Making Kingdom Disciples | Charles Dunahoo

Charles H. Dunahoo. Making Kingdom Disciples: A New Framework. P&R, 2005. 249 pp.

An Overview of the Kingdom Model

Before Jesus ascended into heaven, he gave his final command to his church about their assignment during the interim between his ascension and his return at the end of the age. He said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and 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 that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:18-20).

The importance of those words cannot be overstated. They express God’s revealed will for his church until he returns at the consummation of all things. The church’s mission is to make disciples by evangelizing and educating the believers. In turn, the believers are to be transformed into the likeness of Christ, demonstrated by a life of Christlike service within the kingdom of God.

This survey chapter will present a vision for what I believe is God’s plan for disciple making, which I call the kingdom approach. . . .

It is important to look closely at the word “disciple,” for it has various connotations. In this book I will define the term as follows:

Generic definition: A disciple is someone who accepts a set of beliefs, and embraces a holistic, total, and intentional approach to life based on those beliefs.

Kingdom definition:A kingdom disciple is someone who thinks God’s thoughts after him and applies them to all of life.

In the Christian sense, the aim of every disciple is to “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5), especially remembering the proverb, “As [a man] thinks in his heart, so is [or lives] he” (Prov. 23:7, NKJV; “he is like one who is inwardly calculating,” ESV). . . .

Actually, three of the four approaches that I will shortly describe are not totally wrong, but taken individually, or even combined with one another, they fall short of what I believe is the right one; therefore they are not producing the results that God intends. In that sense they are wrong, if used by themselves.

Simply put, we have been operating, often unintentionally, with more of a man-centered rather than a God-centered approach to making disciples, and it is not working. Although there may be much activity and movement that suggest otherwise, the statistics are real. I use “man-centered” to mean either man corporately or man individually. We must operate with the right paradigm—not a man-centered but a God-centered model; not a narrow isolationist or separatist approach, but a “kingdom of God” approach. What is the difference?

The late Francis Schaeffer, to whom I am deeply indebted, suggested that there is an overarching philosophy that impacts every area of life. In his book The God Who Is There he diagrams a series of steps where philosophy, at the top of the stairs, begins to work its way down and impacts every area of life, even theology and the church. . . . This gives us a sense of the approach we must follow in making disciples.

Three Inadequate Approaches

For the sake of clarity I will say there are three main approaches being used today under the rubric of making disciples. . . . I do not intend to communicate that the three approaches are wrong, but merely reductionistic and incomplete.

The first approach is a program-based model and focuses on man as part of a corporate entity. The second approach focuses on man the individual and his felt needs. The third places man in the context of small-group relationships and focuses more on society. These approaches zero in on man and his relation to God, with a secondary focus being man and his relationship to his fellow man.

Approach 1: The Program-based Model

The first model was primarily used before the 1950s. I call it an “informational or program-based model.” It emphasizes sharing the most information with the most people, focusing on man in his community setting and his activities. This model stresses profession of faith in Christ as well as church membership and attendance. When people participate in church activities, worship, fellowship dinners, Sunday school, and small groups, they find it easy to openly declare their Christian faith. That others are doing the same creates a plausibility structure or a safe environment. For that group, the church becomes almost like a little Christian Shangri-La.

In church the Bible is read and biblical themes are taught, but outside that group environment people tend to put their faith on hold. This model often becomes a programmed (informational) approach to making disciples. We have learned from people like Marshall McLuhan that the methods can easily become the message and thus alter the message’s original intent. That is why we must strongly insist that if our message is correctly defined, we must also use methods that will consistently enable us to communicate the message without changing its content or intent.

Approach 2: The Individual Model

During the early twentieth century, the church was divided between liberals and conservatives, with the liberals seeking to make a broad social application of its message at the expense of the proper gospel focus, and the conservatives reacting and withdrawing from the world and its challenges. This, along with the ineffectiveness of Approach 1, led to the development of a new model in the late 1940s and early 1950s. This second model was more of a “para-church” model. I call it the “individual model.”

The individual model focuses on man and his relation to God, stressing the one-on-one relationship of the disciple to the discipler. In this model people accept Christ, usually because of someone’s witness, and then either that person or someone else comes along to help the new Christian grow in Christ. This model calls for the new believer and his discipler or mentor to meet one-on-one or in a very small group. The focus is usually on reading the Bible, memorizing Scripture, learning to share the gospel, and prayer. This approach generally encourages the development of a neat list of things that we have to do to be a disciple. The individual model’s effectiveness depends on the effectiveness of the one-on-one instruction received. This approach is stronger to the extent that it overlaps the program-based model, weaker to the extent that it stands alone. People like Billy Hanks, Bill Shell, and others have talked and written about the need to integrate this method with the church’s method. As a matter of fact, all of us know people who profess to be Christians but who see no need for the church in their Christian experience. This model easily reinforces that concept.

Approach 3: The Small-Group Model

The third approach works within small groups. Like the second approach, it is what Robert Pazmino calls a formational model, focusing on people, either one-on-one or in small groups. This particular relational model began in the 1960s. During the 60s and early 70s there were a host of groups growing up everywhere. Somewhat out of a reaction to rugged individualism and the need for more intense interpersonal relations, the “groupie” mentality emerged throughout the culture. The movement developed with the emergence of sensitivity groups and transactional psychology. At the same time groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous were experiencing some success. Their approach was based on building intense relationships where people in a small group generally made more progress than people alone or in a crowd.

In the small group there are usually activities such as sharing, praying, and studying the Bible or discussing a biblical topic. Since much of the Judeo-Christian history centered on small groups, this model naturally found a place in the life of God’s people. House churches are well known to those who study early church history. . . .

This small-group model (built around the “felt needs” in a person’s life) focuses on relationships and caring much more than on program or content.

Approach 4: The Kingdom Approach

The kingdom approach, which more fully lends itself to what I call the God-centered framework, not only incorporates these three models, but places them in the context of God’s kingdom. It is informational, formational, and transformational! Not until we reach the transformational stage will we be discipled in the biblical sense of being transformed into a new person by changing the way we think, bringing every thought into captivity to obeying Christ, as Paul wrote in Romans 12 and 2 Corinthians 10, and not copying the behavior and customs of this world. This refers not just to our devotional or church life, but all of life. In the words of Abraham Kuyper, “There is not a square inch within the domain of our human life of which the Christ, who is the Sovereign over all, does not say, ‘Mine.’” All of life is a religious activity to be lived unto God.

The primary objectives of the kingdom approach of disciple making include knowing, understanding, and applying God’s Word to all life. It also involves living lives more obedient to God’s commands. Transforming the way a person thinks and lives is a key in serving and ministering to those who are the image bearers of God both inside and outside the church community. Bringing all thoughts captive to Christ is also essential. This kingdom model produces Christians with a self-conscious understanding of an all-pervasive philosophy of life. As Wuthnow emphasizes, the lordship of Christ will be reflected in how we use our money and other material resources for the kingdom.

The kingdom model does not separate faith and life (as though such were possible). It focuses on integrating God’s truth into all areas of life, and because of that, it is not merely an academic, informational, or intellectual concept. The kingdom model applies to, serves, and ministers to all areas.

While Bible study is basic in the kingdom paradigm, we must also study all legitimate areas of life under the lordship of Christ—mathematics, science, history, law, psychology, and sociology. This model does not suggest that the church plays a lesser role in the process, for the church is the heart of the kingdom model. But the kingdom model paradigm is broader than the institutional church. . . .

Thus the kingdom approach is more comprehensive than the first three approaches above, although it should embrace aspects of all three. A God-centered or kingdom approach focuses on a right view of God, his relation to man, and man’s to him, man’s relationship to his fellow man, and to the world around him.

In the kingdom approach, Christian education not only deals with different institutions—home, church, state, and school, their relationships with one another and the world around us—it also deals with other spheres of life, such as science, history, mathematics, and law; therefore, we are to have a Christian world-and-life-view.

One thing that makes the kingdom framework important is its focus on the transformation of the individual, and its recognition of his or her uniqueness as an image bearer of God. There is no stereotyping in the kingdom, rather, we are to demonstrate our uniqueness as we minister and serve the Lord in our context. The kingdom model respects the individual’s giftedness. Wherever we are in life, we are to serve the Lord’s purpose; that is our reason for being.

Another thing that makes the kingdom focus important is that it offers a particular challenge to the rising generations to know the Word of God, to know the world around us, and to know ourselves. As we grow in that knowledge, we are reminded that Christian education is discipleship and discipleship is obedience to God in all things, because Christ is Lord of all. . . .

At this point I do not want to get into any how-to methods. Rather, I want to focus on understanding the kingdom framework or setting, which will in turn provide for us a way to develop our methodology. Parts 1 and 2 of this book will identify some necessary components of the method and describe some of the anticipated results, but in reality the kingdom framework will vary from individual to individual or group to group. I have evaluated too many programs that have attempted to create the impression that theirs is the right method of making disciples. There are many useful methods, but whatever way we choose to implement the process, we must not use a method that will compromise or alter the message of the gospel.

Also, I want to underscore that the kingdom model incorporates the gospel of truth. It starts and ends with the self-attesting Jesus Christ. “In him all things hang together.” “In all things Christ preeminent.” The kingdom model must not sacrifice the gospel, for without the gospel there is no substance to our efforts to make disciples. If one’s world-and-life-view does not start with the self-attesting Christ of Scripture, then it will be an exercise in futility. On the other hand, the kingdom model involves more than Bible study, sharing, praying, and witnessing in the evangelistic sense; and it takes place within various settings. It is one thing to know the Bible content and another to know how to use that knowledge in everyday life.

I do not hesitate to refer to Christian education as disciple making. Contrary to the inadequate approaches we have described, Christian education is not merely program-centered or informational; neither is it only person-centered or formational; nor is it limited to any one institution or life area. It is God-centered, total-life-oriented, hence transformational. This is a process intentionally designed to help us think, act, and live differently. But the kingdom model does not produce stereotypes or cookie cutter disciples. As a matter of fact, operating within the kingdom model, we may reach different conclusions about many things, but there will be unity as regards the system involved. Christians may reach somewhat different conclusions on ethical issues. Some kingdom Christians may see things differently in the political arena, but all will operate with a world-and-life-view perspective as those options are dealt with. . . .

Transformation of life is our aim in making disciples. You cannot be discipled within the kingdom framework and not have your life orientation changed. You will develop a biblical world-and-life-view that is constantly reforming your thinking and living because that is the aim of the kingdom model.

Reprinted from Making Kingdom Disciples by Charles H. Dunahoo, © 2005 by Charles H. Dunahoo. Used by permission of P & R Publishing, Phillipsburg, NJ. All rights reserved.

Like this post? Subscribe to our feed .