quintity within the Trinity). However, most of the new

Pentecostal churches do not distinguish themselves with new doctrines but confess the

doctrinal basis of the early Pentecostal movements but still some doctrinal differences

exist among the Pentecostals and mainline churches. On the other hand, the church in

Zambia has shown a remarkable tolerance towards different Christian doctrines and

traditions. For most Zambians, God is not divided (“Lesa aba fye umo!”; “Mulungu ndi

9
mmodzi cabe!”), and therefore transcends any individual church. People unite with each

other and support each other far beyond the boundaries of any church which is

demonstrated in nearly each and every funeral. Furthermore, membership in a given

church is not necessarily seen as a life commitment and probably much less so for

Pentecostal churches than for others. According to Udelhoven (2010), churches can play

an important part in people’s lives in Zambia but apart from church membership there are

many other sets of social relations that shape people’s lives, values and outlooks.

The size of the congregation in few Zambian churches have on Sunday’s only

twenty people or even less some may even drop prayers occasionally for lack of people.

According to Udelhoven (2010), other new churches have weekly congregations of more

than one hundred and fifty or even more than two hundred people. Many have a weekly

congregation somewhere in between thirty and fifty adult people. In addition, most of the

places in Zambia are high density and some places are poverty-stricken. However, many

Zambian pastors are engaged in different jobs: a few work in full-time formal

employment and run their churches in the evenings and on weekends. Others are involved

in shop keeping (family businesses), at least two pastors are taxi-drivers, one is a night

watchman, many have occasional jobs, and others pastors live from the salary of their

wives if at all they work. According to Udelhoven (2010), the majority of pastors of new

churches in Zambia make a living mainly from their working professions which is,

however, not always stable. And the support of their congregation may sometimes help

out a bit, or “diversify” the chances of an income but it also limits the opportunities for

full employment. In contrast, some pastors have been urged by their families to give up

10
their churches and seek employment which shows that being a pastor can be a financial

sacrifice.

1.2.2 Contextualizing Discipleship

Discipleship is often overlooked as one of the topics of contextualization.

Whiteman (1997) states that scholars and Christians pay attention to the initial

communication of the Gospel and try to ensure that their message is receptor centered but

when it comes to following up and discipling new believers the methods used are not as

orderly or well-thought through. Take for example, how does one disciple a Muslim

background believer? How does one disciple a Buddhist background believer? If

Christians are careful about how to package the Gospel message for the first-time hearers

then they should also be careful about how to package the follow- up and discipleship

materials for those who desire to grow closer to Jesus. A typical result is that they are

many decisions but very few disciples in the local churches and Christian organizations.

Although most Christians know about the term 'contextualization,' in reality there exists a

big gap between theory and practice. According to Whiteman (1997), the gap between

the theory and the practice rises due to the desires and plans of sending churches.

Christian leaders and missionaries may not have the 'luxury' to listen to the people among

whom they are working. Instead, they must listen to the desires of the supporters who

wish to extend themselves 'across the face of the globe, sincerely believing that this is the

best way to win the world for Christ. However, contextualized discipleship is an

application of contextual theology in following up and discipling new believers in a

cross-cultural setting. By taking the receptor's context seriously, it acknowledges, first of

all, the simple and obvious fact that no one comes to Jesus in a spiritual vacuum. It

11
rejects the theory that the mind of the receptor is ready and eager to receive everything

the Christian has to teach about Christian spirituality. The truth is that every new idea

must be mixed with the existing ideas, sometimes requiring a violent clash and other

times demanding an accommodation to the existing set of beliefs. Discipleship in context

is based on the acknowledgment that everyone has been captive to one's own spiritual or

religious orientation before coming to know Christ (Ephesians 2:1-3). The receptor's

mind is far from empty or free. Rather, the mind must go through a fierce battle before it

can adopt any biblical truth.

In addition, discipleship in contextualization rises out of a dynamic interaction

between text and context. By paying attention to both the Bible and the context in which

people live, the church is able to bring the task of disciple making in a culturally relevant

and biblically faithful manner. Regarding the effectiveness of discipleship, it must be

grounded in the suitable context in which people live. It is the context that allows church

to understand the needs and issues of the new believers. Only after these needs and issues

are properly identified and understood, can church then begin to design a curriculum that

will help people to follow Jesus faithfully in their context. In short, borrowing

discipleship materials or approaches used in another context ought to be resisted. Instead,

academics and churches must be encouraged and empowered to design their own

curricula and approaches to disciple the new believers.

12
1.2.2.1 Discipleship in the New Testament Context

In the New Testament, it is seen how each context presents a different set of

challenges for the followers of Jesus Christ. This difference becomes obvious when

people compare the context of the book of Revelation with the context of the book of

Matthew. Hence, it shows that discipleship is always within a particular context. In the

book of Revelation, John defines “disciples” as those ‘who follow the Lamb wherever he

goes’ (Revelation 14:4). They are the ones who persevere right to the end and come to

the wedding supper of the Lamb by overcoming the world. If people take the late dating

of Revelation, then they can assume that the book of Revelation was written to the seven

churches faced with the emperor cult (the worship of the emperor). These churches in

Asia Minor adopted the emperor cult enthusiastically. Domitian was perhaps the worst of

all emperors as he demanded that people address him as dominus et deus (Lord and God).

As for the Christians the pressure to avoid the emperor cult was compounded by the

pressure coming from traditional religious cults. Together they asked for a concrete

response from the believers. To come out as victors, the followers of the Lamb had to

face at least the following two challenges: Firstly, the relentless force of seduction by the

‘Babylon’ with all its glamour and charm, which is nothing but deception and

destruction. The churches at Ephesus, Pergamum, Sardis, Thyatira and Laodicea were

warned against this. Secondly, the fierce force of persecution by the Beast which in no

ambiguous terms, demands worship from people. The churches at Smyrna and

Philadelphia did not to fall prey to this force and were commended by Jesus in turn. John

writes that seduction and persecution, the twin evils designed to illicit apostasy from the

believers will climax at the end. He urges the believers to live godly and faithful lives

13
right to the end and arrive safely at the wedding supper of the Lamb. In John’s context to

follow Jesus means to overcome the world at all personal cost: Yet, you have a few

people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in

white, for they are worthy. He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will

never blot out his name from the book of life, but I will acknowledge his name before my

Father and his angels (Revelation 3:4-5).

Discipleship in the Gospel of John is different from discipleship in the Gospel of

Matthew’s community. The main problem with the Matthean community was their group

identity as God's people. Mostly composed of Jewish stock the Matthean community

stood at a crossroad between insisting on Jewish identity and facing extinction or

enlarging their tent by reaching out to the Gentiles. Mission to the Gentiles was

Matthew's answer to this community in crisis. Mission was used as a form of

discipleship. The gospel of Matthew was written’ …. not to compose a life of Jesus but to

provide a guidance to a community in crisis (Bosch, 1991)’. Discipleship in John's

context is about resisting seduction and enduring persecution. In many ways, it has to do

with faithfully keeping one's identity as Christians in light of the mounting pressure to

conform to the world. In contrast, in Matthew's context has to do with the letting go of

one's identity and accepting God's plan for a new identity. The Matthean community

must no longer insist on its Jewish heritage as the only rightful heritage, and instead it

must embrace both the Jewish and the Gentile believers as part of its community.

However, with these biblical examples it is noted that it is the context that determines the

issues of discipleship. The Bible teaches who to follow while the context teaches how to

follow Jesus. When people use transferable or generic discipleship material, they miss out

14
the important issues of a particular context that stand in the way of discipleship. How

then does one enter into another's culture and engage in a cross-cultural discipleship

process? Below are the suggestions of several steps involved in contextual discipleship.

Before people take the first step, they must first identify their own theological convictions

about contextualization.

Bevans (2002) shows models regarding contextual theology. First, the translation

model starts with the text. It assumes that there is the supra cultural, supra contextual

essential doctrine. This essential doctrine is put into other terms in a way that the receptor

can understand also referred to as accommodation. Second, the anthropological model

starts with the context. The present human situation is the focus of divine revelation as

much as scripture and tradition have been the focus of divine revelation in the past. Thus

one needs to attend and listen to God's presence in the present context also known as

indigenization. Third, the synthetic model believes in the universality of Christian faith.

However, it does not define the constant in Christian identity narrowly in a set of

propositions. Each context has its own distinctiveness to work out the universality of

Christian faith. Thus, theology is a reflection of the context in the light of the text

alternatively called the dialogical model.

In supporting discipleship in context, a model of contextual theology that pays

due attention to both text and context must be chosen. Of course that must begin with text

the revealed Word of God. The core message has to do with the redemptive work of God

in Christ. However, the existing category of Christian theology for example the typical

order of systematic theology is not necessarily the best arrangement for people in other

contexts. Thinking so is practically the same as ignoring the context. The following

15
approach to contextual discipleship uses the strength of the translation model and the

synthetic model. Regarding a contextualized discipleship material in a particular context,

the following steps must be taken into consideration: state the supra-contextual message

of the Bible. Researchers do not need to start everything from scratch. That would be not

only a waste of time but also a show of arrogance that God could not teach through the

findings of others. According to Nicholls (1979), there are biblical truths or themes that

transcend all cultures and contexts. These have been already identified, deposited and

passed down through two thousand years of church history (tradition) although scholars

may disagree on how they are arranged. Nonetheless, the essential, supra-cultural

message of the Bible can be agreed upon, as reflected, for instance, in the Lausanne

Covenant. While I consider the interaction of text and context essential, I am not

assuming that both text and context are culturally conditioned and relative to each other.

On the hand, the majority of scholars agree that there is a supra-cultural, supra-contextual

message in the Bible which has to do with creation and redemption. The redemptive work

of the triune God is carried on in the world through the obedience of God's people (the

Church). The following are the six essential Bible themes identified by researchers. They

make up the overall message of the Bible. The number of the themes can vary depending

on how one regroups them. These themes do not run one after another but all at the same

time. They in turn interact with the issues raised in a particular context. Naturally, people

in one context understand each Bible theme differently from those in another context.

Therefore, following are the Bible themes issues in context experiencing God, receiving

Salvation in Jesus Christ, living a Holy Life (Life in the Spirit), fellowshipping with

16
Believers (Church), being a Witness and Servant in the World and the last one is

following Jesus and Making disciples.

Additionally, the needs and issues of a particular context must be identified in so far

as people have bearing on the task of discipling new believers. Also, Christian leaders

need to ask, 'What are the issues that stand in the way of the new believers from

becoming mature disciples of Jesus Christ?' They can start with more obvious issues and

move down to subtle ones. If one were to examine the Zambian context, According to

Jose (2003), the following issues and needs will be part of the list: debilitating fear of the

spirits, incorrect notions about God, Church, the Gospel, the Bible, prayer and so on

(negatively influenced by nominal Catholicism),extreme family obligations and other

excessive demands on relationships, immoral living, drinking, gambling and other social

ills, corruption at all levels of society and other societal and environmental problems, the

Lack of material resources (dire poverty) and the increasing gap between the rich and the

poor and de-stigmatizing of the Zambian culture from the years of colonial rule that made

Zambia feel ashamed of their own culture. Ultimately, there is need to understand these

issues from the perception of the Zambian worldview. The question is how do these

issues touch upon the Zambian worldview? For example, how does their understanding

on the spirit world deviate from the biblical understanding of the spiritual reality? An

ontological analysis is in order. While people ought to pay attention to the critical issues

present in a particular context, they must also identify the positive aspects of a given

context that can possibly make the task of discipleship easier. For example, early rise

prayer meeting has been an integral part of spiritual discipline in Korean churches. When

people trace the early rise prayer movement in Korean church history, they find that the

17
movement was an excellent model of the accommodation principle. Early rise prayer

meetings which began during the 1907 Great Awakening in Korea by pastor Kil Sun-Joo,

are now a permanent fixture in Korean Christian spirituality. According to Kwang &

Young (1993), in Korea today almost all churches practice communal early rise prayer

meetings as part of spiritual discipline and discipleship. But what must be remembered is

that this practice predates Christianity. To rise early and to pray to a higher power was a

generally accepted and practiced pattern in Korean spirituality. The Korean church has

adopted this existing practice and utilized in the church setting.

Furthermore, there is need of creating discipleship materials to addresses the

contextual concerns as a basis or a guide, According to Jose (2003), firstly, he must

eliminate topics found in other materials that are not relevant in one's own context. For

example, knowledge based propositional truth claims is not that popular in the Zambians

much less the debate over predestination vs. free will or the proof of the existence of God

is hardly an issue in the Zambian context. Even those who do not come to church believe

in God's existence and accept God's will. However, for a Zambian what is real is not a set

of doctrines but what he is able to feel. Secondly, teach biblical themes that are supra-

cultural but show how they interact with the critical issues of one's own context. This is

perhaps the most important aspect of contextual discipleship. For this step to be effective,

the discipler must thoroughly understand the contextual issues of the receptors. Thirdly,

create categories not found in other contexts but are needed in one's own based on the

needs and issues of the local context. Western discipleship materials are bound to miss

some of the critical issues facing non-Westerners. For this reason, new categories must be

created. According to Ro (1995), evangelical contextualization of theology in Asia can

18
come up with new categories reflecting the diversity of contexts in Asia. They include the

theology of suffering and poverty, the theology of change for the Chinese according to

Confucius' Book of Change, the theology of demons and the theology of evangelism

under totalitarian rule. In addition, some discipleship materials coming from the West

reflect the cultural values of individualism. In this regard, one need to give more attention

to the communal aspect of discipleship which is a supra-cultural theme in the Bible and it

must be presented in the categories meaningful to the Zambian social world. Firstly, the

facility in getting along with others and maintaining a harmonious relationship; Secondly,

self-love in Spanish and means self-respect. It expects others to behave and avoid giving

personal insult or shame. Individuals are important in the Zambian context. In this regard,

individuals find their identity in the group setting or in their family. In such a setting,

everyone learns to value the importance of smooth relationships. Therefore, harsh and

insulting words are to be avoided. An answer requiring 'no' is usually softened up by

ambivalent phrases like 'maybe ' or 'it is possible'. In such a society, exposing someone to

shame is the worst form of social condemnation possible.

1.3 Research Rationale

For almost fifteen years, the researcher has worked as a full time minister of the

Gospel in Gospel Church Harvest Centre and lately as a lecturer and a staff member at

Logos University in Kabwe. He had the opportunity to engage with many individual and

Christian leaders and pastors across Africa and Zambia in particular. The researcher’s

responsibilities in Gospel church Harvest Centre and Logos University included

lecturing, church planting, shepherding, training of missionaries and church leaders.

19
 During this period of interactions with churches, Pastors and missionaries, the

researcher observed that most African churches were not involved in disciple making

process and that there was no proper practical structure of disciple making. The

researcher further observed that the church generally has limited knowledge about the

pattern Jesus Christ used to disciple people. In addition, the researcher also deducted that

this absence of disciple making and lack of accurate information on how discipleship is

suppose to be practiced in the local churches could be the reason for the non-involvement

of most African Churches. However, the rationale of the study is an attempt to fill the

gaps left by the literature and also to shed more light currently on the subject of

discipleship and disciple making. Therefore, using an exploratory qualitative case study

method, the study of “The case for discipleship: Parameters and standards of measuring

church growth and church establishment” is intended to explore the phenomenon

"disciple making process" and establish a discipleship approach toward a successful and

effective discipleship ministry in Africa that will result in an active involvement of the

local church.

1.4 Statement of the problem

The church today is faced with the challenge of numerical growth in local

churches and it is not doing well due to lack of understanding the concept of discipleship

and lack of knowledge of how this discipleship can be practiced in growing church

members for effective ministries in the local churches. The church is also lacking proper

disciple making ministries to help and produce disciples who are spiritually transformed

and go on to make more disciples. Despite the rapid growth of churches in Zambia, there

is still the story of pervasive failure of discipleship and disciple making in local churches.

20
On the other hand, the church is not doing well in discipling its members because of

ignorance and lack of accurate information among Pastors and Christian leaders on the

subject of discipleship. In addition, the church is not practically involved in discipleship

and disciple making process because most of the pastors and Christian leaders are not

well trained and their members not well discipled. In this regard, there is need to establish

how discipleship can be used effectively in assisting Pastors and Christian leaders in local

churches to enhance church growth and church establishment.

1.5 Purpose and Objectives of the study

1.5.1 Overall Objective

The overall objective of this study was to establish how discipleship can be used

effectively in assisting Pastors and Christian leaders in local churches to enhance church

growth and church establishment with emphasis on existing discipleship theories.

1.5.2 Specific Objectives

The objectives of this study are:

1. To understand the contextualization of discipleship in Zambia

2. To discuss the Biblical and theological teachings of discipleship

3. To explain the role of discipleship in church growth and church establishment.

4. To assess what forms of discipleship is practiced in selected Zambian church.

5. To suggest ways local churches can engage discipleship dynamics for church

growth and church establishment.

21
1.6 Primary Research questions

This research seeks to address the following questions:

1. How do pastors define discipleship in their local churches?

2. What forms of discipleship is practiced in local churches?

3. What does the Bible say about discipleship and disciple making?

4. What is the role of discipleship in church growth and church establishment?

5. What are the suggestions that can help engage discipleship dynamics in local

churches?

1.7 Significance of the study

This study provided an important opportunity to advance the understanding of

biblical discipleship and disciple making process in local churches. In addition, the

findings should make an important contribution to the field of theological studies. The

findings will also act as a feedback to pastors and Christian leaders on how their church

members have been prepared for Spiritual growth and effectiveness of their ministries.

On the other hand, the study aims to contribute to this growing area of research by

exploring how pastors and Christian leaders understand biblical discipleship and assess

how they practice discipleship in their local churches. Furthermore, the study sheds more

light on how discipleship would help Pastors and Christian leaders to grow their churches

and have effective ministries. In this regard, the study will offer some important insights

in helping the church to get involved in disciple making process. Therefore, this study

makes a major contribution to research on discipleship and disciple making process by

establishing how discipleship can be used effectively in assisting Pastors and Christian

22
leaders in local churches to enhance church growth and church establishment. The study

will also open opportunities for future research into other areas of discipleship which

have not been fully explored, at least until now.

1.8 Research Design and Methodology

This study was explanatory and interpretative in nature. The research was

conducted by studying “The case for Discipleship: Parameters and standards of

measuring church growth and church establishment”. This study adopted a case study

design to provide a plan for the research. According to Mouton (2001 p.55), the research

design is a plan or blueprint of how you intend conducting the research and Bogdan and

Biklen’s (2007 p.49) further explained that a case study is the researcher’s plan of how

to proceed. In addition, LeCompte and Preissle (1993 p.30) states that the research design

involves deciding on what the research purpose and questions would be; what

information most appropriately will answer specific research questions and which

strategies are most effective for obtaining it (LeCompte & Preissle 1993 p.30). In this

regard, the study being a qualitative research a case study design was regarded as a

strategy of inquiry. By employing qualitative modes of enquiry, the researcher attempted

to illuminate the subject of discipleship and disciple making in local churches. Therefore,

the researcher used a single case study to study a group of pastors and Christian leaders

(Yin, 2003).

The study employed focus group research as primary methodology. The

qualitative method was chosen to enable the researcher to describe and understand

meanings and interpretations of Pastors and church leaders to gain an understanding of

discipleship: Parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church

23
establishment. According to Liamputtong (2009), the primary aim of a focus group is to

describe and understand meanings and interpretations of a select group of people to gain

an understanding of a specific issue from the perspective of the participants of the group.

In this regard, the researcher obtained data in focus group discussion situations and

interacted with pastors and Christian leaders in their settings. Therefore, data for this

study were collected using semi-structured interviews, participant observation and

document reviews.

1.9 Limitations

The major limitation was that this study was only restricted to pastors and

Christian leaders considered to have knowledge and experience of doing discipleship in

their local churches. Another limitation was due to inadequate resources and time. The

researcher only interviewed Pastors and Christian leaders that had information pertaining

to discipleship and disciple making process at pastor’s Christian fellowship in Kabwe and

the five churches for participation observation. In addition, in order to do the interviews,

the researcher had to accommodate the participants and several of the interviews were

one on one and focus group discussions which somehow were time consuming to the side

of the researcher.

1.10 Research structure/ outline

The thesis is divided into five chapters. Chapter one gives a brief background of

the experiences and some challenges the church in Zambia is facing despite the rapid

growth of its membership. Chapter two briefly reviews some of the research-based and

empirical evidences regarding discipleship and disciple making process within the

24
context of the Historical, Biblical and theological theory. The chapter three explains the

methods and research design that was used. In chapter four, the study will discuss a

presentation of the findings and a detailed discussion will be presented. The thesis ends

with chapter five as a conclusion, suggestions and recommendations for future research

in chapter four.

1.11 Ethical aspects of the study

Schurink (2005) points out that the ethical issues are the concerns and dilemmas

that arise over the proper way to execute research, more specifically not to create harmful

conditions for the subjects of inquiry, humans, in the research process. The researcher is

very much aware of the huge task to be sensitive and respectful of research participants

and their basic human rights and fully support the Ethical Code of Greenlight University.

In particular, the researcher ensured the following throughout the study: To explain the

aim and objectives of the study as well as the procedures to be followed up front to

everybody who took part in the research; The researcher made it clear to them that

participating in the study was voluntary and that should they for some reason want to

withdraw from it, they had the right to voluntary do so at any time; that everybody

participated in the study complete an informed consent form the researcher compiled

together with the promoter; and that their privacy would be respected at all time and that

everything they shared had to be treated as confidential. According to Schurink (2005),

research ethics is a complex matter to which there is unlikely to be clear solutions.

Schurink (2005) believes that it is useful for researchers to follow a practical approach in

which they ask questions and push themselves hard to reach answers. The study was

likely to include not only the advancement of knowledge or understanding of some aspect

25
of the social world, but also the factors that involved personal gain such as the

achievement of a personal qualification, of a promotion, of some standing in a discipline

and/or of some research funding.

1.12 Conclusion

This introductory chapter provides the contextual background of the study. It

sheds light on the importance and relevance of the research focus, and the researcher’s

personal interest in this topic. In addition, it briefly introduces the challenging external

environment for discipleship and disciple making process. The chapter offers general

information about discipleship ministries in Zambia, thus giving the reader a basic

understanding of the purpose of the study. It also provides a comprehensive overview of

discipleship and disciple making relevant to assisting pastors for the growth of their

church members and effective ministry. Therefore, the next chapter will present the

literature review.

26
 1.13 Research time table

MONTH FOCUS EVENT/ACTIVITY TARGET

August 2017 Proposal Writing proposal and getting approval 1 month

Sep 2017 Chapter 1 Writing the introduction, context and background of the 1 months
thesis, conceptual framework, overall objectives and specific
aims. Also deal with definitions and terms of the study.

Oct–April, Chapter 2 Finding relevant related literature; write the literature review 5-7 months
2018 section, critical analysis of the material, referencing and
presentation.

May-June 2018 Chapter 3 Define the research methodology research methods, 2 months
selection of participants, carry out the interviews and collect
all the needed data.

July-Sept 2018 Chapter 4 Writing the discussion and application of concepts with 3-4 months
logical aspect of the work.

Oct–Nov 2018 Chapter 5 Write the conclusion and recommendations of the research. 2 months

Dec-Jan 2019 All Chapters Reading for full editing, checking and making corrections 2 months

Feb 2019 Defense of the thesis before the council followed by 1 month
submission of research for examination.

27
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The chapter aims to review the literature in terms of the three themes: understanding

discipleship, and disciple making, the general forms of discipleship practiced in local

churches, and the role of discipleship for church growth and church establishment. The

first theme aims to focus on the literature background to shed light on research question

one: How do pastors define discipleship in their local churches? The focus of the second

theme on the forms of discipleship practiced in the local churches is to assess what forms

of discipleship is done in Zambian local churches and it aims to illuminate the second

research question some extent: What forms of discipleship is practiced in local churches?

The focus of the third theme on the role of discipleship is to explain the mission of

discipleship in growing church members for effective ministry in the local churches and

to help clarify on the research question three: What is the role of discipleship in church

growth and church establishment? Therefore, the background literature reflected in these

themes will provide a basis to the conceptual framework discussed in the chapter for the

research investigation.

28
2.2Conceptual Framework

2.2.1 Development Theory

This study is rooted within conceptual development framework. Miles and

Huberman (1994); Robson (2011) defined conceptual framework as a system of concepts,

assumptions, expectations, beliefs, and theories that supports and informs your research

and the key part of your design. According to Miles and Huberman (1994 p.18), it is also

a visual or written product, one that explains, either graphically or in narrative form, the

main things to be studied, the key factors, concepts, or variables and the presumed

relationships among them. In this research, the term “conceptual framework” is used in a

broader sense referring to the actual ideas and beliefs that people hold about the

phenomena studied, whether these are written down or not; this may also be called the

“theoretical framework” or “idea context” for the study. A valuable guide to developing a

conceptual framework and using this throughout the research process, with detailed

analyses of four actual studies, is Ravitch and Riggan, Reason & Rigor: How Conceptual

Frameworks Guide Research (2011). However, the most important thing to understand

about the conceptual framework is that it is primarily a conception or model of what is

out there that one plans to study, and of what is going on with these things and why a

tentative theory of the phenomena that he/she is investigating. Therefore, the function of

this theory is to inform the rest of the design to help in assessing and refining the goals,

develop realistic and relevant research questions, select appropriate methods, and identify

potential validity threats to the conclusions. According to the report by the UK national

Ecosystem Assessment (2011), conceptual framework is a structure that stands for the

main aspects of a phenomenon at hand presenting clearly its make-up and relatedness.

29
More importantly, they add that a conceptual framework is important in that it makes it

easier for users to comprehend the scope of the phenomenon; realize the knowledge gaps

in the subject as well as benefit from its use as a tool for analysis of the data. In this

research, therefore, the development theory have been used as the supporting conceptual

framework for dealing with discipleship and disciple making process in local churches.

This conceptual framework is helpful in assisting the researcher to have a clear view of

the scope of the issue at hand and the principles that govern it. It further may show the

direction of the research and what gaps exist for possible future works. The framework is

also important in the analysis of the data.

However, the word “development” in the English language connotes such ideas as

“unfolding,” “growth,” “the fuller working out of the details of anything,” and bringing

out the potential that is latent in something. Additionally, one of the prominent

psychologists and educator whose works have played a key role in training in the 21st

century is Lev Vygotsky. In his book ‘Mind and Society’ (1978), he presents a theory to

human development in which he describes the interplay between an individual and the

society and argues for the interaction between learning and development. In other words,

interaction and relationships plays an important role in human development because the

activities, thoughts and inventions are dependent on the past and that it is this past that

shapes the future. Consequently, the people depend on those trained and equipped from

whom they learn skills and knowledge through social interaction. Vygotsky is also

known for the concept of ‘zone of proximal development’ which he says: It is the

distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem

solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving

30
under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers (Vygotsky in Cole et al.

1978, p.86). He argues that by receiving support from a more knowledgeable adult

through mediation and use of signs/tools, a child is able to work beyond what he or she

can do alone and thereby move from a minimal level to a higher level of performance

(Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978; Wells & Claxton, 2002).

2.2.2 The development Perspective in discipleship and disciple making

process
Having discussed the basis of the development theory and its importance in

acquisition of learning skills and knowledge, it is now important to see the significance of

this theory in the area of discipleship and disciple making process. Hull (2006) whose

views influence much of what is said in this discourse, calls “environmental

discipleship”; as “psychological discipleship” or “relational discipleship.” The concept is

how the environment of a group determines what grows or dies within that environment.

Hull (2006) considers this concept as “least-developed concept” important for discussing

discipleship because of the most important issues in spiritual transformation which are

the presence of acceptance, integrity of relationships, and trust. On the other hand, Jones

(2006) and Nelson (2008) speak of congregation, “encompassing the ways people get

along.” In contrast, Hull (2006) recommends the classic discipleship movement as having

mandated trust: “You must be accountable to me.” Additionally, He sees the spiritual

formation movement as having required submission: “If you want to be a part of our

society, you must subject yourself fully to it. No negotiations.” According to Moore

(2012 p.42), disciple making is an intentional friendship with another person, with Jesus

at its core. Here, the emphasis is on friendship. Disciplers will have to make an

intentional friendship in order to bring that person to what they desire a disciple to be.

31
Thus, friendship is very important in disciple-making. In his classic book on discipleship,

Bennett (2001p.23) builds upon Moore’s definition when he states that discipleship is a

process that takes place within accountable relationships within a period of time for the

purpose of bringing believers to spiritual maturity in Christ. The addition of accountable

relationship is very important in understanding the meaning of discipleship accountability

as included. Disciples must be made to understand that they must be accountable to

someone: to begin with, their discipler. Therefore, the way pastors and Christian leaders

practice discipleship in local churches is influenced by the relationships and the

environment in which they are, and so are the development of their church members and

the establishment of their churches. More importantly, the theory is based on

understanding how the processes of change in societies take place and “to realize the

potential that is latent in something,” in this case, the development of people in local

churches through relationships, training and good environment as a key role in the growth

of church members that influences learning. The theory can be useful in any intervention

especially in discipleship and disciple making process intervention.

2.3Definition of terms

2.3.1Discipleship

The word discipleship has been expressed in different ways. Within this thesis

Project “the case for discipleship: Parameters and standards of measuring church growth

and church establishment.” This definition gives the three biblical approaches that make

up the process of biblical discipleship. Barna (2011) defines discipleship as becoming a

complete and competent follower of Jesus Christ. This definition of discipleship states

32
the reason for discipleship which is to be a complete and capable disciple of Christ.

However, discipleship is a practice that involves a Christian leader and influence. For the

Disciples, that leader was Jesus Christ, a leader who impacted them by teaching them, by

giving his life for them, and by loving and caring for others. As spiritual leaders, the

Disciples followed the same method of discipleship within the first century church. For

current leaders today, pastors are to be leaders who have impacted on the local church as

they teach, encourage changed lives, and practice the Word of God.

Hull (2006) in his book “The complete book of discipleship” wrote that since the

mid-twentieth century in the United States, there have been “three streams of thought

regarding discipleship.” Hull (2006) sees the rise of organizations such as The Navigators

and Campus Crusade for Christ as the first of these streams, calling it “Classic

Discipleship.” The characteristics of this approach to discipleship include mentoring,

disciplined Bible study and memorization, and training in witnessing personally and

publicly. The strengths of the approach include focus, method, and measured

performance. The essential and lasting strength of classic discipleship is its commitment

to Scripture and the importance of sequence and segmentation in training people well.

However, the weaknesses include a lack of addressing the disciple’s inner life and the

tendency of the discipleship to last only as long as a program did.

The second stream of thought of discipleship that Hull (2006) reports is the

spiritual formation movement. This movement recaptures “ancient exercises practiced by

Jesus, his disciples, and the monastics.” Many of these “ancient exercises” were not

embraced by the participants in the Protestant Reformation when they made their break

from their Catholic heritage. According to Hull (2006), spiritual formation is a process

33
through which individuals who have received new life take on the character of Jesus

Christ by a combination of effort and grace. The disciple positions himself to follow

Jesus. The actual process of reforming, or spiritual formation, involves both God’s grace

and the individual’s effort. However, Hull (2006) believes that the weakness of the

spiritual formation movement at least from an evangelical point of view is that it is easily

infiltrated by secular worldviews and other religions and philosophies. It is important to

distinguish Christian spiritual formation from others. On other hand, Hull (2006) believes

that the greatest strength of this stream of discipleship is that it causes us to slow down

twenty-first-century life long enough to ponder what’s going on in us and around us. But

he also believes that recently the spiritual formation movement has also incorporated the

focused and “let’s get things done” nature of the classic discipleship movement, creating

a richer and more thoughtful approach to transformation.

The third stream of thought Hull (2006) calls “environmental discipleship”;

however, it is also called “psychological discipleship” or “relational discipleship.” Crabb

(1999), Wilhoit (2008), and Gorman (2002) write about community or sometimes family.

Jones (2006) and Nelson (2008) speak of congregation, “encompassing the ways people

get along.”Hull (2006) sees this third stream as addressing “one of the least-developed

concepts in discipleship.” That concept is how the environment of a group determines

what grows or dies within that environment. He considers this “least-developed concept”

important for discussing discipleship because of the most important issues in spiritual

transformation which are the presence of acceptance, integrity of relationships, and trust.

Regarding the three streams of discipleship, Hull (2006) sees the classic discipleship

movement as having mandated trust: “You must be accountable to me.” He sees the

34
spiritual formation movement as having required submission: “If you want to be a part of

our society, you must subject yourself fully to it. No negotiations.” But he believes that

the therapeutic society we live in has developed its own environment which accepts

nearly anything no matter how damaging it might be. . . .Fortunately some thoughtful

Christians have “spoiled” the therapeutic world by introducing some very important

insights that create trust and allow disciples to flourish. Some of the “very important

insights” among many others that are in varying ways connected to the “therapeutic

world” can be found in the work of Cloud and Townsend (2001), Crabb (1997), Holmes

(2006), and Holmes (2007) and Williams (2007). Besides, Hull (2006) believes that these

three movements classic discipleship, spiritual formation, and environmental discipleship

are now converging to create a new full-bodied discipleship with the potential to

transform the church in the next twenty-five years.

According to samra’s (2003) findings the word discipleship does not occur in the

New Testament. The idea of disciple, however, is expressed by the term mathetessome

261 times with the references occurring in the Gospels and the book of Acts. To make

someone a disciple is mainly indicated by the verb matheteuo, although the word

akolouthein(“to follow after”) is also used some 90 times mainly in the Gospels and Acts.

In the article “It Takes a Church to Make a Disciple” Shirley (2008) explains that the

suffix "ship" in the word discipleship is “derived from the Old English “scipe,” meaning

"the state of, “contained in,” or ‘condition’” The usage of the word mathetesand its verb,

however, makes the meaning of the term discipleship which is derived from them a little

difficult to ascertain. When mathetesis used in an educational, intellectual sense (Matt.

10:24), discipleship may be understood as the process of being educated by a teacher

35
(Samra, 2003). Many other times, however, what is indicated is a transformation of life

(Mark 8:34), in which case discipleship has to do with the process of becoming like one’s

master. Other senses of mathetesin the New Testament could be spelled out, but taken

together, discipleship in the Gospels and Acts “involves both becoming a disciple and

being a disciple. At times the focus is on the entrance into the process (evangelism), but

most often the focus is on growing in the process (maturity); it includes both teaching and

life transformation (samra, 2003).”

Hull (2006) in his book “complete book discipleship” explains that Disciples of

Jesus Christ fulfill their calling through discipleship: “the process of following Jesus”. In

“American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language”, it is explained that the word

discipleship does not appear in the New Testament, the concept is implied through Jesus’

command in the Great Commission to make disciples. The suffix “ship” is derived from

the Old English “scipe,” meaning “the state of,” “contained in,” or “condition”.

According to Hull (2006), discipleship is the state of being a disciple; we are always in

the condition of being disciples, loving Christ and obeying our Master. Another idea

expressed through this suffix is “an art, skill, or craft.” Discipleship is not only an internal

condition of believers, but also involves the active manifestation of their relationship with

Jesus Christ. Another common word derived from the suffix “scipe” is “shape,” which

means to create or form. In Galatians 4:19, Paul writes: “My dear children for whom I am

again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, how I wish I could be with

you now.” Here, Paul expresses a longing to see spiritual formation occur in the lives of

the Galatian disciples that their discipleship would produce changed lives and provide

evidence that transformation was occurring. Spiritual formation is the sanctification or

36
transformation that happens during the process of intentional discipleship. While some

would argue that spiritual formation is the process of growth in Christ, or that it is a

systematic inculcation of disciplines, I would suggest that formation is the result of

discipleship (Dictionary.com Unabridged). Through discipleship the followers of Jesus

Christ are formed into an ever clearer image of him.

Discipleship is sharing your life into other people’s lives by training them in the

Word of God, in relationship by spending intimate time with them, and in Ministry by

sending them out to proclaim the gospel and do good works, so that they can develop as

healthy believers and grow into maturity to disciple others. Berrus defines discipleship as

an intentional, intimate relationship that influences life-change through instruction,

correction, participation, and direction; resulting in well-grounded, self-disciplined

fruitful followers of Jesus Christ. In addition, the word “discipleship” is synonymous to

apprenticeship. An apprentice is someone who undergoes training or someone learning a

trade from a skilled person. Similarly, a disciple submits himself to a teacher, identifies

with his teacher, and learns from him, not only by listening but also by doing. Wiersbe

(2007, p86) observes a disciple from the Christian perspective as one who believes on

Jesus Christ and expresses his faith by being baptized to join the special family of the

faithful. The person remains in the fellowship of the believers so that he might be taught

the truths of the faith. Such a person is able to go out and win others and teach them too.

According to Wilkins (1992), discipleship is the purposeful effort to disciple where the

investment in one individual’s life will result in an impact on other lives, and so on. This

was clearly demonstrated in the life of Christ and his relationship, the apostles then

repeated this process while fulfilling the great commission in the early church.

37
 Moore (2012 p.42) asserts that disciple making is an intentional friendship with

another person, with Jesus at its core. Here, the emphasis is on friendship. Disciplers will

have to make an intentional friendship in order to bring that person to what they desire a

disciple to be. Thus, friendship is very important in disciple-making. In his classic book

on discipleship, Bennett (2001p.23) builds upon Moore’s definition when he states that

discipleship is a process that takes place within accountable relationships within a period

of time for the purpose of bringing believers to spiritual maturity in Christ. The addition

of accountable relationship is very important in understanding the meaning of

discipleship accountability is included. Disciples must be made to understand that they

must be accountable to someone: to begin with, their discipler. According to Akanni

(2013 p.49), discipleship is the process whereby a believer who voluntarily surrendered

himself to the Lord Jesus Christ is being made to become like Jesus Christ by various

exposures, activities and determination of the Lord himself. Here, surrendering oneself

voluntarily to Christ also implies submitting to the activities of Christians which

necessarily include fellowship (koinonia). And Wilkins (1992 p.343) shows the ultimate

goal of discipleship by insisting that “discipleship is the process of becoming like Jesus

Christ.” From the various definitions, discipleship can simply be said to be the process of

helping to produce Christ-like character in a believer by another person. These have great

implications for what is meant by discipleship. The Great Commission, as stated in

Matthew 28:19–20, outlines important elements for the discipling process in the local

church. The process begins with disciples “going” and winning others to Christ, baptizing

them (integrating them into the local church) and teaching them to obey Christ’s

commandments (United Methodist Church, 2016 p.94).One cycle ends when the new

38
believer is able to make others into disciples. Another cycle then begins with the

discipled discipling others. The process is discernible in the discipleship ministry of the

Lord Jesus Christ. For example, according to Matthew 4:23–25, as Jesus “went about”

(referring to preaching the gospel and winning others), he was “teaching” and “great

crowds followed him.” It is assumed that “baptizing” normally took place as Jesus was

making disciples, though the baptizing was done by the apostles (John 3:22; 4:1–2).

Thus, it is a process of preaching, teaching, and being with the people.

2.3.2 Disciple

In order to properly understand discipleship, there is the need to first define the

term “disciple,” the end product of the process of discipleship. Generally, a disciple can

be considered as a person who believes in the ideas and principles of someone famous

and tries to live the way the person did or does. In the Christian sense, a disciple is one

growing to be like Christ, and conforms to his image. Disciples open their whole lives

and subject themselves to learning to grow spiritually toward Christ-like maturity.

According to Wadge, Carter and Carter (2002), the disciple walks with Christ in every

area of life, lives according to the word of Christ, contributes to the mission of Christ and

impacts the world for Christ. In scripture, the followers of Jesus were called disciples.

Along the line, they were referred to as believers, and elsewhere they were named

Christians. The term “Christian,” the Greek Christonos, however, appears in the Bible

only three times (Acts 11:26). The Greek word pistos, which is translated as “believer,”

appears nine times. The usual word used for the followers of Christ disciples which is

translated from the Greek term mathetes, is found 261 times in the New Testament. It is

the term that Jesus himself used in the gospels. The literal meaning of the term is said to

39
be a “learner.” It denotes one who follows another person’s teaching. Consequently, it

follows that, in any culture, those who have accepted to follow the teachings of Jesus can

best be considered as his disciples. According to Willard (2002), the term “disciple”

means “learner” or “follower”. It comes from the Greek word matheteswhich in the

Greco-Roman world referred to one who was a student of a teacher, “anapprentice a

practitioner, even if only a beginner.” The New Testament literature which must be

allowed to define our terms if we are ever to get our bearings in the Way with Christ

makes this clear. In that context, disciples of Jesus are people who do not just profess

certain views as their own but apply their growing understanding of life in the King of the

Heavens to every aspect of their life on earth. This word will be used more than the word

“Christian” in this project in order to make sure of the notion that there is no distinction

in Scripture between a Christian and a disciple. The word “disciple” is used 269 times in

the New Testament as opposed to the word “Christian” being used three times, referring

precisely to the disciples of Jesus.

In addition, Newton (1999) further explains that literally, the word disciple means

a learner; the Greek word mathetesis the root of our word mathematics, which means

“thought accompanied by endeavor.” He further explains that Disciples think and learn

but they also move beyond learning to doing the endeavor. Even in Jesus’ time disciples

were those who were more than pupils in school, they were apprentices in the work of

their master. The essence of the word disciple changed from the first time it is used in

Matthew 5:1 to the last mention in Acts 21:16. In the gospels disciple already had a

meaning before Jesus used the word. In the first century the cultural understanding of a

disciple was one who was more than just a learner; the disciple was also a “follower”

40
(Wilkins, 1992). Throughout the Greco- Roman world great teachers were making

disciples. Philosophers like Socrates had devoted followers who were trained under the

guidance of an exemplary life. Disciples spent time with their master and became

learning sponges soaking up the teaching and example of the one from whom they were

learning. Rabbis like Hillel and Shammai had disciples who learned how to interpret the

Scriptures and relate them to life. The Bible also says that there were disciples of the

traditions of Moses (John 9:28) and that John the Baptist had disciples (see Matt 9:14),

some of whom joined Jesus’ mission (Hull, 2006).

Wilkins (1992) further explains that initially, all of Jesus’ followers were referred

to as disciples; but what we generally think of as the “disciples” today are the twelve men

whom Jesus chose to train and send out for His kingdom work. This group was the

seedbed of the incipient church. Before Jesus ascended to the Father, He gave His

disciples now apostles the responsibility to go and make disciples as He had done.

However, the qualifications for true disciples were: firstly, belief in Jesus as messiah

(John 2:11); secondly, commitment to identify with Him through baptism; and thirdly,

obedience to his teaching and submission to his Lordship (Matt 19:23–30).In the book of

Acts, Luke uses the term disciple to describe all followers of Jesus Christ (Hull, 1990).

Polhill (1992) further mentions that these believers were first called Christians at Antioch

but this is one of only two times he uses this word and in both occasions the term is used

by outsiders. In addition, these disciples are usually mentioned in light of their

relationship to a particular city implying their association with a local group of believers.

Consequently, in the New Testament church followers of Jesus Christ considered

themselves to be a part of a local body of believers, the church and they understood their

41
role within that body to be as a disciple. The word disciple also refers to a student or

apprentice. Disciples in Jesus’ day would follow their rabbi (which means teacher)

wherever he went learning from the rabbi’s teaching and being trained to do as the rabbi

did. Basically, a disciple is a follower but only if Christians take the term follower

literally. Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary (1992) defines the word “disciple” as

“someone who accepts the doctrine or teachings of another, especially an early follower

of Christ, one of the Twelve.” Encarta World English Dictionary (1999) states the

meaning more seriously, "somebody who strongly believes in the teachings of a leader, a

philosophy, or a religion, and tries to act according to them.” The Biblical Greek word for

the English “disciple” is matheses, which comes from the word manthanowhich means

simply to learn. The word basically means a follower or pupil of a leader, teacher, or

philosopher including disciples of Zen Buddhism but the Oxford Dictionary (1998)

supports that this term denotes any early believer in Christ especially one of the twelve

Apostles. Moulton (1981) spells it out for us that to learn by practice or experience

acquires a custom or habit.

The four Gospels with the exception of the Gospel of Mark used the word

"disciple" to mean a believer who has confessed that Jesus is Lord and a believer who

came back to the church. However, as the church grew in hierarchical differentiation the

word “disciple” became archaic and was replaced by “Christian” (Acts 11:26) (Oxford

companion to the Christian thought).In the Epistles, the word “disciple” disappeared and

somewhat reappeared as the word “Saint.” Why did the word “disciple” disappear? The

word “disciple” had been used as a student who was learning secular wisdom in the

Gentile areas and the philosophers especially had been using this word for their followers

42
(John, 1984). Discipleship was practiced by Jesus (Matthew 4: 19). It was focused not on

His teaching but on His personality (John, 1984). So “being a disciple in Jesus Christ”

means a holistic changed life. Furthermore, Wilkins (1992) in his book following the

Master a biblical theology of discipleship has written five prevailing models which can

help in defining the term “disciple”: Firstly, disciples are learners. The word disciple

comes from the verb to learn. But the Greek term mathetes is used in scripture in a

different way (more like follower, cf John the Baptist, whose disciples are more like

adherents to a prophet than students of a teacher); and the word is used in Acts to

describe all believers. Secondly, disciples are committed believers. Ortiz (1997) says

because we are Christians does not mean we are disciples. This model suggests two

levels within the church, disciples and ordinary believers; a disciple is a more committed

Christian than the average Christian. But Jesus calls people to discipleship, to follow him,

to count the cost before making a commitment; it’s a call to salvation not a call to deeper

commitment. Thirdly, disciples are ministers. Believers who have been called out from

among lay believers in order to enter into ministry. The disciples of Jesus form a more

limited and exclusive group than the crowds. But this is to confuse the 12 (who are

apostles as well as disciples) with all those (who are also called disciples). The terms

apostle and disciple point to different aspects of the 12. Fourthly, disciples are converts.

Discipleship comes later a further stage of growth. But this separates the Great

Commission (make disciples) from the description of what that means (baptize and

teach). Fifthly, disciples are converts who are in the process of discipleship. Discipleship

begins at conversion. Bonheoffer (1963) says discipleship is the life that springs from

grace and grace simply means discipleship. Willard says discipleship is about entering

43
into God’s gift of life not about achieving perfection. This model understands the Great

Commission as saying discipleship begins with conversion. So all true believers are seen

as disciples and the Christian life is the outworking of Jesus’ discipleship teachings. But

we still need to clarify the difference between the twelve as disciples and the twelve as

apostles; and to consider what difference Pentecost made in what it meant to be a

disciple. According to Vines (1991), a disciple was not only a pupil but an adherent;

hence they are spoken of as imitators of their teachers. This sets the disciple apart from

the mere learner. A learner may or may not like or admire his teacher. The information to

be gained is his objective; he is here to learn. A disciple, on the other hand, does not only

follow the teaching but the life of the teacher. Furthermore, Marshall et al (2001 p.277),

affirms the meaning of disciple as basically the pupil of a teacher. He states that since the

Greek philosophers were surrounded by their pupils, they adopted the distinctive teaching

of their masters; the word came to signify the adherent of a particular outlook in religion

or philosophy. In view of that the followers of Jesus were referred to as disciples. This

implies that disciples were learners at the feet of their master Jesus Christ. According to

Turner (2008), a disciple is literally one who follows an itinerant master as did Jesus’

disciples. Therefore, a disciple can be defined as a dedicated follower of Jesus Christ, a

mature Christian well-grounded in the word of God and a Christ- like believer. Therefore,

a disciple is identified as a person who is following Christ, is being changed by Christ

and is committed to the mission of Christ. According to Matthew 4:19, Jesus said that,

“Come, follow me and I will make you fishers of men.” A disciple is also a believer that

lives a life of conscious and permanent identification with the Lord in life, death and

resurrection through words, actions, behavior, attitudes, motives and intentions. A

44
disciple is one who absolutely understand Christ’s possession of his/her life, gladly

accepts Christ’s salvation, revels in Christ’s lordship, lives in the permanent presence of

Christ and harmonizes his/her life according to the life of Christ, glorifying his/her Lord

and Savior.

2.3.3 Disciple Making

Disciple making is seeking to fulfil the imperative of the Great Commission

“making disciples of nations” by making a conscientious effort to help people move

towards spiritual maturity. In the original language Greek, the focus is on “make

disciples.” Grammatically, it is a command, an imperative. The other three words ‘go,’

‘baptizing,’ ‘teaching’ are grammatically not command but participles; even ‘go’ is not a

command, literally it is ‘going.’ The ‘going, baptizing and teaching’ tell how Christians

do need to ‘make disciples.’ ‘Making disciple’ is the focus, the command, going,

baptizing and teaching are the means, methods, and the activity. Those are nice things to

do but Jesus actually commanded the disciples to “make disciples.” While it is highly

important that ‘making disciples’ may be the focus, ‘going, baptizing and teaching’ are

also equally important elements in the Great Commission. They are divine mandates in

the process of disciple making; they, thus, enhance disciple making.

The consensus in the history of the church ancient and modern is that the concept

of discipleship is apparent everywhere in the New Testament, from Matthew through

Revelation (Wilkins, 1992).However, the role of pastors demands that they be disciple

makers. They cannot be pulpiteers who preach at to people but have no involvement in

their lives. The process only begins with the proclamation of Scripture. It finds its real

fruition across the entire spectrum of the shepherd’s work: feeding, leading, cleaning,

45
bandaging, protecting, nurturing and every other aspect of a tender shepherd’s loving

care. This is the process of disciple making. Jesus said that every disciple when fully

trained will be just like his teacher (Luke 6:40). That places a very heavy weight of

responsibility on the disciple maker to be like his Master, Jesus Christ. Christians cannot

demand that men and women follow them unless, like Paul, they can confidently say that

they are imitators of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1). Certainly any man who falters at this

point has no business in the pastorate. Moreover, any pastor who is not making disciples

is abdicating a primary responsibility of his calling. The pastor’s calling is to preach, but

he cannot be merely an orator, talking at people but never really ministering to them on a

personal level. The pastor is called to exhort and instruct but he cannot be just a

professional counsellor dispensing spiritual wisdom from across a desk and apart from

holding people accountable. The pastor must lead but he cannot become a full-time

administrator, bogged down with paperwork and business, forgetting that the church is

people. God has not called pastors to be professional clergymen; He has called them to be

disciple-makers. Paul’s mandate in 2 Timothy 2:2 extends to every leader of the ekklēsia

of God: “The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses,

these entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.” That may be the best

one-verse summary of the pastoral role with regard to disciple making in all of Scripture.

The real test of every pastor’s mettle is how he does in the arena of personal

discipleship. It is there that people get to know him best and see him for who he really is.

It is there that he will test his biblical knowledge most thoroughly. It is there that he is

most accountable. And it is there helping others grow more and more Christlike that he

will become more like the Master. MacArthur (2005) defines disciple making as the

46
divine strategy for the continuation of the work of Christ. It guarantees the passing on of

the patterns and principles of His life. According to Hadidian (1979), disciple making is

the process by which a Christian with a life worth emulating commits himself (herself)

for an extended period of time to a few individuals who have been won to Christ the

purpose being to aid and guide their growth to maturity and equip them to reproduce

themselves in a third spiritual generation. On other hand, Ogden (2003) sees disciple

making as a transformative process. When people bring together transparent relationships

and the truth of God’s Word in the context of covenantal accountability for life change

around a missional focus, they have stepped into the Holy Spirit’s hot house that makes

life change possible. The best process for making disciples is that of the Lord Jesus

Christ. Faithful pastors and all Christian leaders should look to Him to discover a

methodology. They are four principles Jesus used in making disciples; principles that

when Christian leaders apply them, they will revolutionize their making of disciples. The

briefest expression of those principles is in Mark 3:13–15, “And he went up to the

mountain and summoned those whom He Himself wanted, and they came to Him. And

He appointed twelve, that they might be with Him, and that He might send them out to

preach, and to have authority to cast out the demons.”

In addition, the first principle Jesus used was that of prayerful meditation. Though

Mark only says that Jesus “went up to the mountain” (Mark3:13), Luke 6:12–13 says

plainly that “He went off to the mountain to pray, and He spent the whole night in prayer

to God. And when day came, He called His disciples to Him.” Somewhere on the west

side of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus Christ was praying for the Father’s guidance in choosing

His disciples. This was no insignificant task in the life of our Lord. This decision would

47
affect not only the coming age of the church, but also the entire course of history. The

suggestion that Jesus, being God in human flesh, did not need to pray (as some have

suggested) since He already knew the perfect will of God, questions the very integrity of

Jesus Himself. Mark records explicitly that Jesus did pray! He is the God-Man, but He

desired to commune with His heavenly Father in order to make a God honouring choice.

The choice was a monumental commitment and the Lord faithfully bathed His decision in

prayer. In his classic, the example of Jesus Christ, Stalker (1980) wrote that we find Jesus

engaged in special prayer just before taking very important steps in life. One of the most

important steps He ever took was the selection from among His disciples of the Twelve

who were to be His apostles. It was an act on which the whole future of Christianity

depended; and what was He doing before it took place? It came to pass in those days that

He went into a mountain to pray and continued all night in prayer to God and when it was

day He called unto Him His disciples and of them He chose twelve whom He also named

apostles. It was after this night-long vigil that He proceeded to the choice which was to

be so momentous for Him and for them and for the entire world. There was another day

for which Jesus made similar preparation. It was that on which He first informed His

disciples that He was to suffer and die. Thus it is evident that when Jesus had a day of

crisis or difficult duty before Him, He gave Himself especially to prayer. Would it not

simplify our difficulties if Christians attacked them in the same way? It would infinitely

increase the intellectual insight with which we try to penetrate a problem and the power

of the hand we lay upon duty. The wheels of existence would move far more smoothly

and our purposes travel more surely to their aims if every morning they reviewed

beforehand the duties of the day with God. The principle of Christ’s prayerful meditation

48
for the selection of His disciples is obvious. It should be mentioned that not only did

Jesus pray for their selection, He also prayed for His disciples throughout His earthly

ministry (John 17), and beyond (Hebrews7:25). However, if a pastor or any Christian

leader is going to fulfil the mandate of the Great Commission, “making disciples of all

nations”, he must prayerfully meditate on choosing those whom he would devote his

available time to nurture. Whether it is someone whom he personally has led to the Jesus

Christ or a believer who needs further nurturing in the faith, his duty is to pray for that

disciple. And if Jesus Christ Himself spent all night in prayer for His disciples, how much

more should church leaders? Paul commanded us to pray without ceasing (1

Thessalonians5:17), and selecting those for discipleship certainly deserves this unceasing

attitude of prayer. Paul’s encouragement to pray about everything (Phil. 4:6) no doubt

must include the disciple making (Ephesians 6:18). His prayers for his younger associates

are numerous in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Timothy 1:2). Moreover, when Jesus Christ

prayed for His own, He set a tremendous example, especially for pastors and all Christian

leaders. He gave His disciples an example by choosing them prayerfully.

The second principle from Jesus’ example is careful selection, as Mark 3:13

indicates: “He summoned those whom He Himself wanted, and they came to

Him.”Historically, Jesus Christ commanded men to follow Him. The pastor committed to

making disciples can have three distinct assurances in implementing this process. First,

he has the assurance that Christ has commanded those whom He wants for discipleship.

In general, Matthew 28:18–20 guarantees the making of disciples because Christ

commanded it and what He commands, His grace will accomplish. The book of Acts

shows clearly that Christ promised the empowering of the Holy Spirit to those who were

49
to make disciples (Acts 1:8). It also shows the result (Acts 2:41, 47). This is also a great

promise to rest on in the process of making disciples. Second, those whom Christ

summons will be “those whom He Himself” wants (Mark 3:13). This attests to His real

sovereignty in salvation and sanctification. Morgan (1927) has rightly observed that this

word suggests self-determining sovereignty, choice based upon reason within

personality.… He was entirely uninfluenced by temporary appeals. No appeal that any

man might have made to Him would have influenced Him in the least. No protests of

inability that any man might have suggested would have changed His purpose. His

choosing was choosing from within, the choosing of His own sovereignty; a choosing

therefore in which He assumed all responsibility for what He did. It is only by the will of

God that anyone becomes a disciple of Christ and that anyone receives discipleship

training in Christ (John 1:12–13). Subject to that same sovereignty, spiritual leaders

should carefully select and disciple those to whom God chooses to impart eternal life.

Just as the apostles led the congregation in selecting servants in Acts 6:1–6, so leaders

today must carefully select others to nurture and teach for service in the body of Christ

(Ephesians 4:11–16). In addition, as Paul instructed Timothy to entrust spiritual truth to

faithful men, church leaders should select such men in whom to reproduce spiritual

leadership (MacArthur, 1986).

The third assurance a pastor can have in careful selection of prospective disciples

is in Mark’s phrase, “and they came to Him” (Mark 3:13). This shows that though

making disciples is a matter of Christ’s command and sovereignty, obedience will be the

result. Likewise, those who respond in obedience to the gospel summons will obviously

be the most likely candidates. These will be willing to take up their cross daily (Luke

50
9:23) and will evidence their readiness for discipleship. However, a word of caution is in

order (MacArthur, 1994). Eims (1978) warned that whoever is thinking about or is now

involved in a ministry of making disciples … should think soberly about this matter of

selection. It is much easier to ask a man to come with you than to ask him to leave if you

learn much to your chagrin and sorrow that you have chosen the wrong man. The chooser

must, therefore, be sober and vigilant in his choice. The principle of careful selection was

Jesus’ method of identifying men to propagate God’s kingdom. Church leaders must not

forget that men, not programs, are the method of Jesus. Eims (1981) cautioned that I have

watched men catch the vision of reaching the world for Christ. I have caught this vision,

and have dedicated my life to this grand and glorious aim. But I have seen some men

become so goal-oriented that to achieve their goals they roughly shoulder their way past

people who need help and encouragement. But what is our objective? What are our

goals? When we all get to heaven it will all be vividly and pointedly clear. We will find

only people in heaven. There will be no committee notes, no scholarly papers on

intriguing themes, no lengthy studies, memos, or surveys. People are the raw material of

heaven. If people become enamored with projects, goals, and achievements and never

lend a hand to people along the way; and if we say, “Doing this will not help me

accomplish my objective,” what are we really thinking about? Self! This is exactly

opposite to the lifestyle of Jesus Christ. Similarly, Hull (1984) said that most Christians

believe that men are indeed the method of Jesus but precious few are willing to invest

their lives by putting all their eggs in that one basket. Believing this people-oriented

philosophy and practicing it are entirely different matters. A large problem in

Christendom is that people don’t want to take the risk or the time to invest in the lives of

51
people even though this was a fundamental part of Jesus’ ministry. We fear that the

basket is really a trap to ensnare us. In his classic work, The Training of the Twelve,

Bruce (1988) summarized this subject of careful selection: Why did Jesus choose such

men? … If He chose rude, unlearned, humble men it was not because He was animated

by any petty jealousy of knowledge, culture, or good birth. If any rabbi, rich man, or ruler

had been willing to yield himself unreservedly to the service of the kingdom, no

objection would have been taken to him on account of his acquirements, possessions, or

titles.… The truth is, that Jesus was obliged to be content with fishermen, and publicans,

and quondam zealots, for apostles. They were the best that could be had. Those who

deemed themselves better were too proud to become disciples and thereby they excluded

themselves from what all the world now sees to be the high honour of being the chosen

princes of the kingdom.… He preferred devoted men who had none of these advantages

to undevoted men who had them all. And with good reason; for it mattered little except in

the eyes of contemporary prejudice, what the social position or even the previous history

of the twelve had been, provided they were spiritually qualified for the work to which

they were called. What tells ultimately is, not what is without a man, but what is within.

Mark told of a third crucial principle for a disciple maker: spending purposeful

time with disciples. Mark 3:14 notes that Jesus “appointed twelve, that they might be

with Him.” He said very plainly that Jesus Christ appointed His disciples for the very

purpose of being with Him. The Greek text clause, hina ōsin meta autou, could mean,

“For the purpose” (or “so,” or even “with the result”) “that they be with Him.” Acts 4:13

later records the fruit of the apostles’ time spent with Christ: “As they [the rulers, elders

and scribes observed the confidence of Peter and John, and understood that they were

52
uneducated and untrained men, they were marvelling, and began to recognize them as

having been with Jesus” (emphasis added). The time with Jesus was not only for the

purpose of growing and learning under His teaching, but for fellowship and refreshment

through His modelling and example. On one occasion, after preaching and teaching,

Jesus said, “‘Come away by yourselves to a lonely place and rest awhile.’ (For there were

many people coming and going, and they did not even have time to eat.) And they went

away in the boat to a lonely place by themselves” (Mark 6:31–32).Any effective pastoral

ministry will emphasize spending valuable, Christ honouring time with those who will

eventually follow their pastor by entering the ministry. Paul’s heart for Timothy was

filled with a desire to have fellowship together in the things of the Lord. He said in 1

Timothy 3:14 that he was “hoping to come to (Timothy) before long.” Then in 2 Timothy

1:4, he said that he was to see Timothy and “be filled with joy.” Paul pleaded with

Timothy to “make every effort to come to me soon” (2 Timothy 4:9) and to “make every

effort to come before winter” (v. 21). This was not simply a fellowship to meet Paul’s

needs, but also a time of mutual refreshment and instruction. Paul had such a bond with

his disciples. The following describes the occasion after he had discipled the elders of

Ephesus for some years and knew they might not see him again: “When he had said these

things, he knelt down and prayed with them all. And they began to weep aloud and

embraced Paul, and repeatedly kissed him, grieving especially over the word which he

had spoken, that they should see his face no more” (Acts 20:36–38). What pathos

between Paul and his men? The structure of such times spent together is flexible, of

course, but the point is this: one cannot truly influence those he does not spend time with.

If a pastor is going to reproduce himself in the lives of others, it will result from a

53
purposeful association of spiritual fellowship and biblical nurturing. In another context,

Whitney (1991) wrote that if you suddenly realized you had no more time, would you

regret how you have spent your time in the past and how you spend it now? The way you

have used your time can be a great comfort to you in your last hour. You may not be

happy with some of the ways you used your time, but won’t you be pleased then for all

the times of Spirit-filled living, for all occasions when you have obeyed Christ? Won’t

you be glad then for those parts of your life that you spent in the Scriptures, prayer,

worship, evangelism, serving, fasting, etc., for the purpose of becoming more like the

One before whom you are about to stand in judgment (John 5:22–29)? What great

wisdom there is in living as Jonathan Edwards resolved to live: “Resolved, that I will live

so, as I shall wish I had done when I come to die.”

Hadidian (1979) said, “How are you going to use your time, knowledge and

ability? Will you use it on that which is temporal or on that which is eternal? How

satisfying it will be when we are close to death to know that we are leaving behind other

people who, committed to God, His Word and His people, are carrying out the work that

we have entrusted to them.”Similarly, Bounds wrote that we are constantly on a stretch, if

not on a strain, to devise new methods, new plans, new organizations to advance the

Church and secure enlargement and efficiency for the Gospel. This trend of the day has a

tendency to lose sight of the man or sink the man in the plan or organization. God’s plan

is to make much of the man, far more of him than of anything else. Men are God’s

method. The Church is looking for better methods; God is looking for better men. The

pastor who is himself spending time with Christ will have a profound disciple making

influence on the ones he spends time with. As he encourages them to spend time with

54
him in the Word of God, spiritual fruit will abound. This will also result in the accrual of

fruit in the people his disciples will ultimately influence. It is impossible to

overemphasize the principle of purposeful association. To the degree that a leader and his

prospective disciples spend time together and with Christ, he will reap a plentiful harvest

of Christ likeness to the glory of God (Romans 8:29).

The final aspect in making disciples is powerful proclamation: “And that He

might send them out to preach and to have authority to cast out the demons” (Mark 3:14–

15). As Jesus purposed to spend time with His disciples, so He also purposed for them to

go out and preach with authority. The Greek construction in verse 14 is similar to the

previous phrase and shows distinctly that Jesus’ plan was to disciple these men in order

to send them out to preach the gospel with power. The principle for contemporary

application is crucial. MacArthur (1992) explained that Christian leaders must note that

the powerful proclamation of the apostles is not repeatable. Since they held a unique

office, they had a supernatural power from Christ that is unavailable today. That is why

the apostle Paul called their miraculous works “the signs of a true apostle” (2 Corinthians

12:12). He also spoke of the apostles’ uniqueness by saying that the church itself has

been “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being

the cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). As pastors/elders in the church today, we cannot claim

apostolic authority and power, but our power comes from the Holy Spirit’s power

working through us to preach the Word of God. Our task is not to cast out demons by

supernatural strength, but to proclaim powerfully the gospel (Romans 1:16).MacArthur

(1992) further explained that Pastors do not simply spend time with others without that

association turning outward. This ultimately is the point of discipleship: their disciples

55
make other disciples and so on. Discipleship reaches into the domain of darkness and

brings people into the kingdom of light; this is the whole purpose of discipleship. As

preachers proclaim the powerful gospel, God makes disciples who will in turn proclaim

that same powerful gospel to others. The disciple making chain continues unbroken until

the day of Jesus Christ.

An implicit principle also emerges from the text. Jesus discipled His men to

preach with authority. He purposed to teach them about how to preach, to “herald” with a

commission to proclaim accurately the prescribed message and to exercise authority in

their world. Our calling, too, is to preach and live a righteous life with power in a godless

world. Our disciple making, then, must include a teaching and an exemplification of how

to live the truth in Jesus’ name. No other means is available to manifest such a

transformed, Christlike life in an unChristlike culture. The legacy people leave in and

through the lives of others they disciple will be powerful and lasting. Furthermore, the

book of Acts has shown how the making disciples worked in the history of the early

church. The first group of disciples were committed and connected to the preaching of

the gospel. They also showed a new way of living, which attracted others to the

community (Acts 2:46–47). This was the beginning of the churches’ obedience to the

teachings of Christ; of becoming the city upon a hill which cannot remain hidden

(Bavinck, 1961).In the article, “Making disciples God’s way to transform nations”,

Mcclung (2011) similarly said that Disciple making is the way Jesus did church. He

explained that Jesus chose a few people and poured Himself into them. He preached to

the multitudes but He spent most of His time with His disciples. Jesus calls people to

follow His example by reproducing what He has given to them in others, who in turn are

56
to invest in others also. However, Mcclung (2011) further states that building a disciple-

making culture and birthing a disciple-making movement does not happen by accident.

Passionate people catch the fire that burns in them from someone else and in turn pass it

on to others. Every person who is influencing other people’s lives can tell you about the

people who impacted upon them. According to Ogden’s (2003) disciple making is an

intentional relationship in which we walk alongside other disciples in order to encourage,

equip, and challenge one another in love to grow toward maturity in Christ. This includes

equipping the disciple to teach others as well. However, Hertig (2001) further sees the

great commission recorded in Matt 28:18-20 as a “post-resurrection declaration of God’s

universal reign.” He points out that to “‘make disciples (mathēteusate) is the main verb,

and thus the focal point of Jesus’ mission. ‘Going,’ ‘baptizing,’ and ‘teaching’ are

parallel participles subordinate to ‘make disciples.’” Hertig (2001) continues: The

resurrection of Jesus led to the final mission mandate which involved more than

proclaiming, but also demanded the surrender to Jesus’ Lordship through the making of

disciples. . . . Disciples are urged both to understand Jesus’ words and to apply them

without compromise (Matt 7:24-27). . . . Disciple making is not a performance; it is total

submission to God’s reign. Hertig (2001) claims that what prompts discipleship is a sense

of holistic mission (to bodies and souls in social contexts) “the central expression of the

Christian faith.” Jacob (2002) says that “Christian mission is the response of Christians

to the presence of God, and their participation in God’s action to liberate all people. The

explanation considered previously that both discipleship and disciple making seem to be

participating in the processes of receiving instruction from God and others and living out

one’s faith for others to see and imitate for the purpose of their spiritual maturity and

57
their ability to disciple still others is a strong corollary to Jacob’s “Christian mission,” if

not the same thing. For Ogden (2003 p.121- 135), the writer of “Transforming

Discipleship”, living the biblical model of disciple making from Jesus and Paul requires

investment in three foundational principles. First, there is need to invest in the lives of

others by shifting from an emphasis on making disciples through programs to making

disciples through relationships. Second, there is need to invest in multiplication by

helping Christians grow to the point of maturity where they become disciples who make

disciples, resulting in multiple generations of disciples (Ogden 2003).Third, there is need

to invest in developing a discipleship system that helps people become like Christ.

“When people firstly, open their hearts in transparent trust to each other secondly, around

the truth of God’s Word thirdly, in the spirit mutual accountability,” Ogden (2003) wrote

that we are in the Holy Spirit’s hot house of transformation. As stated above,

discipleship involves progress through stages of growth in the models of Jesus and Paul.

Therefore, Jesus spent serious time with His disciples. He had a strong

relationship with each one. He trained them; he taught them, they watched him; they

helped him; he got them to the point where they went out two by two and reported back;

he left them and they started the process all over again by making disciples themselves of

the nations. The current church needs to adopt Jesus way of making disciples. In the

contemporary church, the newly saved Christians need someone to teach them how to

read the Bible and get something out of their reading. They need someone who can teach

them how to do personal Bible study and, with the help of the Holy Spirit, apply its

lessons to their lives. They need someone grown enough in spiritual things to help

memorize the Word so that it will be available in their lives. They need someone matured

58
enough to teach them how to assimilate the Scriptures into the spiritual bloodstream of

their lives through meditation on the Word. Much more, they need someone committed to

teach them how to pray and expect answers from God. And that will be a great blessing

to them.

2.3.4 Church

The word in the Bible most often translated as “church” is the Greek ekklesia,

which means any gathering of people. The word ekklēsia is found in 116 places in the

New Testament. In most English Bibles, it is translated as “church” in all of those places

except three. In Acts 19:32 and 41, it is translated as “assembly” and refers to the people

whom Demetrius had called together (Acts 19:25), and in verse 39 it is also translated

“assembly” and refers to a lawful assembly. Ekklēsia is a compound word. The first part

is ek. It is a preposition that means "out of,” “out from,” or “from.” The second part of

ekklēsia, klēsiais a derivative of the Greek word kaleō. Kaleō is a verb that means “to

call.” So, ekklēsia is a compound of a preposition and a verb, but ekklēsia itself is a noun.

In its most basic form, ekklēsia means “the called out from” or “those called out from.” In

other words, it refers to people called out from or out of something. When Jesus said,

“…on this rock I will build my church…” (Matthew 16:18), He was actually saying He

would build His gathering of people. The Greek ekklesia is also used interchangeably of

both local congregations and the body of believers as a whole. The difference is found in

the context. More often in the Bible the word “church” is refers to as a local congregation

of believers. Revelation 2-3: In the letters to the churches the comments are addressed to

specific churches in identified towns. Romans 16:5: Whenever a church is mentioned in

affiliation with someone's home it refers to a local congregation. Acts 8:1: When a church

59
is identified with a city or a region the word refers to local bodies of believers within that

region.“Church” is used the same way today. The local church is a specific body that

meets in a designated place and can be comprised of believers and regularly attending

non-believers. The duties to the local church include regular attendance, respect for the

leadership and financial support. It is important for a believer to attend a local church

because that is where biblical teaching, serving, and spiritual growth most often occur.

The local church is also known as the “church family.”Although “church” has come to

mean a building or organization, the original Greek ekklesia meant “a gathering,

assembly” and is the basis for our word “congregation.” And that is what God designed

the church to be a group of people. The definition of a “church” as a separate building

specifically for worship would have been foreign to the early believers as they met in

homes. When a building was mentioned in the New Testament, it was always in relation

to the church that met there (Romans 16:5). The church was the people not the building.

With the legitimization and affluence of Christianity in later years the “church” came to

mean the building where people met. Now, it often is used to mean a particular

denomination. But the truest meaning of the word “church” is the group of believers.

Christ is the head of the church and the church is the body of Christ (Ephesians 1:22-

23). The members of the body are all Christians. “For just as the body is one and has

many members and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with

Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body Jews or Greeks, slaves or free

and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member

but of many” (1 Corinthians 12:12-14). The universal church is defined as all who have

received the Holy Spirit no matter their location, denomination, or era. To ensure order

60
and to provide fellowship the universal church is also divided into local churches. The

universal church is the body of Christ, composed of everyone who has received Christ as

their Savior. It is comprised of every believer from every country and every time from

Pentecost (Acts 2) until Christ's return. Although a specific denomination may teach a

more accurate view of God and His Word than another the universal church recognizes

no denominations just individual believers joined together in one body. No matter the

denomination or the size of a local church the purpose is to do corporately what all who

name the name of Jesus are to do individually glorify God in worship, obey and honor

Him in all people do and encourage one another to do the same. The church is not a

building; it is a group of people. It is not a denomination; it is everyone who has received

the Holy Spirit. And it doesn't grant salvation; it is people loving and glorifying God and

teaching others about a saving knowledge of Christ. Believers are joined with all

Christians from Peter to the smallest child in the body of Christ. The local church is

where the members of the universal church can apply 1 Corinthians 12: encouraging,

teaching, and building one another up in the knowledge and grace of the Lord Jesus

Christ. At other times, "church" in the Bible means the group consisting of every Christ

follower. Matthew 16:18: In reference to Jesus' church, this includes all believers

everywhere. Acts 8:3: When Paul persecuted the "church," he persecuted believers

wherever he could find them from Jerusalem (Acts8:1) to Damascus (Acts9:1-20). 1

Corinthians 5:12: When Paul gives instruction to "the church," he is often referring to the

body of Believers as a whole. Today, people have the same distinction. The church

universal includes every believer in the world no matter what denomination and excludes

every non-believer even if they go to a Bible teaching church. The responsibilities to the

61
universal church include prayer, support and not causing division because of minor

theological differences. It's important to note that the church universal may include

individuals who go to local congregations that do not teach the true Gospel. The "church"

whether local or universal is a group of people seeking God. At no time in the Bible does

“church” refer to a building. Despite the money, time and attention people pay to

structures the true church is people.

During the Medieval period the Catholic Church focused more on decorating the

Churches than on recovering the essence of the Church. That is one reason that people

regard the Church as a building not an assembly or the body of Christ. The image of the

body in the New Testament teaches people that the ekklesia is to function as

interdependent ministering community gathered so that the members can serve one

another and in this way the individual and community will grow (Richards, 1991).

According to Douglas (1987) the church is refers to as Church universal to which all

believers and only believers belong. This is the same as the body of Christ. It also

indicates a local group of Christians living in a certain place. However, in the history of

the church, the church is refers to as a gathering of the Jewish people in their assembling

in the wilderness and in the New Testament it is refers to as a group of believers.

Therefore, the English word for Church is derived from the Greek Kuriakos meaning

“belonging to the Lord”, but it stands for another Greek word “ekklesia” which denotes

“a gathering or an assembly” the basis for the word “congregation”. In the article, “The

Anglican Understanding of Church”, Allister (1562) defines the Word “Church” as the

visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men….’ According to Allister

(1562), the church can be understood as either local or universal, either visible or

62
invisible: but these distinctions are not identical to each other. The local church is not the

only form of the visible despite what Congregationalists might like to think; and the

universal church is not the same as the invisible regardless of any claims to the contrary

by Rome. Allister (1562) argues that the tendency among Anglican evangelicals today to

understand church as including the local congregation but excluding diocese province or

national church is not the whole truth, is not the best way of understanding the biblical or

the historical evidence, is not authentically Anglican. In Scripture ‘church’ can refer to all

the churches of a geographical area Acts 9:31: Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee

and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened and encouraged by the Holy

Spirit, it grew in numbers living in the fear of the Lord. Here ‘the church’, and the

singular pronouns and verbs are used to describe what some of people would prefer to

call ‘the churches’ (Metzger, 1975). Rather, the local autonomous church is the model

that is affirmed in Scripture. According to Hobbs (1996), the word ‘church’ never refers

to organized Christianity or a group of churches but to either the local body of Christ or

the church universal. The above statement also affirms the mission of the local church:

“to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth.” Acts 1:8 is the force behind the

evangelistic thrust of the church and Matthew 28:18–20 describes the work that is to be

done by the church in the fulfillment of her mission: making disciples.

63
2.3.5 Church Growth

According to Wagner (1990), Church growth is that discipline which investigates

the nature, expansion, planting, multiplication, function, and health of Christian churches

as they relate to the effective implementation of God’s Commission to make disciple of

all peoples.Wagner (1976) further points out that church growth is should be both internal

and external growth as the important areas of the church life. Besides, individuals like

Lewis (1977 .pp19 – 21); Hunter (1985) and Hunger (1983 p.172-178) identified four

kinds of church growth: Internal, expansion, extension, and bridging growth. On the

hand, Towns 2008 (p.187) defines Church growth as the science that investigates the

nature, function, and health of Christian churches as they relate specifically to the

effective implementation of God's Commission to “make disciples of all the nations”

(Matthew 28:19). Church growth is simultaneously a theological conviction and an

applied science, striving to combine the eternal principles of God's Word with the best

insights of contemporary social and behavioral sciences, employing as its initial frame of

reference the foundational work done by Donald McGavran and his colleagues. Church

growth is further defined as the fulfillment of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20),

a theology‐centered process including both spiritual formation and effective evangelism

strategies (Christian Growth 2008).In support to what is stated above by other writers,

Towns (1986 p.65) has also identified at least four types of growth for a local church, not

all related to numerical expansion. First, internal growth focuses on two areas, which are

evangelism that cares for “already baptized members” inside the church and the

evangelism of unsaved existing church members. He further states that internal growth

64
refers to nurturing believers into spiritual maturity. Second, conversion growth takes

places as result of evangelizing the unsaved. The third and fourth are transfer and

biological growth, respectively, pastor’s less effort is required.

2.3.6 Church Establishment

The term “Church establishment” in this research is referred to as when the

church becomes a Bible based church, an interdependent church, a praying church,

Evangelistic with a healthy group structure to reach the lost souls and has a ministry for

every church department. According to Gallup (1990), it’s a Bible centered, a happy

Church, a creative church, a diverse church, an interdependent church, in tune with today

and tomorrow, informs its community, intentional in being Lay led, inspirational, willing

to change, insists on new members involvement, a healthy group structure, places a high

priority on enhancing the individual’s Christian experience, evangelistic, has a strong

leader, has a great vision, is a praying church, has spiritual power, has ministry for every

church department, stands boldly on social issues, participates in strategic planning,

provides growth experience, preaches with biblical authority, and uses quality and

quantity as measurements. Dean (1986)further describes church establishment as one

Grounded in a consistent vision and message, passionately preach the Word of God, love

to celebrate God's presence through dynamic worship, fellowship in small groups,

quickly assimilate new comers, keep their leaders accountable in personal life and

ministry, and take the Great Commission seriously.

65
2.3.7 Parameters

The term “parameters” in this research refers to the limits how discipleship and

disciple making can be done in the local churches. It is also refers to how Jesus Christ

trained his disciples being the role model for pastors and Christian leaders. In Mark 3, the

Bible records the beginnings and purpose of this small group of twelve which Jesus

called together. Jesus called to himself those he wanted, He appointed the twelve to be

with him, to send them out to proclaim and have authority. The Twelve were first called

disciples, usually defined as “learners” or “followers.” The etymology of the word

implies “one who is being influenced (Webster, 1970).” As Kraus (1979) has explained,

“those who accepted (Jesus’) way were called disciples (followers, learners, apprentices),

Christians (Christ’s people), and dedicated ones (set apart to God, saints), to indicate their

relation to Christ. They were to ‘follow,’ ‘obey,’ ‘share in,’ and ‘imitate’ Christ.”

The twelve disciples became the twelve apostles, “the authenticated witnesses (Kraus,

1979 p.19)” of Jesus’ personal authority with God the Father. The Twelve could speak of

Jesus from firsthand experience. They were in his small group together. They lived

together. They shared pain together. They had conflicts with one another. They shared

ministry together. They imitated Jesus together. They experienced the incarnate shalom

of God as human, accessible and vulnerable. They “received the commission and Spirit

of witness to the original Word made flesh (Kraus 1979 p.19).” The relationship of the

Twelve with Jesus was a validation of the realness of Jesus’ humanity that he was not just

an apparition or a metaphysical fantasy (Kraus 1979 pp.27-50). Kraus (1979 p.19) has

argued that this is a key historical critique of docetism, that Jesus only “seemed like a

human being.” Life with the Twelve validated his full humanity because he validated

66
their full humanity. A docetic Jesus would have no use for a specific small group with

whom to live and love.

Jesus, the man, lived and traveled with a small group of twelve men, around whom

were many other groups of men and women. Jesus lived in constant and complete human

encounter with a particular group of human beings. As Lohfink (1987) has affirmed,

these disciples were carefully selected, named and led by Jesus. This group had a new

and unique future. They had to release the patterns and values of their past to adopt the

character of Christ for their futures: Thus Jesus required of his disciples a determined

turning away from their own families…. Common life with Jesus took the place of family

and of all previous ties. This common life meant more than merely being with a teacher,

listening to him and observing him…. The disciples’ community of life with Jesus was a

community of destiny. It went so far that the disciples had to be prepared to suffer what

Jesus suffered, if necessary, even persecution or execution (Lohfink, 1987 pp.32-

33).Today, following the model of Jesus with the Twelve, God continues to call small

groups of men and women to gather around Christ, to give up previous connectional ties,

to learn together the way of Jesus, and to allow their transformed life together to impact a

world cut off from their Creator’s primary intention and ultimate purpose. This is why the

focus upon Jesus, the Christ, as ultimate small group leader is so pivotal to the meaning

and practice of all human small groups. There is no redemptive gathering into a redeemed

humanity unless Jesus continues to practice this ministry by the power of the Spirit

throughout human history.

67
2.3.8 Standards

The word “standards” in this research refers to a kind of life pastors and Christian

leaders ought to live and conduct themselves when they are practicing discipleship in

their local churches. This is also referred to how Jesus Christ lived, spoke and conducted

himself in training his disciples. According to Hull (2009), the disciple of Christ must

seek to live as Jesus did and follow his model, words, and deeds. Jesus Christ is the

standard for discipleship. Disciples are identified with the person of Jesus Christ. Their

focus is to be like Christ. In Matthew 4:18–19, Jesus called the disciples to “Come,

follow me.” The disciple follows the footsteps of Jesus. Discipleship is not just following

his principles, ideas, or philosophy. It is not primarily conceptual, but is personal

(Bennett, 2001). The disciple aims at Christlikeness. The discipleship system should lead

to a transformation of the mind (Romans 8:6; 12:2), heart (Matthew 5:8) and lifestyle

(Ephesians 4:22–24) to that of Christ. Thus, it is essential for every believer discipling

another to exhibit the traits of Jesus.

68
2.4 Understanding Discipleship and Disciple making

In the Christian world, the word discipleship is discussed by many but fully

comprehended by few. By discipleship some people mean primarily a response to Jesus’

call to “Come, follow Me” (Matthew 19:21) or an invitation to a personal relationship

with Him. For others it connotes the commission to “Go . . . make disciples” (Matthew

28:19), bringing others to a similar belief in Jesus as they themselves have. Still other

Christians understand that at a minimum both following Christ and making other

disciples are involved in the concept of discipleship but they are not sure how either of

those activities impacts their lives or even what the Christian life would look like if

discipleship were practiced on a daily basis (Beagles, 2010 p.81). However, Samra

(2003) attempting to take a biblical view of discipleship poses three questions: What is

discipleship? How is discipleship accomplished? What is involved in prompting

discipleship? Samra (2003) believes that there are three reasons for the confusion over

what discipleship is. The first reason he cites is that sometimes the Greek word disciple in

the New Testament is used in a strictly intellectual sense, thus making discipleship

simply the process of being educated by a teacher and at other times it seems to involve

life transformation . . . in which case discipleship is seen as the process of becoming like

one’s master. The second reason Samra (2003) gives for the confusion over the term is

that at times the focus is on the beginning of the process (Matt 27:57; Acts14:21) in

which case discipleship is becoming a disciple. At other times and more frequently the

focus is on being a disciple (Luke 14:26-27) in which case discipleship is the process of

becoming like one’s master. The third reason Samra (2003) gives for confusion is that

there are different referents for the term disciple. Sometimes the term refers to the masses

69
who occasionally followed Jesus in order to learn about him. Other times it is used for the

specific few selected to become as much like Christ as possible through concentrated

focused life transference.

Samra (2003) further cuts through the confusion and concludes that the term

discipleship refers to both becoming and being both evangelism and growth. Therefore, it

is best to think of discipleship as the process of becoming like Christ. Discipleship also

encompasses both the entry into the process of salvation and growth in the process of

sanctification which supports that all Christians are disciples and are called to participate

in the discipleship process both by receiving instruction and living out their faith for

others to see and imitate (Samra (2003). According to Collinson (2004 p.169),

discipleship is an intentional largely informal learning activity which involves two or a

small group of individuals who typically function within a larger nurturing community

and hold to the same beliefs. Each makes a voluntary commitment to the other/s to form

close personal relationships for an extended period of time in order that those who at a

particular time are perceived as having superior knowledge and/or skills will attempt to

cause learning to take place in the lives of others who seek their help. In this regard,

discipleship is intended to result in each becoming an active follower of Jesus and a

participant in his mission to the world. Collinson (2004) further gives the aim of

discipling as the attainment of maturity and development of the ability to become a

teacher or discipler of others. Therefore, it can be concluded that discipleship and

discipling seem to be inextricably linked in aim and process.

70
 Samra (2003 p. 134) further states that all Christians are disciples and are called

to participate in the discipleship process both by receiving instruction and living out their

faith for others to see and imitate including intentionally discipling others for the purpose

or aim of their attainment of maturity and their development of the ability to become a

teacher or discipler of others (Collinson, 2004 p.160) in part by simply living out their

faith for others to see and imitate (Samra, 2003 p.234). Therefore, in answering samra’s

(2003) second question, it can be concluded that both discipleship and discipling involve

participating in the processes of receiving instruction from God and others and living out

one’s faith for others to see and imitate for the purpose of their spiritual maturity and

their ability to disciple still others. Barna (2001) further defines discipleship as becoming

a complete and competent follower of Jesus Christ. This definition of discipleship states

the reason for discipleship which is to be a complete and competent disciple of Christ.

However, discipleship is a process that involves a leader and influence. For the Disciples,

that leader was Jesus Christ, a leader who influenced them by teaching them (formation),

by giving his life for them (transformation), and by loving and caring for others

(application).On the other hand, the Disciples followed the same method of discipleship

within the first century church. In this regard, pastors are to be leaders who have

influence on the local church as they teach, encourage changed lives and practice the

Word of God. Therefore, looking at samra’s (2003) third question, what is involved in

prompting discipleship? To answer this question, the study will use many dedicated

disciplers and religious educators that offered theories, models, and personal praxis.

71
2.4.1 Models of Discipleship

Hertig (2001 p.343) sees the great commission recorded in Matt 28:18-20 as a

post-resurrection declaration of God’s universal reign. Hertig (2001 p.346) points out that

to make disciples (mathēteusate) is the main verb and thus the focal point of Jesus’

mission. ‘Going,’ ‘baptizing,’ and ‘teaching’ are parallel participles subordinate to ‘make

disciples. Hertig (2001 p.347) further explains that the resurrection of Jesus led to the

final mission mandate which involved more than proclaiming but also demanded the

surrender to Jesus’ Lordship through the making of disciples. . . . Disciples are urged

both to understand Jesus’ words and to apply them without compromise (Matthew 7:24-

27). . . . Disciple making is not a performance; it is total submission to God’s reign.

Hertig (2001) also claims that what prompts discipleship is a sense of holistic mission (to

bodies and souls in social contexts) the central expression of the Christian faith.

According Jacob (2002) Christian mission is the response of Christians to the presence of

God and their participation in God’s action to liberate all people. The explanation

considered previously that both discipleship and discipling seem to be participating in the

processes of receiving instruction from God and others and living out one’s faith for

others to see and imitate for the purpose of their spiritual maturity and their ability to

disciple still others is a strong corollary to Jacob’s “Christian mission,” if not the same

thing.

Another model to help answer the question, “What is involved in prompting

discipleship?” follows a family model. Petersen (1994) describes spiritual parenting. This

model attends to the spiritual development of the newer or younger Christian adapting the

role of the discipler to meet the changing needs of the one being discipled. In 1

72
Thessalonians 2:7-10 the disciple is described as a little child and the discipler as being

gentle among you as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children. The needs that

the “child” has are for protection and love; meeting those needs is what will “prompt

discipleship” in the new/young disciple. Paul also implies an “adolescent” stage disciple.

The discipleship prompting that this group needs is that of a father exhorting and

encouraging and imploring (1 Thessalonians 2:11). The discipler must take on a slightly

different role with a disciple in a different stage of discipleship. Petersen (1994)

suggested that the objective of the father is to equip the child or youth to live a life

worthy of God and to live as a citizen of His Kingdom ought to live. As the disciples

grow and mature, they become brothers, sisters (1 Thessalonians 1:6-10) and peers

standing shoulder to shoulder. The goal is maturity in Christ and it can happen only over

time. However, different stages of discipling initiative require different parenting roles to

be taken by the discipler. In addition, there are still other models that a discipler can use

in prompting discipleship in others and that inform what methods can be used. According

to Bruce (1963), three stage model was proposed in the discipleship classic called the

Training of the Twelve originally printed in 1871. In this model, Bruce (1963) sets forth

three stages believers in Christ, fellowship with Christ and chosen to be trained by Christ.

Hull (2006 .p169) further adds a fourth stage to Bruce’s three in order to show how the

disciples finished their training and moved on to carry out their mission. Hull (2006) calls

Bruce’s first stage, “Come and see,” Bruce’s second stage, “Come and follow me,” and

his third stage, “Come and be with me.” The fourth stage which Hull (2006) adds, he

calls, “Remain in me.”

73
 Another closely related to the concept of discipleship is the concept of being

transformed into Christ’s image the result of choosing, following and remaining in him.

Hull (2006) suggests a six-fold definition of the transformation of disciples and Boa

(2001) further explains the process of growing Christian spirituality the desired result of

true discipleship as a gem with many facets. His model includes twelve facets providing

an approach for every personality type. According to Harrington (2007), Christian

spirituality is discipleship that is a positive response to the call of Jesus despite or even

because of our personal unworthiness. Rick Warren’s Life Development Process which

according to Ogden (2003) is one of the most popular and copied public discipleship

models which involves “covenant membership” (making a commitment to Christ), “the

covenant of maturity” (committing to “basic spiritual disciplines of growth”), “the

covenant of ministry” (using one’s experience and gifts for others), and “commitment to

missions” (compassionate service). This model is portrayed in the form of a baseball

diamond with everything centering on the pitcher’s mound in the middle which is

magnification or worship. Warren’s model implies that after a commitment to become a

“disciple” of Christ one also commits to a life of spiritual growth through disciplines of

relational service and compassionate ministry using one’s gifts and abilities in the context

of corporate worship Ogden (2003).

Particularly designed for adolescent catechesis, Henning’s (2007) tripod construct

grows out of question six of the ‘Baltimore Catechism’ (which) explains that God made

us to know, love and serve him in this world and to be happy with him forever’ in the

next. Henning (2007) suggested a framework for adolescent discipleship that had three

legs to know, to love, and to serve God. This three legged- stool formation supplies a

74
stable foundation when the legs are balanced. The seat that rests on these legs is life

experience. These legs are known to educators as the cognitive construct (to know God),

the affective construct (to love God) and the behavioral construct (to serve God).

Henning (2007) observes that those who work with young people have become aware of

the importance of methodology in discipleship formation. He further points out that

looking at the ultimate discipler and model Jesus Christ make it obvious that it is not just

what we teach but how we teach it and live it that is of supreme importance. The message

is definitely impacted by the messenger and for young people observing in the lives of

their disciplers the lived experience of being a disciple is crucial for them to be able to

internalize the head and heart knowledge they are taught. For young people truth is

verified by experience. The personal spiritual experience of the discipler of young people

is definitely “hidden curriculum” in the discipling methodology especially if it is not

congruent with the cognitive and affective aspects of the curriculum (Martin, 1983).

Prompting discipleship in children and youth is also addressed by Hunneshagen

(2002 p.192) as he approaches confirmation ministry or what he calls the discipleship

training of children and youth. Based heavily on developmental theory and research, his

model, or basic framework, includes 4 turnings, 6 disciplines, and 19 assets.

Hunneshagen (2002 p.191) sees the congregation as a whole as the primary instructor.

The first avenue it uses for this disciple making task is Kerygma the church’s

proclamation and sharing of the Good News with undiscipled people. The second avenue

used is Koinonia the Christ-infused fellowship in which loving, caring, forgiving

relationships are built and nurtured. The third avenue is Diakonia the body of Christ

serving people and the world at their point of need. The actual discipleship being

75
prompted involves four “turnings” a concept Hunneshagen (2002) takes from the mission

and purpose statement of his Lutheran congregation. The “turnings” are: firstly, turning

to Christ; secondly, turning to the Christian message and ethic; thirdly, turning to a

Christian congregation; and fourthly, turning to the world in love and mission.

Hunneshagen (2002 pp.191-192) further explains that mature discipleship does not

emerge until all four ‘turnings’ have occurred. The local congregation particularly is the

agent that prompts this maturing discipleship. The turnings can occur in any order but he

emphasizes the importance of these turnings beginning to happen in childhood and youth.

Hunneshagen (2002) further names six disciplines that are actions a committed Christian

disciple will undertake: worship, prayer, Bible study, giving, service, and witness.

However, Search Institute’s “40 Developmental Assets” is the source from which

Hunneshagen’s congregation chose 19 assets that they felt they had the capacity to

address (Roehlkepartain, 1998). According to Hunneshagen (2002 p.192), these assets are

based on research that has identified 40 positive experiences and qualities that children

and teenagers need such as External Assets’ of: #3 other adult relationships, #15 positive

peer influence, #18 youth programs, and #19 religious community. They chose many

more Internal Assets including everything listed under positive relationships,

opportunities and personal qualities. Focus on the Family’s Parenting Compass Web site

supplies scriptural references to underline the importance of each of the assets

(Hunneshagen, 2002).

76
 In addition, Gibson (2004 p.10) approaches discipling youth from an

ecclesiological perspective. Although not promoting a model of discipleship, he states

that congregations should foster an environment of discipleship and accountability in

which spiritual growth can take place. Gibson (2004 p.9) maintains that church

programming that separates people by age or social status prevents Christians from

hearing the insights of the entire community. The concept of church family somehow gets

lost. Gibson (2004) further recommends intergenerational connectedness that promotes

multigenerational worshiping communities wherein young and old, single and married,

share and learn together. Gibson (2004) asserts that congregational connectivity among

teenagers and the entire body of Christ is key to helping adolescents understand the

importance of remaining active in the church. Obviously, models abound that have been

created to answer Samra’s questions: What is discipleship? How is discipleship

accomplished? And what is involved in prompting discipleship? Therefore, all the

models in one form or another involve connecting with and growing in relationships with

God and with others. A growing connection with God leads one to a deepening

understanding of the relationship with him through the revelation of his Word; the

resultant more selfless growing connection with others as disciples who obey God’s

command to love others as themselves results in their ministering to the needs of those

others. All the models that deal with discipling others involve disciples in one way or

another equipping others through teaching, nurturing, or example to grow in spiritual

maturity as they in turn begin to disciple still others.

77
 Growing Disciples in Community Model
Conceptual Framework

PERSONAL PROCESSES OF CHRISTIAN DISCIPLESHIP

The processes through which an individual Christian grows in

spiritual maturity and fruit-bearing (John 15:5-8).

UNDERSTANDING MINISTERING
Learning the truth of God’s Participating in God’s mission
relationship with humanity of revelation, reconciliation, and
through restoration (Matt 25:40; 28:19,
Jesus Christ, the Word (John 20).
8:31;
Matt 4:4).

CONNECTING

“Loving God completely, ourselves correctly, and others

compassionately” (Boa, 25ff.; Matt 22:37-38; John 13:35).

“All Christians are disciples and are called to participate

in the discipleship process,
↓↑
both by receiving instruction and living out their faith
for others to see and imitate”
(Samra, 234).

EQUIPPING

Intentionally walking “alongside other disciples in order to

encourage, equip, and
challenge one another in love to grow toward maturity in Christ”
(Ogden, 129;
Deut 6:4-9; Eph 4:15-16).

COMMUNITY PROCESS OF CHRISTIAN DISCIPLING

The “discipleship living” within the “body of Christ” (local church,

Christian home, Christian friends, Christian teachers) that impacts
others’ attitudes toward and engagement in the individual processes
of maturing as a disciple.

Source: Kathleen Beagles (2010 p.90)

78
 In the New Testament, the Gospels and the Book of Acts include 260 references

to the word disciple. Every time the word is used, it refers to a declared relationship with

Jesus Christ, not a level of spiritual or religious achievement. Becoming a Christian, in

New Testament understanding, was the same as becoming a disciple of Jesus. The word

disciple in the New Testament, then, refers primarily to any Christian, not to a

subdivision of the Christian community. However, the scripture teaches three stages in a

Christian’s life. The first stage the scripture teaches is justification. According to

Arington (1996), the stage of Justification is referred to as transformation. This stage is a

progressive step that takes place by two means: the Word of God, and the Holy Spirit.

This process is referred to in theological terms as justification and sanctification.

Justification is the doctrinal teaching that God the Father has forgiven the sins of the

repentive sinner based on the redemptive work of Christ alone. However, God initiates

justification to bring a person into right standing with Him. The person becomes justified

in God’s sight (Romans 5:1) by confessing and repenting of his sin and asking God to

atone for it through the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Inherent in the person’s

declaration of need for God to redeem him from the penalty of sin is also a profession of

his desire to follow Jesus as the Lord of his life. This profession begins the second stage

which is sanctification. This stage describes a believer’s journey of faith from

justification to the end of his earthly life. Sanctification is the process of becoming

mature or more Christlike in one’s faith. God wants Christians to learn how to live as He

wants them to live (Philippians 2:12). According to Arington (1993), Sanctification is the

process where the Holy Spirit sets the believer apart or makes holy, as taught in

Scripture, “You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy,” which can be found in

79
Leviticus 19:2 and First Peter 1:16. However, there are debates concerning the timing and

process by which sanctification takes place in the believer’s life. Sanctification will be

looked at within this study as a progressive development, for it is a process that begins at

justification (salvation) and will end at glorification (death or the Rapture of the Church).

These two developmental stages in the Christian life are part of the discipleship process,

for discipleship is transformation. Discipleship is the spiritual transformation of the

believer’s life from salvation to the day of physical death or rapture. Therefore, the last

stage the scripture teaches is glorification. One day when a believer’s earthly life is over,

the will be glorified, becoming like Jesus (1 John 3:2). The process of discipleship will

then be complete (Phil. 1:6). Christian discipleship is a lifelong journey of obedience to

Christ that spiritually transforms a person’s values and behavior and results in ministry in

one’s home, church, and the world. Willard (2006), said, “We progressively learn to lead

our lives as he would if he were we.” After someone becomes a Christian, becoming like

Jesus in character and being obedient to Him should be the main objectives in life

(Galatians 5:22-23). John the apostle wrote, “the one who says, ‘I have come to know

Him,’ without keeping His commands, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever

keeps His word, truly in him the love of God is perfected. This is how we know we are in

Him: the one who says he remains in Him should walk just as He walked” (1 John 2:4-6).

The Christian life ought to be more distinctive than any other type of life. Luke 14

records an encounter Jesus had with a crowd of people who were following Him. Perhaps

this passage is the most definitive and clearest of Jesus’ teachings about discipleship.

80
 Now great crowds were traveling with Him. So He turned and said to them: “If

anyone comes to Me and does not hate his own father and mother, wife and

children, brothers and sisters-yes, and even his own life he cannot be My disciple.

Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.

“For which of you, wanting to build a tower, doesn’t first sit down and calculate

the cost to see if he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, after he has laid the

foundation and cannot finish it, all the onlookers will begin to make fun of him,

saying, ‘his man started to build and wasn’t able to finish.’ “Or what king, going

to war against another king, will not first sit down and decide if he is able with

10,000 to oppose the one who comes against him with 20,000? If not, while the

other is still far of, he sends a delegation and asks for terms of peace. In the same

way, therefore, every one of you who does not say good-bye to all his possessions

cannot be My disciple. “Now, salt is good, but if salt should lose its taste, how

will it be made salty? It isn’t it for the soil or for the manure pile; they throw it

out. Anyone who has ears to hear should listen!” (Luke 14:25-35).

According to Willard (2006), Jesus stated at least four conditions for becoming His

disciple. The first condition Jesus talked about was the priority of a relationship with

Him. Discipleship is always rooted in relationship.

If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his own father and mother, wife and

children, brothers and sisters - yes, and even his own life - he cannot be My

disciple (Luke 14:26).

81
Jesus used strange language to describe the priority of a relationship with Him.

Identifying the most intimate of human relationships, He told would-be followers they

must hate those people if they were to be His disciples. What did Jesus mean by that? It

would be inconsistent with the teaching of Scripture if Jesus meant for His followers to

despise their families. Jesus used the word hate to indicate a lesser degree of devotion.

Disciples of Jesus must love Him more than they love any other person, including their

immediate families. Disciples’ love must be a passionate love that reveals itself in daily

life. It is the kind of love that enables disciples to meet the other requirements of

following Jesus. How do Christians grow in their love for Christ so that it becomes

passionate? That type of love is born from time spent together. Jesus modeled for

Christians the intimacy He had with the Father while on earth by making time to be alone

with Him. His days were full; yet time with His Father was the focal point of His life

each day. For Christians, it means that their daily schedules will be centered on both

planned and spontaneous times of prayer, meditation, and Bible study. Time with God

results in changed thinking and changed behavior. Jesus said His disciples were to be salt

and light. Salt and light make a difference when they are applied. Disciples of Jesus are to

be distinctive in the way they live. When circumstances are at their worst, Christians

ought to be at their best. There is no substitute for time intentionally spent with Jesus to

develop intimacy with Him as well as passion for Him. According to Willard (2016), the

second condition Jesus discussed is having the right purpose. Discipleship always

expresses itself in purpose.

82
 Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple

(Luke 14:27).Jesus used this illustration before He experienced His physical death by

being crucified on a cross, but He was aware that the Romans used the cross as a means

of execution. He was also aware that the cross would be the means of His death in the

near future. The cross for Jesus was the means for Him to accomplish the purpose for

which He had been born. The purpose of His incarnation was to redeem humankind to

make possible the restoration of a relationship between God and His human creation.

Although Jesus modeled such a life and taught His followers how to live in such a

relationship, His overarching purpose was to redeem humankind by satisfying the penalty

for rebellion against God. In this regard, the cross means the same thing for Christians

today. It symbolizes their purpose as disciples of Jesus. Their purpose is not to die for

humankind as Jesus did but to die to a self-centered agenda and live to lead people into

right relationships with their Heavenly Father. No matter what Christian livelihood is,

their purpose as a disciple of Jesus is to help people know God and to live in fellowship

with Him through Christ. Christian disciples should be eager to share their faith

experiences with others. This discipline of the Christian life is perhaps the most difficult

because it speaks to the core issue of lordship. Christians might be willing to do any

number of things for Christ, even to sacrifice a great deal, but they want to do it on their

own terms. When His purpose becomes their purpose, it means they are also willing to

forgo personal freedoms to carry out God’s purpose for their lives (John 3:30).According

to Willard (2016), the third condition Jesus told prospective disciples that their

commitment must be long-term. The call to follow Jesus is a lifelong.

83
 Which of you, wanting to build a tower, doesn’t first sit down and calculate the

cost to see if he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, after he has laid the

foundation and cannot finish it, all the onlookers will begin to make fun of him,

saying, “his man started to build and wasn’t able to finish.” Or what king, going

to war against another king, will not first sit down and decide if he is able with

10,000 to oppose the one who comes against him with 20,000? If not, while the

other is still far of, he sends a delegation and asks for terms of peace (Luke 14:28-

32).

Jesus’ call to follow Him is never meant for an interim period of time. It is always an

invitation for the person to commit the whole of life for all of life. Often someone fails to

maintain the intimacy with Jesus that enables the commitment to continue. As Jesus said,

Christians can lose their saltiness (Luke 14:34-35). Spiritual sensitivity can keep

Christians from becoming ineffective in their faith practice. Christians might be willing

to follow Jesus, but they want to choose the conditions for doing so. They have

secularized their faith, carving out specific times and places to practice it. It is far too

dangerous to allow Jesus to set the parameters. He will ask for more of them and for a

much longer period of time than what they have in mind. In Luke 14 Jesus made it clear

that He wanted prospective disciples not to make an emotional decision to follow Him

that they might renounce after giving it thought. Rather, He wanted them first to consider

the cost, and then choose to follow Him even though they knew the cost was great and

would extend for the rest of their earthly lives.

84
 Therefore, Willard (2016) further explains that in the forth condition Jesus stated

that disciples must be willing to give up material possessions. Christian must know that

following Jesus is more important than material gain.The disciple puts Christ before self,

family, and possessions. Jesus expects people to make a commitment to be his disciples.

He discourages people who want to follow him without counting the cost of discipleship

(Matthew 20:20–23). Several passages in the gospels speak about the cost of disciples:

for example:

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If any want to become my followers, let them deny

themselves and take up their cross and follow me.” (Matthew 16:24)

“Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children,

brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple. Whoever does

not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26–27)

“So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your

possessions.” (Luke 14:33)

Disciples have to count the cost and place Christ above their own pleasures, their

possessions, and their family members (Hull, 2009). The comfort and satisfaction in

disciples must be lost and swallowed up by their love for Christ. Disciples place the

agenda of Christ above their own. Indeed, discipleship involves surrendering affections,

delights, feelings, and thoughts to God’s will. For Jesus, becoming his disciple means the

person must be prepared to give up all their possessions. Where personal or family

interests and desires conflict with what Jesus upholds, the disciple must be willing and

committed to put Jesus first. However, if Christians have made a relationship with Jesus a

priority and have committed to His purpose for a lifetime, they must let go of material

85
wealth. Jesus declared that nothing in life can take the place designed for Him. Things

can become gods as easily as people can. If Jesus does not allow people to assume God’s

place, neither will He allow material possessions to (Matthew 6:24). Scripture teaches

that God is the owner of all possessions (Psalms 24:1) and that humankind is only a

steward charged with their care. Even the church’s teaching on tithing is sometimes

misunderstood. Some believe that if they give a tithe of their income back to God, the

remaining 90 percent is available to be used any way they choose. The reality is that all

belongs to God, and a Christian is responsible for using all 100 percent in a way that

glorifies God. The tithe is just the prompter. According to Hull (2009), biblical

discipleship involves following Jesus rather than adhering to a moral code. Although the

task seems daunting, it is life at its very finest. Jesus said, “A thief comes only to steal

and to kill and to destroy. I have come that they may have life and have it in abundance”

(John 10:10). Jesus is not just the giver of abundant life. He desires that all people

experience it (2 Pet. 3:9). However, it is found only in following Him. The good news is

that Jesus enables even the following if someone in faith chooses to do so. That is the

work of the Holy Spirit, who comes to indwell the believer at the moment of expressed

trust in Jesus’ atoning death for him. God Himself is at work in the believer’s life to

manifest His grace and goodness (Philippians 2:13). He prompts someone and even

arranges circumstances to enable the person to do what He desires, but He never forces or

manipulates the person. Therefore, due to the importance of the task of discipleship, the

whole Godhead the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is involved in the commission

that Jesus gives to his disciples. In the Great Commission, Jesus said, “all authority in

heaven and on earth has been given to me . . . behold, I am with you till the end of the

86
age” (Matthew 28:18, 20). This statement by the risen Christ implies that, as the disciples

fulfil the mission of discipling others, they can be assured of the presence of he who has

all authority. The principal resources God has given to his people to disciple others

include the Holy Spirit who is always with them (Luke 24:49); his word which is always

available for them (John 15:1–17), and spiritual gifts that are available to them

(Ephesians 4:11–16). The Holy Spirit is the life force of the disciple’s evangelistic zeal.

Without the Holy Spirit there is no witness. Acts 1:8, “But you will receive power when

the Holy Spirit has come upon you. . .” becomes a source of strength to many disciples,

especially those from the Pentecostal tradition.

Hull (2009) further explained that disciples bear fruit for Christ. This is well

demonstrated in John 15:1–17, where his disciples are to “bear fruit,” “more fruit,”

“much fruit,” and “fruit that will last” (John 15:2, 5, 8 and 16). John 15:8 states, “This is

to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.”

There are two kinds of fruit. First is the fruit of character. Disciples are expected to be

like their master in character. The character of Christ is depicted by the fruit of the Spirit

love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control

(Galatians 5:22–23). In today’s Christianity, people tend to desire the power to perform

the supernatural. Many people are attracted to those who claim to be miracle workers,

hailing such people as more spiritual. Although the promise of power exists in Jesus’

sayings (Acts 1:8), the evidence of true spirituality is demonstrated in the transformation

of character, which includes one’s whole attitude, outlook, and relationship with others

(Matthew 7:22, 23). Secondly, there is the fruit by way of influencing the lives of others

for Christ. Every fruit contains a seed that guarantees its reproduction. The disciples are

87
expected to reproduce their kind. They must win others to Christ and disciple them to

maturity so that those won will also bear fruit and make the cycle continue. As the

ultimate goal of the disciple is to be like Jesus, the process does not end at producing a

godly character individually, or the ability to produce others of one’s kind. The disciple is

to be prepared to share fellowship with others and together take a journey of transforming

communities into the kingdom of God. Thus, authentic discipleship undermines the

postmodern concept of individualistic tendencies, where the individual becomes the

centre of affairs. Community life and the sharing of fellowship are dying out of many

institutions, including the church. However, fellowship is absolutely essential in disciple-

making, as shown in Acts 2:42. This sharing of fellowship includes having and sharing

friendship and things in common. The disciples are all citizens of the kingdom and share

the kingdom principles and values together. They apparently have the same subjects of

discussion, of prayer, and of concerns.

Jesus always moved with his disciples, went to the marginalized, touched and

healed them, and brought them back to the community (Hull, 2009). The disciple of

Christ must seek to live as Jesus did and follow his model, words, and deeds. Jesus

prayed for his disciples in John chapter 7 that they should be one as he and the Father are

one. This was in a way a call to mission for all disciples to participate in his unity in their

ministry on earth. Peter sees this unity of believers as being called together as a chosen

people, a holy priesthood and a holy nation, whose transformed lives must demonstrate

good deeds that should bring others to glorify God (1 Peter 2:9–12). Thus, the individual

believers are not called as just individual priests, but as a holy priesthood that must

cooperatively discharge their duties. Paul encodes this unity of believers as the body of

88
Christ, in which every part is to do their work effectively for the body to achieve its

purpose (1 Corinthians 12). To achieve the purpose of God together, the individuals must

know their roles. The church must find ways to teach, encourage, and help individuals to

find their roles in the community, and then integrate them into the body. The

manifestation of the roles of individual disciples will help the community of disciples to

discern its voice and as such the voice of God. It is the effective expression of the roles

by each individual that makes the church the true prophetic voice of the Lord to the

world. As the voice of God, the authentic Disciples of Christ must demonstrate the

principles of God within the communities they live in. The kingdom becomes visible in

form and practice as the disciples yield to God’s progressive rule. The transformed

disciples become an example of how God wants his kingdom to operate on earth. The

traits of God’s kingdom include righteousness, peace, justice, joy, equality, and

faithfulness. The transformed disciples mediate the knowledge of God, presence of God,

and the worship of God to the nations. Thus, disciples declare the good news of Christ

and live by extending love to those in their communities. The disciples then become

agents of transformation, advocating for peace and justice within their communities. It is

by these that disciples exhibit what Christ meant discipleship to be.

89
2.5 The forms of Discipleship for the Christian church

2.5.1 Biblical Theology Discipleship

There are different forms practiced in the Christian church. However, the first

form of discipleship practiced in Christian church is called a biblical theology

discipleship. According to Wright (2014), the reality of being a disciple is probably best

seen in the Old Testament with a call ‘to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the

Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul’ (Deuteronomy 10.12–13 et al.).

That includes keeping to God’s instructions, but also imitating or reflecting God’s

character. Israel, as a whole people, was called to that kind of discipleship, by living as

the people of YHWH in the midst of the nations, being faithful to its covenant with him,

worshipping him alone, and living by the standards of the Torah. This form of

discipleship has four parts. The first part is the training and mentoring of a new leader.

The Old Testament gives several examples of the transition from one leader to another, in

which it seems that the text itself stresses the role of the older one in preparing, training,

and mentoring the younger. Moses has Joshua serve under him for a long time, and gives

him both encouragement and warning before passing on the baton of leadership

(Deuteronomy 3.21–22). God himself reinforces the lessons that Moses had taught

(Joshua 1.1–9). David passes the kingship on to his son Solomon, though in the midst of

some very fractured and violent family vendettas. His words (if not his example) amount

to encouragement and warning (which Solomon later ignored; 1 Chronicles 28–29).

Elisha accompanies Elijah for some time, doubtless observing and learning, and then

goes on to an even longer ministry (1 Kings 19.19–21).Wright(2014) further explained

that the accounts in the Gospels of Jesus the Messiah (the Christ) in New Testament are

90
inevitably foundational in any quest to discover what is distinctively Christian about

discipleship. The Gospels, as it were, take Christians inside the classrooms within Jesus’

‘discipleship school’. Jesus’ public ministry was not a stand-alone performance of

ministering solo as the authoritative teacher and healer. Instead, from its outset, Jesus

intentionally gathered a group of ‘learners’ who were selected to be with him (Mark

3.16–20). In so doing, he was, at one level, doing nothing different from other rabbis or

from John the Baptist, who gathered such disciples around themselves. At another level,

because of who they are now understand Jesus to be (the Messiah of Israel, the Son of

God now risen from the dead), Christians can discern many further layers to Jesus’

intentions. For example, in choosing an inner circle of the twelve he was evoking the

history the foundational twelve tribes of Israel and thus signaling the reconstitution of

Israel around himself. He was also entrusting to them the mandate to remember his

teaching and to proclaim it ‘to the ends of the earth’ (thus in principle commissioning the

writings of the New Testament).

The call marks the beginning of discipleship, but it anticipates an ongoing

relationship. In Mark, this is very clear with the twelve where it is said of Jesus that “He

appointed twelve, so that they would be with Him and that He could send them out to

preach” (Mark 3:14). So, two reasons are given for the call to discipleship. The first, “that

they would be with Him” is a phrase that indicates discipleship in a unique way. It is in

this sense that, unlike the rabbis, discipleship with Jesus is expressed as following Him

(akoloutheo). Wenham (2007) explained that being with Jesus or following Him is a

figurative way of describing the disciples acceptance of the destiny of Jesus for

themselves and their complete commitment to his person. According to Peacock (1978, p.

91
558-561), the disciples were to share in the vicissitudes of Jesus’ itinerary life traveling

and eating with Him, and being closely connected with every phase of His life. In other

words, unlike the rabbinic form of discipleship, the disciple of Jesus was not there merely

to learn from the teacher, but to share unreservedly in the totality of His life. Mark’s

perspective on discipleship suggests that such intimacy was needed to bring about certain

results in the disciples: to have inner knowledge about God’s rule in the world, to have

insight born of their faith, to be servants of their fellow men, to be filled with love and

compassion, to have a new view about the nature of reality, and to be faithful.

However, several key components stand out if one studies the methodology of

Jesus in order to glean an effective training strategy for discipleship. In this regard, Jesus

intentionally invested time in the lives of others. In fact, the foundation of Jesus’ ministry

was relationships; specifically the training of the twelve. For three years Jesus spent

nearly every hour of the day and night with His disciples (Eims, 1978). Blackaby (2011)

explains that Jesus ate, slept, and walked the dusty roads with His band. Even as His

popularity grew, Jesus narrowed His ministry down to the apostolic company. A quick

survey of the narrative presented in the Gospels reveals that Jesus increased His time with

the disciples as His ministry progressed. Although Jesus did not forsake the multitudes,

His emphasis to train the Twelve was paramount throughout His ministry. In fact, Jesus

frequently wove His interaction with the crowds into a training tool to teach the disciples.

This was clearly seen in the feeding of the five thousand (John 6: 1-15). On this occasion,

Jesus decided to test the disciples’ faith by asking them to do what was humanly

impossible. Their prominence in this event underscores the significance of the learning

experience for them. Unveiling their faithlessness was an important facet of the

92
educational program. But this was not an isolated episode. Jesus’ every action taught and

advanced these men so that would be the bearers of the Gospel. Though Jesus did not

forsake the multitudes, His emphasis to train the Twelve was paramount throughout His

ministry. In fact, Jesus frequently wove His interaction with the crowds into a training

tool to teach the disciples. This was clearly seen in the feeding of the five thousand (John

6: 1-15). On this occasion, Jesus decided to test the disciples’ faith by asking them to do

what was humanly impossible. Their prominence in this event underscores the

significance of the learning experience for them. Unveiling their faithlessness was an

important facet of the educational program. But this was not an isolated episode. Jesus’

every action taught and advanced these men so that would be the bearers of the Gospel.

This principle, of concentrated association with a few as opposed to the masses, is

highlighted by Jesus’ selection of a smaller group within the twelve. Notably, Jesus chose

Peter, James and John to accompany Him into the sick room of Jairus’ daughter (Mark

5:37); to the Mount of Transfiguration where they beheld the Lord’s glory (Mark 9:2);

and finally to attend Jesus as He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:33).

These events demonstrate that Jesus proportioned Himself deliberately to accommodate

the necessity of training a few. . Coleman (2010) stated that the more concentrated the

size of the group being taught, the greater the opportunity for effective instruction. This

strategy seems paradoxical for the One of who was “the savior of the world (John4:42).”

Moreover, it stands in stark contrast to the conventional wisdom of many contemporary

churches. Far too many gifted pastors have diligently worked to build a thriving ministry,

then “for the sake of the ministry,” they isolate themselves from individuals. The

rationale behind this thought is to maximize a pastor’s exposure, so that the world can be

93
reached. Yet this is not what Jesus did. The Lord, who was perfectly omniscient,

understood the powerful principle of mentoring; and He did not waiver from that mission

(John6:15). Instead of seeking to impress the crowds, Jesus stayed engaged and

concentrated on just a few, so that His instructions were more effective, and His students

were better trained. Of course emanating from the teaching pattern of Jesus is the biblical

duty of pastors to train others to do the work of ministry, as outlined in Ephesians 4:12.

This necessitates focusing time and talent on fewer people in the church to prepare them.

Again, this was the model of Jesus. He deliberately invested time in His disciples, in

order to build a strong foundation of leadership for future growth. He trained the apostles

so that they could carry-on His work. That is the hallmark of discipleship – reproduction.

According to Coleman (2010), discipleship flourishes on relationship. Since the

Lord has chosen human agents as disciplers, discipleship must rest on a mutual

relationship. This is one of the areas where disciple-making is radically different from a

pure training model, where conferences and trainings are organized for those who want to

be discipled. Though these are important elements of the discipleship process, the key to

disciple-making is life-on-life relationships. The relationship provides the context for

practical application as the new believer is mentored on a regular basis. The discipleship

relationships must feature love, commitment, authenticity, vulnerability, accountability,

and intentionality with the disciples-to-be. Jesus, having called his disciples, made a

practice of spending time with them. This was the essence of his training programme

letting his disciples follow him. Knowledge of Christ was gained by association before it

was understood by explanation. Jesus opened his life to them and mentored them

(Matthew 9:9). As a result of the time Christ spent with His followers, intimate bonds

94
were forged; as evidenced by the young apostle John leaning upon Jesus as they ate (John

13:25). Imagine the depth of love that would prompt John to rest his head on the bosom

of God. Yet this was characteristic of their cherished fellowship, and the bedrock of their

relationship. “Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end

(John13:1).” Significantly, the riches of Christ’s love formed the foundation of the

apostles’ ministry, for they were commanded to love others as Jesus loved them (John.

13:34, emphasis mine). This attribute was so important that Christ labeled love as the

identifying mark of discipleship. Therefore, Coleman (2010) further explained that it was

by virtue of this fellowship that the disciples were permitted to know the mysteries of the

kingdom of God. Knowledge was gained by association before it was understood by

explanation. For Christians present purposes, however, they can note that, in gathering

disciples around him throughout his ministry, Jesus was doing two main things which

would become perennially important for his followers in generations to come. Firstly, He

was giving Christians a model in his own actions of how to be a disciple-maker and

secondly, He was allowing his first disciples in their responses towards him to become,

for Christians, a model of how they should respond to Jesus’ call and follow him too,

revealing the primary hallmark of Christian discipleship (that is, being a learner in Jesus’

school, a follower of Jesus). Mark 4 reports Jesus’ teaching about the parable of sower,

which appears to confound both the disciples and the multitudes. Jesus’ subsequent

remarks show that while His teachings appeared as riddles (Mark4:11) to the Jewish

multitudes, that ought not be the case with the disciples (Guelich, 1998). Disciples are

expected to have inner knowledge of God’s rule in the world. When Mark records the

account of Jesus stilling the storm, he has Jesus expressing surprise that the disciples did

95
not have faith (Mark 4:39-40). Jesus’ reaction shows faith to be essential for discipleship.

Jesus’ expectation of the disciples to be servants of their fellow men shows up in a few

places in Mark. He asks the disciples to feed the multitudes (Mark 6:37), and He

expected them to be able to cast out demons (Mark 9:14-19). More explicitly, He taught

them that the greatness of the disciple was service and not position (Mark 10:43-45).

Disciples are expected to have love and compassion; so Jesus rebuked the disciples for

not allowing children to be brought to Him (Mark 10:13-16). In Mark the lack of

expected faithfulness on the part of the disciples is perhaps most strongly underlined

when in Gethsemane Jesus chided them for being unable to keep watch (Mark14:37).

Therefore, the ultimate aim of disciples, as has been stated, is to be like their

master. To become like one’s master, one must hold on to the master’s teachings: “Then

Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, ‘If you continue in my word, you are

truly my disciples; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free’” (John

8:31–32). This shows that a disciple is one who is learning and obeying Jesus Christ and

is firmly established on the path of becoming like Jesus. Indeed, some of the teachings of

Jesus will conflict with cultural values and worldly standards, but the disciple is

committed to holding on to the teachings of the master he follows, no matter the cost.

Jesus said that knowing the truth would set people free. The truth is knowing the person

of Jesus as the Son of God, his teaching, and what he has done for humanity. This is what

is referred to as the gospel see Col. 1:4–6 (Lee, 2008). It is this gospel of Christ that

breaks the hard bondage of sin and sets people free (Romans 1:16–17). A disciple knows,

accepts, and obeys the truth of the gospel.

96
 The second part of a biblical theology of disciple making is the discipline of the

family. Ortberg (1997) defines a discipline as any activity I can do by direct effort that

will help me do what I cannot now do by direct effort. The Apostle Paul exhorted his

young protégé Timothy to discipline (himself) for the purpose of godliness (1Timothy

4:7). Ortberg (1997) further explains that the word Paul uses for “discipline” (or “train”

as in the ESV) is word from which we get our English word, “gymnasium”. It implies

time and effort. Spiritual disciplines are to life what calisthenics are to a game. However,

Deuteronomy stresses the importance of the parents’ role in teaching each new generation

to walk in the ways of the Lord. This included constant reminders of the story (what God

had done in Israel’s past) and of the teaching (God’s covenant promises and

commandments). Discipling means discipline, and that was part of the function of the

wider Israelite household in which individuals found their identity, security, memory,

hope, and responsibility (Deuteronomy 4:9–14).

However, the way that this is accomplished is through the family structure. God

set forth the plan in Deuteronomy 6 when he instructed the fathers to teach the Word of

God incessantly and consistently throughout the course of the day, whether by word or by

posting it on the walls of the home. Again in Ephesians 6, when the Apostle Paul is

sharing what is known as the household code, he commands fathers to bring up their

children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. The meaning of the word discipline

is not restricted to punishment; the word means to instruct by deed. The idea is that of

showing children the ways of the Lord by bringing them alongside the father. More is

caught than taught. The meaning of the word instruction is to instruct by word. So, the

ideal is seen once again as first communicated in Deuteronomy. In regard to what is

97
reviewed in the New Testament, “If any man will come after me’’ (Luke 9:23) this

supports that discipleship means discipline. The disciple is that one who has been taught

or trained by the Master, who has come with his ignorance, superstition, and sin, to find

learning, truth, and forgiveness from the Savior. Raymond (1948) points out that without

discipline Christians are not disciples, even though they profess His Name and pass for a

follower of the lowly Nazarene. In an undisciplined age when liberty and license have

replaced law and loyalty, there is greater need than ever before that the Christian be

disciplined to be His disciples. Raymond (1948) further states that discipleship requires

the discipline of conversion, wherein Christians recognize their lost estate because of

rebellion against God, and with penitence come to the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christians assent from their hearts that ‘’all we like sheep have gone astray; we have

turned everyone to his own way’’ (Isaiah 53:6), that ‘’all have sinned, and come short of

the glory of God’’ (Romans 3:23), that ‘’the Scripture hath concluded all under sin’’

(Galatians 3:22), and that we ‘’were by nature the children of wrath, even as others . . .

strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world’’

(Ephesians 2:3, 12). This discipline is difficult for the natural heart of each one, for

Christians will not humble themselves to admit their sin and shame; but it is easy for the

honest and good heart that sees itself in the light of Calvary’s Sacrifice for sin. In the

dispensation before the Cross, David, seeing himself, cried, ‘’I have sinned against the

Lord’’; to which God replied through His servant, ‘’the Lord also hath put away thy sin’’

(2 Sam. 12:13). When Peter saw himself in the light of the Lord’s presence and power, he

fell down saying, ‘’Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord’’ (Luke 5:8). A

woman wept as she stood by His feet, which she washed with her tears of repentance; and

98
she heard the Saviour’s word, ‘’Thy sins are forgiven . . . thy faith hath saved thee; go in

peace’’ (Luke 7:48, 50). The penitent Publican smote his breast in genuine sorrow for sin,

and prayed, ‘’God, be merciful to me a sinner’’ (Luke 18:13), and went home justified.

Thus it has been down the ages; the despondent, despairing of themselves, have

come to the Savior for mercy, and have been saved. ‘’Not by works of righteousness

which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us’’ (Titus 3:5). ‘’But as many

as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that

believe on his name’’ (John 1:12). According to Raymond (1948), without salvation no

sonship; without sonship, no discipleship. It is His sons whom God disciplines that they

might bring honor to His name. He wants to teach and train them, to soften and sweeten

them, to strengthen and steady them, that they may show forth the excellences of Him

who told them, ‘’Learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest

unto your souls’’ (Matthew 11:29). Without discipline Christians are not His sons; but as

His own they need the exhortation, ‘’My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord,

nor faint when thou art rebuked of him; for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and

scourgeth every son who he receiveth’’ (Hebrews 12:5, 6). This discipline at the moment

may not seem ‘’to be joyous, but (rather) grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the

peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby’’ (Hebrews

12:11).

99
 Discipleship requires the discipline of cost. The Lord’s words search deeply into

the depth of the souls of Christians, as He says, ‘’He that loveth father or mother more

than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not

worthy of me’’ (Matthew 10:37). On a later occasion He amplified that statement to

divine principle by saying, ‘’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). What can be the meaning of this strong, unsubdued standard,

to ‘’hate’’ all, even one’s own life? Christians are to love and cherish parents, brothers,

children; Christians love others more because they belong to Christ. What then, does the

Lord mean? Is it not, that all Christians are like Saul of Tarsus, truly ‘’count all things but

loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have

suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ’’ (Phil.

3:8)? Christians are to make their Lord Jesus supreme, permanent, pre-eminent in their

hearts, so that neither person nor anything shares that place in their lives. No price of

parents or loved ones, possessions or life itself, is too great for His sake. This denial of

all, including themselves, is the deepest discipline of discipleship. There are those who

are dearer to them than life itself; but they should not be dearer than the Savior. For Him

and His cause Christians have died to them and every other earthly creature or pleasure it

is Jesus only. Their Lord does not desire that they take this discipline lightly or

thoughtlessly. He gives two strong illustrations about counting the cost (Luke 14:28-33),

concluding, “So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he

cannot be my disciple.’’ Furthermore, He says to them, “Follow me” (Matthew 4:19).

100
He invites them to an open-ended journey rather than a series of tasks to “pray this” or

“do this” that intercepts each person wherever they may be on the faith spectrum.

Jesus Christ is the standard for discipleship. Disciples are identified with the

person of Jesus Christ. Their focus is to be like Christ. In Matthew 4:18–19, Jesus called

the disciples to “Come, follow me.” The disciple follows the footsteps of Jesus.

Discipleship is not just following his principles, ideas, or philosophy. It is not primarily

conceptual, but is personal (Bennett, 2001). The disciple aims at Christlikeness. The

discipleship system should lead to a transformation of the mind (Romans 8:6; 12:2), heart

(Matthew 5:8) and lifestyle (Ephesians 4:22–24) to that of Christ. Although Christ-

likeness is the ultimate goal of the disciple (1 Corinthians 11:1), God uses human agents

in this transformational work (1 Corinthians4:16–17). The human agent must have

already become a disciple, since whether for good or bad, the disciple will become like

his teacher (Luke 6:40). Thus, it is essential for every believer discipling another to

exhibit the traits of Jesus. In addition, the words follow in Matthew 4:19 and make in the

Great Commission point to a journey rather than a juncture, a process rather than a point

in time. Although some may take Jesus’ directions of discipleship as a reference to

evangelism, Talbert (2010) observes that a call to a longer journey with evangelism a first

step in his commentary on Matthew: There is an initial general statement: Make disciples.

Then there follow two dimensions of this task: baptizing them is the initial step, and

teaching them to observe everything I have commanded is the subsequent process. This is

to be done as Christians go. There is an event and a process in the making of disciples.

Disciples become disciples, make disciples and continually transform to greater Christ-

like living. The present active participles (baptizing and teaching) portray making

101
disciples as going beyond the initial moment of saying the sinner’s prayer and confessing

belief. Just as it takes an extended period of learning for apprentices to grow in their

trade, the word disciple references a lifelong looking to their Teacher for continued

growth and leading. Discipleship, as Bloomberg (2009) points out, is not limited to

evangelism; it includes training so that we are also equipping those who will be our

partners in evangelism. Peterson (2000) further explains that Jesus’ idea of a disciple

portrays those who journey beside Him, becoming ever more like Him. Peterson (2000)

quotes Friedrich Nietzsche in describing discipleship as a long obedience in the same

direction.

2.5.2 Early Church Discipleship

The second form of discipleship practiced in Christian church is called early

church discipleship. Once individuals had come to faith in Christ, how did the early

Church help them to continue walking in ‘the Way’ as the faith is described in Acts 19:9

(Michael, 2004)? How did they nurture their newborn infants? Or, to use a phrase that

Luke uses to describe Paul’s activity, how was it that they ‘strengthened the … disciples

and encouraged them to continue in the faith’ (Acts 14.22)? Significantly Luke often uses

this term ‘disciples’ in Acts to describe believers, transferring this title, first used of those

following Jesus in Galilee, to those following the now Risen Jesus in a wider variety of

places: Jerusalem ( Acts 9.26), Joppa and Caesarea (Acts 9.36), Tyre (21.4), Syrian

Antioch (Acts 11.27–29), Galatia (Acts 14.20–22), and Phrygia (Acts 18.23). Note too

Paul’s concern that they should not see themselves as disciples or ‘followers’ of Apollos

or Paul himself but only of Jesus (1 Corinthians 1.12). Much of this disciple-making

102
activity will have been done in one-to-one contexts, as individuals encouraged new or

younger believers in the faith.

After Jesus, the apostle Paul provides perhaps the best biblical model for

discipleship. Throughout his epistles, Paul depicts himself as a spiritual parent caring for

his spiritual children. He wrote to the Thessalonians, “But we were gentle among you,

like a nursing mother taking care of her own children (1 Thessalonians2:7).” This

autobiographical verse provides great insight into the heart and strategy of Paul. First, it

demonstrates his paternal solicitude for those under his care. Like Jesus, Paul established

love as the foundation of his ministry; and he vigorously communicated it in his epistles

(Galatians4:19). To the Philippians, Paul warmly wrote, “I hold you in my heart,” to the

church at Ephesus, Colossae and Thessalonica, Paul said, “I do not cease giving thanks

for you (Ephesians 1:16). To his young disciple Timothy, Paul wrote, “I long to see you

(2Timothy1:4).” Not only was love an important attribute of Paul’s direct ministry, it was

the cornerstone of his pastoral instructions. He commanded others to love. To Timothy,

Paul wrote, “The aim of our charge is love (1 Timothy1:5).” For the Philippians he

fervently prayed, “That your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all

discernment (Philippians1:9).” To the church at Corinth, Paul said that without love,

spiritual gifts are worthless. For Paul, the thrust of the gospel was to produce loving

people Of course, flowing out of Paul’s love for people was his commitment to see them

mature in the Lord. This was the theme of his life, as vividly portrayed in the book of

Acts. After returning from his first missionary journey, Paul was so burdened for the

people that he said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where

we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are (Acts15:36).” Paul did return

103
to Syria and Cilicia, “strengthening the churches (Acts15:41).” Later, he “passed

successively through the Galatian region and Phrygia, strengthening all the disciples

(Acts18:23).” Although these are known as Paul’s second and third missionary journeys,

they should be referred to as his “first and second discipling journeys (Eims, 1978).”

Despite the fact that Paul rejoiced greatly over the conversion of a soul, he never saw that

as the end product. In his letter to the Colossians, Paul wrote, “Him we proclaim, warning

everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom that we may present everyone mature in

Christ. For this I toil (Colossians1:28 – 29).” Paul clearly understood the cost of his labor.

His journeys were arduous and dangerous (2Corinthians11:16-33). Yet Paul was not

deterred by hardship; in fact, he consistently pressed on, to train men and women in

righteousness. He reminded the Ephesian elders that “for three years I did not cease to

admonish each one with tears Acts30:31).” Paul was even willing to surrender his own

personal desire to be with the Lord, in order to remain with the Philippians for their

“progress and joy in the faith (Philippian1:25).”

In the first century the leaders within the church were the eye witnesses to the life

and ministry of Jesus Christ. These eye witnesses followed the process of discipleship

that Jesus used in making them to be followers of him. The Disciples of Christ followed

the secrets to personal transformation that was taught by Christ, which if followed will

transform a church and culture. This process of following Jesus is described by Hull

(2004) in five steps: firstly, a disciple submits to a leader who teaches him to follow

Jesus, secondly, a disciple learns Jesus’ words, thirdly, a disciple learns Jesus’ way of

doing ministry, fourthly, a disciple imitates Jesus’ life and character, and lastly, a

disciple finds and teaches disciples to follow Jesus. This process of following Jesus still

104
works today if pastors and church leaders will follow the example given to the first

century disciples by Jesus Christ, our Lord. At this distance in time Christians cannot

now gauge the measure or content of this ‘individual discipling’. Yet presumably this was

happening every single day from the very first Easter Day onwards. Sometimes this

‘individual discipling’ may have become a more intentional ‘mentoring’. Thus Priscilla

and Aquila invited Apollos into their home ‘and explained the Way of God’ (Acts 18.26).

Paul too, despite his wider responsibilities, may have found time to do this: he speaks of

going ‘from house to house’ in Ephesus (Acts 20.20) and was evidently mentoring the

young Timothy by writing him two encouraging letters. Both 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy

contain strong tones of personal mentoring; see also Paul’s words to Timothy (Phil 2.19–

22). In all such discipling by individuals there will inevitably have been the three

elements as the mentor shared their Words, Wisdom, and Way. It was not just about

teaching but also about modelling; not only truths but practice and lifestyle. So Paul

spoke frequently of mimesis or ‘imitation’ as he encouraged people to imitate his way of

life. In 1 Corinthians 11.1, Paul likewise tells Timothy that he must ‘set the believers an

example for in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity’ (1 Timothy 4.11–12). In

addition, his words to the new Thessalonian believers (whom he had needed to leave after

only three weeks: Acts 17:2) gives a clear insight into what Paul would wish to see in any

such ‘individual discipling’:

like a nurse tenderly caring for her own children. So deeply do we care for you

that we are determined to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our

own selves … As you know, we dealt with each one of you like a father with his

105
 children, urging and encouraging you and pleading that you … lead a life worthy

of God … (1 Thessalonians 2:7–8, 11–12)

The Disciples of Christ led the early church as eye witnesses to the life, death, and

resurrection of Jesus Christ. They led the church through the formation of the Word of

God, the transformation of the Word, and the application of the Word. The Disciples led

the church toward spiritual maturity or discipleship. There are two significant ways in

which the Disciples led the church toward spiritual maturity. First, the Disciples led

individuals to the saving message of Jesus Christ. By sharing the message throughout the

known world, the Disciples of Christ “turned the world upside down (Acts 17:6).”

Second, the Disciples led individuals toward maturity and development of the truth. The

Disciples desired to see individuals grow spiritually as taught in Hebrews 5:11-14 and

first Peter 2:2. The Disciples led the early church in such a way that the record states,

“And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved (Acts 2:47b)”.

According to Michael (2011), the Disciples of Christ were fed by Christ for three years,

as they walked with him, but after the death and resurrection of Christ, they received the

Great Commission, which is found in Matthew 28:18-20. The commission commanded

them to do one thing: “Go.” Go out and teach the Word. Go out and make disciples. Go

out and teach them by example. The very command was to “Go.” The Great

Commission, as stated in Matthew 28:19–20, outlines important elements for the

discipling process in the local church. The process begins with disciples “going” and

winning others to Christ, baptizing them (integrating them into the local church) and

teaching them to obey Christ’s commandments (United Methodist Church, 2016). One

cycle ends when the new believer is able to make others into disciples. Another process

106
then begins with the discipled discipling others. The process is discernible in the

discipleship ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. For example, according to Matthew 4:23–

25, as Jesus “went about” (referring to preaching the gospel and winning others), he was

“teaching” and “great crowds followed him.” It is assumed that “baptizing” normally

took place as Jesus was making disciples, though the baptizing was done by the apostles

(John 3:22). Thus, it is a process of preaching, teaching, and being with the people. That

is exactly what each of the Disciples did with their lives. They went throughout the entire

known world of their day sharing the good news of the Kingdom of God. The Disciples

of Christ made disciples by feeding them the Word of God and by serving the people.

They followed the example of Jesus, the Disciple Maker. As a shepherd, Jesus fed the

disciples. As under-shepherds the Disciples taught the Word of God, which was their

primary responsibility. It is the spiritual nourishment that the flock (church) has to have

to survive. More obviously, there was ‘corporate discipling’ when believers gathered

together ‘encouraging one another’ (Hebrews 10:25). By AD 57 Christians were meeting

‘On the first day of the week … to break bread’ (Acts 20:7); so Christians can see

immediately the importance given both to Sunday worship and to the Sacrament.

Moreover, back in Acts 2, Luke had cast a vision for Christian gatherings with a fourfold

focus: the apostles’ teaching, the breaking of bread, fellowship, and prayers. All four

practices, as regular ingredients in their Sunday worship, would have been a key part in

the Church’s instinctive strategy for nurturing her young. The term ‘fellowship’

(koinonia), which means ‘sharing in common’ or ‘partnership’, should not be

spiritualized; this commitment clearly led to very practical consequences (Acts 2:45),

including care for widows (Acts 6.1). For examples of corporate prayer meetings, see

107
Acts 4:23–31and Acts 13:2 (which also included fasting). For the importance of

‘breaking of bread’, Paul’s teaching on the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 10–11.

The Disciples of Christ sought to protect the Church in many ways. With all that

was taking place in the first century, there was a clear need for protection within the

church. The church was under constant persecution and false teachings. Thus, in order to

protect the Church, the Disciples sought to protect the church through three main means.

Firstly, the Disciples protected the followers of Christ by teaching them the truth of

God’s Word, as taught in Acts 2:14-40. Secondly, the Disciples protected the followers of

Christ by praying for them daily, as taught in Acts 2:42. Thirdly, the Disciples of Christ

protected other disciples by teaching them to test the teaching and preaching of others by

examining it according to their teachings of God’s Word, as taught in Galatians 1:6-9.

Through the early church the discipleship model followed that of the leader being a

shepherd to the church. Of particular importance for the present purpose the church is the

first, a devotion to the apostles’ teaching. This reminds Christians that disciple-making in

the New Testament has an irreducible element of instruction: there are truths to be

received and practices to be learned. It also, crucially, alerts Christians to the fact that,

though they are, strictly, disciples of Jesus (not the apostles), the only way they can truly

access Jesus’ truth now is through the medium of his appointed apostles. They cannot

follow Jesus without, as it were, following them. Christians need their authoritative

testimony about the Risen Jesus to follow that same Jesus authentically today. To put it

another way, as disciples of Jesus they need both the Gospels and the Epistles (both the

words of Jesus and the words about Jesus).

108
 Furthermore, Sunday worship gatherings in the New Testament era would

inevitably have included, the following, to which Paul urges Timothy to commit himself

:‘the public reading of scripture … exhorting … preaching’ (1 Timothy 4:13). These

weekly practices were the essential bedrock for encouraging faithful discipleship. But did

this Sunday commitment to receiving he apostles’ teaching spill over onto weekdays?

Were there evening classes for the newly baptized? In particular, were new converts

given extended exposure to what Christians would call the ‘Jesus-tradition’ (Wenham,

1995)? This is entirely possible historically and would make evident sense: for how could

disciples of Jesus follow Jesus without knowing his life story or what he said? To put it

another way, they too needed not just the (emerging) content of the Epistles, but also the

(faithfully passed on) content of the Gospels. So Christians would do well to reckon

seriously with a prominence being given in the New Testament period to what they now

call ‘catechesis’ that is, deliberate and intentional instruction in the Christian faith

sustained over several months or more. Luke hints at this phenomenon when he says that

Apollos had been ‘instructed in the Way of the Lord’ (Acts 18:25) and that Theophilus,

his dedicatee, will be able to ‘know the truth concerning the things about which you have

been instructed’ (Luke 1:4). On both occasions he uses the verb kateekeo (‘to teach

orally, often by repeating’), from which the word ‘catechesis’ is derived. And was this

instruction solely focused on doctrine? No, Paul’s firm words in Ephesians 4 make it

clear that such catechesis would have involved issues of ethics, morality, and lifestyle:

‘That is not the way you learned Christ! For surely you have heard about him and were

taught in him, as truth is in Jesus. You were taught to put away your former way of life,

your old self’ see Ephesians 4.20–22 (Wright, 2010). Therefore, it remains difficult to be

109
clear about the details of disciple making in the New Testament. However, What

Christians must know is that it was remarkably successful. Regardless of the precise

details, the enterprise as a whole was evidently driven by God’s Spirit. And when

Christians ask what was their ‘secret’, or what was the real agent of the Church’s growth,

both Peter and Paul would draw attention (as Jesus himself had done in the parable of the

sower, Luke 8.11–15) to the power of God’s Word:

You have been born anew… through the living and enduring word of God …

That word is the good news that was announced to you … Like newborn infants,

long for the pure, spiritual milk (1 Peter 1:23, 25b; 2:2)

And now I commend you to God and to the message of his grace, a message that

is able to build you up … (Paul in Acts 20:32)

In the NIV translation, the word ‘spiritual’ (logikos) obscures Peter’s point here. He has

been speaking about the ‘word’ of God (logos) and now says that his readers will

continue to grow by feeding on that word, as a baby feeds on milk; a better translation

might thus be ‘the milk of God’s word’. Those closing words of Paul to the Ephesian

elders at Miletus say it all. How will the Church of God not wither but grow through the

testing years (and centuries) ahead? What will prevent ‘disciples’ from being drawn away

by ‘savage wolves’ (Acts 20:29–30)? The answer is, always, the Word of God and his

grace. However, the early Church was intentional about the training of its members in

living their whole daily lives in the imitation of Jesus. In the ancient Church, the normal

Christian formation required of all (new) church members was primarily seen as a matter

of catechesis. Catechesis was seen as a major task of Church leaders. Many of the well-

known leaders of the ancient Church set aside much time and energy for instructing new

110
believers in the faith, in spite of their many administrative tasks. Christians have many

catechetical works from the ancient Church, like the Didache (c.AD 50–150), Proof of

Apostolic Preaching by Ireneaus (c.AD 190), The Apostolic Tradition by Hippolytus,

bishop in Rome (AD 170–235), and others. People interested in the Christian faith were

first seriously questioned about their intentions, and then entered into a period of three

years of learning. Central to the formational teaching in catechesis were the Holy

Scriptures. Proper formation in church taught people how to live and what to believe, on

the basis of the Holy Scriptures.

In the ancient Church the meaning of the sacraments was taught in catechesis, not

just as a preparation for participating in those sacraments, but also to make these

sacraments an important part of the continued spiritual formation after people entered the

Church. Every celebration of the Sacrament brought to mind the material and ethics

learned during catechesis. As soon as the Church created formal Creeds, these were used

in the training of new believers. Believers had to learn the Creeds by heart and needed to

have an adequate (if limited) understanding of their content and meaning. This was

specifically taught in catechesis, but it was also repeated in the liturgy of the Church. In

each church service this reminded the believers of the basis of their faith. The Lord’s

Prayer was also part of the instruction to new believers. They would learn it by heart.

Thus they were taught how to pray, and after Baptism, during the Eucharist they would

pray this same prayer over and over again. What they learned during their time of

initiation would be repeated weekly in church for the rest of their life. The formal

catechumenate was followed by ongoing formation. For the catechumens, there was

continuity between hearing the Church’s teaching during their time of initiation in church

111
services and hearing the same teachings by the same preachers in daily Mass and weekly

Sunday worship services after their Baptism. The term catechumens means ‘learners’,

from ‘catechesis’, ‘the teaching’. To the sermon, baptism, Eucharist, ancient creeds, and

the Lord’s Prayer Christians could add other liturgical elements like the confession of

sins, the announcement of forgiveness, the readings from Holy Scripture, the members’

greeting each other with the kiss of peace, etc. Weekly repetition played an important role

in the formation of Christians in the ancient Church. The liturgy was the early Church’s

most effective manner of Christian formation for all of its members. After the formal

period of instruction, followed by Baptism, the believers were weekly taught the

Christian life through the liturgy of the Church – the verbal and visual re-enactment of all

the basic aspects of the Christian faith they had learned about. Through its liturgy and all

aspects of it, they were taught how to be true followers of Jesus Christ. This Christian

formation – discipleship training – was church-based, communal, and led by Church

leadership. It was not something separate for those interested in discipleship classes, but

something all believers were supposed to undergo, initially in formal training, and after

their Baptism through participation in the communion of the saints in the normal life of

the Church. Therefore, the discipleship process of the early church fathers, it could be

said that they served as under-shepherds of their flock. They sought to lead by example.

They sought to make Disciples of Christ by leading, feeding, and protecting the sheep.

They followed the biblical steps of discipleship, which are formation, transformation, and

application. There are two things that stand out concerning the discipleship process of the

early church fathers. They wrote letters to their followers and they lived a life in

obedience to Christ.

112
 In addition, the early church fathers wrote letters to churches and believers

personally. These writings all have one central issue among them. The issue that was

facing the Christian Church more than anything else was persecution (Gonzalez, 1984).

There are the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Bishop Polycarp, Hermas,

and others. However, the issue of concern was ministering to hurting people. It is clear

that the early church fathers fed the people the Word of God and were encouraging them

to continue in the faith. This form of discipleship is seen as a under-shepherd tending to

his flock by caring for them as a leader, feeder, and protector. Gonzalez (1984) further

explains that when looking at the lives of the early church fathers, it is clear they were

obedient to the call on their lives, a call to be followers of Jesus Christ. It is true that

church fathers like Ignatius of Antioch and Bishop Polycarp, who both made great

contributions to the cause of Christ by willingly laying down their lives, as did so many

during those days. These men made great statements concerning their obedience to

Christ. Ignatius of Antioch stated, “Now I begin to be a disciple...Let fire and cross,

flocks of beast, broken bones, dismemberment…come upon me, so long as I attain to

Jesus Christ” (Packer, 2000). Also the Bishop of Smyrna, Polycarp, stated, “For eighty-

six years I have served him, and he has done me no evil. How could I curse my king, who

saved me? (Gonzalez, 1984)” These men and others painted the picture of discipleship in

the era of the early church fathers. Therefore, the most obvious feature of Jesus and

Paul’s ministry is that they closely associated themselves with individuals and small

groups. For Jesus, it was His band of twelve. In similar fashion, Paul mentored

individuals through relationships. Men like: John Mark, Silas, Titus, Timothy, Tychicus,

Onesimus, Aristarchus, Justus, Epaphras, Luke, and Demas, were all transformed because

113
of Paul’s willingness to invest in their lives. So why is the church not emulating this

strategy? Coleman (2010) questions that If Jesus, the Son of God, found it necessary to

stay almost constantly with his few disciples for three years, and even one of them was

lost, how can a church expect to do this job on an assembly line basis a few days out of

the year? However, part of the problem resides in the misunderstanding of the term

“discipleship.” Unfortunately, within the Christian community “discipleship” has become

synonymous with “teaching.” Although teaching is a crucial component of the process,

biblical discipleship as modeled by Jesus and Paul, constitutes a deeper interaction

between the mentor and the disciple. As a result, the church has almost exclusively

relegated the duty of discipling to the corporate arena. In contrast, the discipleship is

accomplished through preaching, small groups, Sunday school classes and seminars.

While these methods are important, and should be included in church strategy, they were

not the primary means that Jesus and Paul used to mature men. Consequently, Jesus was

engaged in the lives of His followers; and was able to tailor unique lessons for each

disciple. Firstly, to cultivate faith, Jesus asked Philip, “Where are we to buy bread, so that

these people may eat (John6:5)?” Secondly, to remind James and John that suffering is

the prelude to glory; He asks, “Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink

(Matthew20:23)?” Thirdly, to admonish and correct Peter’s impetuousness, Jesus said,

Get behind me, Satan (Matthew16:23).” These are but a few of the illustrations that

highlight the benefit of the immediacy of discipleship. The old adage “Ministry demands

proximity” is a necessary and powerful ingredient of spiritual mentoring. “The impact of

proximity upon a teacher’s success with students should be obvious. It provides an

effective means of assessing how well they are truly learning their lessons (Mitchell,

114
2010).” Jesus and Paul understood and demonstrated that discipleship is enhanced

greatly through proximity-oriented relationships.

2.5.3 Orthodox Tradition Discipleship

The third form of discipleship practiced in Christian church is called Orthodox

tradition discipleship. Discipleship as a concept is not very familiar in today’s Orthodox

communities, outside monastic circles. Yet it has not always been like that. In the first

three centuries of Christian history, one could trace uninterrupted lines of spiritual

genealogy all the way back to the apostles of Christ. Besides being the natural way in

which the apostolic kerygma was transmitted and character was formed, such authority

relationships were very important, particularly at the times of persecution that dominated

that period, when converts to the Christian faith were often asked to pay the supreme

price for their religious decision. The situation changed radically after the Edict of Milan

(AD 313), when it suddenly became fashionable for people to be Christian. This

substantially ended the disciple-making reflexes inherited from apostolic times. Yet this

tradition did not disappear completely, but was perpetuated among the Desert Fathers and

Mothers, who, at least initially, withdrew in monastic communities, especially in

Palestine and Egypt, as a reaction to the accommodation of Christian communities to the

ways of the secular world. In these early monastic communities, the Christian formation

of new disciples was the duty of more mature followers of Christ (abbas and ammas),

much as had happened in Christian communities in previous centuries. It was a model

rooted in mystical vision and strengthened by an emphasis on ascetic practices, aimed at

crucifying the passions of the flesh. One may ask what happened to the Christian

formation of those who continued to live in society. It is interesting that, as the news

115
about the wisdom of the desert monastics reached larger Christian communities living in

the world, some Christians started visiting the desert monastic communities, in search of

models and sources of spiritual enrichment. This, of course, supplemented the influence

of committed bishops and priests, who often paid a high price for speaking openly against

those who were following the ways of the world. This dual model of Christian

discipleship dominated most of the rest of Orthodox history. In time, monastic

communities became more and more influential, so that they may rightly say that

discipleship in Orthodoxy is dominated by the monastic model.

A key theological concept for the Orthodox understanding and practice of

discipleship is that of theosis, which sadly is often misunderstood as a claim that human

beings can be deified, can become God. This is to misunderstand theosis, a powerful

concept which draws on a number of biblical passages (2Peter1:4).It helps them to

understand that as they become more open to God, they become recipients of the life of

God and begin to reflect the glory of God more faithfully. Theosis is not about a change

of their essence but rather about our becoming more fully alive, more human as humanity

was intended to be, because they have allowed God’s life to fill and eventually

overwhelm them. Discipleship takes them along this road until eventually the (human)

mirror is no longer seen, but only the reflected glory of God. The limits of this text force

us to jump over centuries of significant Orthodox history in order to arrive at the present

time. The mystical and ascetical model of Christian discipleship promoted by the Eastern

Fathers is still the predominant one in Orthodoxy today. If their suggestion is true, one

may rightly ask how this monastic vision of Christian spirituality could still respond to

the needs of Orthodox believers living in secular environments. It is in response to such

116
needs that the Institute for Orthodox Christian Studies in Cambridge has created ‘The

Way’, a course of adult catechism similar to the Alpha course. Yet most Orthodox

communities in the majority Orthodox countries have little interest in such attempts,

being dominated by nostalgia for the times when they had a dominant position in society.

Nevertheless, as secularism progresses, Orthodox believers will be forced to face the

challenge of re-imagining Christian discipleship in the new context, in the light of their

tradition of spiritual formation.

Furthermore, the early Copts of Orthodox churches were known for their inflamed

desire to witness to Christ everywhere, in Egypt as well as abroad, regardless of the

suffering they usually expected to undergo. History recorded the ages of suffering for

faith in Egypt under the Roman Empire, which culminated under Diocletian in AD 284.

The names are innumerable, but the church keeps their memory, celebrates their feasts

annually, and builds churches after the names of some of them. Considering a few

examples of those true disciples who witnessed in Egypt or abroad, whose ministry was

influential: Firstly, in the Roman army there were Coptic officers and soldiers who

witnessed to Christ among their pagan colleagues, in Egypt or abroad, and many gave up

their lives joyfully. They refused to worship before idols so they were beheaded or killed

after severe torture. Some Coptic merchants and sailors witnessed to the Lord through

their trips, and passed the Coptic culture and arts on to many countries in Europe.

Secondly, in Switzerland, in AD 285, a Theban legion arrived, led by St Maurice from

Upper Egypt, and he was martyred there for refusing to offer sacrifices to the idols. His

statue stands today in one of the public squares of the city of St Moritz. All the legion

were martyred with him for the same reason. St Verina, who accompanied the legion with

117
others to serve them, after serving the community there, suffered martyrdom. There is a

statue for her with a comb and a water jar in her hand referring to her service there. His

three friends – a legionary Felix, his sister Regula, and Exupernatius – hid themselves,

and eventually could reach the lake of Zurich, where they baptized converts, until the

ruler heard about them and they were beheaded. They are the patron saints of Zurich, and

with their heads in hands are the subject of the shield of the city of Zurich. A similar

story is recounted about St Victor, the hero of the town of Solothurn, whose relics were

transferred to Geneva in the fifth century. Thirdly, in the British Isles as well, a Coptic

missionary arrived a long time before St Augustine of Canterbury arrived in AD 579. In

Africa, Ethiopia and the Sudan accepted Christianity through Alexandrian preaching. The

Copts had their influence, not only on religion, but also on culture, arts, and all other

aspects of life. At present the Coptic Orthodox Church continues its mission witnessing

to the Lord. Many churches have been founded abroad, almost in every part of the world.

These churches have their active ministry witnessing to the Lord in those places. In

Africa, for instance, they have about 65 churches, three monasteries, two or three

hospitals, four schools, and four vocational training centers. These churches and

institutions serve the whole country. They also have many churches in Asia, in Australia,

in almost every country within Europe, in England, in North America, in South America,

and in Canada.

118
 Additionally, in Orthodox traditional, first, discipleship was done through

education. Alexandrian religious thought spread all over the world through the famous

Catechetical School of Alexandria, the oldest in the world, founded by St Mark himself.

Its fame and influence reached the whole Christian world. Christian principles and dogma

were taught through this school, and the works of its great deans are still the trustworthy

source of biblical teaching. Among those were Athenagoras, Pantanaeus, Clement of

Alexandria, Didymus, and Origen. They attracted leaders from the East and West to be

trained by the Coptic theologians. Those deans of the school also made trips abroad

guided by the Spirit to preach the word. St Clement visited Italy and Greece, and during

persecution he went to Palestine and Syria to teach there. Origen visited Rome during the

pontificate of Zephyrinus and transferred the Alexandrian theological thought to it. He

also was summoned by the emperor’s mother to go to Antioch. He visited Greece and

also established his school in Palestine. Pantaenus undertook preaching and educational

activities in India and in Asia (Tadros, 1993 p.294). In the first three Ecumenical

Councils – Nicaea in AD 325, Constantinople in AD 381, and Ephesus in AD 431 – the

fathers of the Coptic Church of Alexandria played a prominent role witnessed to by the

whole world for defending the Christian faith on the ecumenical level. Among the great

church leaders and theologians is St Athanasius the Great, the 20th Patriarch of the See of

St Mark, who in Nicaea in AD 235 formulated the Creed which all churches still adopt.

St Cyril is another example of a long chain of Coptic great figures who influenced the

history of Christianity. Second, discipleship was done through monasticism. The

Orthodox Church had a leading role in spreading the monastic life in all its forms and

systems. Biographies were written of some pioneers of asceticism, such as St Anthony,

119
the father of all monks, whose biography St Athanasius wrote, as well as St Bachomius,

the father of the cenobite system of monasticism, St Macarius the Great, and St Paul, the

first anchorite in the world. Their influence, teachings and writings, way of life,

simplicity, spirituality, and asceticism extended all over the world, and were the basis for

the monastic movement everywhere. Pilgrims from East and West visited Egypt and

settled among the monks and afterwards wrote about them, like St Jerome, John Cassian,

and Melenia the Elder. Moreover, many leaders of asceticism outside Egypt started their

monastic life under the guidance of those Egyptian pioneers, such as St Eugin. St Basil

the Great, Archbishop of Caesaria of Cappadocia, the founder and organizer of the

monastic movement in Asia Minor, visited Egypt around AD 357 and adopted the

monastic style of life of the desert fathers of Egypt. His rule is followed by the Eastern

Orthodox Churches. St Jerome also came to Egypt and left details of his experiences in

his letters. The monastic orders of Egypt were adopted by Benedict the father of Western

monasticism, who founded the Benedictine order in the sixth century on the model of St

Bachomius. Actually, countless pilgrims visited the desert fathers to emulate their

spiritual and disciplined way of life. At present, the Coptic Orthodox Church has many

monasteries all over Egypt, with a large number of monks and nuns who follow the same

way of life of their fathers. Monasticism today is not confined to worship for monks and

nuns have many other activities and even run projects that serve the community

providing high-quality products with competitive prices like agricultural products, small

handcrafts, and animal products.

120
 The Orthodox traditional way of doing evangelism, with the increasing

immigration movement since the mid-1960s, enabled a large number of Copts

immigrated to various countries abroad. The patriarch H. H. Pope Kyrillos VI (Cyril)

dedicated a great deal of effort to shepherding them, with his successor H. H. late Pope

Shenouda III taking care of them more deeply. He established churches and ordained

priests for them in the countries of immigration. These churches and the Copts abroad

have always proved to be a good witness to the Orthodox faith through their way of life

and ministry. Many, through their example of life, joined the Coptic Church. They

establish good relations with other churches and state institutions in those countries, and

have common activities and meeting with other churches, with Russian churches, Greek,

Armenian, American, Syrian, Catholic, and evangelical churches. Furthermore, bearing

the cross has always been the portion of the Coptic Church. Nevertheless, the church was

and still is a true live gospel witnessing to the truth, to its bridegroom, through its living

Orthodox faith, its pious evangelical life, and its bearing the cross joyfully. The Coptic

Church in Egypt is at present facing the same challenge previously experienced in the

early centuries of Christianity, that is, persecution for bearing the name “Christian”. Over

the last six years the suffering of Copts has increased, as hundreds have been martyred

and hundreds injured. Nevertheless, they always prove to be true disciples, bearing the

cross joyfully. Everybody wonders how these martyrs refused to forsake faith or pretend

to be non-Christians to escape death, for the murderers asked them to be Muslims to

escape death but they refused, preferring to die as Christians rather than to live and

forsake their Lord! Everybody wonders how the families of those martyrs rejoiced for

having a martyr for faith in their family. Not to mention the injured, whose sufferings

121
continue for a long time, if not for their whole life. The most wonderful thing that

transforms many is how those suffering Copts and everyone in the church pray for those

who persecute and murder them that the Lord may forgive them and change them. This is

the true love toward everybody, even enemies, love that transforms and changes lives

with the transforming power of the Spirit. This is the cross that the Lord mentioned,

saying, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross

and follow Me” (Matthew 16:24). “And he who does not take his cross and follow after

Me is not worthy of Me” (Matthew 10:38). To the Copts particularly, “It has been

granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for his sake”

(Phil. 1:29). Through the church’s endurance many are transformed, as one of the early

church fathers, contemplating on the words of the Lord, “Go your way; behold, I send

you out as lambs among wolves” (Luke 10:3), stated: when the wolves devoured the

lambs they themselves became lambs. History repeats itself: when the disciples had been

persecuted they rejoiced that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name

(Acts 5:41). Copts today do the same with courage, endurance, rejoicing, and hope. So

even when witnessing to the Lord is not possible through preaching in the present world

– where fundamentalist movements reign disguised under various religious names –

witnessing is accomplished through bearing the cross with pleasure. This is much better

than words, because it allows others to see how Christ makes them love even the enemies

who kill the bodies but cannot touch the souls, and how they lay all their hope in him.

However, Copts also have ministry of the word – through church meetings, Sunday

schools, seminaries, and theological institutes all over Egypt and abroad. Also, Coptic

television channels take part in mission through theological programmes, sermons, and

122
liturgy, which may be watched by anybody, even out of curiosity. Here the Holy Spirit

can work within them to know the truth and be transformed.

Commenting on Orthodox traditional way of discipleship, Serapion (2016) of the

Coptic Diocese of Los Angeles stated on the official site of the diocese and in one of his

sermons stated that the Coptic Orthodox Church is not merely a school involved in

research work and teaching dogma, but also an institution that worships God and serves

mankind. It works for the renewal of this world, and hopefully awaits for the world to

come. The Coptic Orthodox Church serves the community as a whole through the

services it provides for everybody regardless of religion or affiliation, for the church is

the mother of everyone. The church establishes hospitals, schools, clinics, and food

product projects, providing the best services and the best products to the whole

community, without distinction. For this is the commandment of our Lord, to do works of

charity and care, and whatever works we do are considered done to him personally,

besides the fact that we will be judged according to our works (Matthew 25:31–46). For

this purpose He says, “I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit,

and that your fruit should remain” (John 15:16). This double mission of the church is

expressed by the Coptic Orthodox late bishop Samuel (1971) in a Muslim-Christian

Conference held in Kordoba in September 1972:

Our mission, both Moslems and Christians, is to seek diligently and seriously with

a feeling of responsibility before God and history to search into the challenges

facing man at present from spiritual, psychological, social, and economic aspects,

for this influences the whole personality and integrity of man and of the society as

a whole. Religion has a duty to present to the new generations such faith that

123
 liberates the souls and nations and at the same time be a means of implanting

spiritual values so that these values become influential in the life of individuals,

nations, and the whole world ... the crisis of the present age is that development

and technology achieved in the recent years without similar spiritual progress

made humans forget that they have a spirit, to the extent that some people thought

that material is a god who can solve all problems and introduce solutions! Such

unbalanced progress could not realize happiness for man, but rather increased

man’s concerns and problem.

In Egypt and abroad the Coptic Church is known for serving the community. In Africa,

for instance, there is the active ministry of our Bishop for South Africa, H. G. Bishop

Antonius Morkos. He very recently inaugurated a complex in Uganda comprising a

church, a service building, a clinic, a residence building for volunteers working there, and

an orphanage. These services are usually provided to all Africans without distinction. A

similarly great project was established in Kenya many years ago by H. G. Bishop Bolos

(Paul), with a hospital for which he brought physicians from Egypt. The project is

running well and is appreciated by the state officials. Such is the practical discipleship

that transforms lives. A Christian is like a leaven that leavens the whole world or the light

that shines before the whole world, as the Lord commanded us: “Let your light so shine

before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matt.

5:16). Briefly, we are required to be true children of God without fault and to shine as

lights in the world, holding fast the word of life (Phil. 2:15, 16).

124
 “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine ... for in doing this you will save both

yourself and those who hear you” (1 Timothy 4:16). So Orthodox Christians are required

to take heed to themselves, how they behave, and how they work for their own salvation.

Then take heed to the doctrine to hand down sound teaching based on the holy scripture

and tradition, because those who hear the word may be influenced and follow it and be

saved, if receiving the sound teaching. Is there any conflict between discipleship that

transforms and biblical teaching? Does teaching Bible and dogma contradict social work

and extending love to the whole world? Both are required: to teach and to extend love

and serve others. In the Coptic Orthodox Church: “Teaching is not mere formality, nor

ministry a mere position. Religion is love transmitted from one heart to other hearts, and

faith handed down from one generation to other generations. It is the kingdom of God

spreading and growing (Samuel, 1972 p.88).” However, such questions face the Coptic

Church now, amidst the call for the unity of the church. Christian orthodox are aware that

it is the Lord’s will that they all be one, but this does not mean that they merge into other

churches and lose their identity and faith. They respect the doctrines of all churches, but

they are not ready to surrender for any reason their doctrines and their teaching, which

they have received from the early fathers who received them from the Lord himself. They

are a traditional church and they pride themselves in this. They kept to the line from the

early church up till the present and unto the end of ages. This does not mean they have no

love or are narrow-minded. On the contrary, they are faithful to their Lord, to his

teaching, which is handed down to us by the holy inspiration in the Bible through his

disciples and apostles. The church is wise enough to remove any deviation from the

original faith, and keep its children well informed of the pure teaching that fathers kept

125
by their blood throughout ages. Many of their holy fathers suffered or were martyred to

keep their faith and hand it down pure to their children, some for defending faith, some

for holding to their chastity, and some for refusing to deny their Lord or worship before

idols. These are great examples whose blood and suffering Christian Orthodox cannot

ignore or forget, for the blood of the martyrs is the seed of faith. They feel it is their

responsibility to keep this faith unto the second coming of the Lord. As Metropolitan

Serapion (2016) of the Diocese of Los Angeles says, “The Coptic Orthodox Church is

well known as a conservative church, especially in dogmas and doctrines. At the same

time, it progresses, not by embracing new doctrines or new ‘articles of faith’, but by

explaining the same faith ‘once given to the saints’ in a contemporary language.” And

also, “Dogmas interpret the whole philosophy of the church through repeated practice of

faith through the holy tradition (Holy Scriptures, worship, behavior, and preaching). The

church experiences the Crucified and Risen Christ, truth, and love at the same time

(Samuel, 2005).” This, however, does not mean that they make enmity with other

churches, for they also are an ecumenical church, knowing how to approach others, how

to respect them, and how to find points of agreement with them even concerning dogma.

The Coptic Church is an active member and one of the founders of the World Council of

Churches (WCC), of the Middle East Council of Churches, of the All Africa Council of

Churches, and of many other councils. The Coptic Church actively participates in

conferences, meetings, and dialogues held with other churches to reach an agreement

concerning any controversial points. Even with other religions, in Egypt Christian

orthodox have good relations with the Muslim leadership, they exchange visits on certain

occasions, and they hold common activities among youths on both sides. The Coptic

126
Church leadership behaves very prudently regarding the sorrowful calamities undergone

by the church members, such as murder and declared persecution from fundamentalist

Muslims.

Finally, can anybody imagine that the church makes disciples of all nations

without teaching them about Christ and his teachings, about how they can be his

disciples, and how they also can make disciples of others? Should they only say to the

others, “Jesus loves you,” “He saved you,” “Be sure He has forgiven all your sins,” etc.?

Do they by this serve them or bring them to the true salvation and eternal life? Can they

leave them to do whatever they want depending on the free salvation that the Lord

accomplished for them, or is their duty to teach them how they can benefit from this free

salvation and from the deserts of the precious love shed for them? And what about the

new trends that appears, like atheism and even some strange ideas within Christianity? Is

it not their responsibility to guide them to the right path, or should they adopt their views

and turn from their genuine faith? So, it is clear enough that there is a connection

between discipleship, baptism, and teaching, as the Lord commanded, “Go make

disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of

the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.” These

are the elements Christians should follow to fulfill their call for transformation. This is

what Peter the apostle did on the day of Pentecost. He preached to the multitude about

Christ. And when they heard his words, they were cut to the heart, and asked Peter what

they should do. And St Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized

in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the

Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:37, 38). So they were taught that there is baptism, there is the holy

127
Trinity, there is repentance, there is remission of sins, and there are gifts of the Holy

Spirit. Their lives were transformed by accepting these rules and following them. They

remembered how the early holy fathers resisted and held to the genuine faith and fought

and died for it, how ecumenical councils were held to discuss certain points of the faith,

in order to hand down the sound doctrines to the following generations. It will be

disloyalty to forsake such faith and replace it with new changeable concepts and trends,

which may be erroneous; until step-by-step they find themselves alienated from the

genuine faith of the early church. Experience proves that such new trends and new views

and interpretations led only to more schism and division among the one church. That is

why they are divided and there are hundreds of sects and churches. The ideal solution is

to have all churches search the doctrines set by the early church as recorded in the

teaching of the apostles who received directly from the Lord, and of the apostolic fathers

and the first ecumenical councils that clarified the doctrines of faith, up to the year 451,

the date of the first schism. This would lead to the unity of the body of Christ that

Orthodox believers all aspire to. Orthodox believers should bear in mind that

transforming the world around them and making disciples to Christ is not a fight to bring

others to their faith, or to bring members of other churches to their church, or to claim

that they alone will win the kingdom of heaven or have the sound doctrine. No, the right

thing is to seek the truth and the sound teaching in the original sources dating back to the

days of the Lord and his disciples and the early fathers. Furthermore, Orthodox believers

are sure of God’s absolute justice and mercy, and with this hope we serve and pray for

everybody and for ourselves that the Lord may have mercy upon us and forgive our

trespasses, and give us salvation.

128
2.5.4 Roman Catholic Discipleship

The forth form of discipleship practiced in Christian church is called Roman

Catholic discipleship. In the light of the emphasis currently placed by Pope Francis on

‘missionary discipleship’ it is appropriate to review very briefly some of the background

documents and related Catholic theology emerging at the Second Vatican Council and

more recently. The Prologue to the Catechism of the Catholic Church begins with three

simple sections: first, God calls men and women to seek him, to know him, to love him

with all his strength; second, He invites them to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted

children; Third, all Christ’s faithful are called to hand the Gospel on by professing the

faith, by living it in fraternal sharing, and by celebrating it in liturgy and prayer. This

embryonic expression of holistic Christian discipleship and disciple making, however,

finds scant reflection in the body of the Catechism itself, where the word ‘disciple’ is

almost exclusively used as a historical reference to the first followers of Jesus. However,

if we turn instead to the documents of the Second VaticanCouncil itself (which predate

the Catechism) we find something more interesting. Gaudium et Spes (p.1) famously

begins with the words,

The joys and the hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the men of this age,

especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these are the joys and

hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing

genuinely human fails to raise an echo in their hearts.

It set the agenda for followers (disciples) of Christ in a renewed, outward looking, world-

serving Catholic Church. Gaudium et Spes has been regarded as one of the most far-

reaching of the Council documents, dealing as it does in Part 2 with so many aspects of

129
human existence – economics, family life, armaments and peace, culture, and

international development. Having discussed each of these in detail the document

concludes:

Mindful of the words of the Lord: By this everyone will know that you are my

disciples, if you have love for one another’ (John 13.35), Christians can yearn for

nothing more ardently than to serve the (people) of this age with an ever growing

generosity and success ... In this way (people) all over the world will awaken to a

lively hope.

Here discipleship is clearly seen firstly, as related to the whole of life and secondly, a life

of witness which naturally ‘awakens’ others. Ten years later Paul VI published his call to

Catholic evangelization Evangelii Nuntiandi (p.13), in which he firmly linked gathering

in Jesus’ with the missional vocation, saying, ‘after Jesus’ resurrection, the little flock

gathers together in Jesus’ name in order to seek together the Kingdom, build it up and

live it. Paul VI’s teaching on the missional character of Christian discipleship had a

strong influence on John Paul II, who in 1990 published his own Redemptoris Missio

(p.18), which has an even stronger focus on proclamation being linked to a life of

discipleship. The church, it proclaims, has a special connection with the kingdom of God

and of Christ, which she has the mission of announcing and inaugurating among all

peoples. The story reaches its fruition, for our purposes here, with the 2013 publication of

Pope Francis’s Evangelii Gaudium (p. 120), which speaks of the Church as ‘a community

of missionary disciples’. He goes on: ‘we can no longer think of ourselves as disciples

and missionaries but always together as “missionary disciples. In this document the life

of discipleship and the vocation of disciple-making are finally locked together as one.

130
Beyond the official documents of the Church, Catholic missiologists such as Stephen

Bevans, Robert Schroeder, Sherry Weddell, Therese D’Orsa,Mark Francis, and Anthony

Gittins have increasingly focused on the missional impact of holistic discipleship, of lives

lived to the glory of God through the power of the Holy Spirit. Stephen Bevans in

particular has reflected on the understanding of missionary disciples and how this relates

to the cultivation of a missional spirituality.

The developments that would lead to the Roman Catholic Church were truly

placed in order by the rule of one man, Constantine. This Roman emperor would fight

under the Supreme God, Jesus Christ, but would still function as the High Priest of

paganism within the Roman Empire. However, he would command his soldiers to

worship the Supreme God, who the Christians worship on the first day of the week. It

was in the year 325 that Constantine would call the First Ecumenical Council at Nicea

(Gonzalez, 1984). It was here that Creed of Caesarea was taken as the basis for the

adopted “Creed of Nicaea in 325, which reads.

We believe on God the Father All-sovereign, maker of all things visible and

invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father,

only-begotten, that is of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light,

true God of true God, begotten not made, of one in substance with the Father,

through whom all things were made, things in heaven and things on the earth;

who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and became

man, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended in the heavens, is coming to

judge living and dead (Bettenson & Maunder, 1999).

131
With creeds like this and others that would follow it, an official theology was developing.

This official theology would eventually lead to the development of the Roman Catholic

Church. It was through the Roman Catholic Church that discipleship took a new

meaning. This new meaning would change the Christian faith for centuries to come.

There are three elements that changed the biblical approach to discipleship. First, the

obedience to Christ seen in both the Disciples of Christ and the Early Church Fathers was

no longer required. The persecution of the Church was now over. The Church had

become one with the state. The high cost of following Christ was now over, if you

followed the Church’s program. Second, the absolutes of God’s Word would be altered

throughout the centuries. This would lead to compromise and heresies within the church.

The teachings of God’s Word would only be given to men and women in the Latin

language, no matter where the church was located. This would lead to a time in Christian

History and World History known as the Dark Ages. It was a time of political darkness,

but more importantly, spiritual darkness. During this time there was very little in the way

of discipleship or spiritual development outside of the Priest and Monks. Third, the

Church became obsessed with sacraments. The Roman Catholic Church believes that it is

through the seven sacraments that God’s grace is channeled into the believer’s life. These

seven sacraments are: baptism, confirmation, the Mass, holy orders, penance, matrimony,

and extreme unction (Carson, 1974).It is through this style of programs and beliefs that

the Church and its members lost their close relationship to the church leaders and with

Christ. It was based on these three elements of the Roman Catholic Church that

individuals begin calling for a reformation of the Church. There were leaders like John

Wycliffe and John Huss who called for such reformation and return to God’s Word. It

132
was Wycliffe that called for the Scriptures to take their rightful placed above the Pope. It

was he who spoke against heresies such as transubstantiation and private confession. He

was the first to begin an English translation of the Holy Scriptures (Packer, 2000).It was

John Huss who would stand up for the Scriptures and give his life. However, it would be

around a century later that Martin Luther would read the writings of Huss and eventually

write his own Ninety-Five Theses, which would spark a reformation that would impact

the entire world and put biblical discipleship back on a right path.

2.6 The role of Discipleship in Christian church

2.6.1 Discipleship for Christian maturity

In the New Testament church, followers of Jesus Christ considered themselves to

be a part of a local body of believers the church and they understood their role within that

body to be as a disciple. However, there is an “identity crisis” in contemporary

Christianity that is forestalling spiritual growth in the lives of believers and is eroding the

health of the local church. This is not a contemporary crisis; Bonhoeffer (1959) warned

that the church had evolved a fatal conception of the double standard a maximum and

minimum standard of Christian obedience. Hull (1990 p.33) describes the problem that

lingers even today: The common teaching is that a Christian is someone who by faith

accepts Jesus as Savior, receives eternal life, and is safe and secure in the family of God;

a disciple is a more serious Christian active in the practice of the spiritual disciplines and

engaged in evangelizing and training others. But I must be blunt: I find no biblical

evidence for the separation of Christian from disciple. Although there is only anecdotal

evidence to substantiate Hull’s (1990) claim, the proof is in the lack of power in the lives

of most believers and the general effectiveness of the church in making an impact on

133
society and accomplishing the Great Commission. The longer that the Christians

perpetuate the myth that disciple is a secondary identity reserved for the elite, the more

they will continue to produce “bar-code Christians” who are following aftera “non-

discipleship Christianity (pp.41-44).”Everyone who expresses faith in Jesus Christ as

Lord and Savior becomes a disciple and, by implication, begins a lifelong, Spirit-led

journey of growth and formation in the likeness of the One whom they follow. In

Galatians 4:19, Paul writes: “My dear children for whom I am again in the pains of

childbirth until Christ is formed in you, how I wish I could be with you now.” Here, Paul

expresses a longing to see spiritual formation occur in the lives of the Galatian disciples

that their discipleship would produce changed lives and provide evidence that

transformation was occurring. Spiritual formation is the sanctification or transformation

that happens during the process of intentional discipleship. While some would argue that

spiritual formation is the process of growth in Christ, or that it is a systematic inculcation

of disciplines, I would suggest that formation is the result of discipleship (Hull, 1990

p.35). Through discipleship, followers of Jesus Christ are formed into an ever clearer

image of him.

According to the Baptist Faith and Message (2000), the nature of the church is

described as an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by

covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of

Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them

by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. The local

autonomous church is the model that is affirmed in Scripture. According to Hobbs

(1996), the word ‘church’ never refers to organized Christianity or a group of churches

134
but to either the local body of Christ or the church universal. The above statement also

affirms the mission of the local church: to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Acts

1:8 is the force behind the evangelistic thrust of the church and Matthew 28:18–20

describes the work that is to be done by the church in the fulfillment of her mission:

making disciples. The local church is composed of disciples who should be investing

themselves in the lives of other disciples. The process of following Jesus discipleship is

the curriculum of this Christ-focused school for making disciples. In Acts 2:42–47, this

passage serves as a curricular outline for the priorities of both the local body and the

individual disciple after baptism (Acts 2:41): continuing evangelism, teaching,

fellowship, worship, and ministry. Instead of consigning discipleship to a program of the

church, we should be magnifying its missional role. The health and strength of a local

church hinges on her effectiveness in making disciples. Unfortunately, according to

Ogden (2003), there are some who believe that the church is irrelevant to the discipleship

process. However, unless local churches make committed disciples, all the evangelism,

teaching, fellowship, worship, and ministry will be empty and powerless.

According to Maynard (2001 p.12), the church has responsibility to teach, exhort,

and encourage, rebuke and discipline one another. The task of teaching disciples in the

church occurs on two levels: scripturally and experientially. Teaching the Bible to

believers . . . provides the foundation for making disciples and for nurturing them. The

church also provides experiences that nourish, influence, and develop individuals within

the fellowship of a church. Teaching provides the disciple with a foundation for a biblical

worldview through both formal and informal experiences, through both study and

application. Essential characteristics of the authentic disciple are developed through the

135
task of teaching. There is nothing more important to the development of one’s life in

Christ than consistent study of and obedience to the Word of God. The Baptist Faith and

Message (2000) affirms that all Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the

focus of divine revelation. The Bible guides the relationship with Him and instructs

Christians in how they are to live out their faith in Him. Similarly, the Bible informs the

proper conduct of their relationships with one another. Christians learn about the meaning

of love and its application through scriptural instruction. The Bible also teaches about

kingdom responsibilities, the ministry gifts, and the work God has planned and prepared

for his disciples.

In growing the disciples for ministry, Jesus traveled about from one town and

village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were

with him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary

(called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; Joanna the wife of Cuza,

the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were

helping to support them out of their own means. (Luke 8:1–3). Jesus lived and traveled

with his small group. Luke states that two groups traveled with Jesus the twelve men and

an assortment of women (Luke names three women among many others). The focus of

these two groups was upon Jesus. He was the center of their life together their primary

model and mentor. He not only brought the men together and the women together

separately, he also brought the men’s group and the women’s group together. Their two

small groups and the one larger entourage was a model of community, because they were

with a model leader (Weldon, 1994).These communities gathered around Jesus were not

models because of their perfection, power or charisma, but because of their curiosity,

136
ordinariness, brokenness, diversity and willingness to stay together and follow Jesus.

These were voluntary communities. They shared every aspect of life, but had only Jesus

in common. Jesus’ personal presence and teaching moved them to live together in ways

not prevalent to the world in which they lived. Jesus called the women to live in dignity

and self-awareness. He showed the men how to treat the women with respect. The

women were free to support the men financially (Luke 8:3). The men were free to learn

new ways of relating to the women. Both groups were called to experience life from

God’s viewpoint, as part of the kingdom.

The motley nature and heritage of the Twelve was foundational to the unique

development of the group’s character. Jesus was the source of the group’s character. He

defined the essential quality and nature and pattern of the group. Jesus’ presence formed

the life of the group. While the Twelve often wondered at his teaching and disagreed with

his values, Jesus’ charismatic presence and intimate relationship with Abba God was too

powerful to ignore or to suppress. Prior (1978) has argued that Jesus’ simple assertion,

“Follow me,” was a powerful illustration of his personal presence and power. What the

Twelve found initially attractive in Jesus were his unusual healing and persuasive

powers, his popularity and success. Jesus’ personal authority moved every dimension of

their group life. Dunn (1975 p.68-92) has reflected that Jesus’ personal charisma, which

grounded the authority of his teaching, must have been overwhelmingly apparent. People

acted differently in his presence. In every way Jesus was the formative character,

personality, mind, heart and will of the small group of twelve. This present and

charismatic character of Jesus was an interventional call to a new kind of life together.

Jesus beckoned the Twelve into a new purpose and new relationships, with new values,

137
new perspectives and new character. He welcomed the Twelve to himself to walk with

him, watch him, imitate him, learn with him and take on his character. He became their

future, their center of hope, their model of faith and their source of love. His community

with “the Father” became their community with “the Father.” His community with each

of them became their community with one another.

When Jesus first encountered the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well, his disciples had

gone into the town to buy food (John 4:8) and had left him alone to rest. Toward the end

of this life-changing conversation, his disciples returned and were surprised to find him

talking with a woman (John 4:27). Murray (1987 p.62) explained that Jesus offered a

shocking model of openness and intimacy with a woman in a culture in which it was

forbidden to give a woman any greeting, where one should not talk with a woman on the

street, not even with his own wife, and certainly not with somebody else’s wife, because

of the gossip of men. The Twelve must have felt the powerful rush on their values and

feelings as they watched Jesus do and say things that were far outside the normal

boundaries of their cultural and religious expression. Yet in this particular instance with

the Samaritan woman, they kept silent, watching in wonderment, not asking the questions

pounding in their minds, “‘What do you want?’ or ‘Why are you talking with her?’ ”

(John 4:27). Jesus’ model of life created real tensions and conflict for the gathered

disciples. Jesus beckoned the Twelve to follow him into foreign territory the realm of

God. Jesus invited them to experience new ways and roles for men and women. He

showed them new patterns of human relationships and new perspectives on human

institutions. He led them to places they had never been and feared to go. He asked them

to see people in ways that they had not yet envisioned, and that might cost them to do so.

138
Jesus’ call to “Follow me” was a call to leave old values and measurements of character

behind and to risk the exploration of new values, the embrace of new persons and the

venture into new actions.

The first place Mark records that Jesus took the original small group of four Galilean

fisherman was to Capernaum to encounter a demon-possessed man and experience an

exorcism (Mark 1:21–28). This first adventure had to be an experience of cultural,

psychological and theological shock. They were in a known place but confronted by a

wild man who addressed their leader as Messiah, the Holy One of God. They watched a

confrontation between good and evil and an exorcism, the power of good over evil. They

were astounded enough to declare the whole scene a new teaching. In affirmation of this

kind of dramatic new experience, Ladd (1974 p.107), suggested that Jesus drew his

disciples into a bond of personal loyalty as distinguished from the typical rabbinic pattern

of drawing disciples to be bound together by Torah. The rabbis bound their disciples not

to themselves but to the Torah; Jesus bound his disciples to himself. The rabbis offered

something outside themselves; Jesus offered himself alone…. This relationship had no

parallel in Judaism. Even though Jesus was a strong and charismatic leader, he was

willing to live with the tension, clash and struggle of the wills of the Twelve. The Twelve

had ideas, opinions, values and wills of their own (Matthew 19). Jesus confronted their

value systems but did not demand their absolute loyalty to his new values, thinking and

action. He allowed them freedom for skepticism, disagreement, cynicism and fear. He

allowed them to express their real humanity. But he did not leave them to this raw

humanity. He called them to something beyond themselves. He gave them direction into

a new way of life, a new dimension of life. He called them to change. He became more

139
than their teacher and Lord; he became their friend and brother, and gave them direct

access to God. As they watched and listened and imitated, the Twelve began to

understand Jesus as their new and ultimate model of humanity and godly life.

While Mark’s text reflects only some of the tension between Jesus and the Twelve,

Matthew’s text expresses several successive and intensive situations of conflict: views on

divorce (Matthew 19:10), on the value of children (Matthew 19:13), on wealth and

blessing (Matthew 19:25) and on power and position (Matthew 19:24). Matthew seems to

portray the small disciple group in a constant state of values confrontation, where neither

Jesus nor the disciples were afraid to speak their mind. Jesus’ model and teaching were

disturbing to the Twelve, and they were not afraid to express their frustration and

anxieties. They did not seem to be intimidated by the charismatic strength or godlikeness

of Jesus. And Jesus did not seem to demand blind acquiescence to his leadership or will.

He seemed instead to desire and encourage openness and honesty from the rugged

Twelve. He was willing to enter into the group’s struggle of wills and not give in to the

human temptation to suppress the disciples’ flawed values. So the sparks flew between

Jesus and the Twelve as they were challenged by the one who “taught as one who had

authority” (Matthew 7:29). His authority was not controlling or oppressive, but

impressive and expressive. He expected the group to change through spiritual rebirth and

character redevelopment. Jesus did not demand mindless imitation. He was interested in

the willing transformation of their characters. He would not control, manipulate,

intimidate or terrorize their personhood or relationships. He was not a group tyrant. He

was an assertive but gentle model. He was confident of his relationship and destiny with

140
Abba God, and this confident modeling drew the curiosity of the Twelve into the

wonderment of their own experimentation and imitation of Jesus’ lifestyle.

The group’s willingness to risk imitating the model of Jesus is somewhat humorously

recounted in Matthew. The disciples were in a boat without Jesus, being tossed around in

choppy seas. As Jesus walked out on the water during the darkest period of the night, the

disciples were “terrified” because they thought that they had seen a ghost. Jesus’ calming

words, “Take courage! It is I. Don’t be afraid,” moved Peter to desire to go to where

Jesus was, saying, “Lord, if it’s you, … tell me to come to you on the water” (Matthew

14:22–32). Jesus’ positive invitation encouraged Peter out of the boat and onto the water,

where he walked a few feet and then sank. His fear had overcome his desire to imitate. So

it was with all the modeling Jesus did. The disciples could imitate him up to the point

where their courage ran out and their fear took over. However, Jesus was there to meet

them and catch them in their terrorized state. When the Holy Spirit came to them, their

power to imitate, expand upon and extrapolate what Jesus did come into full bloom. But

this fuller experience of the Spirit was after their beginning discipleship group

experiences. In all things the real model of Jesus became their primary vision for how to

live life. This model was made clear to them as they journeyed together as the small

group of twelve. They discovered that being in the small group community was essential

to the modeling and learning process. If Jesus was the model leader for making the realm

of God visible on earth, the Twelve together with him were to become the model

community for making the realm of God even more visible. Jesus not only called the

motley Twelve to be with him, he also called them to one another. They were a diverse

small group of men who had never before traveled and lived together. Their model of life

141
together was full of conflict and tension. In assessing Matthew 5:1–2, Guelich (1982

p.52-53) pointed out that the Gospel of Matthew is more descriptive of the character

development of the disciples than is either Mark or Luke. This is particularly evident in

the calling of the four fishermen (Matthew 4:18–22) followed by the blessing texts,

which are about the character of people who enter the realm of heaven (Matthew 5:3–12).

The implication is that the gathered disciples are the arena in which God will work and

move, where their character and model of life together will be transformed. Jesus’ model

was a constant confrontation to their more limited and narrow view of life. The Twelve,

in their anxiety during the storm, were confronted with a tired and sleeping Jesus who

challenged their fear (Mark 4:35–41). The disciples, taking up the ministry of Jesus, were

amazed that they too could drive out demons and heal people (Mark 6:7–13). They were

confounded with Jesus’ expectation that they should feed five thousand people with no

money and little food (Mark 6:30–44). The hard-rowing, closed-minded Twelve were

terrified by the sight of Jesus walking on water (Mark 6:45–52). In fact, Mark draws a

connection between the Twelve’s amazement of Jesus walking over the water and their

inability to understand the meaning of his feeding five thousand with five loaves and two

fish. Their understanding of reality and their participation in the realm of God with Jesus

was confused, incomplete, narrow and myopic. Their model of life together was anything

but a clear signal of harmonious and trusting human community. Rather, they modeled

real and chaotic human relationships and attitudes. The poverty of their model

community was also visible in their thinking and learning. The more concrete-thinking

Twelve missed the cosmic meaning of Jesus’ teachings about spirituality. (Mark 8:14–

21). The suffering and dying Jesus rebuked the messianic myopia of the Twelve (Mark

142
8:31–9:1). Day by day, event by event, confrontation by confrontation, turn by turn,

teaching by teaching, the life of the Twelve was drawn into the new and astounding

reality of Jesus and the realm of God. The Twelve were a model group with abundant

flaws. Jesus drew them into character re-formation in spite of their ordinariness and

stubbornness.

Their group was a model of real and ordinary persons, among an ordinary and diverse

people. Their model leader led them into becoming a model group, not because they were

perfect, but because Jesus was present with them. Their model life was accessible,

touchable and understandable to surrounding groups. The fact that such a wonderful

leader would walk among such ordinary people was a dramatic model of the nature of

this realm of God and an encouragement to all human groups. This model of character

development this process of discipleship was a small group process. Jesus did not isolate

his encounters with twelve individual disciples. There are few accounts of Jesus focusing

one on one with individual disciples. The experiences and healings, the arguments and

confrontations, were in the presence of the group of disciples. Jesus’ call to discipleship

was a call to be part of a small group. Their character formation took place in community,

in their life together (Mark 8:27–38).Peter’s emotional declaration that Jesus was the

Christ happened during a conversation with the Twelve together. This is followed by the

most dramatic confrontation recorded between Jesus and Peter, with Jesus saying, “Get

behind me, Satan.” It is helpful to note the group dynamics of this encounter: while Peter

took Jesus aside to rebuke him in private, Jesus rebuked Peter in front of everyone

(Matthew 16:21–28). The group’s awareness of all the real issues of the realm of God

was imperative. Even Jesus’ suffering and death had to be shared and discussed by the

143
whole group. Their model had to be immersed (baptized) into the painful reality. They

had to be an example of a group that was not allowed to avoid conflict, deny death or

trivialize trauma. If they were not going to be perfect (and they could not be), then they

had to be fully human and openly flawed: vulnerable, fearful, obnoxious and defensive.

What a great model these twelve motley men were as they journeyed with Jesus. They

were real; they were human.

Jesus ministered to and with the Twelve in order to minister to the multitude. The

realm of God was present for the Twelve in order for them to be present as the realm of

God among other groups of people. The Twelve were a small ministry group among

several circles of people who hungered for, contributed to or inhibited their ministry.

Prior (1983 pp.28-35) has suggested that the ministry and community of Jesus be

explained as concentric circles of persons who lived in increasing levels of intimacy with

him. Moving from the inner circle to the outer circle, Prior (1983) has targeted six circles

of community: John, the beloved; Peter, James and John, Mary, Martha and Lazarus; the

Twelve; the Seventy; those who believed in him; and the crowds. Jesus lived among

these interlocking circles as the model and representative emissary of the realm of God.

The groups gathered around him became models of life together centered in the new

values of this “near” realm. They modeled life together for several other groups who

observed Jesus and the disciples. Many of these outside groups looked to the inner groups

as the plumbline of Jesus’ call to repent and become part of the realm of God. Some of

these other groups were the ever-present crowd, the women, the counter ministry groups,

Jesus’ relatives, the disciples of John the Baptist and the little children.

144
 The ever-present group around the Twelve was the crowd or multitude. Jesus’

charismatic presence, power and authority attracted people of all kinds, from all places

(Mark 1:22). With Jesus as the crowd-pleaser, the Twelve were often among them as

observers, critics and, occasionally, reluctant servants. They were sometimes confined

inside a home because whole neighborhoods gathered around, blocking their way out

(Mark 1:33). When Jesus and the Twelve looked for retreat and solace, the crowd would

do everything within their power to find them (Mark 6:30–44). The more Jesus healed,

the more other people pushed in toward the Twelve to be healed (Mark 3:10). So Jesus

and the disciples would often avoid the crowd and quietly leave an area (Mark 1:38).The

crowd functioned persistently as the ambivalent arena in which the Twelve could observe

and learn. What Jesus said to the greater numbers in parables, he explained privately to

them (Mark 4:10). Mark especially accents the secrecy of Jesus’ teaching about the full

implications of the realm of God. The realm was to be given to the Twelve, but hidden

from the crowd. The Twelve were to become the living model so the crowd could see

visible evidence of the realm of God. For example, the parabolic teaching suggested that

the realm of God was a reality for the Twelve, but could be (and often would be) missed

by the multitude. An implication of the parable of the soils is that the Twelve were the

good soil those who heard the word, accepted it and produced a crop (Mark 4:11–20).

They were the deeply cultivated model in the midst of a shallow and weedy people. The

process of community with Jesus was a shifting away from the rocky and hardened places

of abused human patterns.

145
 Life with Jesus enabled the Twelve to experience being and working in the reality

(realm) of God. The Twelve with Jesus were God’s kingdom come into being even in the

midst of the earth’s kingdoms. In describing how Jesus taught the Twelve to pray, Luke

implies that God’s realm will come where Jesus is in the midst of specially gathered

human groups. The increased activity of group prayer was therefore in growing

recognition of God’s present realm and an increasing awareness of the people’s hunger

and God’s desire to meet that hunger (Luke 11:1–12).Jesus’ relationship with Abba was

the realm in their presence. With Abba he formed the disciples into a community and a

family (Mark 3:35) to be the realm for one another as well as for others. “Whoever does

the will of God” is in the family with Jesus. The group with Jesus is within near range of

God’s influence and power. Out of the crowd and into the group came the hurting

individuals to whom Jesus ministered. The crowd ignored them, but Jesus with the group

invested in them. The disciples watched him deal with each person, family, village,

system, power, institution and region. They watched and learned the ministries of

exorcism, healing and forgiveness. Jesus practiced most ministry in their presence (Mark

9:14–29).Ultimately, it was the crowd’s condemnation of Jesus that precipitated the

crucifixion (Mark 15:13) of the once popular leader. In this the crowd was manipulated

by the religious and political enemies of Jesus. Further, the crowd pressures became so

great that the remaining eleven disciples deserted Jesus and went into hiding. The crowd

will never be the arena in which the realm of God is seen. The crowd will not be the

arena where Jesus transforms people. Only the small group is where Jesus’ “power is

made perfect in weakness” (2 Corinthians 12:9).

146
 Many of the individuals Jesus observed (Mark 12:41–44), touched and healed (Mark

5:30–33) were women. In doing so he became a wonderful personal model of the realm’s

male humanity. His model of maleness demanded a shift of the Twelve’s sexual value

systems. Jesus was their model of the good man who shared the good news that men were

invited to be different in the realm of God. Jesus, the man, in the midst of an all-male

small group, provided new ways for men to think and act in relationship with women

(Mark 10:1–11). In such a dramatic shift of male values, Matthew described the

disciples’ reaction to Jesus’ teaching on divorce: “If this is the situation between a

husband and wife, it is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10).Not only was Jesus willing

to encounter the ordinary woman in her poverty and pain, but he was willing to risk the

possible condemnation of inferred sexual misconduct in personal encounters with women

(Mk 14:1–9). John’s anti-gnostic Gospel text is more sensually expressive of such an

encounter: “she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair” (John 12:1–3).

Was there any faster way to get word out to the whole world than for Jesus to model the

sexually liberating implications of the good news with the women? Following Jesus’

arrest, Scripture’s focus on the attending presence of the male group of twelve shifted to a

focus on the women’s group (Mark 15:40–41). Between the time the disciples deserted

Jesus and when they were confronted by him after the resurrection, Mark suddenly and

dramatically introduces the presence of the group of women who had followed him and

cared for his needs. They stayed with Jesus through his crucifixion, death, burial and

resurrection. These women were the first to share the reality of the resurrection with the

eleven men who had deserted Jesus. The remaining eleven men were confronted by the

perseverance and faithfulness of the women’s group. The men learned much about the

147
passion, suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus from the women because the women

stayed close by through the dark days. When they refused to believe the women’s report,

the resurrected Jesus rebuked them fortheir stubborn refusal to believe those who had

seen him after he had risen (Mark 16:14). It is clear that the men’s group did not come

through the experience of the Passion Week as faithfully and loyally to Jesus as did the

women’s group.

Like Jesus, John was the charismatic and directional leader of a group of disciples

(Mark 1:1–9). Bruce (1988 pp.1-10) argued that many of Jesus’ disciples were first

disciples of John the Baptist. But unlike John’s group, the Twelve were more interactive

with the ministry of Jesus. They grew from watching the ministry into participating in the

ministry. While John’s group seemed to be oriented toward a separate wilderness and

ascetic lifestyle and ministry, where the crowds went out to them to be baptized in the

Jordan River, the Twelve traveled to where the people lived and ministered to persons in

the presence of their neighbors, families and friends. The Twelve were more relaxed and

spontaneous in their group life, while John’s group practiced careful disciplines of fasting

and baptism. The Twelve had Jesus in their midst as the present realm, while John’s

group was proclaiming preparation for the coming realm. While both groups experienced

the loss of their charismatic leaders, the eleven were sustained beyond that death into a

resurrection and redeemed and renewed group life. Perhaps the most striking and

important point of contrast was that the eleven continued as a reconstituted and expanded

group after Jesus’ death and resurrection. In this special way, the ongoing life of the

group was a resurrected life, a life out of death, a life out of brokenness and desertion.

The life of the new Twelve after Jesus’ resurrection was a new life, a new group

148
relationship, a new group process, a new group beginning, a new shared understanding of

ministry. This transformation of the new Twelve can be compared to Mark’s last

reflection about John’s discipleship group: “John’s disciples came and took his body and

laid it in a tomb” (Mark 6:29). The stark ending of John’s life and group ministry must be

contrasted to Mark’s jubilant descriptions of the resurrection and ascension: You are

looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the

place where they laid him…. ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see

him just as he told you.’ … He was taken up to heaven and he sat at the right hand of

God…. Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with

them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it (Mark 16:6–7, 19–20).The

group whose life is centered in the resurrected Christ does not have a dismal ending, but

is in the constant state of a new beginning.

Mark records two encounters between Jesus and little children (Mark 9:33–37). In

both cases, the Twelve are compared to the little children and found lacking. These

encounters reveal two of the disciples’ great misunderstandings about the nature of God’s

realm firstly, their need to decide which of them was the greatest next to Jesus, and

secondly, their need to control the focus and agenda of Jesus’ ministry. Both

confrontations around the children were loaded with major values differences between

Jesus and the Twelve. The first encounter was precipitated out of the Twelve’s intra

group conflict. Jesus took aside one child to be an example of the kind of mutuality and

hospitality the group should practice toward each other. Their welcoming of the child was

equivalent to their willingness to welcome Jesus and the kind of welcome the disciples

should have for one another. Jesus compared himself to the child to emphasize his

149
weakness and desire to be the servant of the Twelve. The implication was that they

should seek to serve one another and give up their need to control or outrank one another.

In Jesus’ group, positioning was not to be part of the heavenly value system.

The second encounter had to do with the desire of the Twelve to control Jesus’

ministry agenda and to be an exclusive group. This encounter is found in the textual

context of Jesus’ teaching on sexual and monetary values in the realm of God. These

were two very difficult value shifts for the Twelve to understand. From the perspective of

the Hebrew adult male value system, women and children were not high priorities, but

money and power were. Jesus turned the values of money, sex and power upside-down

for the Twelve by giving women and children more value than money and just as much

power as men. Suggesting that the parallel concerns of business, marriage and

government are money, sex and power, Foster (1985) has accented their ethical and

social dimensions. While Foster (1985) does not fully explore the interpersonal

implications of these three minefields, he has suggested such unresolved values are the

sources of human abuse behind most social and ethical problems. Where the issues of

money, sex and power are so greatly covered and avoided, deep and intimate Christian

community is unattainable. Where confessional prayer and interpersonal disclosure and

dialogue could release many from the imprisonment of abusive patterns of business,

marriage and government, the lack of confrontation on such key values does not provide

the freedom to experience true human community. The children, like the women, were

part of the poor and disenfranchised. By rebuking the Twelve and investing in the

blessing of the children, Jesus was saying “No” to the exclusive and controlling male

orientation of the group. They were not to be an exclusive male club, but an inclusive,

150
gathering ministry group who embraced women and children as valuable members of the

realm, even more important than themselves, and just as important as Jesus.

The one man Jesus encountered whom the disciples may have considered most

eligible for entry into their group and the realm was rich and righteous. But contrary

again to the Twelve’s understanding of the prerequisites for group membership, Jesus

made it hard for this rich young leader to join the group. When the ideal recruit went

away sad, the Twelve were astounded and asked one another, “Who then can be saved?”

(Mark 10:17–26). Who could possibly have the right credentials to join God’s select

group? According to Jesus, the little children had the right stuff to join the group. The

Twelve needed to learn how to welcome them rather than work at keeping them out.

Those who considered themselves most eligible to join the Twelve would be the last to

follow, while those seemingly least likely to join should be the first to be welcomed

(Mark 10:31). It was a miracle and a wonder to see this group of thirteen men traveling

throughout the Judean countryside surrounded by hundreds of women and children

getting a substantial amount of Jesus’ attention and being affirmed that they were every

bit as important as the men.

The most unusual short-term small group in which Jesus participated was with Elijah

and Moses on a high mountain while alone with the core group of three disciples, Peter,

James and John (Mark 9:2). This wilderness expedition, comprised of the inner core

group, implied an intimate experience not common to all the members of the larger

disciples’ group. Jesus was willing to risk the divisive potential of taking three away from

the Twelve to experience together a unique event. Many would argue that this could have

been a disastrous leadership miscalculation. When a cohesive group is subdivided in

151
experience and connectivity with the leader, the whole group is often thrown off balance.

Group cohesion is a factor of mutual trust in a small group. If members of the same group

are subdivided and led into diverse experiences, the subgroups are likely to become

distrustful of one another. The inner group is perceived to have more influence with the

leader and the outer group is perceived as having less power (Johnson and Johnson, 1991

p.374).The key questions here are: What was the purpose and implication of Jesus’ desire

and action to subdivide his band of twelve on this specific occasion? What was the

purpose of identification with or relationship between the transfigured three and the

ordinary three on the mountain?

Jesus’ group appearance with Moses and Elijah could be understood as both historical

and eschatological. Moses, the one through whom God gave the Law, and Elijah, the key

representative of the prophets, were both historical figures among the people of God.

Both left the face of the earth rather mysteriously (Deuteronomy 34:5–8). The mystery of

Moses’ death is held in the words, “God buried him in Moab … but to this day no one

knows where his grave is. Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet

his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone.” Elijah’s earthly end was even more

dramatic and mysterious: “suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared, … and

Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.” Both were taken by God in the prime of

physical health. Neither died typical or visible human deaths. At this small group summit

Jesus met and identified with two dead men who were visibly present and obviously

alive. He experienced these brief moments of human community with the historical

leadership of the people of God as they were transfigured together. They were talking

together. They were brought together from two different realms, the heavenly and the

152
earthly. This transfigured group was a model of how the earthly and ordinary was quickly

(instantaneously) accessible to and in community with the extraordinary and eternal

people of God. Jesus was showing the core group of three that their small group

community was not limited to this earthly existence, but was in community with heaven

forever. Theirs was not just a group until death do us part, but a community beyond

death, an eternal community of the people of God, into which Jesus had called them to

live together. He was also showing the three that their ministry in community would have

the impact of Moses, Elijah and Jesus together. The portals of heaven’s power would be

theirs as a group.

The three-on-three confrontation was frightening, but transforming. The core group of

disciples had been reminded that their earthly community with Jesus was connected to an

eternal community with him. Peter’s way of dealing with the eternal community was to

try to secure it as a historical and ongoing event. He wanted to erect three shelters to

house and remember the three heavenly beings who had visited here. But Peter missed

the long-term implications. The three disciples were being given a glimpse of the eternal

community and ministry together of Moses, Elijah and Jesus. They too were participating

and sharing in the community and ministry of the Law and Prophets through the eternal

humanity of Jesus. What was in order here was not a celebration and remembrance of the

past, but an ongoing participation with Jesus to be the community of God on earth as it is

in heaven. They were to live risk-filled lives of faith together in community “down the

mountain,” not build shelters and become cloistered on the mountain. Theirs was to be a

faith and ministry group down among the people with Jesus in their midst. This

awareness of the immediate presence of eternal community with Moses, Elijah and Jesus

153
would be a source of encouragement for the disciples throughout their own ongoing

ministry, suffering, death and resurrection. As Jesus told them, “the Son of Man must

suffer much and be rejected…. Elijah has come, and they have done to him everything

they wished” (Mark 9:12–13). The suffering and success of Moses, Elijah and Jesus was

to be brought together in one group through Jesus who was leading the three disciples to

share in this historical and eternal community of those who have been persecuted and

rejected by the political and religious powers of their day. The heavenly three were a sign

and model for the earthly three to remember and follow. And the whole community of

heaven was present when Jesus was with them. Jesus brought the whole community of

heaven to earth.

Another implication of this intergroup experience was the passing on of the historical

mantles of Moses, Elijah and Jesus. At both death events of Moses and Elijah others

inherited their ministry (Deuteronomy 34:9). Both Joshua and Elisha are given the spirit

and the ministry of their mentors. The three disciples were on the mountain to inherit the

historical and eternal ministry of the transfigured trio. This ongoing ministry of the small

group was transferred through Jesus alone. He was the earthly three’s connection to the

eternal community. But this mantle was not being passed from one to one. The “powerful

and awesome” deeds of Moses and Elijah were reflected in the prophetic and historic

ministry of Jesus, a community ministry being passed to a community of disciples, three

through one, one to three, three to twelve, twelve to one hundred twenty and on to

thousands after the day of Pentecost. The power of the historical and heavenly

community of God was to become the powerful ministry of the apostolic community on

earth. The three were the inner circle of the apostolic community to share their

154
experience of the transforming and eternal power of Jesus with the ever-widening circles

of the new prophetic communities to be established after the resurrection.As they were

coming down the mountain, Jesus gave them orders not to tell anyone what they had seen

until the Son of Man had risen from the dead (Mark 9:9). The mountain experience of the

three was to be shared with the wider community after they had experienced the

resurrection. Like the fifty in the company of prophets who journeyed with Elijah and

Elisha, the other nine disciples (and the many more) who traveled with Jesus watched his

special relationship with the three, heard about the mountaintop experience, learned about

the eternal community of the people of God, and began to participate in that inner

community with Jesus after the resurrection. In this way the intimate experience of the

three unfolded into the intimate experience of the many after the resurrection.

According to Foster (1985),Jesus risked this more intimate relationship with the inner

group of three not to make them an elite above the Twelve, but to make them an elect for

the Twelve and for the many. The experience of the three (and then of the Twelve) has

beckoned the many, not just during their earthly lives, but for subsequent generations of

groups of the people of God. Just as Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha were not to be

an elite above the leaders and prophets of God, so the three with Jesus were to invite all

the people of God into an intimate community of heaven on earth, to become partners in

the new community of priests and prophets after the resurrection and Pentecost. The

mountaintop three shared their intimate community with the inner core of three, who in

turn would pass their community experience with Jesus to the greater community of the

Twelve and “the many.” While small groups have an earthly existence, in Christ they

155
take on the mantle of being God’s voice and ministry on earth wherever two or three

gather. The intimate presence of heaven is passed from one group to another.

Foster (1985) further explained that every new and growing small group needs

models of good leaders and good groups. These models may be in the group or known by

the group. The chief individual model is usually a designated leader who guides the

group in their life together. There may also be spiritual models after whom the

individuals in the group pattern their lives. Sometimes the group’s leadership model and

spiritual model are the same person. Groups should be formed with the modeling

paradigm in mind. Modeling persons are those with small group knowledge, experience

and wisdom. If the group has no such leadership model, the members may not be able to

get in touch with Christ as their chief model. Such groups have little sense of destiny and

direction. New groups or less mature groups are at a vulnerable place of imitation.

Charisma without maturity can be a dangerous thing for a leader of such a group. Such

leaders will sway immature groups; for better or worse they will become the model that

the group imitates. Charisma without maturity can lead to codependent, abusive or

addictive behavior. The model leader can lead the group in the wrong direction. This is

why it is very important that small group leaders are selected and appointed with

discernment and training. The charisma of a misguided leader can harm a group and its

individual members for years to come. The wrong leader can inoculate a potentially

wonderful group against being in a small group at all. An important role for the modeling

leader is to teach and show the group how to have a good group experience. Natural

charisma is a helpful attraction to catch the group’s attention and confidence at the

beginning. However, charisma by itself is not enough. This is one reason pastors often

156
fail in their attempts to lead groups. Many pastors function solely as charismatic

preachers and teachers. But without group experience and skill, charisma is not enough to

give a group a strong sense of direction. As we will discover in the chapter on leadership,

a good group leader knows how to use charisma to model a good group experience.

Energy and humor are two important ingredients in the leader’s charismatic exercising of

directional modeling. Eventually the model of the leader should shift to the incarnate

model of the group as a whole. The mark of a good small group leader is the ability to

transfer power and responsibility to the group. The fruit of the Spirit is for the group to

take on the character and model of Christ as their leader, releasing dependency upon their

original model and leader. A good leader knows when and how to wean the group from

the substance of his or her charisma and strength (Foster (1985). Eventually the group

must begin to look to Christ as their chief model. For some groups this can happen during

the first few meetings, while for other groups this transition may take one to two years.

Model leaders must be prepared to lead new groups for enough time to help them through

this transition of dependence. The healthy modeling process includes leading the group

through these various stages of dependency and into interdependency.

In addition, the small group that models a vital life in Christ usually lives in stark

contrast to other religious or service groups around it(Foster (1985). This contrast can be

an invitation to a more full and complete human life as the realm of God and/or it can

become a threat to the ongoing viability of how other groups function. Often there is a

movement by the existing system to eliminate such a group. This movement to eradicate

the healthier Christ-centered koinonia experience is a natural outcome of a confrontation

of two worlds, the realm of God and the realm of human control. Principalities, systems,

157
groups, clubs, organizations, governments or religious institutions which do not want to

lose influence or control may see the faithful small group as a challenge to their kind of

life. Even pastors have been known to stamp out small groups which do not buckle under

their more controlling leadership. A healthy Christian small group is a threat to any group

that does not want to face the reality of their need to dominate and control. There is a

sense in which each faithful small group becomes a counterculture if they are willing to

allow Christ to be the focus of their formation and life together. Small groups become

cultures to themselves, for better or for worse. The dark side of this is becoming ingrown

and insensitive to the wider world and becoming self-preserving at all costs. The group

can become a “we” against a “they.” Jesus worked hard at modeling the positive side of

this new culture. A small group should become a culture for the benefit of others, not a

vulture for the picking apart of others. The group’s life in the Spirit of Christ should be a

movement toward becoming a band of servant leaders. This sense of destiny and

direction needs to be held up as a target and destination for the entire life of the group.

Groups can become self-satisfied, protective and self-secure. Ministry and mission

beyond the group should be an ever-possible and ever-probable fulfillment of their life

together. Christ desires to take each group on a journey, to travel together into the places

and among the peoples where individuals alone would not dare venture. Small groups are

exodus bands who are moving from the control of life’s negative systems to be servants

of freedom with the present Christ. Group leaders need to understand the fullness of a

healthy small group model: from discipleship into mission, from safety into risk, from old

ways into new ways. This is the model of Christ among the disciples. The group’s

journey inward to Christ and one another must become a journey outward into the world.

158
2.6.2 Discipleship for effective Church Ministry

According to Maynard (2001 p.1), the task of ministry is defined as a loving

response in Jesus’ name to the needs” of all persons, and “involves the church in specific

actions to meet human needs in the name of Christ. The importance of ministry in the

discipleship process cannot be understated; this is the practical expression of the

disciple’s obedience to Christ’s commands and an imitation of his example. The New

Testament example of church-based ministry accentuates the effectiveness of corporate

efforts as well as the role of the church in providing ministry opportunities to growing

disciples (Acts 6:1-7). Ministry is an outgrowth of two of the characteristics of the

authentic disciple and an expression of the third. Love for Christ is perfected by the

intentional development of one’s life in Christ. That love flows into mutual relationships

in the body and into the disciple’s relationships with those outside the church. The

kingdom labor of ministry is born at the nexus of love for Christ, obedience to His

commands, and compassion for people. One of my criticisms of a compartmentalized

discipleship approach presenting discipleship as a church program rather than a church

process is that important church ministries are neglected in the evaluation of discipleship

strategies. Ministries that play an essential role in spiritual formation include worship

services, formed around the proclamation of the Word and the celebration of the

ordinances, deacon ministry, mission teams, evangelism programs and community

outreach. Every ministry program of the local church provides growth experiences that

should be included an integrative discipleship process. By doing so, discipleship can be

delivered through the normal “rhythm” of church life rather than creating new programs.

Leaders begin to see the discipleship potential in their ministries and can use that

159
understanding to plan in conjunction with other leaders (Maynard, 2001). As a result,

church health improves along with individual growth.

They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the

breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and

miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had

everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he

had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke

bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and

enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who

were being saved. (Acts 2:42–47). The practice of small group disciplines provided a

strong identity and base from which the ecclesia (Church) could do ministry and venture

into mission. In fact, the extended practice of the disciplines became the ministry. Luke’s

description of the ministry of these early Christian small groups included selling their

possessions and goods and giving to anyone who had need, meeting daily, breaking bread

and eating together, and praising God (Acts 2:45–47). They met together as a base for

ministry as well as to provide a supportive environment for the apostles to do many

wonders and miraculous signs (Acts 2:43). Dunn (1975 p.163) has described this early

community as living in an atmosphere of the miraculous. Did the ecclesia live within this

atmosphere of signs and wonders or did the signs and wonders live within the atmosphere

of the ecclesia? Were the apostles empowered directly by the Holy Spirit as individuals

or through the communities of prayer and faith? In either case, there was an intimate and

symbiotic relationship between the disciplines of the ecclesia and the apostolic ministry

with signs and wonders. The apostles not only initiated the new small communities, they

160
also received the discernment, affirmation and commissioning of these local ecclesia.

Luke describes several occasions in which the ecclesia practiced discernment, prayer,

laying on of hands and sending of apostles to do specific ministry (Acts 13:3). It seemed

to be the action of the whole group that gave the apostles direction and intention in their

mission and ministry. The apostles intentionally tried to guide these communities into

early ownership and mutuality of Christ’s ministry. As Banks (1980 pp.175-179) has

pointed out, the apostles participated in the ministry of the community and the

community participated in the ministry of the apostles. Apostle and community are

indissolubly tied together from beginning to end … a parent-adult child rather than

parent-infant child relationship … recognizing their self-sufficiency in the Spirit …

seeking their voluntary decisions. The apostles and the ecclesia worked together as

partners in ministry.

Banks (1980 pp.171-173) has further argued that apostolic authority was not

exercised through formal structures but through personal and familial relationships, not

… in an authoritarian manner. The apostle was part of a family for whom Jesus was

friend and brother and God was Abba (loving and caring Father). Apostolic authority

flowed out of personal relationships with God, with Jesus and with those gathered in their

Spirit. The apostles ministered out of community as well as for and to community. The

apostolic delegation of authority for ministry to the whole ecclesia was rather rapid. In

the leadership paradigm of Hersey and Blanchard (182 p.157), the apostolic leadership

style, like Jesus’ leadership style, was definitively and intentionally situational: as the

ecclesia matured the apostles’ delegated ministry. The house groups quickly took

responsibility for themselves as the apostles had to move on to other cities to plant other

161
ecclesia. In reading the apostolic epistles, however, it is apparent that the spiritual

maturity of the communities did not necessarily coincide with their technical maturity.

Their knowledge and experience in how to function as a group often was more advanced

than their emotional or volitional discipline for healthy relationships. Their real authority

for ministry was the authority of the Spirit at work in and through the community,

through the mutual ministry of persons who gathered together in the name of Jesus. As

Banks (1980 pp.180-187) has said that Christians are to submit to one another in the

community: each is the bearer to the other, in some degree, of the word and life of Christ

… ‘to be a sort of Christ to one another’ … to ‘be subject to one another out of reverence

for Christ.’ The full authority for ministry came from the power of the Spirit at work in

the group, not from the presence of the apostle or any other human authority. Bonhoeffer

(1976 pp.90-109) further explained that all practices and activities of the group consistent

with the life and ministry of Jesus with the Twelve became ministries of the ecclesia.

Their ministry emerged out of their gathering to share their common life their persons,

their relationships, their possessions, their food, their meetings and their worship with

whomever had need for them. Their life together became their ministry.

Since their lives were now intimately connected to one another in Christ, the ecclesia

had everything in common: people, relationships, goods, lands, houses and problems.

They saw themselves as the new family of Jesus. As Banks (1980 p.54) has said that the

bonding, intimacy and love of the gatherings was more analogous to the encounter

between adult children and their father, where they were able to relate to Him not only in

the most intimate, but increasingly in the most mature fashion. Banks (1980 pp.52-54)

further explained that what they had owned individually was now seen as owned by the

162
family, by the household of God, for which they were stewards together with Christ as

Lord and brother. The common goods were shared to provide for the needs of the whole.

And God was seen as the Provider for all the members together in the household. This

common sharing of life and goods extended to any nearby who had need. As the

members of the ecclesia shared their common life with each other, they drew others into

the small group circle to share the common life of Christ. The sharing of money and

goods was the concrete expression of the real experience of the group with Christ and

with one another. As Christ had shared his life and his Spirit with them, they were free to

share their life, money and goods with anyone who had need for them. All the believers

were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own,

but they shared everything they had (Acts 4:32). This movement of commonness was

intimately connected to the apostles’ presence and teaching, which had its roots in their

life together as the Twelve and others with Jesus. The common life of Jesus with the

Twelve became the common life of the apostles among the ecclesia, which became the

common life of the ecclesia as household for any who had need, so there were no needy

persons among them. This sharing among the ecclesia of their physical lives and

possessions provided the arena in which the apostles performed many miraculous signs

and wonders among the people (Acts 5:12–16). The inward ministry of the ecclesia was a

ministry of sharing physical life together. The outward ministry was the ministry of the

apostles, based in ecclesia, who healed the sick and exorcised evil spirits. God’s

provision for meeting real physical human need was demonstrated through both the

sharing of goods in ecclesia and the sharing of healing through the apostles. The ministry

life of the ecclesia was the foundation from which the apostles had the power and

163
freedom to fulfill their mission of proclamation and healing. The healing presence and

power of Christ was intimately connected to the sharing of life as ecclesia and household.

The small group community provided the context and support for the apostolic ministry,

all of which was a direct reflection of the continuing ministry of Jesus among the Twelve.

Through the small group koinonia the real human needs of people were met. This attitude

of shared life is foundational for all small group ministry.

Just as a household or family would gather daily, so the ecclesia gathered daily in the

home, synagogues and marketplace. The discipline of meeting together set the context for

the consistent meeting of one another’s needs. The frequency of meeting together created

an intensity and synergy of life together that moved individuals, families and social

structures to change. Change always happens in the midst of great resistance.

Transformational ministry carries a cost. Such vital, intimate and personal sharing of life

together in Christ has continued to be a threat to power structures throughout salvation

history. Where two or three have gathered, their life together has been a counter life to

other systems and structures that would seek to define, control or orient life in a

manipulative or oppressive way. Societal systems are confronted by this new pattern of

communal freedom in Christ and the battle lines are drawn. The more frequent and

diligent their meeting together in Christ, the more fear other systems had that their

dominions would be destroyed by this koinonia. There is a proportional and reciprocal

relationship between the intensity of life together in Christ and the intensity of the social

system’s attempt to rid itself of this alien presence. The two ways and systems cannot

coexist. In Acts, the proclamation and demonstration of the full message of this new life

caused the religious and social leaders to be filled with jealousy (Acts 5:17–20). The

164
daily intensity and pervasiveness of this new pattern of living was taking over the city of

Jerusalem and breaking down ancient and traditional structures. Reaction from the

leaders of threatened power structures was inevitable. The impact of hundreds of small

groups meeting daily around the city was great, and the response on the part of other

political and religious systems was fear. Lee and Cowan (1986) have noted this ongoing

threat of the ecclesia to existing structures: The house church communities … are made

up of Christian persons who have deliberately chosen to cast their lots with other

Christian people. This deliberate choice makes them intentional communities rather than

random gatherings … agents of social reconstruction. Their memories are dangerous

because they spawn hopes that require that present social arrangements be put under

prophetic critique.

According to Lee and Cowan (1986 pp.90-91), the liberationist view of the house

church or base community is that intentional life together through small Christian

communities will effect social change and induce social resistance. While the traditional

Catholic and Protestant churches are heavily invested in making existing social structures

work, generic small group community, almost by definition, seems to become a

countercultural movement in any existing structure. This sets up a fundamental tension

and concern for the ministry of small groups within any religious structure. Wherever two

or three come together in Christ, the Spirit may not move them to fall in line with the

prevailing social structure, religious or political. Herein is the inherent danger of small

group ministry. However, the apostle Paul was assertive in his recommendation to the

ecclesia that every person be subject to the governing authorities…. Whoever resists

authority resists what God has appointed (Romans 13:1–2). While groups may, by the

165
very nature of Christ, call institutions to accountability, they are to be vigilant not to act

as terrorists or espionage teams to intentionally destroy an organization. The ministry of

meeting together frequently was focused on personal and social transformation. Small

group research has shown there is a direct relationship between the frequency of meeting

and group cohesiveness. The more frequently the group meets together, the more the

individuals in the group begin to adopt the life of the group and begin to use the group

life to affect change in those parts of their life outside of the group. This is one of the

principles behind the formation of Twelve-Step groups. Meeting consistently and

frequently provides a base from which habits and patterns can be changed and persons

can be held accountable to continue in that change (Cartwright and Zander, 1968 p.104).

In the process of meeting together, people and their values are transformed and systems

and structures are reformed. The ministry of daily meeting was the discipline of

dramatizing a new way of living in Christ. Just as the Twelve were transformed through

daily life together with Jesus, the apostles now called the new followers of Jesus to be

transformed as they met daily with one another in the presence of Jesus by the power of

the Spirit. As already asserted, these small group gatherings became new family systems

formed to break the power, habits and values of the principalities and powers (Ephesians

6:12) that controlled people’s lives and relationships. Wink (1989 p.104-113) has

suggested that the powers are the inner aspect of material reality. The spirit of an

institution takes on its own life and affects human lives. On the dark side, instead of the

institution or system serving the redemption of humanity, humanity is subjugated to serve

and sustain the institution. Institutions develop a supra human life of their own. The early

church gatherings understood this. They refused to worship the imperial rule and bowed

166
to a higher power. This intervention of Christ and confrontation with the power of Rome

was made possible through their new experience of the presence of God and the Lordship

of Jesus Christ as they gathered in small groups and practiced prayer and mutual

ministry. Part of the process of being saved from this corrupt generation (Acts 2:40) was

the intentional daily meeting together to act out new behaviors of relationship, ownership

and stewardship.

These daily meetings of the Christian groups reinforced the reality that the kingdom

and will of God had come into being on earth as it was in heaven. As Dunn (1975 p.187)

has suggested that in the early home communities the Lord’s Prayer was obviously used

frequently. The use of the prayer of Jesus called attention to Jesus’ life with the Twelve

and his continuing life with the ecclesia. God’s invisible rule was now visible daily on

earth, in the homes and courts of Jerusalem, for individuals, families, men and women,

young and old together. In the daily meeting self-discipline and group discipline

constantly reinforced, encouraged and supported changed attitudes. The ecclesia were

called to a life of repentance, forgiveness and baptism, a life in the name of Jesus, to live

out the gift of the Spirit. These new values led to more healthy behaviors. In Covenant to

Evans (1982 pp.17-21) has explained that the life of repentance, of living out one’s

baptism, is possible only in a community of self-discipline, that is, a covenant

community. Evans (1982) has further named eight basic covenants which help keep the

small group discipline tuned toward ministry as affirmation, availability, prayer,

openness, honesty, sensitivity, confidentiality and accountability. The daily cycle of

shared experience helped to develop mutual trust that nurtured mature groups and

individuals as they met together over extended periods of time. Bruce (1988) has

167
suggested that this intense cycle of shared experience and mutual trust is koinonia, and

that those who live in this cycle of koinonia become mature through the process and in

time. The mutual ministry that took place in the daily meeting of the ecclesia was the

foundation from which the ecclesia launched its mission and outward ministry. As Lee

and Cowan have so clearly said, both koinonia and diakonia, shared life and service,

community and mission, are part of the Christian base group. Their inner ministry opens

out into mission. The primary relational group becomes a secondary task group.

A primary group is one in which the bonding is very effective in character. It is a

natural grouping, based upon family or friendship bonds. The quality of their

interpersonal life is a primary concern. The other kind of group is a secondary group,

with characteristics more like those of a formal organization. The secondary group exists

for some purpose other than their personal relationships … they have a shared task and

that is their real reason for being a group. Lee and Cowan (1986 pp.34-35) define the

ecclesia as a hybrid group because it has some characteristics of both the primary group

and the secondary group. The stronger their life together, the more potent their mission

apart. Like the Twelve and the seventy, their mission was accomplished through

subgroups teams of persons in twos, threes and fours sent out by the parent group (Acts

13:1–3). It was while the ecclesia in Antioch were worshiping the Lord and fasting that

the Holy Spirit spoke to them to send Barnabas and Saul. Their mission emerged out of

their worship and life together. Likewise, the other subgroups consisted of friends, fellow

workers and fellow soldiers together in ministry (Philemon 1–2). Paul’s letter to

Philemon was also addressed to the church that meets in your home. The team ministry

and mission of the joint worker and joint soldier was evidently experienced, even for

168
Paul, from the base of meeting together in Philemon’s home. These mission teams cared

for one another while venturing into the tough and hostile environments of the villages

and cities to share the good news of Christ. The daily meetings provided daily support for

their ventures into the marketplace and courts as well as to distant cities. The daily

meetings also provided space for theological reflection and feedback, visioning and

strategic planning to risk the greater mission and ministry. The daily meeting of the

ecclesia was both the arena of ministry and the center for mission. The sharing of life and

goods with all those who had need was focused in the sharing of meals, and ultimately

enacted in the sharing of the Lord’s Supper. Eating the common loaf and drinking the

common wine was both the symbolic and real center of the community’s understanding

of life in Christ. When the Lord’s Supper was shared, the message was clear: this ecclesia

is the body of Christ. And whoever ate with the ecclesia was being invited to share life

and ministry together. The sharing of the Lord’s Supper was an act of covenant and

commitment to the common life of the ecclesia. The shared meal was a common

discipline to launch the group into the ministry and mission reflected out of the very

nature of the shared meal. And the invitation to share the meal was a key evangelistic

strategy as well as key ministry training event. Sharing the Lord’s Supper set up a style

and character of community that was to be worked into other meals and influence outside

group situations as potential ministry. As Banks (1980 p.84) has affirmed, the Lord’s

meal was not a token or a part of a meal, but the whole meal, the main meal of the

gathering, the one to which guests were generally invited (1 Corinthians 11:17–34). In his

first letter to the Corinthians Paul discusses the way the ecclesia was to share the meal (1

Corinthians 11:17–24). His admonishment “when you come together to eat, wait for each

169
other” is a profound call to merge the Lord’s Supper with the attitude that should

permeate all general meals. The meals were to be the center place of mutual ministry, and

the Lord’s Supper was the ultimate expression of this sacred center and of this attitude

and display of mutual ministry. The meal was a ministry and a base for mission. The

meal was the mission when guests were invited. The mission of the group was to

demonstrate to visitors what life together in Christ was all about. For around the table, the

members of the ecclesia told their stories of transformation in Christ so the novice could

be touched and invited to join the group.

The discipline of mutual ministry was very important to maintain. All aspects of the

group’s life were interconnected for mutual ministry. In Ephesians there is a clear

apostolic emphasis on individual gifts being for ministry to and through the body, to

prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built

up(Ephesians 4:1–16). The common meal implied a common ministry where each

member had a unique contribution to make to the group, in the group, through the group

and from the group to the world. The sharing of the meal set the character and meaning of

all other group ministry. As Banks (1980) further said that it is primarily by assembling

that the responsibilities of members to one another are fulfilled. Patience, discernment,

sensitivity and self-discipline had to be the distinguishing marks of the ecclesia’s

mutuality. How the Lord’s Supper was shared was the preeminent demonstration of how

all things would be shared, of how all things would be administered, of how the group

would venture into mission. The ministry implications of the meal are numerous. Both

men and women should wait for and wait on each other in meal and ministry. The meal

and ministry were always to be mutually accomplished. There was no hint that the

170
apostles had special or privileged status in either the meal or the ministry. There were no

clergy-laity distinctions for service or mutuality. The meals, like the ministries, were

visible demonstrations that heaven had come to earth, that life now was eternal through

the resurrected Christ, and that God was calling humanity to live in reconciled

community forever and ever. The meal was the center of ministry and the fuel for

mission.

According to Dunn (1975 pp.182-188), the ecclesia’s glad sharing of food and goods

was a demonstration of their worship of God. Their worship and praise of God was

interwoven with their mutual ministry. The nature of their community (koinonia) and

their way of worship were intimately interconnected. The warmth and affirmation of

gathering together led to their glad and “sincere” expressions of what God was doing for

them and with them. Worship and fellowship were simultaneous and symbiotic. As they

shared their meals, their goods and their money, they were constantly announcing their

worship (work) of God, the one Jesus called Abba. The Greek term translated praise here

in Acts 2 emphasizes the verbal announcement and affirmation of God’s work among

them and through them. This reflects the telling of personal experiences in the group

meetings and attributing them to God’s work with amen’s from the hearers. Their

horizontal expressions of love for one another were pivotally connected through the

present Christ to their vertical exclamations of love for God. What was enjoyed in their

life together became a basis for praise of God. What was important in their praise of God

became a source of affirmation for their life together. Both worship and community were

converging axes of the cross of Jesus. The worship and the ministry of the ecclesia

exuded from and to the spontaneous and reconciling joy of God’s movement toward them

171
through a resurrected Christ. Their embracing movement toward one another was an

anticipation of an eternal communal realm with God. The gatherings of ecclesia were

guided by spontaneity and excitement, unencumbered with formal structuring. As has

been previously stated, the groups had some basic disciplines and patterns, but their order

of community ministry was immediately adjustable to the needs and offerings of

everyone present. The simplicity of their life together affirmed living in the here and now

as a way of showing the there and then. They were an immediate eschatological reality

(Hanson, 1986 pp.435-38). The character of the ministry of the community was a direct

reflection of the character of their life together and their life with God in Christ. Their

mission flowed out of their joy in worship. The fulfillment of their worship was the

action of their mission.

There was a strong and sustained social impact as the many small groups gathered in

the courts and homes: “everyone was filled with awe” (Acts 2:43; “fear came to every

soul”); they were enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their

number daily those who were being saved (Acts 2:47). The continuous meetings of many

small groups who exemplified new values and new character could not go unnoticed in

the close urban context. These groups attracted much attention and the general feeling

was favorable. Outsiders liked what they saw happening in and through these ecclesia.

Their life together was an attractive life. Their ministry struck feelings of amazement and

awe in those who were healed as well as in those who watched. But most important, their

new life together began to affect how more and more other people lived and worked.

These ecclesia, as microcosms of a new world view, began to transform the dynamics of

the city’s macro culture, its power structures and its political balance, at the grassroots

172
level. Through the small and local gatherings of real people who experienced transformed

character and relationships, larger societies and structures were redirected, reformed and

restructured. Schumacher (1973 pp53-54) has said that we need the freedom of lots and

lots of small autonomous units, and at the same time, the orderliness of large-scale …

unity and coordination. When it comes to action we obviously need small units, because

action is a highly personal affair, and one cannot be in touch with more than a very

limited number of persons at one time…. The church in an area will be stunted to the

extent that any believers are not committed to one another in a home church…. It is with

these that we are going to set about the work of spreading the gospel. Prior (1983 p.25)

further pointed out that organizational officials have a need to control. This is as endemic

to the institutional church as it is to any secular government. The human need to control

situations for which we are held responsible becomes very urgent…. It is very tempting

to keep tight control even while decentralizing and delegating … The grassroots

communities … are not the fruit of a scientific design or formula, but rather the dynamic

action of the Spirit who forms the family of God despite so many human limitations and

shortcomings. One of the results of the apostolic ecclesiastic ministry was political

tension with power structures. This was the result of their fear of losing control over the

people who fed their organizational power. The ecclesias were symbols to the

principalities and powers that they were no longer the primary influence in the people’s

thinking and practice. The transforming social impact of the ecclesia was the result of

people seeing a new way to live life and a new way of being in relationship to one

another.

173
 The miracles (the signs and wonders) caused fear among the people, but the sharing

of life together in the courts and homes induced the favor of all the people. The social

impact of ecclesia was both fear and favor, avoidance and approach. The society had a

love-hate relationship with these ecclesia. While their good attitudes and loving actions

were appreciated, their radical ideas and assertions were upsetting. While there was some

social benefit of having them around, they upset the existing balance of power. Their

presence was a growing reminder that all was not well with the rest of the world, and that

this world in its present form is passing away (1 Corinthians 7:31). In The Cost of

Discipleship Bonhoeffer (1963) quotes this verse to reinforce his point that the visible

community of Christ is an alien community. In the world the Christians are a colony of

the true home, they are strangers and aliens in a foreign land…. They seek those things

that are above and not those things that are on the earth. He also suggested that the favor

of the people may have been the result of spiritual naiveté, that “they could not see that

the secret of this common life was the cross of Christ. The adding each day to the number

who participated in the ecclesia was a subtracting from those who had been pawns and

slaves to existing religious, political and military systems. The more who joined the small

communities of those being saved (Acts 2:47), the fewer who were willing to remain

imprisoned by the manipulation, isolation, fragmentation and oppression of the structures

being abandoned. The evangelism of the apostolic ecclesia was not good news to existing

powers. Bonhoeffer (1963 pp.303-4) pointed out that an irony in the hostile reaction of

the social powers to the ecclesia’s ministry. Above all they pray for all in authority, for

that is their greatest service. Hanson (1986 p.435) further explains that the salvation of

humanity through ecclesia was interpreted by world leaders as a potential threat to

174
existing power structures. The loving life together on the inside of the small Christian

groups impacted the less human and disjointed life of the culture on the outside. The

developing togetherness and bonding of their inner circles released these men and women

to assist in unraveling the bondages of institutional principalities and powers. As Wink

(1988 p.41-43) further said that the social demonic is the spirit exuded by a corporate

structure that has turned its back on its divine vocation as a creature of God and has made

its own goals the highest good. The role of the ecclesia was to be a new community

driven at its heart by the love of persons and the value of healthy human relationships as

modeled and empowered by the Spirit of Christ. Therefore, there was immediate and

constant tension with the spirits of the opposing gathering forces. Those gathered to Jesus

were continually frustrating the powers of those gathered to Rome, to Judaism, to

paternalism, to mammon, and so forth. Their small group experience of the power of love

gave the ecclesia the courage to venture into the larger world of power where strength,

size and intimidation were the predominant values. Their life together valued human

beingness for each unique person in a world that mostly valued human productivity and

success for a few at the top. But as renewing as their inner circles of love and koinonia

were, there were continuing struggles and conflicts among the members of the groups as

they lived together week after week trying to become new families and heavenly

communities on earth.

Therefore, small groups need to see themselves as places for mutual ministry.

Members should be encouraged to minister to each other during group meetings and in

between group meetings. This suggests there needs to be training to help members learn

the basic disciplines of mutual ministry. Groups should think of themselves as ministry

175
situations. Group members should be helped to practice healthy ministry skills and

disciplines such as listening, asking good questions, feedback, prayer, leading

discussions, using “I” language rather than “you” language, developing non condemning

responses, doing inductive Bible study, etc. Such key small group skills are the core of

developing good Christian community. The group needs to be a place where people can

practice their skills and get feedback for improvement of skills. Some groups are not able

to handle such a developmental approach to their life together. This may mean that

special mutual training experiences are created so small group members may set aside

special time and energy to work on the skills of mutual ministry. Groups should also see

themselves as ministry bases. As Slocum has said in Maximize Your Ministry, the small

group is the base from which individual members should be sent out into the world in the

name of Christ. There should be space in the group for all members to reflect upon their

everyday life as situations for ministry. Whether they find themselves at home, at work,

at church, at play or alone, they need to be able to talk with the group about their lives as

ministers of Christ scattered out into the world. Small groups need to recognize and

support the ministry of the laity as base camps for climbing up secular mountains and

climbing over religious walls. If the laity has no such base ministry group, they will

continue to venture out into hostile worlds with no sense of community support. At

minimum, we all need to know there is a group who loves us and prays for us in the midst

of a world which seems to be getting crazier. Sometimes these base groups are better

developed if they are more homogeneous: men’s groups, women’s groups, professional

groups, labor groups, management groups, labor-management groups, CEO groups,

middle-management groups, single-parent groups, etc. Every Christian needs to know

176
they are anchored to Christ through a small group which is a safe harbor next to the

stormy secular seas of life. Small groups are not just bases to support the ministry of

individuals scattered but also for the ministry gathered of the institutional church. Every

member of the congregation should have an opportunity of service and a group to support

them in their individual places of service within the church as organization. And groups

should view themselves as ministry teams. Children’s ministry, youth ministry, music

ministry, evangelism ministry, etc., can all be done through small group ministry teams

or committees who also function as communities. This is especially true of mission teams

(short-term or long-term) who prepare together, work together, rest together and reflect

together about what God is calling them to accomplish as a faith task community. Short-

term mission communities are the fastest growing form of small group ministry in the

church. Such teams need special ministry training and preparation with a focus in dealing

with the cross cultural situations in which they will find themselves.

In addition, small groups need to be given the authority and power to do what they

need to do in ministry and mission. Small group empowerment for ministry and mission

means that the clergy needs to give away the responsibility and privilege of ministry to

groups, train them to do the ministry, support them to do the ministry, and expect them to

do the ministry. This means that professional staff needs to learn to work well with

today’s volunteer who has less time to work, wants more freedom to act, wants carefully

defined ministry job descriptions, and wants the support systems to be successful at the

jobs. If groups are going to take responsibility for ministry and mission, they need to be

trained, encouraged, supported and affirmed for their ministry ventures. Such a

development of the ministry of the laity demands a new role for clergy which is typically

177
not taught or modeled in the seminary context. Clergy may need to go back to school for

continuing education which helps them support small group ministry and mission. The

frequency and intensity of small group meeting schedules impacts their ability to enter

into the depth of ministry demands. Groups which meet once a month will not have the

same team energy needed for ministry and mission as a group who meets once a week or

more for intense periods of prayer and preparation. Long-term mission groups may do

well with the once a month sustenance and support meeting, but groups just beginning

their ministry or mission venture need more frequent and more intense meetings to get off

the ground. Such groups are like launching a mission rocket. Huge amounts of group

energy are needed at the beginning to get the mission going, but once it’s launched, the

ongoing power needed to keep it going is not as great. Give ministry and mission teams a

lot of up-front attention, training, support, encouragement and affirmation.

2.6.3 Discipleship for effective leadership training

Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to

them, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” He took Peter and the two sons of

Zebedee along with him, and he began to be sorrowful and troubled. Then he said to

them, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep

watch with me.”Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed….

Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Could you men not keep

watch with me for one hour?” he asked Peter. “Watch and pray so that you will not fall

into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak.”He went away a second time

and prayed…. When he came back, he again found them sleeping…. So he left them and

went away once more and prayed the third time…. Then he returned to the disciples

178
(Matthew 26:36–45).Jesus was a leader who prepared his small discipleship group to be

leaders. Leadership is the art of influence, of taking initiative, of showing others where to

go, what to do, how to act and how to think. Jesus’ leadership was a continual calling of

the group’s attention to the primary authority of Abba God in their lives. Jesus led his

small group in word and action, in prayer and planning, and called them to be even as he

was, to do what he did, to watch like he watched. But the small group of disciples were

not the leaders Jesus desired them to be until after Pentecost. In Gethsemane Jesus prayed

to the Father for them, “so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them….

As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify

myself, that they too may be truly sanctified” (John 17:13–19).

Jesus’ leadership had to be experienced as well as taught. The group had to see it to

believe it and follow it. The group was their arena of leadership discovery and

development. Leadership implies group process. If there is a leader, there must be at least

one follower. Most initiatives of human leadership are ventured in the context of a small

group. This is because leadership requires accessibility and nearness. While there is a

kind of leadership that directs crowds and large groups, it is difficult to lead well from a

distance. Face-to-face connections are important for successful long-term leadership.

Followers need to be able to touch and see and feel their leaders. This can happen only

when a leader is close enough to be encountered and experienced. Most helpful

leadership happens in the midst of small bands of followers. Leaders of large groups

usually lead a small group of leaders who lead other small groups. Leadership is therefore

the leading of a small group or the leading of a small network of groups. Jesus

understood this basic leadership rule: lead a small group of leaders who will in turn lead

179
their small groups of leaders, who will lead the people. As discussed earlier, Moses also

discovered this rule of leadership. Leadership, to be effective, must be in the midst of a

leadership community. Jesus selected and developed his own leadership community, and

they changed the world.

A crucial leadership scene in the life of Jesus and the Twelve was Gethsemane. The

crisis of the final hours of Jesus’ life reveals a pattern of leadership he consistently used.

First, he led the group where he wanted them to go. This meant he had to have a sense of

leading within himself. He had learned to follow the inner direction of Abba. Second, he

gave the group directions. Jesus led in word and action leadership always combines word

with action. Third, he led the smaller and more intimate core group a little farther than the

others. But he always went a little farther himself than he took any of the members of the

group. Fourth, he was always taking the initiative. He would not ask of them what he was

not willing to experience himself. Fifth, he shared himself his heart and his feelings with

them. He showed them who he really was, even in vulnerability, pain and sorrow. He did

not protect them from the dark side of his spiritual life, but invited them to join him,

watch him, and watch with him. Jesus allowed them the freedom to fail. When the small

group of disciples did not meet his expectations, he was patient and understanding of

their humanity and weakness. He gave them the space to be less than perfect. Yet he

called them to be leaders of the Spirit. He taught and showed them how to pray, and led

them into prayer. He revealed to them a deep intimacy and intensity of prayer. Finally, he

patiently and repeatedly encouraged them to go the hard way of leadership. He called

them beyond their comfort zones and led them where they did not want to go. He called

them to experience what they did not yet have the capacity and discipline to experience.

180
He continually called them to practice spiritual discipline and persevere in their practice.

Jesus was a leader for leaders and a leader of leaders who would lead many other groups.

Jesus was a follower of Abba which made him a leader of humanity. He was the small

group leader who used the small group as an arena in which to develop other leaders.

Jesus often focused his leadership among a very small group of three: Peter, James and

John.

Of the Twelve Jesus gave special attention to the three, Peter, James and John.

Mallison (1989 p.4) has argued that Jesus spent more time with these three because they

were the key leadership for the future. It is possible that he invested more in these three

because they were more aware of who he was and what he was about. He knew they were

more likely to become the primary leaders and spokespersons of the Twelve after his

death and resurrection. The early church (ecclesia) seemed to affirm the primary

importance of this core group. Peter’s voice emerges frequently in Acts and the epistles

of Peter, John speaks through a Gospel and set of three epistles. James is noted as a

significant leader of the Jerusalem home church and author of the Epistle of James. The

New Testament seems to give continued special recognition to these three men as key

leaders in the new church, affirming that Jesus did something special with them that he

did not do with the other Twelve. Simply, it may be that Jesus liked to be with the three

more than the others (Mallion, 1989 p.4). The relationship of Jesus with the three was not

always warm and friendly, however. Jesus had many edgy confrontations, especially with

Peter. Peter was the one who first exclaimed that Jesus was the Messiah, only to be

immediately rebuked by Jesus as satanic for trying to dissuade him from his destiny of

suffering and death (Mark 8:29–33).Since Andrew was one of the first four disciples, he

181
was perhaps the most conspicuous disciple not included in this inner core group. Yet

there is no apparent biblical reason for Andrew’s absence from the core group. Peter,

James and John seem to be characterized as having more assertiveness, aggressiveness

and drive to be a part of the inner circle. Peter often took the primary role as

spokesperson for the Twelve and the three. James and John had an assertive mother who

conspired with them to ask of Jesus to be at the right and left side. This was an arrogant

request, but it showed their initiative, ambition and willingness to take risks and lead. The

three formed around Jesus as the inner group of the Twelve. They were with Jesus from

the beginning of his ministry (Mark 1:16). The three were with Jesus when he healed

Peter’s mother-in-law (Mark 1:29–31). They took the initiative to go out looking for

Jesus when he was in solitary prayer (Mark 1:35–39). The three were probably with Jesus

when he called the tax collector, Levi, and went to eat with him at Levi’s house with

other tax collectors and sinners (Mark 2:13–17).

On several occasions, Jesus invited only the three to accompany him. One of these

was an invitation to the house of Jairus to be in the room with him, Jairus and Jairus’ wife

when their daughter was raised from the dead (Mark 5:35–43). The Gospel of Mark does

not explain the secrecy attached to this scene, but simply says “he gave them strict orders

not to let anyone know about this.” They were also alone with Jesus on the mountain

when he appeared transfigured with Moses and Elijah and they heard the “voice from the

cloud” affirming Jesus as beloved Son. Again, Jesus asked the group to keep the

confidentiality of the experience among themselves (Mark 9:2–13). If this imperative

included the confidentiality of the three not to tell the rest of the Twelve, Jesus had the

intention to layer the knowledge and awareness of the three amidst the Twelve. Only

182
speculation can answer the question, why would Jesus want to keep such an amazing

happening from the rest of the Twelve? Why were only the three with Jesus at such

important moments? In any case, it is clear that Jesus had a special relationship with this

core group and they emerged as primary leaders of the future expanding small group

movement called ecclesia, or church. The three were included in the innermost life,

thoughts and feelings of Jesus while the other nine had more limited contact. The

splitting away of the three from the rest of the Twelve seemed to be a source of group

irritation. The nine left behind when Jesus and the three went up the mountain did not

have the spiritual maturity to accomplish an exorcism (Mark 9:14–37). This raises the

question as to whether there was a gap between the spiritual maturity of the three and the

rest of the Twelve. One wonders whether the layered relationship, the relative status of

the three and the other nine, had taken its toll on the cohesive ministry of the Twelve.

Would the argument over “who was the greatest” have happened if the three had not been

given special attention and relationship with Jesus? Would Judas have betrayed Jesus if

he had been included in the inner three or if the Twelve had been more evenly

interdependent? Did Jesus use this separation as a designation of friendship and trial to

test the commitments of the whole group?

It was after the heady mountaintop event that James and John had the audacity to ask

for special privileges and status in their relationship with Jesus. This caused the other

disciples to be “indignant” with them and gave Jesus an opportunity for some theological

reflection on the nature of servant leadership (Mark 10:35–45). James and John had a

misunderstanding of the nature and privilege of their inner relationship with Jesus. They

tried to impose a secular view of leadership upon the friendship nature of the realm of

183
God, where there were to be no tyrannical leaders. They wanted to set up a hierarchy of

power even among the Twelve. Did Jesus use the particularization of the three from the

Twelve to provide an opportunity to teach kingdom leadership and shared power? He

must have known that the existence of the inner group would eventually cause hard

feelings and temptations to hoard position and power. Peter seemed to be more observant,

more vocal and more risk oriented than the others. Jesus quite often played off Peter’s

rash comments and initiatives, almost as though his leadership was a counter initiative to

Peter’s misdirected attempts at leadership. For example, Peter recognized that the fig tree

which Jesus cursed had withered (Mark 11:21), giving Jesus an opportunity to speak to

the Twelve about the intimate relationship between prayer and faith. Jesus used Peter’s

observation as an opportunity to address the whole group. The smaller group provided a

more intimate and more interactive environment than the arena of the Twelve. In a

noteworthy shift of the profile of the inner grouping, the original four disciples (the three

plus Andrew) approached Jesus as he sat on the Mount of Olives, opposite the temple, to

ask him privately about the sequence and meaning of his expectation of future events

(Mark 13:3–4). Again, in this situation the question emerges whether the inner group had

some continuing hope that they would be in the inner circle of leadership if Jesus planned

to overthrow the existing political system in Jerusalem. From their perspective, they

probably thought that since they were the “original” four disciples, they were the most

probable inner group to rule with Jesus in the coming of the new kingdom. This could

help explain Peter’s denial of Jesus after Jesus was captured and sent to trial (Mark

14:27–31, 66–72). Maybe it was not until that moment that Peter understood the deep

frustration of his own ambition (shared by the other two or three), that he had been

184
hoping for a conquering Messiah rather than a dying one, and that he thought he would

be a shareholder and insider in the new ruling group. In any case, Jesus took the three

along with him to Gethsemane to share in his deep distress and sorrow, but they fell

asleep and deserted him at his moment of crisis (Mark 14:32–42). Their lack of personal

support for Jesus in his most intense hour of pain is amazing in light of their seeming

intimacy and close friendship. After all the special attention Jesus gave to the inner

group, it is amazing they were not mature enough to participate in what Jesus was

feeling. While he was preparing to be separated from his most loved friends and be

killed, the three could not bear that such a powerful and charismatic leader would make

himself so vulnerable to death. Their sleep may have reflected a numbness (and extreme

denial) at the point when Jesus was most vulnerable. That Jesus’ full passion was

inaccessible to them may have been the result of their inability to share at this time the

deep pain of what God was asking Jesus to endure. No matter how close to Jesus the

three had become, they were not close enough to know the full humanity of Jesus. No

matter how capable a leader Jesus had been, he was still not able to lead them fully into

the place where he had to go. There was still a chasm of intimacy and a flawed chemistry

in their human bonding. Not until after Jesus’ death and resurrection was the Spirit able

to complete the leadership task Jesus could not fulfill in his finite humanity.

This realization of Jesus’ limitations should caution every human leader of a group to

be aware that there are things that only the Spirit can lead a group to accomplish and

individual members to understand. Such ultimate leadership influence is primarily a

spiritual reality, not just a matter of good modeling, great training and perfect planning.

Such a realization should take the heavy burden off small group leaders. Only the Spirit is

185
able to complete the development of fine leadership. Even Jesus himself was not able to

lead the group where they would not go or could not understand to go. After Jesus’ arrest

Peter was the first of the three to recognize and feel the deep pain and sorrow of his lack

of trust in the leadership of Jesus (Mark 14:72). Peter’s brokenness in the absence and

loss of Jesus was finally a recognition of his intimate loss and the vulnerability of his

relationship with Jesus. Peter grieved the loss of his friend and mentor, but more fully

grieved the recognition of his own cowardice and disloyal behavior. After the

resurrection, his deep sorrow was met by the angel’s insistence to the women that Peter

be specifically told about the resurrection of Jesus (Mark 16:7). Even in death and

desertion, Jesus attended to the emotional needs of his followers. The inner core of the

Twelve consistently experienced more of the personal reality and heart of Jesus. They

were the ones to feel the deepest loss of separation at his death, and exaltation at his

resurrection. The paradox of the inner three was that while they were not called to rule

with Jesus in the worldly sense, they were called to serve with Jesus in the heavenly

sense. Their rule was through their friendship and intimate community. Jesus used their

experience of intimacy to beckon others into future intimate community with the risen

Lord (Acts 1:11–15). Jesus led them into closeness so that they would be able to lead

others into deeper community with Abba and with one another by the power of the Spirit.

Jesus led the inner core of three disciples who led the Twelve, who, in turn, gathered with

the one hundred twenty, who led the expanding circles of ecclesia (church).

186
 According to Johnson (1991 p.372-74),Jesus used different leadership styles with the

crowd, with the women and with his enemies than he used with the Twelve. Without the

varying leadership styles of Jesus and his initiating, directing and sustaining presence, the

Twelve could not have been a cohesive discipleship group. Once Jesus called them

together their common bond was his presence as leader (Mark 3:13). Jesus situationally

shifted the focus of the group from his personal presence to their interpersonal faith.

Jesus’ first group leadership act was to call twelve to be with him and to follow him.

While Jesus himself remained the continuity for the group’s bonding, over the weeks and

months he shifted his leadership style gradually and intentionally. In the end Jesus

became the absent and delegating leader of the Twelve through the presence and power

of his Spirit (Matthew 28:18–20).The trinitarian baptismal benediction at the end of the

Gospel of Matthew may signify a fulfilled leadership progression in the life of the

Twelve by the situational leadership of God. God’s leadership initiative was that the

Father sent the Son, and the Son sent the Spirit. The disciples’ maturing process may

have been connected first to an awareness of the new parenthood of God, second to the

experience of Jesus as the Son and their partner-brother, and third to the Spirit coming

into their community to make them full partners and mutual priests. Jesus’ affirmation,

“Surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age,” was made possible by the

sending of the Spirit to be Jesus’ ongoing presence among them. The Spirit came when

the eleven were gathered in the upper room for prayer and reflection among one hundred

twenty men and women (Acts 1:13–15). There the Spirit succeeded and completed the

leadership work first of Abba, then of Jesus. It was in the presence of the Spirit that the

fulfillment of Jesus’ leadership came to bloom. He no longer led the Twelve from outside

187
but moved to lead from within their hearts and between their relationships. This group

leadership movement from Jesus to the Spirit, from without to within, is key to the

maturing eschatological call and identity of all post resurrection Christian groups. Every

group in Christ has the destined potential to experience the intrinsic leadership of the

Spirit in the maturing process of their community together. As it was for the leadership

and character formation of the Twelve, so it can be for every group that is called together

in the name of Jesus (Matthew 18:18–20). The binding or bonding process on earth is

attached to that which is true in heaven. Where two or three come together with Jesus in

their midst, they are in the presence and realm of God. The coming together of the group

on earth is simultaneous to their coming together in heaven. Jesus is the continuing leader

who brings people together in twos or threes in small groups. Jesus initially calls the

group to God as Abba, but finally in maturity, calls the group to the spirit within them.

The maturational movement of Jesus’ leadership is from God as parent (dependence) to

God as Spirit (interdependence). And Jesus himself models this full continuum of small

group discipleship and leadership development. Jesus may initially call the group

together through the charismatic presence of one strong human leader, but it is the

Spirit’s maturing desire and work to move that faithful group into a leadership of

interdependence upon the Spirit of Jesus. In the Gospel of John there is a connection

between the going away of Jesus and the coming of the Spirit. This is a situational

leadership movement (John 14:16–31). The charismatic leader Jesus had to leave so that

the Spirit could give leadership charismata to the whole group of twelve and beyond.

Jesus finished his earthly leadership task by announcing to the Twelve that the Spirit will

guide you into all truth (John 16:13).

188
 In the ongoing life together of the Twelve, their group maturity and situations

changed. Their leadership needs shifted. Their personal characters and task competencies

matured. They matured in their awareness of how and where Jesus was leading them. But

it was not until the Spirit came into them and among them that they fully understood the

purpose of Jesus’ direction and leadership. Jesus wanted each member of the group to

become as he was, full of the Spirit, attentive to Abba, but empowering of those who

followed together. Hersey and Blanchard (1982 pp.150-55) have affirmed the relationship

between group growth and maturity and aggressive leadership styles. The highly directive

early leadership style of Jesus among the Twelve transitioned into a final and completely

delegating style. The coming of the Spirit made possible the completion of the ongoing

process of spiritual maturity which empowered the Twelve to be interdependent with one

another and lead others in the name of Jesus. They no longer needed to be dependent

upon the finite direction of the present and human Jesus. Tracing the leadership character

and style of Jesus through the Gospel of Mark it becomes clear that Jesus, the strong

human leader (Mark 1:17), became Jesus, the Spirit of shared leadership (Mark

16:17).Between the beginning and the ending of the Gospels is a shift of emphasis upon

who is doing the ministry and the leadership. Jesus’ Come, follow me, and I will make

you fishers of humanity becomes In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak

in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly

poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people and they will

get well (Mark 16:17–18). The emphasis on the leadership and ministry of the human

Jesus shifted to an emphasis on the people who do leadership and ministry in the name of

Jesus. In reviewing the actions of Jesus’ various leadership styles, it is important to note

189
how he adjusted his leadership style as he led the Twelve on the way to Jerusalem. The

early Jesus called persons to himself. The later Jesus called the disciples to take

responsibility for the ministry. According to Mallison (1964 p.4),Jesus chose to share his

ministry with others, not delegating in order to help him cope with the growing demands,

but to develop future leaders. And Coleman (1992) has affirmed that this process of

group leadership and ministry delegation is a mandate for Christian discipleship. Jesus

came to share the power and authority of the realm of God with all those who follow him.

Jesus’ determination to share leadership authority and power, first with the Twelve (Luke

9:1–2), then with the seventy-two (Luke 10:1–11), then with the one hundred twenty

(Acts 1:15–2:4), and finally with all who are afar off (three thousand on the first day of

Pentecost, Acts 2:14–21, 38–41) is foundational to the meaning, purpose, goal and

process of his leadership among the Twelve. Of all the Gospels, Luke is most clear about

this revolutionary practice and concept of a leader sharing power with wider and wider

groups of persons. Shared and empowered leadership development is unique to the good

news of Jesus’ discipleship model. Prior (1983) argues that Jesus modeled and taught the

Twelve a non-grasping view of power (Matthew 11:12). Prior (1983) maintains that

Jesus’ leadership style and use of power was counter to every cultural norm of getting,

grabbing, keeping, snatching, controlling and retaliating. He became a leader who saw

power in terms of giving, serving, welcoming and forgiving. To follow the model of

Jesus is to be a servant of all, to give himself away, to walk the way of the cross. Prior

(1983) sees Luke articulating five leadership themes in Jesus’ radical call to servant

power: facing up to failure; dealing with competitiveness; avoiding the divisive spirit;

denouncing racial prejudice; and following with a whole heart. According to Prior

190
(1983), Jesus and Power (1987 pp.75-87), Jesus was not to be snatched away and held on

to, but to be given away and to be shared with anyone who desired to become a member

of the realm of God. While this model of power-sharing began with the Twelve, they

were key to it being distributed at Pentecost to many different groups of people (Acts

2:5–12).

The Twelve were present on Pentecost among the one hundred twenty Galileans who

on Pentecost spoke the languages of many diverse people groups. This is a dramatic

example of how God shares power with all people. Language, speech and hearing are

communication power, which is leadership power. The sharing of language is a symbol

of shared power and leadership. The people said, “We hear them declaring the wonders

of God in our own tongues.” What does this mean? God is not just the God of the Jews.

Jesus is not just the leader of the Twelve. Jesus is the Lord for all and Lord of all. Jesus is

the Lord who gives power and authority to all. But before Jesus had the freedom to share

power with all, he had to be willing to recognize all power came from Abba. This is the

hard preparation for healthy group leadership. He had to deal with the temptations of

human leadership and leadership systems to control and manipulate people for one’s own

ends. Jesus had to deal with these temptations before he could be the servant leader after

the heart of God, and before he could lead others to become the servant leaders of God.

Therefore, the leader needs to be a personal practitioner of small group life. Leaders

need to have self-awareness of their own abilities and disabilities as a group leader. They

need to have a directional vision about the full meaning and implications of small group

ministry as an action of the Holy Spirit and the realm of God. A leader needs to be able to

understand the particular cultural context of the group ministry and be able to adjust the

191
ministry model to fit the needs and opportunities of the context. Leading a small group is

both easy and difficult. If a group is practicing mutual and interdependent behavior, the

formal leader may have little need to take initiative and give direction. The group may do

this for one another. However, if the group tends to be greatly dependent upon the vision

and knowledge of a leader, group leadership is much more demanding. The leader of a

more dependent group must be able to move the group into less and less dependence on

the leader and increased dependence on the Holy Spirit and one another. This is very hard

work helping a group to maturity takes patience and perseverance. The leader must have

a strong sense of purpose and direction. This kind of leadership demands a mature leader.

Mutual groups do not demand the same intensity of leadership as dependent groups. This

is even more intense in a group full of dysfunctional, addictive, abused or recovering

persons. Such groups need leaders of confident experience and assertive powers. Leader

goals are different for short-term versus long-term groups. Leading a short-term group

generally takes less knowledge of life cycles, periodic evaluations, and interventions,

confrontations, recovenanting procedures or maturational patterns. The short-term group

can function quite well with a prepared curriculum. However, the healthy long-term

group demands a leader who can take the group through life-cycle changes, periodic

evaluations and numerous corrections of vision and direction. The leader of the long-term

group needs to be able to wean the group from her or his dominant presence and help the

group take on the responsibility of sharing the load and joy of leadership. The long-term

group will not reach their personal, relational or spiritual maturity if the leader does not

understand how to let go of the group’s authority and power and empower others to take

it.

192
 DePree (1989) defines leadership as an art. Small group leadership is both skill and

art. The good small group leader commits to learning the skills and practicing the art.

This is a lifetime commitment and process. Small group leadership skills can and should

be used in all arenas of human gathering not just for the church group, but for teams,

friendship, marriage, counseling, psychotherapy, committees, families and boards. This is

leadership for being completely human. It is good therefore to call all people of faith to

an intentional process of developing their small group skills and art. This is not just a

program, but a way of life. Small group leaders must become aware of and deal with their

temptations of power and control. Group leaders have biases, seductive tendencies,

controlling styles, dysfunctional patterns and defective knowledge. Ongoing leader

accountability, reflection, feedback and affirmation are key to the maturity of a small

group leader. Leaders need to be in circles of affirmation and accountability to become

more aware and more skilled. This means the primary leader of a small group network

needs the same kind of ongoing accountability and development. Ongoing leader support

groups may help to accomplish this. A good small group leader should be growing up in

the stature of Jesus Christ. Leadership is a commitment to move beyond status quo and to

run against the inertia of groups who resist venturing into the deeper community with

Christ in the realm of God. Leaders must encourage small group leaders to read the

Gospels and see Jesus as a model of small group leadership. If leaders can develop this

mindset of seeing Jesus as their primary model of good group leadership, they will have a

lifetime target for which to shoot. This will also develop their observational and

interpretative skills as a Bible study leader. In addition, leadership is what any member of

a small group can and should do. The good group leader will encourage other members of

193
the group to take appropriate initiatives of leadership. The freedom, responsibility and

privilege of leadership action should be shared with all group members. As soon as the

initial leader begins to give permission for others to take leadership initiative, they

become empowerment leaders for the group. As we have seen, Jesus was not afraid to

encourage the disciples to speak up and take initiative. The many potential leadership

actions for group members should be outlined so members can choose to activate them:

asking good questions, leading a discussion, observing the group dynamics, leading

group prayer, preparing the place of meeting, hospitality, planning a special event or

meal, making contact with the individual members, etc.

2.6.4 Discipleship for effective group ministries

Group experiences constitute the most common process for discipleship in the local

church. The purpose of a group will dictate its size and focus. Large group experiences

are useful in communicating a large amount of information in a classroom setting, using a

presenter with expertise in a particular area. These include conferences, workshops, and

Bible study programs. Small group options include Sunday School classes, home groups,

accountability groups, gender groups, and special interest groups. The Sunday School

class is the most common group model; These groups deliver discipleship through Bible

teaching and fellowship experiences.

Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted…. He appointed

twelve designating them apostles that they might be with him and that he might send

them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons (Mark 3:13–15). God’s

ministry presence in the world has consistently been expressed as a small group presence.

Even when leading thousands, God’s power is often more fully demonstrated when a

194
smaller, more faithful group is gathered and sent on a mission of risk and faith. As the

members of this smaller group act courageously, larger numbers of people are drawn into

the reality of God’s mighty acts in the world. The movement of God’s Spirit in the world

is a decentralizing and empowering flow through leaders who build new communities

and call those communities to a pervasive priesthood, mediating God’s presence to

others. The great leaders of the people of God in the Old Testament were iconoclastic

models when compared to the prevalent parallel monolithic tyrannies, cities, nations and

empires. God’s vision for the nation of Israel was for them to be a people of shalom who

treated other peoples with dignity, respect and assertive accountability to Yahweh. The

tribal and small community expressions of Yahweh’s presence continually affirmed that

God’s might was to be demonstrated through a humanizing community that would

confront the structural facades of dehumanized systems, kingdoms and religions.

Sensitive to this call to build human communities, God’s primary leaders were

confronted face to face with the powerful personal nature of a God who desired to be

present with them and for them. God’s request was that these leaders always would be

present with and for God, modeling intimacy with God before the people, and calling the

people to practice a similar community with God and with one another. However, in

Israel no leader had emerged who could completely model the power and fullness of such

personal, vulnerable and empowering life among the people. No high priest was able to

call all the people to become the nation of priests that God had envisioned them to be.

Moses, along with models like Joseph and David, had shown Israel a leadership who

knew God face to face, but they were terribly bound by the existing images and shadows

of tyrannical pharaohs and kings who led systems of pyramids and hierarchies. No

195
refined community-building model had been developed or demonstrated that could help

leaders give away such personal and communal power from generation to generation. For

humanity to find a way back to the Garden, there had to be a leader who could incarnate

the character of God in human form and lead a community to be transformed by the

power of the Spirit. All such human attempts at intimate and vulnerable community had

fallen short. So Israel looked for the humanity, integrity and community of a Messiah.

Then came Jesus, the man who was the face, presence and community of God

incarnated on earth. He was the man who drew others into intimacy with the Father as the

Son in the Spirit. Jesus was the long-awaited leader who would bring a small group

together and demonstrate the immediate nearness of God’s presence in divine

community. Jesus called this demonstration of God’s rule in community the kingdom of

God. The small group community who gathered with Jesus in their midst was the visible

kingdom on earth (Mark 1:15). This new community was led by the “rule” of God, who

measures the quality of life in different terms than do earthly kingdoms and leaders.

God’s desire was for this rule to become visible. And it could become real only if real

humanity began to demonstrate it in everyday life. This was the purpose of the coming of

Christ and the calling of the Twelve: to make God’s full nature, character and purpose

visible and active on earth as it is in heaven. The Sabbath grain field scene (Mark 2:23–

28) from Jesus’ life shows us how clearly his small group strategy and tactics worked to

change the entire course of human history. Jesus’ walk through the grain fields with his

small group of disciples was an enactment of the nature of God’s presence in and through

the group on earth. The small group of disciples was picking raw grain (and probably

eating it) on the Sabbath. Jesus used this event as a parable of the nature of priesthood,

196
reflecting back on what David did with his band of outlaw men. He entered the house of

God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also

gave some to his companions (Mark 2:26). Jesus, as had David, reaffirmed the ancient

covenantal meaning of faith community to become a kingdom of (community) priests on

a journey together (Exodus 19:6).

The calling the Small Group Togetheris a core value for the development of small

group ministry the calling together of a group to experience the intimacy of Jesus’

vulnerable relationship with Abba God. This molds a group to become a model of God’s

dwelling place on earth. This original discipleship group existed in juxtaposition to their

surrounding culture and society. Jesus modeled God’s way of transforming the world. He

called out a small group of people to experience their own exodus journey together, to

move from the enslavement of controlling social, political and religious patterns and to

enter into the freedom of pouring]new wine into new wineskins (Mark 2:22). The faithful

small group with Jesus in their midst was the visible demonstration of heaven come to

earth. Mallison (1989 pp.3-4) asserted that Christ’s key ministry strategy was a small

group strategy. While Jesus ministered to thousands, he provided discipleship and shared

ministry with twelve and a few others. Jesus worked in groups of two or more (Mark

1:16–17), although his most frequently noted group was the Twelve. Jesus’ mission was

to demonstrate the nearness of God to alienated humanity. To do this he formed small

group communities. While Jesus did not live, travel or work alone (Mark 1:12), at times

he chose to be alone. These were times of prayer, reflection and temptation, times when

God and angels ministered to him. These were times when he invested in the community

of heaven so that his community of earth would so reflect his heavenly connection. Jesus

197
proclaimed and ministered in the midst of people because he received and revelled in the

ministry of the community of heaven God’s communal and intimate presence. People

were his ministry and mission. He intervened and completed the frustrated and unfinished

work of God’s creation. He reclaimed the “paradise lost” the lost community of God with

humanity and humanity with God. In Mark 3, firstly, Jesus called to himself those he

wanted; secondly, He appointed twelve; Thirdly, He wanted them to be with him;

Fourthly, Jesus sent them out to proclaim; and lastly, He sent them out to have authority.

As the Logos, Jesus called this small group into being and gave them the right to become

children of God children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a

husband’s will, but born of God (John 1:12–13). These were the new family of God, a

family not by bloodline but by the Spirit. As the Word was made flesh, so this small

group family of God was flesh. As the Spirit made Jesus the incarnate one (Luke 1:35),

so the Spirit made this gathered group the incarnate community of Christ. His word was

his nature, which was action and community. Christ formed the group to become Christ

to the world. As Jesus’ face shone among them and toward them, so their faces would

shine as light together for one another and in the midst of a dark world. The one who was

with God in community from the beginning was sent to be with a few so that the few

could be with a few more in each expanding gathering. Lohfink (1989 pp.33-35) argued

that because the circle of disciples was greater than twelve, including men and women,

the concept of the Twelve was a schematic element introduced by Matthew, not given the

task of surrogate or replacement for Israel, but to represent Israel symbolically, to be

what Israel was not able to become. This view tends to reduce the importance of the

practical and existential implications of Jesus working with a consistent small group over

198
an extended period of time. However, Jesus specifically named twelve men to be this real

group. Recognizing the constant and continuing references to the names of specific group

members, it is clear that the group was not only a symbolic representation of Israel, but a

strategic reenactment of God’s primal pattern for humanity the gathering of a small group

community with God in their presence. This enactment harked all the way back to the

Garden, the early covenantal families, and Moses’ decentralization of a budding nation of

priests. The Twelve were first called disciples, usually defined as learners or followers.

The etymology of the word implies one who is being influenced Webster (1970 p.401).

Kraus (1979 p.17) explained that those who accepted Jesus’ way were called disciples,

Christians, and dedicated ones, to indicate their relation to Christ. They were to ‘follow,’

‘obey,’ ‘share in,’ and ‘imitate’ Christ. They were mathētai (students) of Jesus. As leader

of the small learning and following group, Jesus was responsible for their purpose and

actions (Lohfink, 1989 p.32).

Jesus designated the Twelve to be apostles. An apostle is one who is sent forth. The

etymology of the word implies one who is sent from. Jesus first called the small group to

come and follow, then to go and minister (Lohfink, 1989). In relationships with Jesus,

this inner group of twelve grew out of discipleship into apostleship. The following and

learning flowed into the being sent and ministering. Implied in the life-cycle of the

faithful small group is the process of journey, growth, transformation and progression

into ministry. Mission is always the fulfillment of learning. Coleman (1992) described

this small group movement as eight stages of discipleship: selection, association,

consecration, impartation, demonstration, delegation, supervision and reproduction.

Coleman (1992) further asserts that the overarching importance of the Twelve as a small

199
group community in their discipleship with Jesus. He describes Jesus’ small group

strategy as the principle of concentration: Here is the wisdom of his method … the

fundamental principle of concentration upon those he intended to use. One cannot

transform a world except as individuals in the world are transformed, and individuals

cannot be changed except as they are molded in the hands of the Master. The necessity is

apparent not only to select a few … but to keep the group small enough to be able to

work effectively with them (p.24). However, the Twelve did not remain static in their

relationships with Jesus or with one another. Their life together with Jesus over two to

three years reformed their experience, awareness and understanding of reality and their

purpose for life. They came to discover the truth of Jesus’ proclamation, the kingdom of

God is near (Mark 1:15). The biblical image of “kingdom” is that realm where God is

present and influential. Wherever Jesus lived, moved and acted he brought along his new

family of heaven, that is, his intimate connection to Abba God and the angels of heaven.

This intimate connection to the familial community of the heavenly realm was

dramatically demonstrated on the “mount of transfiguration” when he appeared before

the disciples talking with Moses and Elijah (Matthew 17:1–8). It comes as no surprise

that a bright cloud enveloped them, and a voice from the cloud said, ‘This is my Son,

whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!’ ” (Matthew 17:5). Where Jesus

stood and walked, the entire community of heaven stood and walked with him. He

represented heaven’s community on earth. And he brought the Twelve, along with others,

into the realm and relationship of his heavenly family. The realm of God is the

community of God among humanity and the human community in the presence of God.

God’s realm is the eternal community of real persons in relationship and work together.

200
The realm of God was “near” the group because Jesus was in their presence and because

they were brought into one another’s presence by the God who desires to live in the midst

of people. The gathering of the Twelve is foundational to the proclamation and

demonstration of the gospel as good news: God is with us; God has come down to show

us the way of salvation (Mark 1:1).The good news about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is

that he came to bring God to all people and all people to one another. The good news is

that God loves all human beings and has sent Jesus to proclaim, establish and enact the

realm of God on earth. This enactment of the divine community was focused and

launched in the group experience and ministry of the Twelve. There is no good news if

humanity is not in community with God and if this community was not concretely

modeled by Jesus among the Twelve. The good news is not Jesus alone as the rugged

individual, but Jesus with people, especially Jesus with the Twelve.

It is good news that God, through Jesus, can bring together any combination of

persons to become a community to be healed and to bring healing to others. The

community called and calling healed and healing, forgiven and forgiving, reconciled and

reconciling, is the community with Jesus and from Jesus to the world. The healing

community of the gathered disciples was not only directed toward humanity but toward

all creation. Hanson (1986 p.397) argued that the healed community will bring about a

healed creation, that there is an intimate relationship between humanity and the physical

universe which humanity without Christ is destroying. The Twelve were the first

microcosm of this good news community on earth as reality and action. The story of

Jesus is the story of Jesus with the Twelve. Hauerwas (1981 p.41) states that there is no

real Jesus except as he is known through the kind of life he nurtured among his disciples.

201
The Twelve were the prototype and foundation of Jesus’ universal call to all humanity to

become small communities of disciples. Hauerwas (1981) further said that the universal

can only be claimed through learning the particular form of discipleship required by this

particular man. The particular kind of discipleship to which Jesus called people was

formed as a traveling community of twelve men surrounded by other groups of both

women and men. Jesus’ story is a narrative of small group discipleship. Several

theologians have called attention to the ethical and moral implications of Jesus’

relationship with the disciples. However, few have called attention to the particularity of

the Twelve as a generic and universal small group paradigm. Some have focused on the

political act of Jesus in calling a community to be around him to be formed by his own

character. But everything that has been said about the general community of disciples is

also particularly and concretely true about the small group of twelve(Hauerwas, pp.36-

52).So it is extremely important that the particular life of the Twelve is seen as reflective

and fulfilling of the primal small group model God desired for creation from the

beginning. The gospel is a story of God’s realm coming to a few select people in a

particular time and space to begin the reclamation of all creation. Hauerwas (1981 p.45)

stated that there is no way to know the Kingdom except by learning the story of Jesus.

For his story defines the nature of how God rules and how such a rule creates a

corresponding world and society. There is no way to talk about the social ethics of

Christianity except as they are determined by the form of Jesus’ life. To be a disciple is to

be part of a new community, a new polity, which is formed on Jesus’ obedience to the

cross. The constitutions of this new polity are the Gospels. The Gospels are not just the

depiction of a man, but they are manuals for the training necessary to be part of the new

202
community. To be a disciple means to share Christ’s story, to participate in the reality of

God’s rule.

The Gospels can be likened to training manuals for small group life with Jesus. They

describe the form, content and polity of Jesus’ strategic ministry of intervention into old

human institutions and systems. In establishing the Twelve, Jesus created a new

prototype. Kraus (1979 pp.13-26, 27-50) has suggested that Jesus’ work with the

disciples as a prototype was authentic to the original intent of God’s desire for humanity

to live in community. The Twelve were a prototype group for the wider community of

disciples. They were a beginning, but not a complete version of the prototype they could

not be a full prototype because they were all male. For from the beginning God created

men and women to be in community together. Jesus’ calling of twelve men was an act of

intervention, that is, a corrective intervention to call humanity back to the authentic

purpose of God for men and women to live in harmony with God and with one another.

He called the Twelve to follow him and to rediscover how to live with God, women,

children and other men. The Twelve as a small group were not in themselves or by

themselves the final prototype, but a launching pad, laboratory and mission group to form

the initiative of this new prototype of human community. As Jesus walked with the

Twelve, he gathered women to join them as extended family. The twelve disciples

became the twelve apostles, the authenticated witnesses (Kraus, 1979) of Jesus’ personal

authority with God the Father. The Twelve could speak of Jesus from firsthand

experience. They were in his small group together. They lived together. They shared pain

together. They had conflicts with one another. They shared ministry together. They

imitated Jesus together. They experienced the incarnate shalom of God as human,

203
accessible and vulnerable (Kraus, 1979 pp.27-50).They received the commission and

Spirit of witness to the original Word made flesh (p.19). The relationship of the Twelve

with Jesus was a validation of the realness of Jesus’ humanity that he was not just an

apparition or a metaphysical fantasy. Kraus (1979 pp.31-35) further argued that this is a

key historical critique of docetism, that Jesus only seemed like a human being. Life with

the Twelve validated his full humanity because he validated their full humanity. A

docetic Jesus would have no use for a specific small group with whom to live and

love.Jesus, the man, lived and traveled with a small group of twelve men, around whom

were many other groups of men and women. Jesus lived in constant and complete human

encounter with a particular group of human beings. Lohfink (1989 pp.32-33) affirmed

that these disciples were carefully selected, named and led by Jesus. This group had a

new and unique future. They had to release the patterns and values of their past to adopt

the character of Christ for their futures: Thus Jesus required of his disciples a determined

turning away from their own families…. Common life with Jesus took the place of family

and of all previous ties. This common life meant more than merely being with a teacher,

listening to him and observing him…. The disciples’ community of life with Jesus was a

community of destiny. It went so far that the disciples had to be prepared to suffer what

Jesus suffered, if necessary, even persecution or execution. Today, following the model

of Jesus with the Twelve, God continues to call small groups of men and women to

gather around Christ, to give up previous connectional ties, to learn together the way of

Jesus, and to allow their transformed life together to impact a world cut off from their

Creator’s primary intention and ultimate purpose. This is why the focus upon Jesus, the

Christ, as ultimate small group leader is so pivotal to the meaning and practice of all

204
human small groups. There is no redemptive gathering into a redeemed humanity unless

Jesus continues to practice this ministry by the power of the Spirit throughout human

history.

2.6.5 Discipleship for effective home fellowships groups

Those who accepted Peter’s message were baptized…. They devoted themselves to

the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. (Acts

2:41–42). The apostles were those who had had a personal encounter with the risen Jesus,

who had personally sent them out into the world to start other groups of followers.

According Dunn (1975 pp.272-75), the word Apostle means delegate, envoy or

messenger, one with the “authority to represent Jesus’ community elsewhere and to set up

local communities of Jesus in other places. They had three unique attributes: firstly, they

had been commissioned personally by the risen Jesus in a resurrection appearance,

secondly, they were missionaries and church founders, and thirdly, they had a

distinctively and decisively eschatological role. The apostles were called to start small

Christian communities (small groups). Their authority for beginning these small

communities of believers was Jesus himself, who founded an original community of

twelve men, related to other small disciple groups. These groups expanded into multiple

group clusters of one hundred twenty men and women before Pentecost.

It was important for these new small communities of Christians to focus upon the

discipline and direction of the apostles, who carried the group story and the community

experience of Jesus. They had lived with Jesus, walked with Jesus, talked with Jesus, and

argued with Jesus. They had to be able to transfer both the message and experience

(medium) of being with Jesus to the new groups. Their group life with Jesus was their

205
message. The experience (medium) of the Twelve, the seventy and the one hundred

twenty was the experimental context where the teaching of Jesus could take on real

meaning, real relationship, real personhood and real community. The apostles taught with

authority because they taught from personal and communal experience. They had

experienced Jesus’ message as his medium. The new group communities they started

needed the apostolic discipline of both experience and teaching, word and sacrament, that

came out of direct contact with Jesus. This discipline of personal experience was behind

the polemical response to Gnosticism in John’s first epistle: That which was from the

beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have

looked at and our hands have touched this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The

life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life,

which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have

seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with

the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. (1 John 1:1–3).

The apostolic drive for firsthand encounter through personal, touchable and concrete

evidence was absolutely necessary for the continuity and consistency of the real human

fellowships who gathered in the name (nature and way) of Jesus. Jesus’ life with the

apostles was a real human fellowship, which means that the small group fellowship of

Christians needed to be a real human fellowship, a flesh-and-blood community of healing

and reconciling persons, men and women, young and old, Gentile and Jew. The teaching

of the apostles was the teaching and life of Jesus through firsthand face-to-face

experience. Jesus’ communal life was both the direction and discipline of every ecclesia.

This apostolic treasure of firsthand instruction and experience with Jesus was sustained

206
through the ongoing mutual and supportive grouping of the apostles in Jerusalem. They

continued to minister, teach, heal and confront in partnership (koinonia) together. The

Twelve called together the larger group of disciples in order to pick seven “to wait on

tables” so that the apostles could give their “attention to prayer and the ministry of the

word” (Acts 5:12–6:7). Even the apostle Paul went to Jerusalem to meet with the core

apostolic group to hold dialogue on the question of circumcision. The community of the

Twelve was the center of theological and christological integrity for all the small

Christian communities being formed in both the Jewish and Gentile worlds (Acts 15:1–

35). The dialogical and experiential grouping process of the Twelve was an important

community of reflection, where each was held accountable to maintain integrity with the

life and words of Jesus. As this apostolic group continued to hold itself in mutual

accountability and integrity, the other newly birthed small groups maintained their

discipline of listening carefully to the disciples’ teaching, which was considered a direct

word and life pattern from the resurrected Jesus himself.

For these small groups of Christians to be able to sustain a new way of life in both the

pagan and religiously closed societies of Jerusalem, they had to adopt and practice simple

but definitive community-building disciplines. Luke’s summary of these universal and

key small group disciplines included devotion to the apostles’ teaching and to the

fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer (Acts 2:42). We know that these four

acts are key group disciplines because of Luke’s use of the term devoted, which means

continuing steadily, intensively, with focus, strong purpose and intentionality. Without

the consistent and recurring practice of these crucial disciplines the new home-gathered

communities would dissolve into pervasive and oppressive urban cultures. But instead,

207
through the diligent (devoted) practice of every day discipline, these small Christian

communities began to attract more and more attention, transforming the very culture that

sought to wipe them out. These groups were living examples of the realm of heaven

coming to tent on earth, transforming human systems even while these same systems

developed more oppressive techniques to rid themselves of the mobile heavenly

communities. These earthly communities, these ecclesia, received their identity and

purpose from the risen Lord who sat in the presence of Abba God in heaven. In Greek

ecclesia was a familiar word. From the fifth century B.C. onwards it referred to the

regular ‘assembly’ of citizens in a city to decide matters affecting their welfare (Banks,

1980 pp.34-35). The communities of believers became family along with the Son who

lives in eternal community with the Father and works to bring brothers and sisters into his

new heavenly family through the ambassadorship of apostles and the foreign consulates

of small local households on earth. Lee and Cowan (1986 pp.190) explained that the key

to the vision of Jesus is that the parenthood of God makes us all sisters and brothers.

God’s parenthood puts an end to human patriarchy…. God’s parenthood is a critical

subversion of all structures of domination. While Lee and Cowan represent a liberationist

strategy for the formation and purpose of small groups as “base communities,” their

theological understanding of Jesus’ role as elder brother is key to the understanding of the

ongoing need for small group ministry patterned after the foundations of the ecclesia in

Acts 2. If there is no locally identifiable new family of two or more who gather in the

name of Jesus, there can be no ongoing expression of the good news incarnate. Unless

there are established beachheads of small house groups in the cities and towns, there is no

hope of God occupying the whole land. The continuing incarnation of Jesus comes

208
through the Spirit who ushers a plurality of incarnate groups into culture and society. It is

Jesus meeting with two or more that is both the mind and the method of the gospel.

The practices and ethics of these Christ-centered ecclesia were earth-directed, but

their source, values and center of discipline were heavenward. The apostle Paul said that

Christ is the head source of the body, the ecclesia (Col 1:18). The Greek word kephalē

can mean head or source. It carries the descriptive image of head waters or source of flow

or center of relationships, and does not reflect a hierarchical image of control from above,

dominance from higher up, or manipulation. Banks (1980 p.45) noted that this passage

brings ecclesia and kephalē together. He is the kephalē of the body, the ecclesia.

Unfortunately, too often the spatial and geographical concepts of height and position

have been confused with the relational concept of center and source. This is key to the

understanding of ecclesia not being an organization and structure with Jesus at the top,

but being a gathering of human beings with Jesus in their midst. The commitment of the

ecclesia to regular gathering was their core discipline. Gathering allowed them a

consistent practice of the four key disciplines of Christian community. Postema (1983)

affirmed that discipline creates space for encounter with God, with creation, with self and

with others. Without this core discipline of gathering, there is no such thing as the church.

Christ now has an earthly body if there is a small group who forms it.

Unfortunately, when those who are products of the Western concept of classroom

education hear the word teaching, we bring a very strong image and bias to this biblical

term and pattern. The teaching of Jesus and the apostles was exousia, out of the very

essence of who they were (Matthew 7:28–29). Their teaching was their experience of

Abba God in relationship with Jesus and with them by the power of the Spirit who made

209
them to be “Christ” together. The apostles’ teaching had to be a group experience pouring

out of a group experience. Their memories of being with Jesus in a group were reflected

and mediated through their ongoing group which were shared as interpreted story in the

context of house groups. They would have had no teaching except that they continued to

invest in small group life. Their teaching was their life together, using the fullness of their

mental, emotional and physical capacities as human beings in community. Learning is a

relational process. Learning is dialogical and experimental. Learning is an integrated

experience of a whole person among whole people. Learning is a communal, familial and

tribal process from a center and source flowing to fertile and tilled ground. As the

apostles gathered people together, life was their foundation and field of instruction. Like

Jesus, they told stories and led gutsy discussions. They encouraged curiosity and affirmed

questions. Arguing, debating, confronting, challenging, reflecting, sharing, feeling and

planning to act were all part of the group process. They practiced non condemning

responses to the wondering, the inquiring, and the conflicting. They wanted real men and

women to have a safe place to deal with the hard questions of life. And in all the

discussion and teaching, they pointed to Jesus’ life as the center and source of the

community. They were, like Jesus, more interested in formation of lives and relationships

than they were in getting people to accept the right information. There was and is no New

Testament discipline of teaching that is not group bound. For the apostles, the only true

learning environment was that which they had experienced with Jesus, the small group in

conversation about real life.

210
 The word community is one way to translate the Greek term koinōnia. The context of

Acts suggests that koinōnia was a general descriptive word for the gospel’s impact on all

aspects of human relationships. In Christ every human activity and intention was guided

by the law of love: love God, love neighbor, love self. The apostles understood that the

essence of life “in the name of Jesus” was the emerging reality of reconciled

relationships. Just as Jesus built human community wherever he ministered through his

teaching and his life, the apostles, who imitated Jesus, were builders of ecclesia

(gathering). The apostle Paul advocated and incarnated this reconciling, relational,

personal community-building attitude of Jesus. For Christ’s love compels us, because we

are convinced that one died for all…. And he died for all, that those who live should no

longer live for themselves but for him (2 Corinthians 5:14–15). And living for Jesus

demands that we live for others after the model of Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17–21).The

apostles also understood that the reality of reconciliation would not happen unless there

was intentionality and space to practice the disciplines of reconciled relationships. From

the model of Jesus they understood this disciplined space to be in small groups of persons

who came together around the real person of Jesus. While these groups were not

intentionally limited in numerical size, they started small, honoring Jesus’ parameter,

wherever two or three came together (assembled or gathered) there was ecclesia. The

disciplines of coming together and of going together were apostolic because they were

Jesus’ group disciplines. The process of sending groups into mission was also consistent

with Jesus’ strategy. The Jerusalem apostolic group called together the whole network of

ecclesia to choose a subgroup to go to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. This team

gathered the Antioch assembly together to encourage and strengthen them. Paul and

211
Barnabas remained with them to teach and proclaim the word of the Lord. The disciplines

of teaching, proclamation and community building were always practiced by mission

teams who themselves acted together (Acts 15:22–23, 30–35).Just as Jesus had originally

sent them, the apostles went out from a larger group to travel in twos, threes and fours.

The apostles (sent ones) traveled and ministered together in community in small mission

groups. While they practiced the disciplines of community building among one another,

they also modeled and taught others to practice these same disciplines of human

reconciliation through small- and medium-sized groups. The apostolic team ministry, by

example, called new believers to practice the law of love as they observed the apostles

practicing the law of love. It was this constant display of concrete apostolic reality, of

real Christian community, alongside the words of the Lord, which taught the believers in

various cities what it meant to follow Jesus. The apostolic mission was the portable

community of Jesus who birthed other groups.

Paul called upon the Philippian ecclesia (church) to join with others in following my

example” and “live according to the pattern we gave to you (Phil 3:17). This was the

example of a person living in intimate relationship to Christ and the pattern of living in

community with one another. These are the two dimensions of the Christian discipline of

community, a balance of word (teaching or didachē) and sacrament (community or

koinōnia).Word in the Reformed tradition is often understood to mean the written and

verbal explanation of the gospel, often losing its existential meaning as the person and

work (community) of the historical Jesus who lived in real human relationships. This is

the intended polemic against Gnosticism in John’s Gospel, the Word became flesh and

made his dwelling among us (John 1:14). From our inheritance of rationalism and

212
empiricism of the Enlightenment (and before that in scholasticism) there has been an

ongoing tendency in Western theological thought to reduce the full humanity and

community of Jesus to a ministry of the written or spoken word. Such has been an

ongoing modified form of Gnosticism. Thankfully, the modern existential pragmatics of

the social sciences seem to be calling the Christian faith back to its primal roots in the full

spirituality of human community. This modern movement of human potential is one of

the pressures placed upon classic theology to again find its center and balance in the full

humanity and community of Jesus. The real disciplines and elements of Christian

community were partly, if not greatly, lost in the Reformation. According to Webster

(1970 p.1252), the word sacrament has to do with an oath of allegiance … a mutual

contribution made by two parties. The covenantal root of the concept of sacrament is the

basis for the discipline of community, that wherever two or more come together in

mutual commitment to Christ and to one another, there is the real presence of Christ. This

formed the fullness of Jesus’ and the apostles’ teaching. These two group disciplines

found their integrative and unifying fulfillment in the specific sacramental event of the

group’s breaking of the bread.

For the small groups of early Christian community, the intentional discipline and

practice of breaking bread was foundational. The definition and purpose of the breaking

of bread had to do with the very nature and being of their human community (Webster,

1970 p.995). To be in an ecclesia was to be a participant in the shared breaking of bread.

The apostles gathered believers together around the centrality of the Person of Jesus, who

had gathered them around the table of the Last Supper. Jesus had first broken the bread

with the twelve apostles. Whether he did so with only the Twelve (Matthew 26:20) or

213
with more (Luke 22:14, his apostles, Dunn (1975) and others would say the Twelve and

others, the importance here is that a small group of apostles was present with Jesus in a

home. The apostolic repetition of the discipline of breaking bread in homes was an

ongoing reenactment of the place and spirit of the Last Supper, which they had shared in

a guest room, or a large upper room of a home in Jerusalem (Luke 22:10–12). The shared

meal was a continuing return to the scene of the group event and an ongoing portrayal of

the story. For the early ecclesia the breaking of the bread was deeply attached to their

meeting as small groups in homes. This third discipline of the early Christian small

groups, like the others, was deeply rooted in the historical reality of the apostles with

Jesus. The place, the ethos, the feelings, the conversation and the exact words of Jesus

were recalled every time the apostles led the meal. This pattern of physical, spatial and

geographical reenactment was rooted in Hebrew history. Jesus had intentionally tied the

celebration and reenactment of the Passover to his own breaking of bread. The Passover

meal was originally a small group home event. The Lord’s Supper was a home event in

continuity with the Exodus story (Exodus 12). According to Voegelin (1978 pp.10), the

Hebrew practice of spiritual discipline was for recall (remember) and replay (reenact).

Voegelin’s (1978) philosophical apologetic and critique of what he called apocalyptic-

gnostic thinkers whose purpose of abolishing a ‘past history’ of mankind relates to this

discussion of the nature of small group as sacramental community. Voegelin (1978)

argued that the remembering and reenacting in consciousness of the true historical past

the real events of the past is of prime importance to maintaining our human sense of

identity, balance and direction. The historical dimension at issue was not a piece of ‘past

history’ but the permanent presence of the process of reality in which man participates

214
with his conscious existence. The ongoing practice of meeting in small groups in the

presence of Christ is a continuing affirmation of the historical reality of the life, death and

resurrection of Jesus with the Twelve and the early apostolic communities. The words of

Jesus at the last supper, Do this in remembrance of me (Luke 22:19) is a call to small

group life.The re-doing-ness of the breaking of bread was deeply and intimately

connected to the re-doing-ness of the meeting together in homes and the re-doing-ness of

the small group community, the ecclesia. Today we are again moved to ask the crucial

question, Is this special call to the re-doing-ness of the breaking of bread in homes a

radical and historical critique of the institutionalization and clericalization of the breaking

of bread in larger religious gatherings and buildings? The small group celebration of the

supper would be in direct conflict with most current Catholic and Protestant practice. In

such organizational systems the Lord’s Supper is ordinarily performed in the sanctuary

with an ordained minister or priest. This Christendom practice continues to raise

questions about group size, place of practice, intimacy of community and historical

rootedness. Biblical foundations strongly suggest the need for a return to intentional

small group celebrations of the Lord’s Supper wherever two or three come together in

Christ (homes, work, schools). For religious institutionalists this is a tough movement.

In the small group communities, the sharing of a general meal together was directly

connected to the sharing of the Lord’s Supper. Eating together affirmed the importance of

the group’s mutual and interdependent economic and physical sustenance. These were no

longer separate individuals who had no connection to or responsibility for one another.

These were now people who were bound together for human community, for food, for

money, for touch, for survival, for salvation, for growth and for preparation for earthly

215
ministry. The sharing of the meal was integral and central to the expression of a totally

shared life. If a member of the group had no food nor money to buy food, the rest of the

group shared their money and food. The individual’s bread became the community’s

bread because all bread came from God. The Lord’s Prayer uses bread as a specific

symbol for the total daily physical and economic needs of the community of disciples.

Give us each day our daily bread (Luke 11:3). Jesus also taught the apostles to feed those

who were hungry in smaller groups. When confronted with the hunger of the multitude,

Jesus told the Twelve, “You give them something to eat” (Luke 9:13). Jesus gave the

apostles direction to divide the crowd into smaller groups of about fifty. This was a

numerical and spatial movement from which the Twelve learned a universal strategy for

ministry: Do not try to minister to the whole crowd at one time. Serve the people in

smaller groups. Feed the people when they are in more intimate communities. The

division of the crowd paralleled the division of the post-Pentecost Jerusalem crowd into

smaller groups for the breaking of bread in their homes. The sharing of food, in the life of

Jesus, was distinctively a small group experience. The apostle Paul’s strong theological

and christological centering of all meals in the meal of Jesus with the Twelve is a very

important foundation for all small Christian gatherings. When you come together, it is not

the Lord’s Supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for

anybody else. One remains hungry; another gets drunk…. Do you despise the [ecclesia]

of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? For anyone who

eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment….

When you come together to eat, wait for each other. (1 Corinthians 11:20–22, 29, 33).

The meal of the gathering is a measure of the intention, integrity and maturity of the

216
small group. And the communal reality and value of all meals should be measured

against the spirit and discipline of the Lord’s Supper. The gathering must be sensitive to

every member of the group, where every member is looking out for the needs of every

other member.

The enactment of the Lord’s Supper gave focus and ultimate meaning to the more

general practice of eating meals together. The mere sharing of food with others was not

enough. The sharing had to be rooted in the event of Jesus breaking bread with the

apostles. The Lord’s Supper defined the meaning and direction for all other suppers:

Jesus was in the midst of the house group, which was the physical body of the risen Lord.

The members of the group were called to feed one another, to live for one another, to

serve one another, and to love one another. It is no accident that the Gospel of John

places Jesus’ teaching about washing one another’s feet and loving one another in the

context of the Lord’s Supper (John 13). The shared meal was the focused event around

which all other sharing and serving of the body should happen. Friends and family share

meals and life together. Intimacy exists as a way of life in the household where people

show deep affection for one another, fight with one another, and plan to lay down their

lives for one another. The meal is the central sacrifice of the sacrificial community. The

sharing of the meal was to be a reflection of this intimate and loving community. The

abuse of mealtime was a visible insensitivity to Jesus, who presided at every meal. All

meals were to be measured by the rule of the one meal that bridged earth and heaven,

today and forever. Dunn (1975 pp.184-85) pointed out that in so far as it (the common

meal) harked back to the fellowship meals of Jesus’ ministry, particularly the last, it

would almost certainly carry the same note of eschatological expectation (Luke 22:18,

217
‘from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the Kingdom of God

comes’).The small group or house ecclesia was the concrete space and place where the

spiritual discipline of breaking bread was to be practiced and critiqued. The small group

ecclesia was also the space where a glimpse of God’s future for humanity could be seen,

where men and women, adults and children, free and slave could relate with one another

based upon the new values, new character and new hope of forgiveness and

reconciliation. The Christian small group was to be a foretaste of the meals of heaven.

The fourth group discipline which the apostolic groups practiced was prayer.

According to Dunn (1975), the discipline of prayer gave the other group disciplines

direction and meaning. This prayer discipline was specifically a group discipline and not

a private discipline. While Jesus had taught the Twelve to pray (Luke 11:1–4), their

practice of prayer had little content or intensity until their communal experience in the

upper room. When the Twelve gathered with the one hundred others in ecclesia they all

joined together constantly in prayer (Acts 1:14).There is no evidence that when the

Twelve were with Jesus they had any regular practice of prayer, individually or

corporately. When the three were with Jesus on the Mount of Olives he called them to

pray so that you will not fall into temptation,” but he later found them asleep (Luke

22:45–46). Also, when the other nine disciples failed in their attempt to exorcise a demon

from a boy, Jesus pointed out that “this kind can come out only by prayer (Mark 9:28–

29).In the upper room this group discipline of prayer was learned with the women. The

women had been passionate participants in the suffering and death of Jesus (Luke 23:27,

49, 55). It is possible that the women were experienced in the group discipline of prayer

before going into the upper room. Could it be that their model of group prayer was

218
formative for the Twelve men in the upper room? Luke’s Gospel, far beyond the

emphasis of the other synoptic Gospels, emphasizes the reflective and passionate

character of Mary, the mother of Jesus, even including her poetry (Luke 1:26–56). Luke

suggests that she was already a disciplined person of reflection and prayer. Perhaps Mary

was instrumental in teaching the Twelve the discipline of prayer in the upper room group.

It was in the midst of this shared discipline of men and women together in prayer that the

Spirit of Jesus came in fulfillment of Joel’s prophetic message: “Your sons and daughters

will prophesy…. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my spirit in

those days” (Acts 2:17–18). Even as the discipline of prayer was shared by men and

women, so the Spirit was given to men and women together in the group. And it was men

and women together from the group who shared the good news of the resurrection

throughout the whole city of Jerusalem. The amazement and perplexity of the citizens

may have been partially the result of seeing both women and men participating together

in such a public display of passion, intensity, emotion, and common purpose.

Dunn (1975) further explained that after learning the discipline of prayer in the upper

room with men and women together, the apostles helped new believers to form household

groups of men and women, young and old, who practiced this group discipline of prayer

together. The learned experience of the power of group prayer became a major

component of the life of every small group ecclesia that met in the homes and courts. The

groups’ discipline of prayer came out of continuity with the apostles’ experience of

prayer, which had been nurtured by the prayer life of Jesus. Dunn (1975 p.187) states that

the prayer of primitive Christianity finds its starting point and center in the prayer of

Jesus. But beyond this, as with the continuation of the common meal, so in prayer, the

219
first Christians were not merely doing as Jesus did, but doing it in conscious reference to

and continuing dependence upon Jesus. The four small group disciplines of the early

house ecclesia were mutually interwoven into the fabric of their being together. The

apostles’ teaching informed the character and meaning of the koinonia, the breaking of

bread and the prayers. The shared meal added substance and symbol to the community.

And prayer centered the community in the intimacy of the Son with Abba God. The four

disciplines were founded in the historical continuity of the life of Jesus with the Twelve.

The practice of these four small group disciplines gave the ecclesia the character and

courage to practice its ministry, which had been passed on from Jesus with the Twelve to

the ecclesia. The ecclesia, practicing the four disciplines of Jesus, became small groups

open to the formation of Christ’s life among them. Their receptivity to being guided

together and to being directed into the future was a product of an apostolic attitude which

undergirded all their experience. They were encouraged to listen, discuss and respond to

Jesus as a voluntary experience of their own curiosity. Theirs was an inductive

experience of Christ totally embraced as their own.

Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they

received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see

if what Paul said was true. Many of the Jews believed, as did also a number of prominent

Greek women and many Greek men (Acts 17:11–12). According Dunn (1975), the

strategic plan of going to the Jewish synagogue (assembly) of a particular town or city

was Paul’s regular practice for forming new gatherings of Christian believers. At the

synagogue, Paul reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the

Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead (Acts 17:2–3). Those who had assembled in

220
the tradition of Jewish culture and religion became those who were called by Christ to

gather as ecclesia. The movement between synagogue and ecclesia often called for a

radical regrouping of the men with the women since they were generally separated in the

synagogue. The ecclesia, made up of Jews and Gentiles, men and women, were founded

around a traditional process of building community through biblical, theological and

experiential reflection. Among the ecclesia the original sources for faith exploration were

the Old Testament Scriptures and the apostles’ firsthand experience with Jesus. Just as

Jesus led the apostles to experience his being and teaching through communal reflection

of the Old Testament Scriptures, so the apostles expected the small house groups to meet

together to share their reflections of Jesus and his relationship with the Father. The

ecclesia were formed out of firsthand experience with the apostles, who had firsthand

experience with Christ as he taught, ministered, suffered, died and rose from the grave.

Unlike the synagogues where the Scriptures were interpreted through several layers of

Jewish commentary, the ecclesia called its members to the immediate and personal

experience of the apostles with Jesus, to firsthand contact with the biblical texts, and to

firsthand charismatic experience of the Spirit. These firsthand experiences were reflective

of the inductive nature of Jesus’ community and apostolic ecclesia.

Induction is the process of allowing a source, an experience, an event, a person, or a

text to speak for itself. The Holy Spirit is the great inductive agent of Christ in the small

group community. The Spirit must be given the freedom to teach the group and its

members what Christ desires for the group to know and understand. Induction is a tough

group discipline because much of Western educational theory is built upon a hermeneutic

of deduction, that is, having an expert interpret the primary sources and tell the group

221
what they mean. Deduction is an honorable and helpful discipline if practiced within the

greater arena of an inductive ethic. If expert deduction controls the thought of a group,

the Spirit is greatly limited in its freedom to teach and empower. This was a source of

constant tension in apostolic authority. The apostles were called by Jesus to call together

small groups, teach them the inductive disciplines of community in Christ and to let them

go (with some guidance) by the direction of the Spirit. The Spirit’s ethic and attitude of

inductive learning and empowerment had to balance the leadership temptation of the

apostles to control the ecclesia and stifle their creative and personal sense of divine

direction. According to Webster (1970 p.1966, 718), the apostles were to be group

spiritual directors, not CEOs of controlled systems. From an educational perspective

deduction is in polarity with induction. Induction is the process of allowing an original

source to speak for itself. Deduction is the process of an expert summarizing and

systematizing what the original said, which forces the learner first to understand the

summary and system of the expert. Induction allows the learner to encounter the source

firsthand. In the case of ecclesia, induction was a key to the noble character of the

Bereans, demonstrated by their direct scriptural and charismatic encounter with word and

Spirit. Deduction, the temptation to defer to a human system in relating to God, was part

of the Thessalonian syndrome (Acts 17:1–9). Why were the Thessalonians so jealous

except that their closed system was being threatened by this new, firsthand experience

with God?

222
 The charismata as inductive experiences were the ongoing creative events, the

immediate mutual ministries of the Spirit at work in and through the ecclesia. As Dunn

(1975 pp.260-65) has said, the charismata are the living actions of the body of Christ. The

body of Christ only comes to realization in any place through the manifestations of

grace…. Christian community exists only in the interplay of charismatic community, in

the concrete realizations of grace, in the actual being and doing for others in word and

deed. The apostles did not want to inhibit believers from personally and corporately

exploring their new life of the Spirit. Instead, they wanted the ecclesia to have the

freedom to exercise the exousia of Jesus as their own exousia. And this could only

happen as they were willing to risk firsthand encounters with the Spirit. They

demonstrated their community hermeneutic by calling each ecclesia to explore primary

faith sources personally and inductively. The house groups reasoned together with the

apostles about their experience with Jesus and their understanding of Scripture. They

experienced life in the Spirit together as a community. In sum, their three primary

inductive sources were the apostles’ life with Jesus, the Hebrew Scriptures and their

charismatic experience of the Spirit with one another in community. These three

resources the present Lord Jesus Christ, those present persons in mutual ministry of the

group through the Spirit, and the Scriptures have continued to be the primary inductive

sources for the ecclesia throughout salvation history. For each of these primary inductive

sources in the historic life of the Christian small group, there is a parallel small group

discipline to be learned and practiced. These three disciplines are the discipline of

participating in the prayer of Jesus with the Father, the discipline of studying and the

discipline of sharing life together (koinonia) as mutual ministry of those in the Spirit.

223
Paul reasoned with the Thessalonians and examined the Scriptures with the Bereans.

These reciprocal movements of face-to-face dialogue and firsthand biblical examination

were examples of the inductive community discipline which the apostles called the

ecclesia to practice. This was no lecture method, no one-way communication, no

deductive systematic theology. The apostles expected the members of the ecclesia to

participate with them in the ongoing discovery of the meaning of Christ’s life and

resurrection. They met together around the texts of Scripture. Their authority was not in

their official expertise, but in their personal experience.

As Luke commented about the Bereans, the nobility of Christian community lies in its

personal eagerness to receive and examine the inductive sources of the group’s life and to

experience life together for themselves as a body called and connected (Dunn, 1975). The

underlying values which drove such a nobility of openness and responsiveness were the

desire to know God personally and corporately, the willingness to learn together as a

community, the determination to embrace experts (apostles) into mutuality, and the

practice of the group to be interdependent upon one another’s knowledge, ideas,

opinions, thinking, disciplines, perspectives and wisdom. These were small groups who

sought with all their heart to find God. As Jeremiah prophesied, “‘You will call upon me

and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when

you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you,’ declares the LORD” (Jeremiah

29:12–14). The dwelling place of God is in community with a curious, seeking and noble

people. Such interdependent inductive learning enabled the Spirit, not the apostle, to be

the primary teacher. The Spirit called the apostolic community to remember all that Jesus

did and taught (John 14:26). The Spirit called the community to do the ministry of Jesus’

224
life at work through them (John 16:5–15). The Spirit was the advocate and the

empowerer of mutual ministry. Such interdependent experience and learning in the Spirit

leads into interdependent ministry in the Spirit. Banks (1980) argues that the

interdependence of the Christian community is the result of dependence on Christ and

independence from outside social values and systems. This empowerment had to do with

the apostles’ understanding of charismatic authority. They taught that their authority

existed in the centering of the gospel in Christ and the working of the Spirit in the life of

the ecclesia. Christ was the primary authority of the group. Theirs was an authority

alongside, not above, the ecclesia. They became partners in ministry as quickly as

possible. The apostle only had authority as focused in the person and ministry of Christ.

Furthermore, Dunn (1975) explained that the inductive presence of the Spirit in the

ecclesia as “counselor and teacher” reorients a small group away from typical human

values of authority. The human leader of the group, specifically the apostle, was never

allowed the place of lordship in the group. For every ecclesia there was only one Lord

and one source of the body’s direction, one ultimate leader of the group the Spirit of

Christ. This made all other group leaders penultimate sources of authority. Their

leadership was to call the community to dependence on Christ and to interdependence

with one another. The nobility of the ecclesia was inherited from its princely Leader and

Lord, Jesus Christ, who himself worked through various members of the group to

minister to and to teach each other. Jesus was no Lord of control, manipulation and

intimidation, but a Lord of love who invited a willing group of followers to accept

responsibility for their life together. Too much giving of authority to a secondary source,

even to an apostle, would have undermined this delicate learning relationship and

225
process. Deferring to expert human authority, apart from Christ, moves a group away

from its primary relationship with the Spirit and Scripture, creating a dependence upon

the more deductive and limited systems of that human authority. For the apostolic expert

to become the primary authority was to move the Spirit out of its central role. The

community would then lose its noble calling of inductive discovery of the word and

ministry if it sought its identity and life in the deductive system formed by human

ingenuity and strategy, no matter how brilliant, how influential, how attractive or how

powerful. This was Paul’s major concern for the Galatian ecclesia (Galatians 1–3). They

had so easily given up their direct dependence on the Spirit and the gospel to lean upon

the secondary authority of Jewish law. This human system would rob them of their

primary dependence on Christ and their mutual interdependence in the Spirit. To give up

dependence upon the Spirit was to accept dependence upon a human system and upon

those who taught such a system. According to Paul, even the apostle Peter was guilty of

bowing to such a human system and running away from the freedom of the gospel.

Complete deductive dependence on the expert or theological system robs the ecclesia of

an inductive interdependence with the Spirit. The apostle must be a mutual participant

with the community of those who exercise their nobility of interdependent learning and

ministering. The directive leadership of the apostle was always to be submissive to the

guidance of the Spirit among the group. The group always lives between these two poles

of authority as they exist in creative tension under the primary direction of the Spirit,

assisted by secondary adjustments by individual group members.

226
 The ecclesias were inductively and intuitively countercultural because they

experienced firsthand the reality of God’s presence in the world (Dunn, 1975). Wherever

the apostles proclaimed the gospel and formed a new small house group they introduced

the inevitable dissonance with existing cultural patterns. The new creation and inductive

authority of the Spirit was often seen as subversive to the established deductive authority

of the law. Such tension with existing principalities and authorities was a strong reason

Jesus was crucified and the ecclesia were persecuted. The mutual submission of the

group to one another out of reverence for Christ implied that existing systems and

authorities lost primary control over their lives together and as individuals. This may be

the reason the apostolic epistles admonish the ecclesia to submit … to every authority

instituted among humanity (1 Peter 2:13). In some cases the ecclesia wrongly assumed

their freedom of mutuality could be imposed upon the outside world. They might use

their experience of the Spirit to refuse to live peacefully with the existing hierarchical

paternal and controlling systems. Rather than submit to the abuse of the system as Jesus

did, they were tempted to transform the human system through militant, rebellious or

vindictive actions. Such reaction by ecclesia would look like anarchy to a controlling

governing power. Eventually these outside religious and political systems lost their

authority, power and control over the house communities. Such a loss of influence and

control moved them to attack the apostles and to persecute the groups. The personal,

relational and ethical values of the members of the ecclesia were being directed and

transformed by the presence of Christ through the power of the Spirit. Their patterns of

thinking about human relationships and institutions were changed through a continuous

inductive experience of life together in Christ. They lost their need to be conformed to the

227
patterns of the world as they intentionally helped one another to be conformed to the

pattern of Christ. Their inductive learning of Christ through the Spirit caused them to be a

transformed human community. They became a small group of people who lived for one

another through the law of love. As Bonhoeffer (1976 p.31) said that in the community of

the Spirit there burns the bright love of brotherly service, agape.

2.6.6 Discipleship for Multiplication

Now that same day (of the resurrection) two of them were going to a village called

Emmaus…. They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. As

they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked

along with them; but they were kept from recognizing him. He asked them, “What are

you discussing together as you walk along?”They stood still, their faces downcast….

“About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied…. “Some of our women amazed us. They went

to the tomb early this morning but didn’t find his body…. Some of our companions went

to the tomb and found it just as the women had said….”And beginning with Moses and

all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning

himself…. They urged him strongly, “Stay with us….” So he went in to stay with them.

When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to

give it to them. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he

disappeared from their sight. They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within

us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?” … The two told

what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke

the bread. (Luke 24:13–17). The smallest Christian group is two persons together with

Jesus meeting them (Matthew 18:19–20) in their hopes and fears. The Emmaus Road is

228
an explicit case study of Jesus’ teaching and modeling about the nature of Christian

community. Where two persons are together and reckoning with the reality and person of

Christ, Jesus is suddenly and immediately present. The present Christ is the center of all

human community. This was particularly true for the two on the road to Emmaus who

experienced the emotions of hope and fear when Jesus met them and walked with them.

The Emmaus Road is a post resurrection paradigm of life together with Jesus. The

smallest common denominator for small group ministry is where two people share life

together around their personal faith experience with Christ, their reflections on Scripture,

and their breaking of bread. In such an intimate moment of relationship the resurrected

Jesus appeared with the two while they were on the way to Emmaus. In their honest and

painful exchange of the dramatic and traumatic, in their reasoning together about the

Scripture, and in their eating together, the reality of the present and resurrected Jesus

became clear to them. Luke said, “Their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and

he disappeared from their sight” (Luke 24:31). And in that recognition of Jesus’ real

presence, they came to understand that Jesus continued to be present with them in their

relationships and community even though he disappeared physically from their

immediate sight. The resurrected Christ is present where two or more gather or walk

together, sharing humanity which flows to and from the heart of Jesus. The continuing

presence of Jesus is the important reality. The community of the Spirit of Jesus grew

from the resurrection community encounters into the Pentecost community

empowerment, from the community of Jesus with the Twelve to the community of Jesus

with the two on the road to Emmaus, to the community of the one hundred twenty in the

upper room and into the midst of the house churches. In all times and places, the

229
continuity of community experience with Jesus is “wherever two or three or more come

together in his name.” Their eyes are opened to see that he is present in such a way that

their hearts burn within them. Wherever a small group comes together to explore the

meaning and purpose of Jesus’ life, they discover that his life is present with them and

between them as they share life together on the way. Jesus joins them when they come

together. Their coming together reflects his very character and community. The story of

Jesus has become their story. Their coming together becomes the body of Christ on earth.

The small group is the powerful arena where we can face the stark reality of suffering and

death and feel the presence of the resurrected Christ. Hauerwas (1981 p.18) said that

Good and just societies require a narrative (story-event) which helps them know the truth

about existence and fight the constant temptation to self-deception. Hauerwas (1981)

further argued that the story of Christ, the experience of Christ, forms the character of the

community, for it is a community around a special and unique character, Jesus of

Nazareth. For the Emmaus two it was their discussion about the life story of Jesus which

culminated in the climactic breaking of bread that opened their eyes on the journey to

Emmaus. And in that event they realized they were no longer cut off from Jesus. If they

had not been struggling with their experience of Jesus, they may not have had their eyes

opened. They may have continued in their skeptical wonderment and sense of

abandonment. Christian small groups must be formed by the narrative of the Scripture

which pivots around the life of Jesus. Friendships, marriages, families and small groups

discover their social and ethical values as they reflect and act together around the story of

the people of God made complete in the story of Jesus. Neither doctrine nor theological

principle ultimately forms the real life of the relationship or community. It is formed by

230
the reality of life together that has been personally experienced and practiced in the

presence of the resurrected Jesus. As the Emmaus two walked out their experience with

Jesus, they came to understand the key to their openness to new life was Jesus there in

their midst. This was most clear as they shared the meal with Jesus. Their beingness and

relationship took on new meaning and passion when they realized that Jesus was with

them. They understood that their relationship had become a meeting place of heaven on

earth, where intimacy with God had released the possibility of intimacy between persons.

Jesus had come to initiate a new community a new way for two or more human beings to

relate to God and to one another.

As Kraus (1979 p.90) has affirmed that Jesus gave new importance and dignity to the

individual…. Jesus came to establish authentic community…. Life in the Spirit is a life of

new openness to others in a fellowship of reconciliation. Kraus (1979) understands that

Jesus authenticates the identity and reality of this new story-formed community. The

person and relationships of Jesus become the formative model of how the rest of the

community should relate and act. The Christian small group is the micro story-formed

community, even where only two are on the road together with Jesus. The climactic and

revelatory event of the Emmaus micro community, and of every Christian community

since, is the breaking of the bread. Meals, which are most often shared in small groups,

gather people into face-to-face encounters. By eating together, their common humanity is

affirmed. It is often at the point where the symbolic body of Jesus, the loaf, is broken and

shared that the community realizes that they have become the ongoing body of Jesus.

Jesus becomes known and the group walks on together in the Spirit. At the very point of

Jesus’ breaking the bread, the two recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight.

231
The two realized that their relationship and conversation, their ongoing community and

ministry, their “burning hearts,” were the continuing presence and body of Jesus. Their

micro group was where Jesus lived as long as they shared life, Scripture and bread

together, as long as they had Jesus in common (Luke 24:30–31).The apostle Paul worked

out this theology of the body more completely in his letters to the Corinthians. As Paul

declared, the climactic recognition of the community is that Jesus’ body was given and

continues to be shared so that more and more humanity may participate in his body.

Wherever the bread is broken, wherever Jesus is acknowledged, wherever Jesus appears

unexpectedly, those gathered discover that they are Jesus’ community. They recognize

that their continued sharing is the ongoing character, life, event and story of Jesus. The

passion of the group’s life together, that is, the burning of their hearts, was the result of

being with Jesus. This was their experience of the ministry of the word and sacrament.

Understanding the theological and relational foundations of word and sacrament,

structure, formality and liturgy are disciplines of community practiced to provide a free

way into the warmth and reality of real people together. They share food, discuss

Scripture and meet Jesus face to face. If the formal disciplines of word and sacrament do

not lead to this freedom of real life together, there is no reality of human community with

Christ. In fact, the liturgy and structure of discipline can become idolatrous rather than a

means of grace. Wright (1980 p.273) has refocused the meaning of the Eucharist toward

its primal relational roots. Wright (1980) has said, for instance, that sacrifice is the loving

surrender of self to the other.

232
 Sometimes church leaders are seduced by a temptation of maintaining institutional

icons. They may argue for the continuity of formal practices of word and sacrament but

fail to call for the substance of such life to be seen in the ordinariness of everyday human

community. Such institutionalists may have a hard time seeing the Emmaus Road as a

real eucharistic sacrifice of word and sacrament. But it is clear in Scripture that event and

symbol must be simultaneous. It is in the historical event where real life and symbol

come together. The resurrected Jesus is present at the sharing of the real meals of

gathered groups. As Paul said to the Corinthians, if this is not recognized, there’s little

point in practicing the formal symbol (1 Corinthians 11:29).While on the road, the three

shared themselves with one another in conversation and food. Jesus provided the

leadership and vision for the other two to see life from a new perspective. Their beings

were stirred. Their passions were aroused. Their humanity was freed. Their relationships

were intensified. Their micro group became an event of transcendent life together, life

beyond typical human bounds, yet life as ordinary humanity. The two knew they had

been with Jesus and with one another. They would never again be the same; their eyes

had been opened. As they met together, the community in heaven had met their

community on earth.

Anderson (1974 pp.227-37) argued that it is being present with other real human

beings that gives an individual the experience of the Spirit and the reality of God. He has

declared that the kenotic (hidden) community is formed of actual people who have their

place in the community, not by virtue of their capacity to love or their maturity of spirit,

but by virtue of their common humanity with Christ and the reality of the Holy Spirit

which comes as a gift. When the Holy Spirit assumes the historical existence of the other

233
man as the form of Christ for me, a cripple is no less real than a whole person. If this is

true that the community continues as the incarnational presence of Christ in the world,

then it is as the individual experiences the real community of persons gathered in the

name and story of Jesus that God’s real presence is experienced in the world. The

incarnation of Christ is experienced through the incarnational community, the small

group, where two or three gather, like the Emmaus group. The two together continued the

spirit, attitude and community of the three even though Jesus was no longer visible. They

continued to experience the transcendence of the three as they met together in the name

of Jesus. Since they had personally experienced life together with the resurrected Jesus,

the two saw all of life differently, including the value, role and integrity of women. This

new male understanding and openness to women was a direct result of their personal post

resurrection experiences with Jesus in community. The women were right Jesus had been

raised from the dead (Luke 24:24). Their eyes were opened to the model of Jesus, who

entered fully into community trust with women as readily as he did with men. So the men

and women of the post resurrection community gathered in the upper room for sharing

life, for discussing the Scripture, for exploring their past with Jesus, for continuing to

affirm their current life with the invisible Jesus through prayer (Acts 1:12–2:1). The

Emmaus two contributed to the openness of the upper room one hundred twenty, and to

the wider formation of local house groups. The resurrected power of Christ expanded

from a micro group of three to a macro group of three thousand to a met network of

millions of small groups throughout salvation history. George (1991 p.570 uses the term

meta-church to describe multiple small groups that exist together within a common

unifying principle or structure that is, they exist alongside or with one another. Meta (as

234
in metamorphosis) implies change. The term Meta-Church … signifies both a change of

mind about how ministry is to be done and a change of form in the infrastructure of the

church. Such a network of small groups as a structure has a chamele on like ability to

adjust to change quickly. This metagroup idea finds its roots in the New Testament

pattern of house groups. These ecclesia (gathering) existed side by side all around the

city of Jerusalem and beyond. However, today this pattern of the adjustable and flexible

church structure exists in some tension with Christendom’s seventeen-hundred-year-old

practice of church defined by the tight structures of buildings, liturgy and institutional

life.

The experience of the Emmaus group was multiplied a hundredfold as home groups

expanded throughout Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the world. The resurrected presence

and spirit of Jesus was the center and heart of every new group: All the believers were

one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his (her) possessions was his (her)

own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to

testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There

were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or

houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it

was distributed to anyone as he had need. Great fear seized the whole church and all who

heard about these events (Acts 4:32–35). According to the apostles, the development of

the ongoing gathering and meeting of the people who believed in Jesus was the

continuing and extending ministry responsibility of the Lord Jesus Christ himself. Jesus’

ministry did not stop with his earthly ministry in death, resurrection and ascension. The

apostolic community understood that Jesus continued to call out those to be saved. It was

235
Jesus’ continued activity in the world that added to the ecclesia day by day. The gathering

of persons into the temple courts and homes was the result of Jesus’ continued action in

the world. Jesus was still calling people to be in community together. His resurrection

and ascension removed his physical presence from the one group so that he could be

present in multiple groups, simultaneously, by the power of the Spirit. And each new

group was a new incarnation of Jesus’ presence and character on earth.

These early Christian small groups developed a unique character from being together

and having everything in common (Acts 2:44). This was demonstrated in their expression

of “gladness” and “simplicity of heart” (Acts 2:46). This character of life together formed

their character of moral behavior with one another and with the wider world. The

intentional imitation of the twelve apostles’ life with Jesus set the environment for the

formation of their new life and their new character in Christ. Hauerwas (1981 p.131) has

described it as moral life entails by imitating another…. The Christian life requires a

transformation of the self that can only be accomplished through direction from a master.

The problem lies not in knowing what we must do, but how we are to do it. And the how

is learned only by watching and following. Hauerwas (1981) further argues that healthy

moral development comes through the imitation of healthy moral behavior. As the

apostles imitated Jesus, so the ecclesia imitated the life of the Twelve with Jesus. The

apostles’ community and character were formed as they lived life together in memory of

their life with Jesus and Jesus’ life with Abba Father.

236
 Such healthy character formation could happen only in a community that had a

consistent and ongoing healthy center. Jesus was the character center of every ecclesia.

And the apostles were present to reinforce and affirm, in being, word and action, what

they had learned from Jesus. Jesus had shared everything with the Twelve (even more

than they could bear or understand) and had lived life as model and mentor before them

in gladness and simplicity. Jesus, through his Spirit (John 14–17), continued to be the

personal and relational presence through whom the character of the small Christian

groups were formed. He was the one in whom they lived and moved and had their being

(Acts 17:28). It was not just Jesus the suffering and dying man who was able to transform

the character of the Twelve, but the resurrected Jesus through the power of the Spirit. The

Spirit launched the beginning of the transformation while the Twelve were gathered in

the upper room as part of the one hundred twenty. Kraus (1979 p.89) noted that Jesus

gave them their authentic selfhood, both individually and corporately. This awareness of

one’s new individual identity before God inevitably and necessarily involves one in

community. Life in the Spirit is a life of new openness to others in a fellowship of

reconciliation. The character of the individual was formed by the character of the group,

which was formed by the character of Jesus who walked with the Twelve. Jesus had

initiated a new family system. The apostles had been formed before the resurrection and

transformed after Pentecost by the presence of Jesus. This was the key to their family

system. In this experience of transformation with the one hundred twenty in the upper

room, they were able to give birth to ecclesia in the same identity and character of Jesus.

Jesus’ story and Spirit lived on in the newly formed small group communities. It would

be an interesting study to compare the process of transformation in the upper room with

237
that which often happens in twelve-step groups. In what ways did the Spirit act as an

agent of intervention among the Twelve and between the men and women to give them

the freedom to create new communities without being loaded down with the old baggage

of their arguments with Jesus? Something happened in the community of the upper room

that drew them into confrontation with the way Jesus accomplished character

transformation and taught them about how to change. For after Pentecost they were

changed, and they formed change-oriented house communities.

The health of the apostles flowed from the fullness of the Spirit (Acts 2:1–4). Being

“all together in one place” preceded being “filled with the Holy Spirit.” The apostolic

community reached a point of committed (covenant) togetherness after fifty days of post

resurrection prayer and group discussion. In the midst of this sharing of life together the

Holy Spirit was freed to be overtly demonstrated. The dramatic ecstatic effects of the

Spirit came out of intimate community with God and the people of God. The maturing

health of the group in the upper room was demonstrated in their freedom of expression so

that every person in the crowd heard them speaking in their own language. This

potentially exclusive group addressed the plurality of the city in a free and inclusive

manner. Such freedom of group expression and invitation could only come from God’s

welcoming Spirit at work in the health of the group. As Hauerwas (1981pp.132-33) has

affirmed, Moral growth involves a constant conversation between our stories that allows

us to live appropriate to the character of our existence. By learning to make their lives

conform to God’s way, Christians claim that they are provided with a self that is a story

that enables conversation to continue in a truthful manner. The Christ narrative forms the

life pattern of the small Christian community. The character of the apostles together with

238
Jesus became the character of the ecclesia. The narrative of Jesus became the narrative of

the apostles, which became the narrative of the multiple ecclesia. Healthy community

birthed healthy community because their stories were consistent and continuous with

Jesus’ story. Jesus’ moral character became the real moral character of each ecclesia. The

“fruit” (Gal 5:13–26) of their life together was the direct result of their life with Jesus

through the Spirit, reinforced through the words, relationships and actions of the apostles

who had also learned from watching Jesus with Abba as the pattern of the Spirit. There is

a bright and dark side to every Christian small group gathering. The patterns of sin are in

conflict with the essential character of the group’s Spirit-formed identity. Only through

persistent disciplined intentionality can a small group enter into the healing process of the

Spirit. This is not the group’s ability to make the Spirit work but the group’s intention to

provide space to give the Spirit freedom to work. This is the crucifixion process

articulated by the apostle Paul in Galatians. The group crucifies (disciplines) the acts of

sin and sets aside an intentional space for the gift of the Spirit to intervene (Galatians 3).

The work of Jesus in demonstrating character formation became the how of the Spirit

in accomplishing character transformation. Jesus provided the words and the life as the

content, but the Spirit provided the desire and the direction of Jesus as process and

presence. Each ecclesia, then, through the power of the Spirit could fully form the real

character of Jesus and be the body of Christ. Whereas Jesus with the Twelve was a

complete expression of this group character, each ecclesia could also be a full expression

of his moral character. Sin, however, continued to be a real and present danger

simultaneous to the ecclesia expression of new life. By putting on the character of Christ

as a community, each small gathering of Christians was able to impact persons,

239
marriages, families, institutions and governments to override the resistance of sin through

their individual and corporate presence. They became Christ’s presence in the world,

drawing many into the good news community and disturbing the status quo of social

networks. As Lee and Cowan (1986 p.159)explained that when members of a house

church all choose to change their lifestyle, the sub-culture of their koinonia provides a

sustaining and encouraging context…. Banding together for empowerment and

networking with other groups for still greater empowerment … we are building mediating

structures. What we cannot do alone we can often do together.

The liberationists, like Lee and Cowan (1986), see the ecclesia as a strategy and

structure for intentional political change. And so it can and should be. While the early

church may not have had such a strong intentional political agenda as their defining

purpose for gathering, the political impact of their gathering was definitely perceived and

resisted. Wherever two or three gather in the name of Jesus, there will be moral and

political implications. But this was not the primary reason for believers to come together.

Rather, their primary reason for gathering was to express the beingness, the nature, the

character and the community of God in the world, and to live up to the intended nature of

humanity in creation. When all else about human grouping is said and done, God’s

comment on the nature of humanity still rings as the overwhelming call to ecclesia: “It is

not good for humanity to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). Where people continue to gather in

the nature and character of Jesus with the Twelve, the earth will be more transformed by

the realm of heaven, more salt is sprinkled and more light is shined.

240
2.7 Conclusion

The literature reviewed that in order to properly understand discipleship, there is

the need to first define the term “disciple,” the end product of the process of discipleship.

Generally, a disciple can be considered as a person who believes in the ideas and

principles of someone famous and tries to live the way the person did or does. In the

Christian sense, a disciple is one growing to be like Christ, and conforms to his image.

Disciples open their whole lives and subject themselves to learning to grow spiritually

toward Christ-like maturity. To summarize using the words of Wadge, Carter and Carter

(2002): the disciple walks with Christ in every area of life, lives according to the word of

Christ, contributes to the mission of Christ and impacts the world for Christ. Rather, the

question is how the failure of discipleship or lack of involvement by local churches in

discipleship can be corrected through the understanding the context of discipleship and

how it can be accomplished to fulfill the great commission. In the literature there is

confusion over what discipleship is. Samra (2003) writes that there are three reasons for

the confusion over what discipleship is. The first reason he cites is that sometimes the

Greek word disciple in the New Testament is used in a strictly intellectual sense, thus

making discipleship simply the process of being educated by a teacher, and at other times

it seems to involve life transformation . . . in which discipleship is seen as the process of

becoming like one’s master. The second reason he cites is that at times the focus is on the

beginning of the process in which case discipleship is becoming a disciple. At other times

and more frequently the focus is on being a disciple in which case discipleship is the

process of becoming like one’s master. The third reason he cites is that there are different

referents for the term disciple. Sometimes the term refers to the masses who occasionally

241
followed Jesus in order to learn about him. Other times it is used for the specific few

selected to become as much like Christ as possible through concentrated focused life

transference. On the other hand, Collinson (2004 p.169) argues that discipleship is an

intentional largely informal learning activity which involves two or a small group of

individuals who typically function within a larger nurturing community and hold to the

same beliefs. Each makes a voluntary commitment to the other/s to form close personal

relationships for an extended period of time in order that those who at a particular time

are perceived as having superior knowledge and/or skills will attempt to cause learning to

take place in the lives of others who seek their help.

Within the theoretical and analytical framework discussed above, the

investigation in attempting to take a biblical view of discipleship by samra and other

models is aimed at finding out what discipleship is, how it can be accomplished and also

to look at what is involved in prompting discipleship. These models will provide a

reflective basis for the current study. Therefore, all the models in one form or another

involve connecting with and growing in relationships with God and with others. A

growing connection with God leads one to a deepening understanding of the relationship

with him through the revelation of his Word; the resultant more selfless growing

connection with others as disciples who obey God’s command to love others as

themselves results in their ministering to the needs of those others. All the models that

deal with discipling others involve disciples in one way or another equipping others

through teaching, nurturing, or example to grow in spiritual maturity as they in turn begin

to disciple still others.

242
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

All research is based on some underlying philosophical assumptions about what

constitutes valid research and which research method(s) is/are appropriate for the

development of knowledge in a given study. In order to conduct and evaluate any

research, it is therefore important to know what these assumptions are. This chapter

discusses the research methodologies, and design used in the study including strategies,

instruments, and data collection and analysis methods, while explaining the stages and

processes involved in the study. The research design for this study is a descriptive and

interpretive case study that is analyzed through qualitative methods. Participant

observation, face-to-face interviews, focus-group interviews and document review were

used as data collection methods. Furthermore, the justification for each of the data

collection methods used in the study was discussed. The chapter further discusses the

philosophical assumptions and also the design strategies underpinning this research

study. Common philosophical assumptions were reviewed and presented; the interpretive

paradigm was identified for the framework of the study. The chapter also addresses the

details of approaching data collection and describes the data analysis procedures in this

study. This is followed by the discussion of the issue of trustworthiness of the research

and ethical considerations. Finally, in order to ensure trustworthiness of the research,

appropriate criteria for qualitative research were discussed, and several methods.

243
3.2 Primary Methodology

The study used focus group research as primary methodology. Mouton (1996

p.35), describes methodology as the means or methods of doing something. Polit and

Hungler (1999 p.648) refer to it as the process of following the steps, procedures and

strategies for gathering and analyzing the data in a research investigation. These methods

describe in detail how the study was conducted. According to Burns and Grove (2001),

methodology includes the design, setting, sample, methodological limitations and the

data-collection and analysis techniques in a study. This is the know-how of the scientific

methods and techniques employed to obtain valid knowledge. Furthermore, focus group

research is a qualitative technique for data collection. The primary purpose of using focus

group methodology in this study was to describe and understand meanings and

interpretations of Pastors and church leaders to gain an understanding of discipleship:

Parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment.

According to Liamputtong (2009), the primary aim of a focus group is to describe and

understand meanings and interpretations of a select group of people to gain an

understanding of a specific issue from the perspective of the participants of the group. In

this regard, the researcher used focus group methodology to explore the attitudes of

Pastors and Christian leaders and their perceptions, feelings and ideas about discipleship:

parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment.

Furthermore, Anderson (1990 p.241), defines focus group as a group comprised

of individuals with certain characteristics whose focus discussions is on a given issue or

topic. In this regard pastors and Christian leaders who participated in this study came

from similar social and cultural backgrounds and they had similar experiences. They

244
were brought together to discuss the issue of discipleship: parameters and standards of

measuring church growth and church establishment with the help of a researcher in a

particular setting where participants felt comfortable enough to engage in a dynamic

discussion for about sixty to ninety minutes. According to Hennink (2007 p. 6), a

successful focus group discussion relies more heavily on the development of a

permissive, non-threatening environment within the group where the participants can feel

comfortable to discuss their opinions and experiences without fear that they will be

judged or ridiculed by others in the group. In this regard, focus group interviews allowed

group dynamics and helped the researcher capture shared lived experiences and accessed

elements that other methods might not be able to reach. The focus group methodology

permitted the researcher to uncover aspects of understanding that often remain hidden in

the more conventional in-depth interviewing method.

Therefore, focus group method gave pastors and Christian leaders the opportunity

to define what was relevant and important to their experience. Based on the assumption

of this study, the focus group method allowed researcher to pay attention to the needs of

those who had little or no societal voice and this also helped the researcher to appreciate

the way pastors and Christian leaders saw their own reality. Ivanoff & Hultberg (2006)

states that the strengths of the focus group method are that the researchers are provided

with a great opportunity to appreciate the way people see their own reality and hence ‘to

get closer to the data’.

245
3.2.1 Rationale for Focus Group Methodology

Focus group methodology in this study was useful in exploring Pastors and

Christian leaders’ stories, their experiences in ministry and concerns. According to

Kitzinger (2005 p.57), the focus group method is an ideal approach for examining the

stories, experiences, points of view, beliefs, needs and concerns of individuals. The

method is especially valuable for permitting the participants to develop their own

questions and frameworks as well as to seek their own needs and concerns in their own

words and on their own terms. Furthermore, the focus group method also allowed the

researcher to access different forms of communication pastors and Christian leaders use

in their everyday life in their ministries. According to Kitzinger (2005 p.58), group work

allows the researchers to access different communication forms which people use in their

day-to-day interaction, and these include joking, arguing, teasing and recapturing past

events. Kitzinger (2005 p.58), further states that being able to gain access to diverse

forms of communication is valuable since it may not be possible, or can be difficult, to

capture the knowledge and attitudes of individuals by asking them to respond to more

direct questions as in positivist science such as surveys and questionnaires. Therefore, the

forms of communication that people use in their everyday life ‘may tell us as much, if not

more’ about their knowledge and experience. Based on the research assumptions of this

study, focus groups permitted the researcher to enter the world of participants which

other research methods might not be able to do and it revealed diverse understanding

difficult to access by standard methods of data collection. Therefore, focus group method

also allowed the researcher to explore the Pastors’ and Christian leaders’ views. Kitzinger

(2005 p.58) explained that focus groups permit researchers to enter the world of the

246
participants which other research methods may not be able to do. Focus groups are likely

to reveal diverse understandings which often are difficult to access by more orthodox

methods of data collection. The method allows the researchers to explore individuals’

diverse perspectives since focus groups function within the social network of groups.

Crucially then, focus groups discover ‘how accounts are articulated, censured, opposed,

and changed through social interaction and how this relates to peer communication and

group norms’. In this regard, focus group is significant in two perspectives. Firstly, it

offered the researcher a means of obtaining an understanding of a wide range of views

that pastors and Christian leaders had about discipleship: parameters and standards of

measuring church growth and church establishment and secondly, how they interacted

and discussed the issue of discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church

growth and church establishment. According to Conradson (2005), focus groups are

valuable in two main perspectives. They offer the researchers a means of obtaining an

understanding (insight) of a wide range of views that people have about a specific issue

as well as how they interact and discuss the issue. In this regard, the researcher used

focus group methodology in order to get rich and detailed information for pastors and

Christian leaders. However, the method is flexible when getting the information.

According to Stewart (1984), a focus group interview is a useful research tool when the

researcher does not have a depth of knowledge about the participants. Focus groups

provide rich and detailed information about feelings, thoughts, understandings,

perceptions and impressions of people in their own words. The focus group method is a

flexible research tool because the method can be applied to elicit information from any

topic, from diverse groups of people and in diverse settings. Furthermore, focus method

247
made it easier for the researcher to explore the gap between what pastors and Christian

leaders say and do. According to Conradson (2005 p.131), focus groups offer possibilities

for researchers to explore ‘the gap between what people say and what they do’. Why is

this so? In this regard, the focus group method is a useful approach for exploring this

difference. An individual may be reluctant to discuss this contradiction during an in-

depth interview where the main dynamic occurs primarily between researcher and the

participant. But in a focus group setting, where the interactions occur between the

participants themselves rather than with the researcher, the participants are likely to be

more open about the divergence and the reason why this might be. The focus group

setting also provides the researcher with opportunities to follow up the comments and to

cross-check with the participants in a more interactive manner than a questionnaire or

individual interview can offer.

3.2.1.1 Uses of Focus Group Methodology

In this study, the researcher used the focus group research to strengthen data

collection for a range of reasons. First, the researcher used focus group to use the pastors

and Christian leaders and its interactions as a way to gain information about discipleship

and disciple making process. On the other hand, the researcher aimed at promoting a

comfortable atmosphere of disclosure in which pastors and Christian leaders could share

their ideas, experiences, and attitudes about discipleship and disciple making in their

local churches. According to the variety of definitions exist within the literature regarding

focus groups (Lewis, 1995), a focus group is defined as a small gathering of individuals

who have a common interest or characteristic, assembled by a moderator, who uses the

group and its interactions as a way to gain information about a particular issue. As Kruger

248
and Casey (2000) note, the purpose of focus groups is to promote a comfortable

atmosphere of disclosure in which people can share their ideas, experiences, and attitudes

about a topic. Participants "influence and are influenced," while researchers play various

roles, including that of moderator, listener, observer, and eventually inductive analyst

(Krueger & Casey, 2000). According to Barbour & Kitzinger (1998), focus groups are

unique in their explicit use of group interaction to produce data. As a method, focus

groups are based on two fundamental assumptions. The first is that individuals can

provide a rich source of information about a topic. The second is that the collective and

individual responses encouraged by the focus group setting will generate material that

differs from other methods (Glitz, 1998). Second, the researcher used focus group

method to aim at collecting high-quality data in a social context, which primarily helped

to understand the problem addressed in this study from the perspective of the pastors and

Christian leaders who participated in the study. According to Patton (2002), focus group

interview aims at collecting high-quality data in a social context, (Khan & Manderson

1992) which primarily help understand a specific problem from the viewpoint of the

participants of research.

3.2.3 Application of the Focus Group research to this study

The researcher independently chose the focus group research to underpin data

collection and analysis for a range of reasons. First, the focus group research not only

occupies an intermediate position between other qualitative methods but also possess a

distinctive identity of their own. On the one hand, focus groups cannot really substitute

for the kinds of research that are already done well by either individual interviews or

participant observation. In addition, focus groups provide access to forms of data that are

249
not obtained easily with either of the other two methods. According to Kitzinger (2005

p.58), group work allows the researchers to access different communication forms which

people use in their day-to-day interaction, and these include joking, arguing, teasing and

recapturing past events. Second, one of the advantages of the focus groups in comparison

to participant observation is the opportunity to observe a large amount of interaction on a

topic in a limited period of time based on the researcher's ability to assemble and direct

the focus group sessions. The comparative advantage of focus groups as an interview

technique lies in their ability to observe interaction on a topic. Group discussions provide

direct evidence about similarities and differences in the participants' opinions and

experiences as opposed to reaching such conclusions from post hoc analyses of separate

statements from each interviewee. This reliance on group interaction, however also

means that individual interviews have clear advantages over focus groups with regard to:

firstly, the amount of control that the interviewer has and secondly, the greater amount of

information that each informant has time to share. Third, the strength of relying on the

researcher's focus is the ability to produce concentrated amounts of data on precisely the

topic of interest. This strength was clear in comparison to participant observation because

focus groups not only give access to reports on a wide range of topics that may not be

observable but also ensure that the data will be directly targeted to the researcher's

interests. This strength is one source of focus groups' reputation for being “quick and

easy.” Furthermore, focus group is their reliance on interaction in the group to produce

the data. As Morgan and Krueger (1993) note, the comparisons that participants make

among each other's experiences and opinions are a valuable source of insights into

complex behaviors and motivations. Furthermore, in an era when issues of consensus and

250
diversity are of intense interest to theologians and other scholars, the discussions in focus

groups can provide direct data on these exact issues.

3.3 Research Design

The research design for this study is a descriptive design case study that is

analyzed through qualitative methods. Qualitative researchers tend to analyze their data

inductively. In a descriptive case study, the researcher analyses, interprets and theorises

about the phenomenon against the backdrop of a theoretical framework. Merriam (1998)

states that qualitative case studies in education are often framed with concepts, models

and theories. An inductive method is then used to support or challenge theoretical

assumptions. Since “meaning” is of essential concern to the qualitative approach (Bogdan

and Biklen, 2003), the participant’s perspectives on their own conceptions of practice will

be the focus. On the other hand, the study adopted a case study design to provide a plan

for the research. According to Mouton (2001 p.55), the research design is a plan or

blueprint of how you intend conducting the research and Bogdan and Biklen’s (2007

p.49) further explained that a case study is the researcher’s plan of how to proceed. In

addition, LeCompte and Preissle (1993 p.30) states that the research design involves

deciding on what the research purpose and questions would be; what information most

appropriately will answer specific research questions, and which strategies are most

effective for obtaining it (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993 p.30).

On the other hand, the study being a qualitative research, a case study design was

regarded as a strategy of inquiry. According to Gay (1996 p.218), the design of a study is

basically the overall approach used to investigate the problem of interest, that is to say, to

shed light on, or answer, the question of interest. It includes the method of data collection

251
and related specific strategies. Furthermore, Denzin and Lincoln (2005) describe such

strategy as comprising the skills, assumptions, enactments and material practices one uses

when moving from a paradigm and a research design to collect and analyze data about

your research subject. In regard to this, direct observation, interviews, documents,

archival records, participant observation, physical artifacts and audiovisual materials

were used as data collection strategies for the study. According to Creswell, (2009 p.13),

case studies are a strategy of inquiry in which the researcher explores in depth a program,

event, activity, process, or one or more individuals.

In addition, a case study design was used in this study to describe, explain and

assess discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church

establishment in the current church to know their knowledge of discipleship, their

environment and contextual factors that influence the way they do discipleship in their

local churches and how they help the growth of their church members. Furthermore, the

findings of this study helped to provide knowledge and ways on how current church

could engage discipleship dynamics. According to Benbasat, Goldstein and Mead (1987),

through the case study design, both the reader and the researcher may form theory based

on what is practiced and possibly carry out further studies. In this regard, through case

study design the researcher explored discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring

church growth and church establishment and common features, themes and patterns were

established for the pastors and Christian leaders to review. Therefore, a case study design

was appropriate for this study. Furthermore, one of aims of adopting case study design in

this study was to discover new insights, meanings and understandings of discipleship:

parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment, the

252
topic under investigation. However, the researcher’s interest was in the explanations that

the participants gave concerning discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring

church growth and church establishment. According to Brink and Wood (1998 p.337), a

qualitative design is directed towards discovering or uncovering new insights, meanings

and understandings. It is an in-depth analysis of the problem in order to understand the

‘what’ and ‘why’ of human behavior. In addition, Creswell (1998) regards a qualitative

researcher as someone who is interested in means that explain how people attribute

meaning to their experiences.

Therefore, a case study design in this study focused on the end product and all the

process to achieve the outcome of discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring

church growth and church establishment and the research design was viewed as the

function plan in which certain research methods procedures linked together to acquire a

reliable and valid body of data for empirically grounded analysis, conclusions and theory

formulation. In addition, the case study design was also used in this study to provide the

researcher with a clear research framework; therefore, it guided the methods, decisions

and established the basis for interpretation. According to Bless and Achola (1988 p.50), a

research design is a plan of any scientific research from the first to the last step. In this

wide sense it is a programme to guide the researcher in collecting, analyzing and

interpreting the participants’ views about the topic under investigation. Mouton (1996

p.107) further states that the main function of a research design is to enable the researcher

to anticipate what the appropriate research decisions are likely to be, and to maximize the

validity of the eventual results. More importantly, the researcher used a case study design

to study a group of pastors and Christian leaders (Yin, 2003). According to Dyer and

253
Wilkins (1991), when a single case study is used, the researcher can question old

theoretical relationships and explore new ones because of that a more careful study is

made. This makes also the researcher to get a deeper understanding of the subject.

3.4 Data types and sources

3.4. 1 Primary Source

The researcher collected primary data specifically for the research study. Through

primary data sources the researcher gathered information which no one had compiled and

was not published in any forum accessible to the public. In addition, the primary data

collected in this study was directly related to the problem of discipleship: parameters and

standards of measuring church growth and church establishment. According to Kumar

(11nd MLSc), primary source are original sources from which the researcher directly

collects data that have not been previously collected. Primary data are first-hand

information collected through various sources and methods. In this regard, the researcher

collected primary data through in-depth individual interviews, focus group discussion

interviews and participant observation. Primary data has not been published yet and is

more reliable, authentic and objective. In addition, Kumar (11nd MLSc) further states

that primary data has not been changed or altered by human beings; therefore its validity

is greater than secondary data.

254
3.4.2 Secondary sources

The researcher collected secondary data from church constitutions, books,

encyclopedias, gray literature, articles, pamphlets, scholarly journal and refereed/peer

reviewed journal. These were different secondary sources kept information. According to

Kumar (11nd MLSc), secondary data collection may be conducted by collecting a diverse

source of documents or electronically stored information, census and market studies are

examples of a common sources of secondary data. This is also referred to as data mining.

In this regard, the researcher used secondary data to gain initial insight into the research

problem of the study.

3.5 Data Collection Techniques

The main data collection techniques used in this research study were the semi-

structured interviews, participant observation, focus group interviews and documents

reviews. Focus group interviews constituted one of the most important and valuable

sources of information. According to Kombo and Tromp (2006 p.99), data collection

refers to the gathering of information to serve or prove some facts. Data collection is vital

in everyday living. Merriam (1998) and Chikuya (2007 p.93) further argues that since

case studies are normally of qualitative nature, it is logical that they utilize qualitative

data collection methods. In this regard, the researcher used the main qualitative methods

such as combined interviews, observations, and document reviews as data collection

strategies. However, the researcher chose these techniques of collecting data to provide

information for discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and

church establishment. According to Daymon and Holloway (2002), the combination of

interviews, observations and content analysis as qualitative data collecting techniques are

255
likely to yield the most needed information about the topic under investigation. These

data collecting techniques are mainly used to give more detailed insights into interpreting

the situation so that the researcher sees things as they really are.

3.5.1 Interviews

The researcher in this study used semi-structured interviews in collecting data.

However, this method of interview has features of both structured and unstructured

interviews and therefore use both closed and open questions. As a result, it has the

advantage of both methods of interview. In order to be consistent with all participants, the

interviewer has a set of pre-planned core questions for guidance such that the same areas

are covered with each interviewee. As the interview progresses, the interviewee is given

opportunity to elaborate or provide more relevant information if he/she opts to do so. In

this regard, the researcher used semi-structured interviews and prepared a few guiding

questions although they were not always asked in a very direct fashion regarding

discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church

establishment. According to McMillan and Schumacher (2006 p.350) interviews are

response questions to obtain data from participants about how they conceive and give

meaning to their world and how they explain events in their lives. In addition, Leedy and

Ormrod (2005 p.146) further explains that interviews in a qualitative study are rarely as

structured as the interviews conducted in a quantitative study. Instead, they are either

open-ended or semi-structured in the latter case revolving around a few central questions.

However, it should be noted that in this semi-structured interview the general outline to

be followed was indicated but within each section the questioning was free according to

the choice of the interviewer (Sidhu 2003 p.149).

256
 On other hand, the main purpose of using semi- structured interviews in this study

was to obtain the required information to meet the objectives of discipleship: parameters

and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment. According to White

(2005 p.143), an interview instrument provides access to what is inside a person’s head,

makes it possible to measure what a person knows (knowledge or information), what a

person likes or dislikes (values and preferences) and what a person thinks (attitudes and

beliefs). In this regard, the researcher and participants was considered to be one of key

instruments of the study. Therefore, the extent to which the required information obtained

in this study depended on the research skills of the researcher and the richness of

interviewees’ responses. Furthermore, the semi-structured interview used in this study

also helped the researcher to probe for more information as the interview unfolded

thereby supplementing on what the researcher might have omitted in the planned

questions and this was done by allowing the informants to express their views in their

own words regarding the study. According to Gall et al. (2007), oral interviews usually

allow respondents to speak in their own words thereby making the phenomenon clear.

Berger (2003) further explained that respondents can also express their ideas/views and

attitudes to the benefit of the researcher. They allow the researcher to record the

conversation for analysis later. Therefore, the semi-structured interviews employed in this

study were appropriate and they were proved to be more useful tool for collecting data.

According to Berger (2003), an interview is the conversation between a researcher and an

informant. In this regard, the researcher had conversations with pastors and Christian

leaders in churches under study to obtain information required for the study. The semi-

structured interviews were used before and after the church service and observation was

257
used in weekly church services and Bible studies. Therefore, a set of carefully designed

and related open-ended questions were asked to the respondents so as to allow them

answer freely and in depth.

3.5.1.1 In-depth semi-structured individual interview

In-depth individual interviews played a significant role. The researcher employed

in-depth semi-structured individual interviews to obtain relevant information required for

the research objectives of discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church

growth and church establishment. Cohen and Manion (1997) define an in-depth semi-

structured individual interview as a two-person conversation initiated by the interviewer

for the specific purpose of obtaining research-relevant information as specified by

research objectives of systematic description, or explanation. Therefore, in-depth

individual interviews with pastors and church leaders were necessary because they helped

to clarify issues in more detailed concerning discipleship: parameters and standard of

measuring church growth and church establishment.

3.5.1.2 In-depth semi-structured Focus Group interview

In this study, the researcher used in-depth semi-structured focus group interviews

as a method of data collection to collect date through interaction and to find out more

about the problem which was under investigation. According to Sidhu (2003), one of the

advantages of in-depth focus group interviews is that an interviewer can probe into casual

factors, determine attitudes, discover the origin of the problem, involve the interviewee in

an analysis of his or her own problems and secure his/her cooperation in this analysis. In

this regard, the researcher conducted in-depth focus group interviews with pastors and

Christian leaders. Each focus group interview had an average of six to eight members.

258
Therefore, the researcher found it necessary to employ in-depth focus group interviews in

the study. According to White (2005 p.146-147), interviewing more than one person at a

time sometimes proves very useful.

3.5.1.3 Observation

Although the main method for data collection was interviews, there was need for

the researcher to use observation method too. In this study, the researcher used

observation method to compliment the interviews as the interviews could not answer how

pastors and Christian leaders practiced discipleship: parameters and standards of

measuring church growth and church establishment in their local churches. In addition,

the use of observation in this study was helpful because the method helped the researcher

to make field notes about what happens in the local churches based on the research

questions. According to Gall et al. (2007), observation was meant to help the researcher

in understanding some of the respondents' answers given during the oral interview and

avoid prejudice. And Gall et al. (2007) further states that observation surpass information

obtained from the respondents in an interview especially if it has been done for a long

time. In this regard, the field notes obtained through observation contributed greatly in

data analysis and discussion.

Therefore, the study employed participant observation as a data gathering-

instrument because the researcher was interested in the ways in which Pastors and

Christian leaders thought about discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring

church growth and church establishment. The researcher assumed that the subject of

discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church

establishment could only be appreciated if words and expressions of pastors and Christian

259
leaders were revealed while they were performing their tasks. According to LeCompte

and Preissle (1993 p.195), participant observers live as much as possible with the

individuals they are investigating, trying to blend in and taking part in their daily

activities. Participant observers watch what people do, listen to what people say, and

interact with participants. In this regard, the researcher made sure that the information

collected presented what people said and did, and how significant events unfolded, the

researcher also tried not to divorce the interpretation of events from the actual

observation thereof. In addition, the researcher made sure that the observations centered

specifically on the issue under investigation discipleship: parameters and standards of

measuring church growth and church establishment. Furthermore, the researcher also

tried to describe all relevant aspects of the situation observed as accurately as possible

immediately after leaving the setting. The researcher also made sure that the descriptions

were based on facts; they were true and detailed without being cluttered by irrelevant

issues. According to White (2005 p.158), the purpose of observational data is to describe

the setting that was observed, the activities of the participants that took place in that

setting; and the people who participated in those activities and their contributions.

Additionally, the researcher made sure that all personal reactions of pastors and

Christians were recorded to the observed situations. However, this was done to minimize

the effects of the researcher’s biases concerning the findings, especially since the

researcher was one of pastors in church ministry that practice discipleship programmes.

According to White (2005 p.159), the basic criterion that the researcher should apply to a

recorded observation is the extent to which the observation permits any reader to fully

understand the observed situation. In this regard, the researcher collected a great deal of

260
information through informal and naturally occurring conversations. In addition, the

researcher also understood that interviewing and observation were mutually reinforcing

qualitative techniques. Furthermore, the researcher combined interviewing and

observation techniques to complement each other. During the face-to-face interview the

researcher also involved observation skills. However, the researcher was aware that a

skilled interviewer is a skilled observer who is able to read nonverbal messages, sensitive

to how the interview setting can affect what is said, and carefully attuned to the nuances

of the interviewee interactions and relationships. Likewise, interviewing skills were

essential for the researcher because during fieldwork the observer needed and wanted to

talk with people, whether formally or informally.

3.5.3 Documentary Review

Document reviews played a very big role in this study. The researcher used

document reviews to support the interview and observation methods which were the main

data collection strategy. Among the documents that were analyzed were books, articles

and journals. In this regard, the contents of these documents were analyzed to validate the

information obtained using other methods of data collection. According to Chiyongo

(2007 p.iv), other data collection strategies is used in order to verify the responses given

during the study and Gay (1996 p.244) further states that the use of other data collection

strategies acts as a safeguard to detect serious effects too. Therefore, in order to be fully

conversant with existing knowledge regarding the topic discipleship: parameters and

standards of measuring church growth and church establishment the researcher read the

latest relevant books, articles and journals (De Vos et al 2002), and searched for an

261
overview of the actual, practical situation in which the proposed study was being

conducted and population groups were interviewed.

3.6 Research Approach - Qualitative Approach

The study employed qualitative approach in order to satisfactorily answer the

research questions posed in chapter one (see chapter 1.5). According to Leedy and

Ormrod (2005 p.133),to answer research questions, we cannot skim across the surface.

We must dig deep to get a complete understanding of the phenomenon we are studying.

In qualitative research, we do indeed dig deep: we collect numerous forms of data and

examine them from various angles to construct a rich and meaningful picture of a

complex, multifaceted situation. In this regard, the main purpose of adapting qualitative

research in this study was to explore and understand the meaning individuals or groups

ascribed to a social or human problem. In addition, the process of this research involved

emerging questions and procedures, data typically collected in the participant’s setting,

data analysis inductively coming from particulars to general themes. In addition, the

researcher made interpretations of the meaning of the data. Therefore, the final written

report had a flexible structure. Furthermore, the researcher was engaged in this form of

inquiry to support an inductive style, a focus on individual meaning, and the importance

of rendering the complexity of a situation. Ibrahim (2006) further explains that qualitative

approach is first used to explore, define and develop an approach to a problem. Second, it

is used to develop a deeper understanding of the phenomenon being investigated and to

develop a detailed perspective of that phenomenon. In this regard, the researcher used the

qualitative paradigm to establish in detail the factors that might have led to the problem

being investigated.

262
 In addition, the qualitative approach was chosen to enable the researcher to

identify many aspects related to discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring

church growth and church establishment and enabled participants to describe their

experiences of doing the ministry of discipleship in their local churches. According to

McMillan and Schumacher (2001 p.395), qualitative research is an inquiry in which

researchers collect data in face-to-face situations by interacting with selected persons in

their settings. In this regard, the researcher obtained data in face-to- face situations and

interacted with pastors and Christian leaders in their settings. Furthermore, it was hoped

that the participants in this study would share with the researcher their beliefs, feelings,

and attitudes about how discipleship programmes are practiced and structured in their

local churches. According to Smith (1987 p.175), qualitative research is based on the

notion of context sensitivity. However, it is different from other forms of research

because the social environment in which people find themselves has a great bearing on

what they think and how they act.

In addition, the study employed qualitative approach to verify the claim that in

Zambia, local churches are doing well in practicing discipleship programmes. In this

way, the researcher hoped that qualitative research approach would enable this study to

assess how discipleship programmes are practiced in Zambian local churches. According

to Leedy & Ormrod (2005 p.135), qualitative research approach provides a means

through which a researcher can judge the effectiveness of particular policies, practices, or

innovations. McMillan and Schumacher (2006 p.315) further explains that qualitative

studies are used for theory generation, policy development, improvement of educational

practice, explanation of social issues and action stimulus.

263
 Therefore, the study adopted qualitative approach to establish how discipleship:

parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment can be

used effectively in assisting pastors and church leaders for church growth and church

establishment. This study deals with the purpose, the means and procedures of how

discipleship can be effectively practiced and considered in its context in African

churches. However, a qualitative approach was appropriate to capture the views of

pastors regarding discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and

church establishment. In addition, the researcher employed qualitative research to provide

in-depth descriptions and interpret something by using case study, personal experiences,

interview and observation.

3.7 Research Paradigm

The philosophical assumptions adopted for this research came from the

interpretive tradition. The interpretive philosophy is concerned with understanding the

world as it is from subjective experiences of individuals. They use meaning oriented

methodologies, such as interviewing or participant observation, that rely on a subjective

relationship between the researcher and subjects. Based on the philosophical assumptions

adopted in the study, this research is considered to be interpretive. Interpretive

approaches give the research greater scope to address issues of influence and impact, and

to ask questions such as ‘why’ and ‘how’ particular technological trajectories are created

(Deetz, 1996). Walsham (1993) asserts that the purpose of the interpretive approach in

information science is to produce an understanding of the context and the process

whereby information science influences and is influenced by the context. This assertion

justifies the researcher’s choice of hermeneutic as the philosophical rationale for this

264
study. Thus, the Researcher adopted an intersubjective or interactional stance towards the

reality he was investigating.

The purpose of employing focus group methodology was to describe and

understand the meanings and interpretations of Pastors and church leaders and also to

gain an understanding of discipleship: Parameters and standards of measuring church

growth and church establishment. According to De Vos 1998 p.242, qualitative

methodology is a way of discovering what is true by considering opposed theories and it

is interpretive. During the interaction between the researcher and the research

participant, the informant’s world is discovered and interpreted by means of qualitative

methods. According to Schwandt (2000), reality should rather be interpreted through the

meanings that people give to their life world. This meaning can only be discovered

through language, and not exclusively through quantitative analysis. In this regard, the

fieldwork was conducted at the sites during the period from September 2017 to June 2018

and a steady conversation has been maintained with the different informants at the sites.

However, the main data collection methods used in this research study was semi-

structured interviews, participant observation and documentation analysis.

On the other hand, the researcher in this study used interpretative research to

understand people’s experiences and this enabled the researcher to recognize many

aspects related to discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and

church establishment. This approach also enabled participants to describe their

experiences of doing the ministry of discipleship in their local churches. However, the

research took place in a natural setting where the participants make their living.

According to Collis & Hussey (2009 p.56-57); Rubin & Babbie (2010p.37),

265
Interpretivism focuses on exploring the complexity of social phenomena with a view to

gaining understanding. The purpose of research in interpretivism is understanding and

interpreting everyday happenings (events), experiences and social structures as well as

the values people attach to these phenomena. Interpretivists believe that social reality is

subjective and nuanced, because it is shaped by the perceptions of the participants, as

well as the values and aims of the researcher. Mertens (2009) further adds that the

purpose of the study expresses the assumptions of the interpretativist researcher in

attempting to understand human experiences. Assumptions about the multiplicity of

realities also inform the research process. For instance, the research questions may not be

established before the study begins but rather may evolve as the study progresses. The

research questions are generally open-ended, descriptive and non-directional (Creswell,

2003). A typical model includes a “grand tour” question followed by a small number of

sub-questions (Spradley, 1979). The grand tour question is a statement of the problem

that is examined in the study in its broadest form, posed as a general issue, so as not to

limit the inquiry (Creswell, 2003). Based on the philosophical assumptions of this study,

the researcher had a conversation with pastors and Christian leaders in churches under

study to obtain information necessary for the study. A set of carefully designed and

related open-ended questions were asked to the respondents so as to allow them answer

freely and in depth though some the questions did not follow the exact order but followed

the course of the conversation between the interviewee and the interviewer as long as all

the scheduled topics on the interview guide were answered. In addition, the sub-questions

were used as a guide for the methodology and methods to enable the researcher to answer

the broad-based grand tour question.

266
 In addition, interpretive researchers believe that the reality to consists of people’s

subjective experiences of the external world; thus, they may adopt an inter-subjective

epistemology and the ontological belief that reality is socially constructed. According to

Willis (1995) interpretivists are anti-foundationalists, who believe there is no single

correct route or particular method to knowledge. Walsham (1993) argues that in the

interpretive tradition there are no ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ theories. Instead, they should be

judged according to how ‘interesting’ they are to the researcher as well as those involved

in the same areas. They attempt to derive their constructs from the field by an in-depth

examination of the phenomenon of interest. Gephart (1999) argues that interpretivists

assume that knowledge and meaning are acts of interpretation, hence there is no objective

knowledge which is independent of thinking, reasoning humans. Myers (2009) argues

that the premise of interpretive researchers is that access to reality (whether given or

socially constructed) is only through social constructions such as language, consciousness

and shared meanings (online). Interpretive paradigm is underpinned by observation and

interpretation, thus to observe is to collect information about events, while to interpret is

to make meaning of that information by drawing inferences or by judging the match

between the information and some abstract pattern (Aikenhead, 1997). It attempts to

understand phenomena through the meanings that people assign to them (Deetz, 1996).

Reeves and Hedberg (2003, p. 32) note that the “interpretivist” paradigm stresses

the need to put analysis in context. The interpretive paradigm is concerned with

understanding the world as it is from subjective experiences of individuals. They use

meaning (versus measurement) oriented methodologies, such as interviewing or

participant observation, that rely on a subjective relationship between the researcher and

267
subjects. Interpretive research does not predefine dependent and independent variables,

but focuses on the full complexity of human sense making as the situation emerges

(Kaplan and Maxwell, 1994). This is the interpretive approach, which aims to explain the

subjective reasons and meanings that lie behind social action. The interest of

interpretivists is not the generation of a new theory, but to judge or evaluate, and refine

interpretive theories. Walsham (1995b) presents three different uses of theory in

interpretive case studies: theory guiding the design and collection of data; theory as an

iterative process of data collection and analysis; and theory as an outcome of a case

study. The use of theory as an iterative process between data collection and analysis has

been applied in this research study.

Therefore, the philosophical assumptions underlying this research come from the

interpretive tradition. This implies a subjective epistemology and the ontological belief

that reality is socially constructed. Livesey (2011c p.1-3) explains the social world in

relation to three important interrelated, philosophical assumptions that underpin the

different paradigms, namely: ontology (what do we believe); epistemology (the science

of knowing) and methodology (the science of finding out). Firstly, according to Livesey

(2011c p.1), researchers who view their world realistically generally accept the basic

principles of the natural and the social sciences to be the same. Empirical evidence

serves as proof for valid knowledge, but in itself it is not sufficient. The main objective

of realism is thus to go beyond a description of relationships and to discover how such

relationships came to being. Realists believe and are convinced that the social world has

to be understood in its totality. That is to say, all parts of the social world are affected by

the other parts. However, Livesey (2011c p.4) proposes the use of focus groups or in-

268
depth interviews to collect reliable and valid data for a study, in accordance with the

realism paradigm.

3.8 Data Analysis Methods

Interpretive researchers attempt to derive their data through direct interaction with

the phenomenon being studied. An important aspect of data analysis in qualitative case

study is the search for meaning through direct interpretation of what is observed by

themselves as well as what is experienced and reported by the subjects. Bogdan and

Biklen (2003) define qualitative data analysis as “working with the data, organizing them,

breaking them into manageable units, coding them, synthesizing them, and searching for

patterns”. The aim of analysis of qualitative data is to discover patterns, concepts, themes

and meanings. In case study research, Yin (1994) discusses the need for searching the

data for “patterns” which may explain or identify causal links in the data base. In the

process, the researcher concentrates on the whole data first, then attempts to take it apart

and re-constructs it again more meaningfully. Categorization helps the researcher to make

comparisons and contrasts between patterns, to reflect on certain patterns and complex

threads of the data deeply and make sense of them. The process of data analysis begins

with the categorization and organization of data in search of patterns, critical themes and

meanings that emerge from the data. A process sometimes referred to as “open coding”

(Strauss and Corbin, 1990) is commonly employed whereby the researcher identifies and

tentatively names the conceptual categories into which the phenomena observed would

be grouped. The goal is to create descriptive, multi-dimensional categories that provide a

preliminary framework for analysis. These emerging categories are of paramount

importance as qualitative researchers tend to use inductive analysis. In a case study like

269
this one, the data collection and analysis can also go hand in hand in an iterative manner

in that the results of the analysis will help guide the subsequent collection of data. Data

collection and analysis inform or drive each other, with the result that the analysis

becomes a higher level synthesis of the information. The iterative cycle is repeated and

course design and development checked and revised as the process continues. In this

study, the interviews, both individual and focus group, were recorded and transcribed. A

couple of open-ended questions were posed to which learners were required to respond in

writing. In these processes useful information that may be closely linked to their

experiences can emerge. The individual responses were analyzed, compared and

categorized with the results of transcription of the focus group interview, and

subsequently triangulated and interpreted to draw conclusions.

On the other hand, Burns and Grove (2001) explained that data analysis is a

mechanism for reducing and organizing data to produce findings that require

interpretation by the researcher. Qualitative data analysis needs to be conducted with

rigour and care (Coffey & Atkinson 1996 p.189). In qualitative research, the analysis

begins as soon as the first data are collected. They may consist of no more than a single

interview. When the researchers get ready to attend to the data, their first task is a

conceptual one: the clarification of their own preconceptions of the phenomenon under

study. This is “bracketing” and means “suspending as much as possible the researcher’s

meanings and interpretations and entering into the world of the individual who was

interviewed” (Tesch 1992 p.92). The actual data analysis occurs when researchers read

the entire data set. Based on the assumptions of this research, reading is more than a

casual taking note of the content. The researchers immerse themselves in the data, read

270
and reread, and dwell with the data, in order to achieve closeness to them and a sense of

the whole. When they are satisfied that the text has become accessible to them, they can

delineate all “meaning units” throughout the entire interview transcription and then

decide which ones are relevant to the research questions asked then bound the meaning

units that contain them (Tesch 1992 p.91).Streubert and Carpenter (1999 p.60) further

suggests that data analysis requires that researchers dwell with or become immersed in

the data. Data analysis is done to preserve the uniqueness of each participant’s lived

experience while permitting an understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.

This begins with listening to the participants’ descriptions and is followed by reading and

rereading the verbatim transcriptions or written responses. As the researcher became

immersed in the data, he identified and extracted significant statements. It is critical to

identify how statements or central themes emerge and connect to one another if the final

description is to be comprehensive and exhaustive. In this study computer software was

utilized for efficient data storage and retrieval.

3.8.1 Methods of Analysis used in the study

According to Cohen et al.(2007 p.461), qualitative data analysis can be described

as the process of making sense from research participants’ views and opinions of

situations, corresponding patterns, themes, categories and regular similarities. And

Nieuwenhuis (2007 p.99-100) explains that qualitative data analysis tends to be an

ongoing and iterative process, implying that data collection, processing, analysis and

reporting are intertwined, and not necessarily a successive process. Gibbs (2007, vol. 6

p.1) defines qualitative data analysis as a process of transformation of collected

qualitative data done by means of analytic procedures into a clear, understandable,

271
insightful, trustworthy and even original analysis. Gibbs (2007) further states when

engaging in qualitative data analysis, the researcher not only wishes to highlight recurring

features, but also different steps, procedures and processes that are at the disposal of a

researcher. In this study, the researcher used document reviews to support the interview

and observation methods which were among the main data collection strategy. Among

the documents that were analyzed were books, articles and journals. However, the

contents of these documents were analyzed to validate the information obtained using

other methods of data collection. According to Best and Khan (2006 p.270) the first step

in analyzing qualitative data involves organizing the data. It is however, crucial to bear in

mind that the methods of organizing the data will differ depending on the research

strategy and data collection techniques. Once the data have been organized, the

researcher can proceed to the following stage in data analysis, namely description. During

the second stage of data analysis the researcher seeks to describe the various pertinent

aspects of the study, which include inter alia the setting, both temporally and physically;

individuals being studied; the purpose of any activities examined; the viewpoints of

participants and the effects of any activities on the participants. Patton (2002 p.434)

further describes the third and final phase of the analysis process namely interpretation as

involving an explanation of the findings answering why questions attaching significance

particular results and putting patterns into an analytic framework.

272
 Therefore, according to Patton (2002) discipline and rigour of qualitative analysis

depends on presenting solid descriptive data in such a way that others reading the results

can understand and draw their own interpretations. Based on the philosophical

assumption adopted in this study, the captured data from the qualitative research was

presented, analyzed, described and interpreted in a systematic manner as the next step of

the research process. The documentation and analysis methods aimed to present data in

an intelligible and interpretable form in order to assess discipleship: parameters and

standards of measuring church growth and church establishment in accordance with the

research purpose. The researcher opted that in turn the assessed phenomenon will enable

the study to establish how discipleship can be used effectively in assisting pastors in local

churches to enhance church growth and church establishment. In this study, the

theoretical framework and the context for the data analysis has been provided. Based on

the assumptions of this research, qualitative data are in the form of text and the act of

analysis involves the examining of all elements of the data sets to clarify concepts and

constructs as well as the deconstruction of the textual data into manageable categories,

patterns, themes and relationships according to the research aims. However, the

researcher had different methods for the analysis of qualitative data and various steps,

procedures and processes are described by other authors, experts and academics for

qualitative data analysis.

273
3.8.2 Types of Qualitative Data Analysis

3.8.2.1 Content Analysis

Based on assumptions of this study, the researcher read the entire interviews and

identified several topics in the interview. These topics then became primary categories or

category labels. Partington (2003 p.113) explains that there is little standardization with

no absolutes where a specific type of qualitative data relates to a specific type of analysis.

Neuman (2006) further opines that no single qualitative data analysis approach is widely

accepted, while Schurink et al. (2011 p.403) posit that there are always variations in the

number and description of steps for the same process of data analysis by different

authors. From the preceding views, it can thus be inferred that each qualitative data

analysis to some extent will be a uniquely designed event. With the preceding in mind,

the qualitative data analysis of this research (responses from the semi-structured

interviews) was done according to a qualitative content analysis process that integrated

Creswell’s (2013 p.182-188) analytic spiral with the process as described by Marshall

and Rossman (1999 p.152-159) and Watling and James (2012 p.385-395), comments as

offered by Gibbs (2007:vol.6 p.1) and Creswell (2009 p.184-185) and recommendations

by Henning et al. (2004 p.104-109); Roberts et al.(2006 p.43); Davies (2007 p.181-184);

Gall et al. (2007 p.257); McMillan and Schumacher (2010 p.322-323;366-377); Greeff

(2011 p.359) and Schurink et al.(2011 p.403-404).

Therefore, the qualitative content analysis involved the following procedures:

First, recording data was done by audio recording on a digital voice recorder while audio

recording on another tape recorder served as backup of electronic failure and faults; and

to ensure that all voices could be heard. Taking notes served as further backup and

274
provided the context to the interviews. Second, verbatim transcription of the responses

from the interview commenced as soon as possible; and was done by an expert to ensure

a speedy completion. To ensure that the researcher became acquainted with the data for

the purpose of analysis and interpretation, the original interview of the completed

verbatim transcription was listened to again. Transcription notation symbols, comments

and the taking of field notes as suggested by Henninget al. (2007) were used to capture

non-transcribable text to gain as much of the complete picture as possible. In an attempt

to ensure the reliability and validity of the data, the verbatim transcribed interviews were

presented to the respondents to verify and sign off. In addition, the entire transcribed text

and field notes were thoroughly read at first to obtain an overall and comprehensive

impression of the content and context before the abstraction process of coding began

where units of meaning are identified or labeled. Thirdly, the coding began and units of

meaning were identified and labeled. According to Henning et al. (2007) and Neuman

(2006), codes are names or labels assigned to specific units or segments of related

meaning identified within the field notes and transcripts. In this study, the transcribed text

was arranged in meaningful themes and categories with the assistance of Atlas. As

progress was made with the analysis, further sub themes and sub categories were

included to identify meaning connections, relationships and trends. Therefore, the codes

were eventually evaluated for relevance to the research objectives and were then listed in

categories according to the research objectives and theoretical framework from the

literature study. Based on the assumption view of this study, qualitative content analysis

was used to review each article first, for the purpose of the study; second, for interpretive

theory or theories used; third, for research questions being investigated; fourth, for

275
research design or qualitative tradition used; fifth, for data collection methods; and

lastly, for data analysis. Data across these categories were then analyzed in terms of the

paradigmatic perspectives or assumptions reflected in the study.

3.8.2.2 Thematic Analysis

The thematic analysis is the most widely used qualitative approach to analyzing

interviews. The conceptual framework of the thematic analysis in this research was

mainly built upon the theoretical positions of Braun and Clarke (2006). According to

Braun and Clarke (2006 p.79), thematic analysis is a method used for identifying,

analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within the data. The reason for choosing this

method in this study was that ‘rigorous thematic approach can produce an insightful

analysis that answers particular research questions’ (Braun and Clarke 2006 p.97).In

addition, this approach complemented the research questions by facilitating an

investigation of the semi – structured interview data from two perspectives: first, from a

data- driven perspective and a perspective based on coding in an inductive way; second

from the research question perspective to check if the data were consistent with the

research questions and providing sufficient information. The next important consideration

was identifying themes in the semi- structured interview data the researcher collected.

What counts as a theme is that it is something which captures the key idea about the data

in relation to the research question and which represents some level of patterned response

or meaning within the data set (Braun and Clarke 2006 p.82). What is required here is to

be consistent throughout the process of determining themes. A according to Bazeley

(2009 p.6), themes only attain full significance when they are linked to form a

coordinated picture or an explanatory model: ‘Describe, compare, relate’ is a simple

276
three-step formula when report the results. Braun and Clarke (2006) further explain that

themes or patterns within data can be identified either in an inductive 'bottom up' way

(citing Frith and Gleeson, 2004), or in a theoretical, deductive 'top down' way (citing

Boyatzis, 1998 and Hayes, 1997). According to Thomas (2003 p.2), the primary purpose

of the inductive approach is to allow research findings to emerge from the frequent,

dominant or significant themes inherent in raw data, without the restraints imposed by

structured methodologies. Thomas (2003) further points out that three main purposes for

using an inductive approach is first, to condense extensive and varied raw text data into a

brief, summary format; second, to establish clear links between the research objectives

and the summary findings derived from the raw data; and third, to develop a model or

theory about the underlying structure of experiences or processes which are evident in the

raw data. However, the research has acknowledged that top-down and bottom-up process

are interactive in some way because the research keeps a specific interest in identifying

themes influenced by the theoretical framework.

Therefore, using the thematic analysis of semi- structured interview data served

the purpose of this study as it enabled the effective categorization of changes in

discipleship programmes. This study confirmed the notion by Braun and Clarke (2006)

that it is appropriate to choose a method of analysis that is driven by both research

question and broader theoretical assumptions. Braun and Clarke (2006 p.85) also claim

that using the data collection questions (such as from an interview schedule) as the

'themes’ are the ‘worst examples of thematic analysis’, because they are entirely

deductive and fail to take account of emergent themes based on a process of induction.

The questions employed in the interviews were always more open-ended to begin with,

277
followed by semi-structured questions keeping the key points relevant to the research

questions ready appropriate to respondents’ posts and positions. The main categories and

themes were identified from the data. Although the stages used in the analysis of the data

look sequential, they iterative and built up on the previous stage as Braun and Clarke

(2006 p.86) have already highlighted, ‘Analysis is typically a recursive process, with

movement back and forth between different phases. So it’s not rigid, and with more

experience (and smaller datasets), the analytic process can blur some of these phases

together.

3.8.2.3 Data coding

Coding of data, though more common in quantitative approaches, is also

applicable in qualitative research designs. It is a formal representation of analytic

thinking whereby the researcher designs a coding scheme and assigns codes to the

categories and themes emerging from the data set. Rossman and Rallis (2003) define

coding as the process of organizing the material into chunks or segments of text before

bringing meaning to information. Coding, in a qualitative approach, may take the form of

non-valuating numbering, abbreviations of key words, or other forms which assign

nomenclatures to the categories or themes emerging from the data sets. The coding

process is more than a technical procedure; it is essentially part of analytic thinking, and

the coding process may reveal new insights which necessitate re-classifications of the

data (Rossman, 2006). In this regard, the coding process in the present study was mainly

entail non-valuating numbering and word concisions of participant expressions.

278
 This study used two methods of data coding: The first data coding system that

was used involved “open coding”: an emergent coding technique drawn from grounded

theory methodology (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The second data

coding used “template coding”: an a priori coding system drawn from template analysis

(Crabtree & Miller, 1992; King, 1998). In this study, the researcher selected the two

coding approaches to identify the meaning within a text without any preconceptions and

the other uses a purposefully developed framework as a means to draw out meaning. The

researcher identified Open coding as a method of generating a participant-generated

‘theory’ from the data and template coding was identified as a tool for framing data into a

coherent construct through the application of an established ‘language’. The second

analytical tool that the researcher decided to use was “template coding”(King, 1998).

Template coding, in recognizing the interpretive nature of the researcher, moves away

from the positivist/realist paradigm of open coding, suggesting that some researchers are

“sceptical of the existence of 'real' internal states which can be discovered through

empirical research, and may therefore feel that template coding is more conducive to their

position” (King, 1998, p.119). In this regard template coding seemed more in-line with

epistemology and ontology and offered the researcher an analytical method that allowed

the data to speak through rather than at. In this study, the intention was to tell the story of

the participants the researcher felt that template coding could offer specific terms that

would give the data a voice.

279
3.9 Sampling and Sample size

3.9.1 Purposive Sampling Method

In this study, the researcher used purposive sampling in order to seek knowledge

about the pastors’ view on discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church

growth and church establishment which the participants would provide by virtue of their

experience and the effectiveness of their ministries under investigation in the city of

Kabwe. According to Leedy and Ormrod (2005 p.133), the particular entities which

qualitative researchers select comprise their sample, and the process of choosing them is

called sampling. The most important thing in sampling is to identify an appropriate

sample from which to acquire data. In this regard, the participants were identified and

purposefully selected based on their involvement in ministry in local churches. The

number of participants is further viewed as being sufficient.

On the other hand, the pastors and Christian leaders who were members of

pastor’s Christian fellowship in Kabwe were included in the study because they happened

to be in the right place at the right time. However, the researcher consciously selected the

participants according to specific selection criteria. According to Patton (2002),

purposeful sampling is a technique widely used in qualitative research for the

identification and selection of information-rich cases for the most effective use of limited

resources. This involves identifying and selecting individuals or groups of individuals

that are especially knowledgeable about or experienced with a phenomenon of interest

(Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2007). Based on the assumption of sampling method,

experienced pastors and Christian leaders with Knowledge from different churches were

selected. According to Kombo and Tromp (2006 p.82), the researcher purposely targets a

280
group of people believed to be reliable for the study. The power of purposive sampling

lies in selecting information related to the central issues being studied. In this regard, the

individuals which were likely to yield the most needed information about the topic of

discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church

establishment under investigation were chosen to participate. Therefore, the purposive

sampling technique was appropriate for this study because the selected participants were

in the position to discuss issues concerning the topic of the study.

3.9.2 Sample size

Due to the manageable number of pastors and Christian leaders identified on the

five churches and Pastor’s Christian fellowship meetings, it was decided to include all

one hundred and twenty pastors and Christian leaders in this study. The total population

was therefore used for this study, as it was practically possible. According to Iacobucci

and Churchill (2005 p.285) sample sizes can either be fixed (when they are determined in

advance of the study) or sequential (when more data can be collected if the initially

collected data does not answer the research question). Therefore, this study aimed to

work with a fixed sample size.

3.9.3 Population

In this study, the target populations identified were Pastors and Christian leaders

from different churches in the city of Kabwe who had been considered to have

knowledge and experience of doing discipleship for the growth of their church members

in their local churches. According to Burns and Grove (2001), the population is the entire

set of individuals (or objects) having some common characteristics as defined by the

281
sampling criteria established for the study. In this regard, the participants selected in this

study were all pastors and Christian leaders.

3.10 Ethical considerations of the study

In this study, caution was taken to avoid any harm to participants in the light of

sensitivity of the research theme concerning responses about the discipleship: parameters

and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment required by pastors

and church leaders for growing their members in accordance with the diverse needs of

Zambian local churches. According to Keeves (1997 p.257-260) and Busher (2002),

ethical issues and considerations have mainly to do with permission to carry out the

research, the participation of respondents, the community and public as well as the

process employed to analyze data. Based on the assumptions of collecting the needed

data from the purposively sampled participants, the researcher sought permission through

writing before going in the field to collect data. A detailed prescribed application was

submitted to the Research Ethics Committee of the Greenlight University for approval to

conduct the research and it was granted. According to Kombo and Tromp (2006 p.98), a

researcher requires a research permit before embarking on study. To conduct this

research, the researcher sought and obtained permission from the Pastors and Christian

leaders of the churches which were chosen for this study. The pastors and Christian

leaders heading the churches granted permission and assured the researcher to be assisted

with information provided the researcher acknowledged their contributions.

282
 In this study, the researcher always asked interviewees to allow him to record

their discussions. In all the instances the researcher was granted permission to have the

discussions recorded and the interviewees did not mind that they could be identified

through the description of their positions. Getting consent of the interviewees was easy.

In addition, the researcher assured all the participants that he was going to treat the

information given to him with the confidentiality that it deserved. According to Lupele’s

(2007 p.129), interviews are interventions as they lay open thoughts, feelings, knowledge

and experience of both the interviewer and interviewee. Lupele’s (2007) further says that

interviewing often takes people through a thoughtful reflection on an experience of one’s

life. He further warns that the purpose of a research interview is to gather data and not to

change people’s attitudes and beliefs.

Furthermore, the researcher ensured that participants and respondents would

remain anonymous; Participants and respondents were not subjected to any risk of

unusual stress, embarrassment or loss of self-esteem; According to Mouton (2001 p.238),

the ethics of science concerns what is wrong and what is right when conducting research.

And Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2000 p.49) further explains that ethical concerns in

educational research are often complex, subtle and can sometimes place the researcher in

a moral predicament that may be irresolvable. In this regard, confidentiality in this study

was highly observed and no one else was able to have access to names and responses of

respondents except the researcher. The names of respondents were not used in the data

and no personal identifying data was left loosely. However, the recorded interview was

erased after the project. All personal indirectly identifying data has been anonymised. In

this study, data collected was strictly used only for the study and not for any other

283
purpose. According to Cohen et at. (2000 p.49), ethical issues may arise from any of the

following: the context of the study, the procedures to be adopted, methods of data

collection, the nature of participants, the type of data collected and that which is to be

done with the data. In this regard, the following ethical considerations were identified as

most appropriate for the research: voluntary participation, informed consent, no harm,

confidentiality and anonymity and privacy.

3.11 Reliability

Based on the assumptions of qualitative research, the researcher accurately

described the various aspects of the subjects such as status and their roles, the concepts

and the methods used. In this regard, the researcher asked questions about discipleship:

parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church establishment based on

the participants’ experience and practices of discipleship in their local churches.

According to White 2005 (p.201), qualitative researchers regard reliability as the

elimination of casual errors that can influence results. Reliability can be divided into

internal reliability and external reliability. Internal reliability is achieved during the study

through triangulation, cross examination, member checks, careful selection and training

of assistant researchers, careful auditing of the data, by reaching consensus regarding the

findings with the participants, and using audiotapes and video recordings to store

information and computers for the processing of data while external reliability refers to

the verification of the findings of the research when the same research is conducted by an

independent researcher under the same circumstances and using the same participants.

Although the researcher holds the view that replicability is difficult to ensure in

qualitative studies, he nevertheless strived for replicability by ensuring that the methods

284
of gathering data were accurate and efficient. Furthermore, the researcher made sure that

the research design in this research was appropriate to the problem that was investigated.

In this way, other researchers who would like to replicate this study would be likely to

obtain similar results.

285
CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This study set out with the aim of establishing how discipleship could be used

effectively in helping Pastors and Christian leaders in local churches to enhance church

growth and church establishment. This chapter provide the presentation of responses and

the discussion of the main findings from the research and where appropriate, links the

literature to the research outcomes. The chapter will discuss on the findings related to the

case for discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church growth and church

establishment. The perceptions of the interviewees and information obtained from the

observations and other appropriate documents constitute the centre of this chapter. The

presentation is based on the five churches and pastors and Christian leaders from pastor’s

Christian fellowship meetings that the researcher focused on and from the interviews

conducted. The five churches were involved in the study under observation: two churches

from the mainline churches, the other two churches from Pentecostal churches and one

from charismatic churches. For ethical reasons, the names of Christian leaders and

pastors observed have been replaced with artificial names as A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and A6.

However, both the interview schedule and observations were framed from the sub-

questions which were also framed from the literature review.

286
4.2 Presentation of Responses

This section discusses the themes that emerged from the findings of the study as

presented and discussed in this research. In order that appropriate conclusions may be

reached, the themes that emerged from the study are analyzed in the light of the

theoretical and methodological lenses discussed in chapters one, two and three in relation

to the objectives of the study as a way of answering the research questions. The themes

concerning the case for discipleship: parameters and standards of measuring church

growth and church establishment were: Background information about participants,

Biblical discipleship, the right way of doing discipleship, the involvement of the local

churches in disciple making. The discussion about these themes was validated with the

quotes from interviews, and collaborated and linked with existing literature and

theoretical frameworks discussed in the study.

4.2.1 Background information about participants

All the Pastors and Christian leaders from the selected churches and pastor’s

Christian fellowship meetings were willing and helpful to participate in the research, and

all the interviews were conducted in a friendly and cooperative manner. The majority of

respondents were male and few female; Among the pastors and Christian leaders

participated in this study, most of them held a certificate, two held a diploma, one had a

Bachelor degree, one boasted a Honors Degree, one a Masters and only one had obtained

a doctorate. However, the church ministry experience varied from nine years to fifteen

years and thirty years to thirty eight years. This aspect was included in the interview

schedule so that the researcher would understand other variables that might influence

pastors’ and Christian leaders’ practice of discipleship and disciple making in the local

287
churches and also to know their level of education with the view of understanding why

growing church members into maturity is far more complex and difficult task in local

churches. This would also enable the researcher to understand situations surrounding

pastors’ and Christian leaders’ performance and why the church in general was not doing

well in discipling its members. However, this study found out that the six pastors from

five selected churches and those from pastor’s Christian fellowship meetings that were

involved in the study were from different backgrounds and these played a role in their

church ministry and helped in some way to disciple their church members. Therefore, all

interviews were however completed in full.

4.2.2 Biblical Discipleship

Biblical discipleship is one of the themes that emerged from the findings of this

study. As indicated in the literature review, biblical discipleship refers to sharing your life

into other people’s lives by training them in the Word of God, in relationship by spending

intimate time with them, and in ministry by sending them out to proclaim the gospel and

do good works, so that they can develop as healthy believers and grow into maturity to

disciple others. Wiersbe (2007 p.86) observes a disciple from the Christian perspective as

one who believes on Jesus Christ expresses his faith by being baptized to join the special

family of the faithful. The person remains in the fellowship of believers so that he might

be taught the truth of the faith. Such a person is able to go out and win others and teach

them too. According to Barna (2015), churches are in need of new models for

discipleship. Current programs capture only a minority of Christians, and most believers

do not prioritize an investment in their spiritual growth. At the same time, church leaders

desire a clear plan and lack systems to evaluate spiritual health. However, the following

288
quotes serve to support the preceding view. For the purpose of this study, the concept of

discipleship was earlier identified and explained as core and functional in growing church

members in the local churches. In this regard, the first research objective explored the

extent to which the concept of discipleship is understood by the pastors and Christian

leaders and how they apply it in their local churches. The findings showed that most of

pastors and Christian leaders interviewed defined discipleship as the training of a believer

in matters of life and service to God and other interviewees defined discipleship as

grounding Christians in the word of God. This is in agreement with Barna’s (1992)

findings which showed that discipleship is the process of transformation that changes us

to be increasingly more like Christ through the Word, the Spirit, and circumstance.

In a variety of perspectives were expressed:“My understanding about biblical

discipleship is that everyone who has accepted Jesus Christ into their lives must be

grounded in the word of God. When they are grounded and rooted in the word they will

grow and be strong in the lord” (Interview A2).

“I understand that biblical discipleship is the process of passing on spiritual knowledge

to another’s” (Interview A21).In coherence with the literature review and interviews,

some responses showed that biblical discipleship involves the teachings of Jesus Christ.

As one respondent put it, “It involves teachings of Jesus Christ, a believer or pastor

should go and disciple people out there, telling them about the goodness of Christ and to

have with them fellowship teaching them about Christ and making them listen and follow

him” (Interview A8). In coherence with literature review, other responses implied the

following Jesus teachings and obeying his commandments. Talking about this issue the

289
respondent said, “Biblical discipleship is all the believers who accept the lordship of

Jesus Christ in their lives. Those who follow his teachings and obey his commands and

those who may give up their occupation, friends, possessions or status for his sake”

(Interview A12). While other responses from interviews expressed ignorance among

some of the respondents. The response is coherence with the requirement from statement

problem about the pastors and Christian leaders having little knowledge about

discipleship and disciple making. For example, one respondent said, “We should not hate

one another. We should love one another and forgive one another” (Interview A32).

Another respondent when asked to give his opinion on biblical discipleship said, “To talk

in the biblical way” (Interview A33). This also accords with the earlier observations,

which showed that most of the pastors and Christian leaders had little knowledge about

discipleship and disciple making process.

4.2.3 The right way of doing Discipleship

The third theme is the right way of doing discipleship in the local churches which

pertains to the forms of discipleship for Christian church from the literature review. This

theme was introduced to assess the type of discipleship done in the local churches and

observation was done with six pastors and Christian leaders in five selected churches in

the city of Kabwe. The pastors who were said to have a positive attitude towards disciple

making and this was also seen in the large numbers of pastors and Christian leaders who

were interviewed. As mentioned earlier, the pastors and Christian leaders interviewed

revealed that there was need for the church to do discipleship in the right way. The

second theme that came from the semi-structured interview, relate to how Jesus trained

his disciples and discipleship was done in the early church. Jesus changed human history

290
through the process of forming an intentional small group of twelve persons (Mark 1:17).

For the purpose of this study, as a great teacher who taught the truth, Jesus was preparing

the disciples for a lifetime of spiritual growth and development. Having said that, the

church is also remained that the Disciples of Christ were twelve men that Jesus called to

follow him. He called the first two disciples, Simon and Andrew, and called them to

follow him “and I will make you to become fishers of men.” This was the calling to all

the disciples. It was a calling to follow Jesus and become fishers of men. The goal for the

disciple was to become like Jesus. The purpose to achieving that goal was to teach the

Word of God, be changed by the Word of God, and live by the Word of God. It was the

disciples’ mission to make more disciples for Christ throughout their lives and ministry.

The leaders, in relation to the current study, should be eye witnesses to the life

and ministry of Jesus Christ. They should follow the process of discipleship that Jesus

used in making them to be followers of him. The Disciples of Christ followed the secrets

to personal transformation that was taught by Christ, which if followed will transform a

church and culture. This process of following Jesus is described by Hull (2004 pp.15-21)

in five steps: (i) A disciple submits to a leader who teaches him to follow Jesus, (ii) A

disciple learns Jesus’ words, (iii) A disciple learns Jesus’ way of doing ministry, (iv)A

disciple imitates Jesus’ life and character, and (v) A disciple finds and teaches disciples

to follow Jesus. This process of following Jesus still works today if pastors and church

leaders will follow the example given to the first century disciples by Jesus Christ, the

Lord. This theme was identified and represented from the responses of the interviewees.

291
 Responses assigned to this theme represented the respondents’ viewpoints and

perceptions about the right way of doing discipleship in the local churches. As was stated

in the study, in coherence with the literature review, some of the responses implicitly

indicated that the discipleship required to grow church members in local churches should

be the way Jesus trained his disciples. According to wilder and Jones (2011), the

disciples of Christ made disciples by feeding people the Word of God and by serving the

people. They followed the example of Jesus, the disciple maker. As a shepherd, Jesus fed

the disciples. As under-shepherds the disciples taught the Word of God, which was their

primary responsibility. It is the spiritual nourishment that the flock (church) has to have

to survive. In the similar way Arnold (1992) explained that in Jesus’ first-century world

disciples were usually the students of a particular teacher, apprentices who learned all

that their master could teach so that they could go on to become masters themselves. In

addition to teaching the Jewish law and the traditions of Moses, the rabbis (or teachers)

sought to train their disciples to live out their faith as obedient followers of God. A

number of times during Jesus’ ministry he, too, was called Rabbi. Observers felt that he

had met the criteria necessary to be a disciple maker in the line of Moses. Like the Jewish

rabbis, Jesus had gathered his own group of disciples and was training them. Jesus,

however, was set apart from the rabbis of his day. In Matthew 7:28–29, the people were

amazed after Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount because “he taught as one who

had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.”

292
 Furthermore, when Jesus called the twelve disciples (and many others who followed

him during his ministry), his command was different from that of other disciple makers.

His words to Simon and Andrew in Mark 1 were “Follow me.” It was a simple phrase,

yet one loaded with meaning. In Christ’s call to discipleship he challenged the disciples

to live with him, to learn how to live as his disciples, and to prepare others to hear the

Good News. According to Arnold (1992), the call “Follow me” had a very real physical

application. Jesus did not say these words and then walk away never to be seen by the

disciples again. He expected them to leave what they were doing in order to physically

walk after him. For three years after this call the twelve disciples lived with him. They

travelled to many different places and sought food and shelter in a host of ways. They

saw Jesus in the morning when he got up and at night when he laid down. They watched

him pray, heal, preach and teach. They observed Jesus in his dealings with difficult

people. Through all of their experiences with him, they learned that Jesus’ lifestyle was

radically different from the one they had learned from birth. They were challenged to a

new life. This new life did not come easily to them. They were naturally brash, selfish

and uncaring. Jesus had to teach them to be gentle, giving and compassionate. On many

occasions he took the disciples aside (Matthew 5–7) in order to instruct them. When he

told parables, he would explain the meaning to them after the crowds had departed. (The

disciples were as “deaf” as the crowds when it came to understanding parables.) He asked

questions of them, taught them, admonished them, prodded them to take steps of faith,

nurtured them, and loved them.

293
 Theirs was a special relationship that, for two reasons, went much deeper than the one

Jesus had with the crowds that followed him for two reasons. First, Jesus committed

himself to the disciples in every way. He made himself accessible to them and confided

in them. He had great expectations for them and occasionally showed frustration with

them. You might recall the time the disciples were crossing the Sea of Galilee with Jesus

asleep in the boat when a great storm came. Jesus chided them for their lack of faith.

Because he had committed himself to his disciples, Jesus had great expectations of them

(Arnold, 1992).The second reason it was a unique relationship was that the disciples were

committed to Jesus in return. Since Jesus supplied the brains and purpose for the

fledgling Christian movement, the disciples were not able to add much to the process.

What they did bring was a growing love for Christ and an awakening desire to be

obedient and loyal in everything. They struggled with their faith, sin and weaknesses, but

they wanted to be faithful. They loved Jesus and became willing to give up everything

(eventually most of them even gave their lives) for this man from Galilee. Arnold (1992)

further, explained that one of the marks of good students is that they are able to do what

the teacher has instructed them to do, even when the teacher is not present. Knowing this,

Christ trained his disciples by encouraging them to take steps of faith on their own. As

the disciples travelled with Jesus, they were able to do some helpful things, but they spent

most of their time observing the master at work. Then, Jesus sent them out two-by-two to

prepare towns for his coming. They preached as they had seen Jesus preach. They sought

faithful God-fearing people in the towns as Jesus had done. They healed the sick and

comforted the bereaved. And they learned what ministry was all about. In being sent out

from Jesus, they learned even more about how to imitate their rabbi.

294
 The right way of doing discipleship is how it was also done with the early church

in the New Testament. In the New Testament, the disciples learned how to think and act

based on their relationship with the master disciple maker. They in turn began to

duplicate his kind of ministry after Jesus went back to heaven. In the book of Acts much

can be discovered about the history of the church. Following Christ’s ascension into

heaven, the promised Holy Spirit manifests in power at Pentecost, and the disciples start

carrying the Good News to all people. It was an exciting time for the church, a period of

rapid growth in spite of tremendous persecution. Peter’s sermon in Acts 2 brought three

thousand new believers into the church in one day. These new believers combined with

other disciples to worship in the temple each day. Just imagine the uproar their meetings

must have caused in the already crowded temple courtyard. Yet their lives were so

different that they were viewed favorably by others, and the church grew daily. In the

New Testament, the church met together in larger groups for corporate worship. But

small groups also had a place in the life of the church. The apostles not only taught large

groups, but they also went from house to house, visiting small groups in homes as they

taught and made disciples (Acts 5:42). People met together in their homes to break bread

together and to use the opportunity to encourage each other to live out their faith in ever

greater obedience. There were home prayer meetings like the one held while Peter was in

prison (Acts 12:12), and Paul’s letters allude to “house churches” (Rom 16:5).Whether

house churches were independent groups of believers or were part of larger churches is

uncertain. It is likely, however, that small house fellowships were the building blocks of

the church in each city or region. The early disciples met in groups small enough to fit

into normal homes (for instance, Priscilla and Aquila were tentmakers and probably not

295
wealthy see Acts 18:3).The church needed the “house church” for its survival. There

were periods of intense persecution for the first few centuries after Christ, so the early

church was often not able to meet openly, nor were they allowed to purchase large

buildings for gathering. They relied on the more protective environment of the home to

nurture and protect the gospel in the lives of believers. However, the following responses

echoed by respondents, were in agreement with related themes from the literature

overview.

“One on one is the best way of doing discipleship, it is more effective because you mentor

and develop the followers closely, you grow and develop in relationship like father son

relationship which cannot be done when you are the group discussion and it helps the

teacher the ability to mentor and shape another person and then send him or her out to

do the same for someone else” (Interview A50).

“The right way of doing discipleship in local churches is one on one discipleship. One on

one discipleship is good to do. But since it is at local, group discussion discipleship in the

best, that’s why we do have cell-meetings” (Interview A8).

“One on one is effective because the pastor is able to find enough time with that

individual member while group discussion will be difficult because people have different

needs which makes it difficult for them to come together at once. Hence rendering its

effectiveness not well. Jesus commanded us to make disciples. Jesus and Saul made

disciples through relationships not in teaching a class” (Interview 13).

“It depends; one on one can be effective. Here you assign a new covert or immature

believer to a mature Christian disciples who can personally work with the person in a

relational setting over a period of time to train, counsel, teach, advise, answer questions

296
etc group discussion is also good but it depends on how you take it. But one on one can

reach and make people be good leaders etc.”(Interview A11).

“One on one discipleship is one of the best because every believer is given a command to

share the gospel with others” (Interview A25). In coherence with the literature overview,

some responses from interviews pointed out the group discipleship to be the most

effective way of growing church members in the local churches. As one interviewee put

it:“Group discipleship is the right way of doing discipleship in a local church. Because in

a group as an instructor or teacher you reach many at once though you may be alone”

(interview A5).

Other responses from interviews identified both one on one discipleship and

group discipleship as important in growing church members in the local churches.

“Both one on one and group discussion is important in making disciples. One on one

mentoring discipleship can be more personal, where individuals share personal

struggles. While group discussion allows for a variety of knowledge and wisdom in

discussions from many different people with varied life experiences, education levels and

perspectives” (Interview A4).

“We do one to one discipleship by paring the mature Christian discipling the new

convert. We also do group discussion discipleship by grouping members in a small

number about 6 to 12. This has helped us so much” (Interview A2).

“Both are right depending on the state of the church. Meaning that if the church is small,

it’s possible that one on one can be done. This is the most effective. But if the church is

297
big- numerically that is- then the group discussion is the option. But to get good results

there is need for time investment” (Interview A31).

“It was a challenge from the beginning when we started but by the grace of God, we are

now doing both one on one and small groups to disciple church members” (Interviews

A26).

Other responses from interviews showed more detailed on how discipleship and

disciple making were done in their local churches. The responses of this category were all

related to the interview questions about the respondents’ view of the forms of

discipleship practiced in the local churches from the literature review.

“We have formed classes, every Sunday we go into a class before the main service .We

call it Sunday school and children Sunday school. It is easy for people to participate in

smaller groups. Those who did not come they are followed by their teachers. We have a

teacher’s manual and student book which have a work book. So student they do

assignments & marked” (Interviews A28).

“We have a discipleship class run by a team of leaders with an elder in charge. These

run a discipleship class periodically and provide mentorship lessons and teachings on

discipleship to the new followers” (Interview A9).

“In our church, discipleship is done in two ways: Every Sunday services, the program is

made in such way that there is time for discipleship class, where foundation doctrines

like repentance baptisms, faith, eternal judgment and giving are taught. The other

method is by getting a disciple get involved in programs like prayers of intercession and

evangelism” (Interview A27).

298
“In my church, we have classes of different age groups, children ministry, youth ministry,

and the church bible study where everyone is allowed to attend. There is couples

fellowship and singles fellowship. However, all these groups are used as discipleship

classes” (Interview A12).

“Discipleship is done through houses cells and youth group and as a pastor, I meet new

converts every Saturday for discipleship” (Interview A11).

“Mostly through house groups to which new converts are introduced , taught and given

opportunity to practice what they learn including sharing their faith to non – believers”

(Interview A1).

According to the respondents, there was a variety of ways of how discipleship could be

done in the local churches. Some respondents argued that the right way of doing

discipleship is one on one while others believed that it could be done in the small groups.

Still some felt that both ways were appropriate for doing discipleship while others

considered that discipleship should be run as a programme through house groups. This

also accords with our earlier observation that discipleship should be done both one on one

and small groups. Church members in the current church are challenged to live with their

leaders, to learn how to live as their disciples, and to prepare others to hear the good

news. Therefore, the respondents also revealed that there was a need for pastors to

disciple their members from house to house, visiting small groups in homes as they

taught and made disciples.

299
 Some of the issues emerging from these findings relate specifically to the

statement problem of the study about the church not practically involved in discipleship

and disciple making process due to pastors and Christian leaders who are not efficiently

well trained and their members not well discipled. For example, one respondent said, “At

the moment it is not fully practiced in the biblical way. Mostly we are in a hurry of

having a bigger number in churches and to have one on one discipleship it will take time

to have more members in the church” (Interview A16). Another respondent, when asked

about how discipleship is done in the current church, said, “To be honest we do not have

it” (Interview A13). These results match those observed in the earlier studies and the

comment shows that discipleship is rarely practiced in the local churches.

However, the following codes for the case discipleship: parameters and standards

of measuring church growth and church establishment identified from data regarded as

the most important tools for effective church ministry will be discussed.

4.2.3.1 Discipleship tools for disciple making process

Discipleship tools to use for effective church ministry in the local churches

include teaching God’s word, relationship, interaction, learning and training of believers.

The responses of these categories were all related to the interview questions about the

respondents’ view of right way of doing discipleship in the local churches, the main focus

tools in disciple making and most disciplines the disciple maker as a church leader and

pastor should be trained in. However, most of responses were recorded that viewed the

teaching God’s word, relationship and interaction, learning and training of believers in

the local. “Well, all discipleship involves teaching the word of God, training in the

practice of the principles of the Lord. This includes time spent with people, class

300
association and togetherness in growing to maturity in Christ Jesus.” (Interview

A11).The respondent quoted above, however, suggested that the word of God is needed in

the training of Christian leaders and pastors and for the growth of church members in the

local churches and this should be done in the class set up.

“Discipleship requires lots of interpersonal relationships and interaction” (Interview

A30).

“…… We see where Jesus talked with one or two disciples and really showed them the

way. It is also easier for people to open up to an individual about need and struggles than

to a group” (Interview A20). The respondents argued that discipleship involves close

relation and interaction with the people discipled. In that way, it would be easier to learn

and grow church members in the local churches. As one respondent said, “In my church,

it is done on relationship” (Interview A29).

Discipleship as an important aspect for effective ministry in the local churches, in

coherence with the literature review, further implied the training of believers in local

churches as well as of the need of the pastor and Christian leaders.

“Training is important. We need to see members with potential and train them, these will

now help to train others also, 2 Timothy 2:2. When we have people who are trained and

involve them reaching out for Jesus and they will disciple other converts. So we must

train and disciple these members” (Interview A2).

“Church leaders must be grounded in following the principles of the bible to disciple

people” (Interview A6). As a way of improving how discipleship is done in the local

churches, the respondents considered training of pastors and Christian leaders to be the

most important in growing their church members in the local churches. In accord with the

301
literature overview, discipleship also implied the planning to disciple believers in local

churches as required for the pastors and Christian leaders. For example one respondent

said, “I feel that currently, we need to be more intentional with discipleship” (interview

A20).As way of involving the church in disciple making, the above comment shows that

they are must be a strong intentionality about the way the church was doing ministry,

whereas in others the Church needed to be called back to its roots as a community of

disciples who made disciples. The above mentioned quotes indicate that the

understanding of discipleship and disciple making is closely related to the four

discipleship disciplines, namely the teaching of God’s word, relationship and interaction,

learning and training of believers in the local churches and is thus in accordance with the

related perspectives of understanding discipleship and disciple making as discussed in the

literature review.

Furthermore, an overview of the responses related to the question what their

understanding of right way of doing discipleship in the local churches was, a more

general view of discipleship and disciple making referred to the concept as “Mentorship”

(Interview A1) and a general misconception that “a process of following

Christ”(Interviews A 11). In addition, one respondent also held the belief that “the right

way of dong discipleship is by having short seminars and long seminars with church

members”(Interview A3). The other responses from interviews are in accord with the

requirement from the literature review about understanding the concept of discipleship

and disciple making as a point of growing disciples in the local churches and enhancing

church growth and church establishment. However, there is close relationship between

one’s understanding of discipleship and disciple making, and discipleship tools required

302
to enhance growth and church establishment in the local churches. As a result hereof, this

question of the interview schedule allowed for more probing questions that yielded

different responses that manifested again at a later stage during the interview.

However, the common view responses among respondents indicated the current

failure of doing discipleship in the local churches. “If anything there is no discipleship

done in our churches today because we are not preaching the commands of Jesus Christ,

but our own. And the members are not growing spiritually” (Interview A23).

“I have noticed that a lot of churches conduct deliverance programs more than

discipleship programs” (Interview A15).All respondents, including those from pastor’s

fellowship meetings indicated that they were no discipleship taking place in the local

churches and this was also confirmed in the five selected churches that was under

observation. However, the current findings have shown that the lack of proper disciple

making ministries to help and produce disciples who are spiritually transformed and go

on to make more disciples has led to discipleship failure in the current church. Talking

about this issue as one respondent said, “To be honest we do not have it” (Interview A13).

This finding supports in the literature review that most of the pastors and Christian

leaders in local churches were not actively involved in disciple making process.

In contrast to the earlier findings, other issue emerging from the finding relates

specifically to the challenges facing pastors and Christian leaders in discipling their

church members in the local churches. The following responses expressed by the

interviewees, were in agreement with related themes from the literature review. For

example, one respondent said, “One of the challenges pastors face today is lack of

knowledge and understanding about the importance of discipleship or discipling”

303
(Interview A9).Another respondent when asked said,“......... pastors are not trained in

discipleship themselves” (Interview A13). Some respondents further argued,

“Members not willing to be discipled” (Interview A13).

“Church members rarely attend discipleship programmes” (Interview A18).

“Church members have many leaders to learn from and imitating. They can’t be loyal to

their pastors. They are a multi- follower” (Interview A19).

“There are no teachings on discipleship in local churches, pastors just preach from their

pulpits” (Interview A12). Today most church members are haunting for miracles from

men of God in different places. They want quick solutions to their needs and hence they

are not stable in the things of God” (Interview A26). While others said that “Lack of

discipleship materials” (Interview A12).

Other responses from the respondents implicated that the other challenge could be

how discipleship was done in the local churches and thus it should be done in the biblical

way. As one respondent put it, “My opinion on how discipleship is done, in the current

church discipleship is not well balanced, many people in the church are just followers of

men or church members by registration and many have no time for discipleship. They are

busy bodies. They have no hunger for the Lord”(InterviewA26). This also accords with

the area observations, which showed that the current church is lacking proper disciple

making ministries to help and produce disciples who are spiritually transformed. In

addition, in line with the literature review and interviews, it was clear that the church

today is faced with the challenge of growth of church members in the local churches and

it is not doing well because of lack of understanding the concept of discipleship and lack

304
of knowledge of how this discipleship can be done in growing church members for

effective ministries in local churches. The other responses from the interviews related to

how the current church was doing discipleship and referred to how it was practiced in the

local churches were:“The way I look at it is that most churches do not have a discipleship

“mind set” with respect to church members, the church program usually consist of:

worship and music, prayer meeting, bible study, fellowship, activities, committee and

business meeting.

Discipleship in the local churches is not done in the biblical way. However, the so called

leaders are not discipled and cannot disciple others” (Interview A11).

“It is not necessarily done in the a biblical way because it is only taught on Sunday on

the pulpit so it is not as much, basically looking from the Bible it was done from house to

house selling their property to have things in common” (Interview 14).

“It is not done in the biblical way due to lack of sound doctrine by some churches. They

don’t believe on the teachings of Christ and his disciples” (Interview A30).

“Most churches they have stopped teaching but now they are busy having show in

churches. They (minister) giving people what they what to hear than what GOD what’s

them to hear” (InterviewA28).

“I think it is not done in a biblical way. Because many church members from many

churches are inherited members. These members come from other churches and they are

not fully trained or discipled properly”(Interview A5).

“I believe some of it is done biblically, but the walking beside and with someone in an

area the church falls short. The need to have better accountability with church members.

305
Need to encourage that all members are responsible for their individual growth, as well

as coming alongside brothers and sisters in Christ to “spur them on” in the ways of the

Lord. It is not just the church leader who disciples, but all followers of Christ should be

discipling in their homes and work place” (Interview A4).

In coherence with the literature overview, a response from the above respondents

indicated that lack of discipleship in local churches was still an issue, and was intense

than other aspects of church work. Quite clearly, responses from some of the respondents

related to how discipleship was done in the church which signified a negative experience

concerning how discipleship and disciple making was done. In addition, most of

responses from the interviews related to whether discipleship was done in the biblical

way is however, what the researcher also observed from all the five selected churches

that discipleship was not practically done in the local churches though the leaders might

talk about it but practically, it was not there in their local churches. The researcher further

observed that despite church members coming weekly in their meetings like bible studies

and prayer meetings, pastors and Christian leaders had no relationship with their

members. However, the church leaders and pastors needed to develop that intimate

relationship with their members to help them in their spiritual growth. The preceding

response to some degree indicated consistency with responses that emphasized the need

of discipleship structures. This view was expressed by one respondent from the group

discussion who echoed, “We must be making the Register, form structure so that those

who become born again are easily helped. We must form smaller classes (15) per class,

so that it is easy to monitor the growth of church members” (interview A28).

306
4.2.4 The involvement of the local churches in disciple making process

The involvement of the local churches in disciple making process, the fourth

theme that came from the semi-structured interview, relate to ways the local churches

could engage discipleship dynamics for church growth and church establishment. Most of

the responses from the interviews recommended training of both church leaders and

church members as a need to involve the church in disciple making:

“Training is important. We need to see members with potential and train them, these will

now help to train others also, 2 Timothy 2:2. When we have people who are trained and

involve them reaching but for Jesus and they will disciple those convents. So we must

train this members and disciple all members” (Interview A2).

“By deliberately training the church on the importance of discipleship and on how to do

discipleship” (Interview A5).

“Church leaders must be grounded in following the principles in the Bible to disciple

people. Lead by example as they follow Christ” (Interview A6).

“A holistic approach involved in the teaching and making known the importance of

discipleship to church leaders and especially the visionaries. When visionaries or set-

men understand the importance and value of discipleship, then they can be the initiators

of discipleship schools in their churches. The other suggestion would be to ensure that

every Christian college or university whether at certificate or degree level, a discipleship

course is embraced” (Interview A9).

“The members/ leaders must be grounded in the word so that they carry out the message

to other new members who are away” (Interview A11).

307
“More training of pastors and church leaders on discipleship. Also involving the church

members to do evangelism and visitation from the time they get saved” (Interview A15).

“The church should be encouraged to begin a programme with topics properly arranged

from simple to hard teachings. Materials should also be made available for discipleship.

The church leadership should be made aware of the benefits of making disciples”

(Interview A21).

“It is by teaching the church the importance of disciple making if the great commission

can be fulfilling” (Interview A23). In coherence with the literature overview, the findings

indicated that the lack of training among Christian leaders and pastors was the major

cause of the church not involved in the disciple making process and that led to the failure

of fulfilling the great commission. According to the respondents, the involvement of the

church in disciple making depended on the training of Christian leaders and church

members in local churches. However, the preceding response to some degree showed

consistency with responses that emphasized the need of training of church members. This

view was expressed by one respondent from the group discussion who echoed,

“Currently there is no discipleship training going on in most of the churches, if any,

there are few churches doing that.” (Interview A13). This also accords with the earlier

observations, which showed that discipleship and disciple making was rarely practiced in

the local churches.

308
 Therefore, information from interviews with pastors and Christian leaders

revealed a number of issues concerning the case for discipleship: parameters and

standards of measuring church growth and church establishment. It was also shown that

the findings were similar to those acquired through observations. The findings were also

congruent to information discussed in the literature review in the sense that aspects

considered to be important in the case for discipleship: parameters and standards of

measuring church growth and church establishment in literature were also considered

significant by the pastors and Christian leaders interviewed. For instance, training of

pastors and church leaders in discipleship was considered to be more important by the

respondents since it prepares church members for effective ministry in the local churches.

In addition, the discussion of themes in the study has been validated by quotes gathered

from the interviews. The themes from the findings have also been related to the existing

literature and theoretical framework. The evidence from the study suggests that the

discussion about the themes that emerged from this study could assist in addressing the

challenges the pastors and Christian leaders faced in discipling their church members in

the local churches from a more holistic perspective. However, the next section discusses

the findings.

309
4.3 Discussion of the Findings

The results of this study indicate that growing church members into maturity is far

more complex and difficult task and this was confirmed in the literature review and the

respondents. This is further corroborated by the research results from this study which

showed that the respondents were far less satisfied with what was happening in local

churches. The word discipleship was defined and the way discipleship could be practiced

in the local churches were identified. In accordance with the previous studies, the present

results showed that lack of understanding the concept of discipleship and little knowledge

about the practice of discipleship and disciple making in local churches, the lack of

proper disciple making ministries and the lack of the church involvement in disciple

making process could be the reason why the Church has the challenge of the growth of

church members and generally not doing well. Therefore, a possible explanation for these

results may be the lack adequate training of pastors and the lack of accurate information

on the subject of discipleship.

310
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of the study was to establish how discipleship could be used

effectively in assisting pastors and Christian leaders in the local churches to enhance

church growth and church establishment. In particular thesis has provided, an overall

understanding of rapid growth of churches in Zambia, how they multiplied and

Christianity came alongside with prophetic ministries emphasizing so much on prophecy

and brought about the prosperity Gospel with miraculous signs and wonders though the

church has failed to produce quality people as disciples of Christ. Therefore, the study

has further cited other challenges the church has been facing despite of the rapid growth

of its membership such as the lack of spiritual growth among Christians which has

affected the involvement of the church in disciple making process and the lack of

understanding the concept of discipleship and not knowing how it could be practiced in

local churches for church growth and church establishment.

Furthermore, the study has shed light on the importance and relevance of the

research focus, and it has also shown the researcher’s personal interest on discipleship

and disciple making process. However, the researcher observed that most African

churches were not involved in disciple making process and that there was no proper

practical structure of disciple making. The researcher further observed that the church

generally has limited knowledge about the pattern Jesus Christ used to disciple people.

In addition, the researcher deducted that this absence of disciple making and lack of

accurate information on how discipleship is suppose to be practiced in local churches

could be the reason for the non-involvement of most African Churches. Therefore, the

311
study has offered general information about discipleship ministries in Zambia to give the

reader a basic understanding of the purpose of the study.

The study also provided the review of literature in terms of the three themes: first,

understanding discipleship and disciple making which focused on the literature

background to shed light on research question one: How do pastors define discipleship in

their local churches? Second, the general forms of discipleship practiced in local

churches to assess the forms of discipleship done in Zambian local churches and to

illuminate the second research question some extent: What forms of discipleship is

practiced in local churches? and third, the role of discipleship for church growth and

church establishment to explain the mission of discipleship in growing church members

for effective ministry in the local churches and to help clarify on the research question

three: What is the role of discipleship in church growth and church establishment?

Therefore, the literature reviewed that in order to properly understand discipleship, there

was the need to first define the term “disciple,” the end product of the process of

discipleship. Generally, a disciple can be considered as a person who believes in the ideas

and principles of someone famous and tries to live the way the person did or does. In the

Christian sense, a disciple is one growing to be like Christ, and conforms to his image.

Disciples open their whole lives and subject themselves to learning to grow spiritually

toward Christ-like maturity.

The study has further discussed the research methodology and design used in the

study including strategies. The chapter attempted to answer the research questions using a

descriptive case study design that served the purpose of the study within the qualitative

approach. The design was used to provide a plan for the research and it was also regarded

312
as a strategy of inquiry. The primary methodology for the study was chosen as focus

group research. The focus group research was chosen to explore the attitudes of pastors

and Christian leaders and their perceptions, feelings and ideas about discipleship and

disciple making. The data collection methods of this research consisted of in-depth

interviews, observations and document review. First, the required information to meet the

objectives of the study was obtained using semi-structured interviews. Second,

participant observation was used as a data gathering instrument because the researcher

was interested in the ways in which pastors and Christian leaders thought about the

involvement of the church in disciple making process and third, the interview and

observation methods as main data collection strategy was supported by document reviews

such as Church constitutions, books, articles and journals. Interview data were generated

from two types of participants: Pastors and Christian leaders and the main research

questions used in the study were: How do pastors define discipleship in their local

churches? What forms of discipleship is practiced in the local churches? What does the

Bible say about discipleship? What is the role of discipleship in church growth and

church establishment? What are the suggestions that can help engage discipleship

dynamics in the local churches?

Additionally, the findings of the study in coherence with literature review

indicated that lack of understanding the concept of discipleship, little knowledge about

the practice of discipleship and disciple making in local churches, the lack of proper

disciple making ministries and the lack of the church involvement in disciple making

process is the reason why the Church has the challenge of the growth of church members

and generally not doing well. Therefore, a possible explanation for these results was lack

313
of adequate training of pastors and the lack of accurate information on the subject of

discipleship. However, if training of Pastors and church leaders was implemented, the

church could have not had the challenge of church growth and church establishment.

More importantly, the findings of this research has made several contributions to

the current literature. Firstly, it has advanced the understanding of biblical discipleship

and disciple making process in the current church. Secondly, the findings acted as a

feedback to pastors and Christian leaders on how their church members have been

prepared for spiritual growth and effectiveness of their ministries. Thirdly, the study has

contributed to this growing area of research by exploring how pastors and Christian

leaders understood the concept of biblical discipleship and an assessment was done on

how pastors and Christian leaders practiced discipleship in their local churches. Fourthly,

the study has offered some important insights in helping the current church to get

involved in disciple making process. Therefore, the study has made a major contribution

to research on discipleship and disciple making process by establishing how discipleship

can be used effectively in assisting pastors and Christian leaders in the local churches to

enhance church growth and church establishment and the study has further opened

opportunities for future research into other areas of discipleship which have not been

fully explored, at least until now.

Also, the research has thrown up many questions in need of further study in the

area of understanding the concept of discipleship and disciple making process, the forms

of discipleship practiced in the current church, the tools for disciple making required to

grow church members in the local churches, and the involvement of the current church in

fulfilling the great commission. Therefore, it is also important to acknowledge that the

314
researcher for this study is still a learner. There may be weaknesses regarding collection

and analysis of data which might not be the case if the study was done by an experienced

researcher. However, the supervisor has done all he could to ensure that a reliable and

valid study was conducted.

Therefore, this study makes a series of recommendations for how the issue of

discipleship and disciple making process can be addressed in the local churches: Firstly,

the church should subsidize discipleship and disciple making process relating it to how

Jesus trained his disciples, teaching the truth with the purpose of changing human history

through the process of forming an intentional small group and preparing them for a long

life of growth and development. Secondly, the church must have disciple making

ministries that will facilitate church growth and church establishment. Thirdly, the church

should send their pastors and Christian leaders to suitable schools to have adequate

training in discipleship and disciple making process to enable the church to get involved

in disciple making process. Fourthly, the church should have deliberate programs for

discipling their church members to produce the quality of people as Disciples of Christ

and to do what Christ commanded “to make disciples of all nations”, and therefore, the

pastors and Christian leaders should provide relevant discipleship materials to guide the

church members in the local churches and making it easier for them to participate in

disciple making process.

315
REFERENCES

Anderson, R., 1974, Historical Transcendence and the Reality of God (Grand Rapids,

Eerdmans, Mich., pp. 227–38.

Anderson, G., 1990, Fundamentals of educational research, The Falmer Press, London.

Akanni, G., 2013, Becoming Like Jesus: God’s Keys to Abundant Living, Peace House,

Gboko.

Arrington, F., 1993, Christian Doctrine: A Pentecostal Perspective, Vol. 2, Cleveland,

Pathway.

Asamoah-Gyadu, J.K., 2005, African Charismatics: A Study of Independent Indigenous

Pentecostal Movements in Ghana. E.J. Brill, Leiden.

Allert, C. D., 2007, A High View of Scripture? Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

Allister D., 1562, "The Book of Common Prayer", Articles of Religion.

Atkinson, P., & Coffey A., 1997, Analysing Documentary Realities, In. Silverman, D.,

(Ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, Sage Publications, London,

pp. 45-62.

Auken, P.V., 2002, Ten Spiritual Principles of Church Health,

www.forministry.com/..../vsItemDisplay.dsp&objectI. Accessed on July 6, 2011.

Bailey, K.D., 1994, Methods of Social Research. The Free Press, New York.

316
Bailey, K.D., 1982, Methods of Social Research, 2nd Ed., New York: Free Press.

Braun V. & Clarke V., 2006, Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative

Research in Psychology 3, pp.77-101.

Bazeley, P. 2009, Analysing Qualitative Data: More Than ‘Identifying Themes’,

Malaysian Journal of Qualitative Research.

Banda, 2010,The changing face of Christianity, Fenza, Lusaka, Zambia.

Banks, R., 1989, Paul’s Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their

Historical Setting. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, Mich.

Barbour, R. & Kitzinger, J., 1998, Developing Focus Group Research, Sage, London

Baptist Faith and Message, 2000, Article VI

Barna, G., 2001, Growing true disciples: New strategies for producing genuine followers

of Christ, Waterbrook Press, Colorado.

Bavinck, J. H., 1961, An Introduction to the Science of Missions, The Presbyterian and

Reformed Publishing Company, Philadelphia.

Beagles, K., 2010, Growing Disciples in community, Andrews University Seminary

Studies, Vol. 48, No. 1, 81-108.

Benbasat, I, Goldstein, DK & Mead, M., 1987, The Case Research Strategy in Studies of

Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, vol. 11, pp. 369-386

317
Bennett, R., 2001, Intentional Discipleship: Cultivating Spiritual Maturity in the Local

Church, NavPress, Colorado.

Berger, 2003, Infants usc handrails, tools 111 a locomotor task, Developmental

Psychology, 39, 594-605.

Best, J.W. & Kahn, J., 2006, Research in Education, Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd, New

Delhi.

Bettenson, H & Maunder, C., 1999, Documents of The Christian Church. Oxford, Oxford

University, UK.

Bevans, S, 2002, Models of Contextual Theology, revised and expanded edition,

Maryknoll, Orbis, NY.

Blackaby, H & Blackaby, R., 2011, Spiritual Leadership: Moving People on to God's

Agenda, Broadman and Holman, Nashville.

Bless, C. and Achola, P., 1988, Fundamentals of Social Research: An African

Participative, Lusaka, Government printers.

Bloomberg, C., 1992, Matthew: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy

Scripture, The New American Commentary, Broadman & Holman, Nashville.

Boa, K., 2001, Conformed to His Image, Zondervan, Grand Rapids.

Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K., 2007), Qualitative research for education, an introduction

to theories and methods, 5th e.d., Boston, Pearson Education Inc, MA.

318
Bonhoeffer, D., 1959, The Cost of Discipleship, Touchstone, New York, 47.

Bonhoeffer, D., 1995, The cost of discipleship, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY, 89.

Bonhoeffer, D., 1963, The Communion of Saints: A Dogmatic Inquiry into the Sociology

of the Church, Harper & Row, New York.

Bonhoeffer, D., 1954, Life Together. Harper & Row, San Francisco.

Bosch, D., 1991, Transforming Mission , Orbis, Maryknoll, p. 57.

Brink, P.J. & Wood, M.J. (Eds.), 1989, Advanced Design in Nursing Research, Newbury

Park, Sage Publications, CA., 319 pp

Britten N., 1999 (eds), Qualitative interviews in healthcare. In Pope C, Mays N,

Qualitative research in health care, 2nd ed, BMJ Books, London, pp 11-19.

Briscoe, Stuart, D., Larson, Knute, Osborne & Larry, W., 1993, Measuring Up: The Need

to Succeed and the Fear of Failure. Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Books, Mastering

Ministry's Pressure Points, S. 47.

Bruinsma, R., 2009, The body of Christ: A biblical understanding of the church,

Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald.

Bruinsma, R., 2006. Faith step by step: Finding God and yourself, Grantham,

Stanborough Press, p161, England.

Budiselić, E., 2012, Paul’s Understanding of the Church in the Epistle of Ephesians as a

Model for Today’s Church.

319
Burns, N & Grove, 2001, The practice of nursing research: Conduct, critique

&utilization, 4th edition, WB Saunders, Philadelphia.

Busher, H., 2006, Understanding educational leadership: People, power and culture

Maidenhead, Open University Press, McGraw-Hill.

Bruce, A. B., 1988, The Training of the Twelve, reprint, Grand Rapids, Krege, 37–38.

Carson, H, M., 1974, Roman Catholicism,The New International Dictionary Of the

Christian Church, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, MI.

Cartwright, D. & Zander, A., 1968, (eds.), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory, 3d

ed., Harper & Row, New York.

Chaney, Charles L & Ron S. Lewis, S, R, 1977, Design for Church Growth, Nashiville,

Broadman Press, TN.

Chinn, C. & Brewer, W., 2001, Models of data: A theory of how people evaluate data.

Cognition & Instruction, 19, 323-343.

Chiyongo, V., 2007, Training Needs of Basic and High School Managers in Selected

Schools of Chongwe District, M.Ed. (Admin.). Dissertation, Lusaka: University of

Zambia.

Churchill, GA. & Iacobucci, D., 2005, Research Designing exploratory research, and

qualitative data, marking research, methodological foundations, South Western, Delhi.

320
Cohen, L., Manion. L., & Morrison, K., 2000, Research methods in education (5th ed.),

Routledge, London.

Cohen, L. & Manion, L., 2007, Research methods in education, 6th ed., Routledge,

London.

Coleman, R. E., 2010, The Master Plan of Evangelism, Baker House, 26, Grand Rapids,

p 126.

Coles, R., 1997, Doing documentary work. Oxford, NY.

Collis, J. & Hussey, R, 2009, Business Research: A practical guide for undergraduate

and postgraduate students, 3rd edition, New York, Palgrave Macmillan.

Collinson, S. W., 2004, Making Disciples: The Significance of Jesus’ Educational

Methods for Today’s Church, Eugene, Wipf and Stock, OR, 164.

Conradson, D. & Latham, A., 2005a, Transnational urbanism: attending to everyday

practices and mobilities, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(2): 227–233.

Crabb, L., 1999, The Safest Place on Earth: Where People Connect and Are Forever

Changed, W. Publishing, Nashville.

Crabtree, B. & Miller, W., 1992, Doing qualitative research, Sage Publications, Newbury

Park.

Creswell, J.W., 2003, Research design, Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approaches, Thousand Oaks, Sage, CA.

321
Creswell, J. W. & Clark, P. V. L., 2007, Designing and conducting mixed methods

research, Thousand Oaks, SAGE, CA.

Creswell, J. W., 2009, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches, Thou-sand Oaks, Sage, Calif.

Creswell, J., 1998, Qualitative inquiry and research designs: Choosing among five

traditions, Thousand Oaks, Sage, CA.

Davis, P.M., Fromerth, M.J., 2007, Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced

468 publisher downloads for mathematics articles? Scientometrics 71, 203–215

Daymon C. & Holloway I., 2002, Qualitative Research for Public Relations and

Marketing Communications, London, Routledge.

Dean, K., 1986, Why Conservative Churches Are Growing by Dean Kelly.

Denscombe M., 2007, The good research guide for small-scale social research projects.

Open University Press, 3rd Edition, Maidenhead.

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y., 2005, The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research,3rd edition,

Thousand Oaks, Sage, , CA.

Deetz, S.,1996, Describing differences in approaches to organization science: Rethinking

Burrell and Morgan and their legacy, Organization Science, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 191-207.

De Vos, AS., 2002, Research at grass roots, 2nd edition, JL van Schaik, Pretoria.

322
De Vos, A.S., 1998, Research at grassroots, Pretoria, Van Schaik.

DePree, M., 1989, Leadership Is an Art, Doubleday, New York.

Dictionary.com Unabridged, 1.1st (ed.), s.v. “ship.”, http://dictionary.referece.com/

browse/ship/, Accessed 17th October, 2017.

Dilley, P., 2000, Conducting successful interviews: Tips for intrepid research. Theory

into Practice, 39, 131-137.

Douglas, J. D., 1987, New International Bible Dictionary, Zondervan Publishing House,

Michigan, P. 218.

Dunn, J.D. G., 1975, Jesus and the Spirit. Westminster Press, Philadelphia.

Dyer, W.G., Jr, Wilkins, A. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M., 1991, Better stories, not better

constructs, to generate better theory: A rejoinder to Eisenhardt; better stories and better

constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. The Academic of management

Review, 16(3), 613.

Eims, L, 1978, The Lost Art of Disciple Making, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, Colorado

Springs, Navpress, 29.

Eims, L., 1981, Disciples in Action, Colorado Springs, Navpress, and Wheaton, Victor,

40.

Eims, L, 1978, The lost art of disciple making, Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan.

323
Eliot T. S., 1952, Choruses from ‘The Rock,’ Complete Poems and Plays, Harcourt and

Brace, New York, p. 101.

Encarta World English Dictionary, 1999, St. Martin's Press, New York.

Evans, L. H., 1977, Jr.Covenant to Care, Wheaton, Victor Books, Ill.

Fielding, N.G. & Fielding, J. L., 1986, Linking Data, Sage, London.

Folkestad, B., 2008, Analysing Interview Data: Possibilities and challenges, Eurosphere

Working Paper Series, Online Working Paper, 13.

Foster, R., 1985, Money, Sex and Power: The Challenge of the Disciplined Life Harper &

Row, San Francisco, pp. 1–15.

Frith, H. & Gleeson, K., 2004, Dressing the body: The role of clothing in sustaining body

pride and managing body distress, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5, 249-264.

Gall, Meredith D., Gall, J. P. and Borg, W. R., 2007, Educational Research: An

Introduction. 8 edition, Boston, New York, Pearson Allyn and Bacon, Sydney.

Gallup, Jr., 1990,http://www.mbcb.org

Garner, 2000, Religion as a Source of Social Change in the New South Africa, Journal of

Religion in Africa, vol. 30, issue 3, 310-343.

Gay, L.R., 1996, Educational Research, Competencies for Analysis and Application, 5th

ed., Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.

324
Geiger, E., 1991, Nikolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf, seine Lebensgeschichte,

Holzgerlingen, Hännsler Verlag, ISBN 3-7751-2839-5, p.110

George, C., 1991, Prepare Your Church for the Future, Old Tappan, Revell, N.J., p. 57.

George R. & Beasley-Murray, J., 1987, Word Biblical Commentary 36, Waco, Word,

Tex., p.62.

Gephart, R. P., 1999, Paradigms and research methods, Research Methods Division

forum, 4. aom.pace.edu/ rmd/199 9_RMD_Forum_Paradigms_and_Research_

Methods.htm.

Gibbs A, 2007, Focus groups: Social research update,Issue 19. Guildford Department of

Sociology University of Surrey. http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/sru/SRU19html.

Gibbs, A., 1997, Focus groups, Social Research Update, On-line, Issue Nineteen,

University of Surrey, http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/sru/SRU19.html.

Gibson, T. S., 2004, Congregational Connectivity: The Key to Keeping Youth in the

Church, Journal of Youth Ministry 31/1, 10.

Glaser, B., 1992, Basics of grounded theory analysis: emergence versus forcing, Mill

Valley, Sociology Press, CA.

Glaser, B., 1978, Advances in the methodology of grounded theory: Theoretical

sensitivity, Mill Valley, Sociology Press, CA.

Glaser, B. & Strauss, A., 1967, The discovery of grounded theory, Aldine, Chicago.

325
Glitz, B., 1998, Focus Groups for Libraries and Librarians, Forbes Custom Publishing,

New York.

Grimsaw, J. & Russell, I., 1993, Achieving health gain through clinical guidelines.

Developing scientifically valid guidelines. Quality in Health Care, I, 2: 243-248.

Gonzalez, J., 1984, The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Dawn of the

Reformation, San Francisco, Harper, CA.

Guelich, R. A., 1998, Mark 1–8:26, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. Word,

Incorporated, Dallas, p. 206.

Hadidian, A., 1979, Successful Discipling, Moody, Chicago, 18.

Hanson, P., 1986, The People Called: The Growth of Community in the Bible, Harper &

Row, San Francisco, p. 56.

Harrington, D. J., 2007, Dynamics of Discipleship, America 196/3, 38.

Harvey, G. C., 1996, Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the

Reshaping of Religion in the Twenty-First Century. Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-

Wesley; The Myth of the Twentieth Century: The Rise and Fall of Secularization,1999,

in Harvard Divinity Bulletin, Vol. 28, 2/3, 6-8, USA.

Henning, L., 2007, Forming Disciples of Jesus in Parish and School, Momentum,

September–October, 56.

326
Henning E. 2004, Finding your way in qualitative research, Van Schaik, Pretoria, Pp. ix

– 27.

Hennink, Monique M., 2007, International focus group research: a handbook for the

health and social sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 248 pp.

Henrichsen, W. A., 1974, Disciples are made-not born, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K., 1982, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing

Human Resources, 4th ed., Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, N.J., pp. 150–55.

Hanson, P. D., 1986, The People Called: The Growth of Community in the Bible, Harper

& Row, San Francisco.

Hauerwas, S., 1981, A Community of Character, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre

Dame.

Herbert, M., 1990, Planning a research project, A guide for practitioners and trainees in

the helping professions, Cassell, London.

Hoehner, H. W., 2002, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, Baker Academic, Grand

Rapids.

Hertig, P., 2001, The Great Commission Revisited: The Role of God’s Reign in Disciple

Making, Missiology, An International Review 29/3: 343.

Hertig, P., 2001, The Great Commission Revisited: The Role of God’s Reign in Disciple

Making, Missiology, An International Review 29/3: 346.

327
Hertig, P., 2001, The Great Commission Revisited: The Role of God’s Reign in Disciple

Making, Missiology, An International Review 29/3: 347.

Hobbs, H. W., 1996, The Baptist Faith and Message: Revised Edition, Life Way,

Nashville.

Holliday, A., 2002, doing and writing qualitative research, Sage, London.

Holmes, P. R., 2006, Trinity in Human Community: Exploring Congregational Life in the

Image of the Social Trinity, Tyrone, Paternoster, GA.

Holmes, P. R. & Williams, S. B., 2007, Becoming More Like Christ: A Contemporary

Biblical Journey, Authentic Media, Colorado Springs. Idem, Church as a Safe Place: A

Handbook Confronting, Resolving, and Minimizing Abuse in the Church, Authentic

Media, Colorado Springs.

Hull, B., 2006, The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of

Christ, NavPress, Colorado Springs.

Hull, B., 2006, The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of

Christ, NavPress, Colorado Springs.

Hull, B., 2006, The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of

Christ, NavPress, Colorado Springs.

Hull, B., 2006, The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of

Christ, NavPress, Colorado Springs.

328
Hull, B., 1990, The Disciple Making Church, Fleming H. Revell, Grand Rapids.

Hull, B., 1984, Jesus Christ: Disciple Maker, Old Tappan, Revell, NJ.

Hunneshagen, D. M., 2002, Discipleship Training of Children and Youth, Dialog, A

Journal of Theology 41, 192.

Hunter, K. R., 1985, Developing a Church Growth Philosophy of Ministry, Chap, in Your

Church Has personality, Nashville, Abingdon Press, TN.

Ibrahim, M.A., 2006, Student Attrition and Retention in Distance Learning in the

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Maastricht School of Management, Netherlands.

Ivanoff, S. D. & Hultberg, J., 2006, Understanding the multiple realities of everyday life:

Basic assumption in focus group methodology, Scandinavian journal of Occupational

therapy, 13 (2), 125-132.

Jacob, E. M., 2002, Discipleship and Mission: A Perspective on the Gospel of Matthew,

International Review of Mission 91/360: 102.

Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, F. P., 1991, Joining Together: Group Theory and Group

Skills. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, N.J.

Jose M. D., 2003, Why Theology is Never Far From Home, De La Salle University

Press, 2003, Manila, pp58-65.

Kaplan, B. & Maxwell, J. A., 1994, Qualitative research methods for evaluating

computer information systems, In J. G.

329
Keeves, J.P., 1997, Models and model building, In J.P., Keeves (Ed.), Educational

Research, Methodology and Measurement: An International Handbook (2nd ed.),

Pergamon, Oxford.

Khan, M. E. & Manderson, L., 1992, Focus groups in tropical diseases, Research Health

Policy and Planning, Vol.7, No.1.

King, N., 1998, Template analysis. In Cassell, C. & Symon, G, (Eds.), Qualitative

methods and analysis in organizational research, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications,

CA.

Kitzinger J., 1995, Qualitative research, Introducing focus groups. Br Med J, 311: 299–

302.

Kitzinger J. & Barbour R.S., 1999, Introduction: the challenge and promise of focus

groups, In Developing Focus Group Research. Politics, Theory and Practice, Sage,

London.

Kombo, D. K. & Tromp, D. L. A, 2006, Proposal and thesis writing: An Introduction,

Pauline publications Africa, Nairobi.

Kraus, C, N., 1979, The Authentic Witness, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, Mich.,p. 17.

Krueger, Janice, M., 2002, Review of Identifying and analyzing user needs: A complete

handbook and ready-to-use assessment workbook with disk, by Lyn Westbrook, College

& Research Libraries 63:99.

330
Kumar 11nd MLSC

Kwang, Lee, S. & Young W. L., 1993, Introduction to Missiology, Presbyterian

Publishing, Seoul, pp. 229-230.

Ladd, G. E., 1974, A theology of the New Testament, Lutterworth Press, Cambridge.

LeCompte, M.D. & Preissle, J., 1993, Ethnography and Qualitative Design in

Educational Research, Academic Press, Inc, London.

Leedy, P.D. & Ormrod J. E., 2005, Practical research: Planning and design, 8th ed.,

Pearson Education, New Jersey.

Lewis, M., 1995, Focus group interviews in qualitative research: A review of the

literature, Action Research Electronic Reader,

http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arr/arow/rlewis.html.

Liamputtong, P., 2009, Qualitative research methods, 3 rd edition, Oxford University

Press:

Liamputtong, P. (2010a) Performing qualitative cross-cultural research. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, Melbourne.

Livesey, C., 2011, The Mass Media, 1st ed., United Kingdom: Sociology Central, p.1,

http://www.sociology.org.uk/media_defined.pdf (Accessed 21 May 2015).

Lohfink, G., 1989, Jesus and Community, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, pp. 33–35.

331
Lupele, K. J., 2007, Networking: Enabling professional development and

institutionalisation of environmental education courses in Southern Africa, thesis, Rhodes

University, Durban.

MacArthur, J., 1992, Charismatic Chaos, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 120–25, 230–35.

MacArthur, J., 1994, The Gospel According to Jesus, rev. (ed.), Zondervan, Grand

Rapids.

MacArthur, J., 2005, MacArthur Pastor's Library on Pastoral Ministry (261), Nashville,

Thomas Nelson Publishers, TN.

MacArthur, J., 1986, Ephesians, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, Moody,

Chicago.

McMillan, J.H., 2008, Educational Research Fundamentals for the Consumer, Pearson

Education, Inc, New York.

Mallison, J., 1989, Growing Christians in Small Groups, Sydney, Scripture Union,

Australia, pp. 3–4.

Marshall, I. H., 2001, New Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, Leicester: Inter-Varsity

Press, p.277.

Marshall, C. & Rossman, G., 1999, Designing qualitative research, Third edition.

Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, CA.

332
Martin, Carlos G., 1995, Principles and Procedures of Adventist Church Growth, Class

notes for MSSN 600.

Martin, J., 1983, What Should We Do with a Hidden Curriculum? inTheHidden

Curriculum and Moral Education: Deception or Discovery? (ed.), Giroux H. and Purpel

D. McCutchan, 1983, Berkeley.

Marton, F., 1993, Our experiences of the physical world, Cognition and Instruction, 10,

227-237.

May, G., 2006, Christianity Origins to Constantine, Cambridge University Press, New

York.

Maynard, M., 2001, We’re Here for the Churches: The Southern Baptist Convention

entities working together, LifeWay, Nashville.

Mcclung, F., 2011, Making disciples God’s way to transform nations, Mission Frontiers.

McMillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S., 2006, Research in education: Evidence-Based

Inquiry, Pearson Education, Inc, London.

Merriam, (ed.), 2002, Qualitative research in practice. San Francisco, Jossey- Bass, CA.

Merriam, S.B., 1998, Qualitative research and case study applications in education,

Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

333
Mertens, D.M., 2010, Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating

diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods, 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks,

SAGE, CA.

Metzger, M. B., 1975, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament

UBS, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart.

Michael, 2004, Green’s Evangelism in the Early Church, revised edn., Grand Rapids,

William B. Eerdmans, MI.

Miles, MB. & Huberman, AM., 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed), Thousand

Oaks, Sage Publications, CA.

Mitchell, 2010, Leading, Teaching, and Making Disciples, World-Class Christian

Education in the Church, School and Home , Cross Books, Bloomington, IN.

Moore, R., 2012, Making Disciples: Developing Lifelong Followers of Jesus, Regal,

Ventura.

Morgan DL, Krueger RA., 1993, When to use focus groups and why. Successful focus

groups: Advancing the state of the art, DL Morgan. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,

CA.

Morgan, D. & Krueger, R., 1997, The focus group kit, Sage Publications, London.

Morgan, G. C., 1927, The Gospel According to Mark, Tarrytown, Revell, NY.

334
Morse, J.M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olsen, K. & Spiers, J., 2008, Verification strategies

for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research, International Journal of

Qualitative Methods, 1, 13-22.

Mouton, J., 2001, How to succeed in your Master’s and Doctoral Studies: A South

African guide and re-source book. Van Schaick Publishers, Pretoria.

Mouton, J., 1996, Understanding social research, JL van Schaik, Pretoria.

Moulton, H. K., 1981, (ed.), the Analystical Greek Lexicon Revised, Zondervan, 57,

Grand Rapids, quoted in Christopher B. A.,1989, Personal Disciple Making, San

Bernardino, Here's Life Publishers, Canada.

Myers, M. D., 2009, Qualitative research in business and management, London, Sage.

Nelson, C. E., 2008, Growing Up Christian: A Congregational Strategy for Nurturing

Disciples, Macon, Smith & Helwys, GA.

Neuman, Lawrence, W., 2006. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches. 6th ed., Boston, Allyn & Bacon, MA.

Newton, G. C., 1999, Growing Toward Spiritual Maturity, Wheaton, Evangelical

Training Association, IL.

Nicholls, B., 1979, Contextualization: A Theology of Gospel and Culture, IVP, 1979,

Downers Grove, pp. 24-25.

335
Nieuwenhuis, J., 2007a, Introducing qualitative research, In K, Maree, First Steps in

Research, Van Schaik Publishers, Pretoria.

Nieuwenhuis, J., 2007b, Qualitative research designs and data gathering techniques. In K,

Maree, First Steps in Research, Van Schaik Publishers, Pretoria.

Nieuwenhuis, J., 2007c, Analysing Qualitative Data. In K. Maree, First Steps in

Research, Van Schaik Publishers, Pretoria.

Noyes, 1996, Review of Handbook of usability testing: how to plan, design, and conduct

effective tests, by Jeffrey Rubin, Ergonomics 39:339.

Ogden, G., 2003, Transforming Discipleship: Making Disciples a Few at a Time,

Downers Grove, Inter Varsity Press, IL.

Onyinah, 2002, Deliverance as a way of confronting witchcraft in modern Africa, Asian

Journal of Pentecostal Studies, vol. 5, issue 1, 107-135.

Ortberg, J., 1997, The Life You’ve Always Wanted: Spiritual Disciplines for Ordinary

People, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Ortiz, J. C., 1975, Disciple: A Handbook for New Believers, Lake Mary, Creation House,

Florida, p109.

Oxford Dictionary, 1998, Dorling Kindersley Ltd and Oxford University Press.

Packer, J.I., 2000, 131 Christians Everyone Should Know, Nashville, Broadman &

Holman, TN.

336
Partington, G., 2003, Why Indigenous issues are an essential component of teacher

education programs, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 27(2), 39-48.

Patton, M. Q., 2002, Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.), Newbury

Park, Sage, Calif.

Peacock, H. F., 1978, “Discipleship in the Gospel of Mark, Review & Expositor”, 75 no 4

Fall, p. 556.

Peterson, E. H., 2000, A Long Obedience in the Same Direction: Discipleship in an

Instant Society, Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, IL.

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H., 2006, Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical

guide, Blackwell, Malden MA.

Philip, J., 2002, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christi-anity, Oxford

University Press, New York.

Polit, D.F. & Hungler, B. P., 1991, Nursing Research, Principles and Methods, Lippincott

Company, J.B., Philadelphia.

Polhill, J. B., 1992, Acts, The New American Commentary, Broadman, Nashville, 273.

Postema, D., 1983, Space for God, Grand Rapids, CRC Publications, Mich.

Prior, D., 1987, Jesus and Power, Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, pp. 75–87, Ill.

Ravitch, M. S., & Riggan, M., Reason & Rigor, 2011, How Conceptual Frameworks
Guide Research, SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.

337
Raymond .V.E., 1948, The Disciplines of Life, Van Kampen Press, Wheaton, IL.

Richards, O. L., 1991, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Words, Zondervan,

Grand Rapids.

Ro, B. R., 1995, Contextualization: Asian Theology in Ken Gnanakan, (ed.), Biblical
Theology in Asia, Theological Book Trust, Bangalore, pp. 3-17.

Robson, C., 2002, Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and
Practitioner-Researchers, 2nd ed, Blackwell Publishing, USA.

Rossman, Gretchen B. and Rallis, S. F., 2003, Learning in the field: An introduction to
qualitative research, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, CA.

Sailhamer, J. H., 1984, “Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1:1-2:4a.” Trinity Journal 5 NS,
Spring, 73-82.

Samra, J. G., 2003, A Biblical View of Discipleship, Bibliotheca Sacra 160, p219.

Samra, J. G., 2003, A Biblical View of Discipleship, Bibliotheca Sacra 160, pp219- 220.

Samuel,1972, “‘A Word before the Moslem-Christian Conference’ in Kordoba in

September,” in Christian Religion in Principal Concepts,( ed.), Tawadros Maurice, 4th
ed., Dar Antoun Publishing House, July 2005, Cairo.

Schumacher, E. F, 1973, Small Is Beautiful, Abacus, London, pp. 53–54.

Schurink, W.J., 2005, Lecture thirteen: Evaluating qualitative research, Department of

Human Resource Management, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg.

Schurink, W. Fouché, C.B. & De Vos, A.S., 2011, Qualitative data analysis and
interpretation, (In De Vos, A.S., Strydom, H., Fouché, C.B. & Delport, C.S.L. Research
at grass roots: for the social sciences and human service professions, 4th ed., Van Schaik,
Pretoria.

338
Schwandt TA., 2000, three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry:
interpretivism, hermeneutics,and social constructivism, Handbook of qualitative
research 2nd ed., NK Denzin, YS Lincoln. Sage publications, Thousand Oaks, 189–205,
CA.

Serapion , 2016, Metropolitan of the Diocese of Los Angeles, Southern California and
Hawaii, Discipleship in Christ’s Way, Homily, Los Angeles, 29 November, on the
official site of the bishopric.

Shirley, C., 2008, It Takes a Church to Make a Disciple: An Integrative Model of

Discipleship for the Local Church, Southwestern Journal of Theology 2/50, p. 211.

Sidhu, K. S., 2003, Methodology of Research in Education, New Delhi, Sterling

Publishers Pvt. Ltd.

Silva, L. & Backhouse, J., 2003, The circuits-of-power framework for studying power in
institutionalization of information systems. Journal of the Association for Information
Systems, 4(14), 236–294.

Smith, M. L., 1987, Publishing Qualitative Research, American Educational Research

Journal, Vol. 24 (2). 173-183.

Spradley, J.P., 1979, The Ethnographic Interview, Wadsworth Group, Belmont, CA.

Stalker, J., 1980, The Example of Jesus Christ, New Canaan, Keats, CN.

Stalp, M. C. & Grant, L., 2001, Teaching qualitative coding in undergraduate field
method classes: An exercise based on personal ads, Teaching Sociology, 29(2), 209-218.

Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J., 1998, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn., Thousand Oaks, Sage, CA.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and tech-niques, Thousand Oaks, Sage, CA.

339
Stewart, D.W., 1984, Secondary Research: Information Sources and Methods. Newbury
Park, Sage, California.

Streubert, H.J., & Carpenter, D.R. (Eds.), 1999, Qualitative research in nursing,
Advancing the humanistic imperative, 2nd ed., Lippincott, Philadelphia.

Tadros, M., 1993, Introduction to the Coptic Orthodox Church, Alexandria, St George
Coptic Orthodox Church, Egypt.

Talbert, C. H., 2010, Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament: Matthew, Grand
Rapids, Baker Academic.

Tesch, R., 1992, Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools, Falmer, New
York.

The New Lexicon Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1992, Lexicon Publications.

Thomas, D. R., 2003, A general inductive approach for qualitative data analysis, School
of Population Health University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Town, E, L., 1986, The Relationship of Church Growh and Systematic Theology, Journal
of the Evangelical Society, 29(1).

Turner, D. L., 2008, Matthew: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament,
Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, MI.

Udelhoven, B., 2010,The changing face of Christianity in Zambia.

www.fenza.org/documents/churches. Accessed: July 6, 2017

UK National Ecosystem Assessment, 2011, The UK National Ecosystem Assessment

Technical Report. Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC. Retrieved:
http://uknea.unepwcmc.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=m%2BvhAV3c9uk%3D&tabid=82

United Methodist Church, 2016, The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church,
Nashville, The United Methodist Publishing House, 94, Tenn.

340
Vine's Amplified Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, 1991, Iowa Falls, ISBN
0-529-10383-4.

Voegelin, E., 1978, Anamnesis, Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press, Ind., p. 10.

Vygotsky, L. S., 1978, Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, Lev S., 1978, Mind in Society. The development of higher psychological

processes, In Cole, Michael & John-Steiner, Vera & Scribner, Sylvia & Souberman,

Ellen (eds.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wadge, J. Carter, B. & Carter, H., 2002, Discipleship, Evangelical Church of Zambia,
Kitwe-Zambia.

Wagner, P., 1990, Church Planting for a Greater Harvest, Ventura, Regal Books, CA.

Wagner, C., Peter, 1976, Your Church Can Grow, Regal Books, Glendale.

Walsham, G., 1995, Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method,
European Journal of In-formation Systems, 4(2), 74-81.

Walsham, G., 2006, Doing interpretive research, European Journal of Information

Systems, 15(3), 320-330.

Watts, M. & Ebbutt, D., 1987, More than the sum of the parts: Research methods in

group interviewing. British Educational Research Journal, 13, 25-34.

Webster’s New World Dictionary, 1970, World Publishing, New York, p. 401.

Weldon, I. G., 1994, Biblical Foundations for Small Group Ministry: An Integrative
Approach. Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, Ill.

Wells, G & Claxton, G. (Eds), 2002,Learning for Life in the 21st Century: Socio-cultural
Perspectives on the Future of Education,Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

341
Wenham, D., 1995, Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity? Grand
Rapids, William B. Eerdmans, MI.

White E. G., 1904, Testimonies, vol. 8, p. 21

Whitney, S. D., 1991, Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life Navpress, Colorado
Springs.

Wiersbe, W.W., 2007, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, David C. Cook, p.86, Colorado.

Wilder, M. & Timothy, J. T., 2011, “Life As A Shepherd Leader,” Southern Seminary,
Fall, Vol. 79, No. 4. 38.

Wink, W., 1989, Transforming Bible Study, 2d ed. Abingdon Press, Nashville.

White, C.J., 2005, Research: A practical guide, Pretoria: Ithuthuko Investments,

Publishing.

Whiteman, D., 1997, Contextualization: the Theory, the Gap, the Challenge, International
Bulletin for Missionary Research, 21:1.

Whitney, D. S., 1991, Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life, Navpress, Colorado
Springs.

Wilkins, M. J., 1992, Following the Master: A Biblical Theology of Discipleship, Grand
Rapids, Zondervan, MI.

Wilkins, M. J., 1992, Following the Master: A Biblical Theology of Discipleship, Grand
Rapids, Zondervan, MI.

Wilkins, M. J., 1992, Following the Master: A Biblical Theology of Discipleship, Grand
Rapids, Zondervan, MI.

Wilkins, M. J., 1992, Following the Master: A Biblical Theology of Discipleship, Grand
Rapids, Zondervan, MI, p110.

342
Wilhoit, J. C., 2008, Spiritual Formation as if the Church Mattered: Growing in Christ
Through Community, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

Wilkins, M. J., 1992, Following the Master: A Biblical Theology of Discipleship, Grand
Rapids, Zondervan, MI.

Willard, D., 2002, Renovation of the Heart: Putting on the Character of Christ.
NavPress, Colorado Springs.

Willard, D., 2006, he Great Omission, HarperCollins Publishers, New York.

Wright, T., 2010, Virtue Reborn, SPCK, London.

Wright, N. T., 1994, Following Jesus: Biblical Reflections on Discipleship, SPCK,

revised 2014.

Yin, R.K., 1994, Case study research: design and methods,Thousand Oaks, London,
New Sage Publications, Delh.

Yin, R.K., 1994; 2003; 2009,Case study research: Design and methods, Thousands Oaks,
Sage, CA.

Young, P., 2013, Principles of Church Growth, (n.d.), publishers, Cape Town,
http://www.times.co.z/news/viewnews.cgi?category=8&id=1107387021. Accessed on
26/10/2017.

343
APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Participant Participation Form

Greenlight
University
la connaissance
et l’espoir

wl edge & Hope

Kno

GREENLIGHT UNIVERSITY

PARTICIPANT PARTICIPATION FORM

PhD Research Project

Researcher: Victor Mwila

Supervisor: Prof. Nickson Banda

Research Office: Greenlight University

I, ……………….,am a PhD student in the Faculty of Humanities and Social

Sciences at Greenlight University. You are invited to participate in a research project

entitled “The Case for Discipleship: Parameters and Standards of measuring Church

growth and Church establishment.”

344
 The aim of this study is to establish how discipleship can be used effectively in

assisting Pastors and Christian leaders in local churches to enhance church growth and

church establishment.

Your participation in this project is voluntary. You may refuse to participate or

withdraw from the project at any time with no negative consequence. There will be no

monetary gain from participating in this study. Confidentiality and anonymity of records

identifying you as a participant will be maintained by the University.

If you have any questions or concerns about participating in this study, please

contact me or my supervisor at the numbers listed below. The interview should take

about 30 minutes. I hope you will take the time to participate.

Sincerely

Investigator’s signature …………………………… Date …………………………

Prof. Nickson Banda - supervisor: ableinternet@gmail.com, Phone: +260976880043

Mr. Victor Mwila – student: victormwila24@gmail.com, Phone: +260978151895

345
Appendix 2: Consent form

Greenlight
University
la connaissance
et l’espoir

wl edge & Hope

Kno

GREENLIGHT UNIVERSITY

PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM

PhD Research Project

Researcher: Victor Mwila
Supervisor: Prof. Nickson Banda
Research Office: Greenlight University

CONSENT

I_________________________________________________________ (full names of

participant) hereby confirm that I understand the contents of this document and the nature
of the research project, and I consent to participating in the research project. I understand
that I am at liberty to withdraw from the project at any time, should I so desire.

___________________ ___________________

Signature of Participant Date

346
Appendix 3: Questionnaire form

Greenlight
University
la connaissance
et l’espoir

wl edge & Hope

Kno

GREENLIGHT UNIVERSITY

PhD Research Project

Researcher: Victor Mwila
Supervisor: Prof. Nickson Banda
Research Office: Greenlight University

Questionnaire for semi-structured interviews

SN Questions

A1 What is your highest qualification?

Have you ever being trained in any theological college or University?

And how long have you been in the ministry?

B2 What is your understanding about Biblical discipleship? Briefly explain your
answer

C3 What is your opinion on how discipleship is done in the current church? Is it

done in the Biblical way or not? Give reasons to justify your answer
D4 What are the challenges/ obstacles pastors and Christian leaders face in
discipling their church members?
E5 What do you think is the right way of doing discipleship in the local churches?
Give reasons to justify your answer
E6 How do you practice discipleship in your church? Briefly explain your answer

G7 What do you think can be done to help the church get involved in disciple
making process in fulfilling the great commission?

347