Discipleship Should Create a Mature Community (Not Just Individual Stars)
Imagine you’ve won a behind-the-scenes tour of your favorite baseball team’s spring training. What would you see as you wandered through the camp? The pitchers would be working on their grips, establishing a rapport with the catchers, and shaking the dust off their arms. Hitters would be perfecting their swings. Outfielders would be shagging fly balls, while the middle infielders get to work on turning double plays. Those returning from injury might have special exercises intended to strengthen specific areas. In other words, everyone is doing something a little bit different.
And yet, they’re doing all those individual exercises for a common purpose—to win ball games in the upcoming season.
Should discipleship in our churches function any differently? Discipleship quite rightly involves both the individual and the community, the player and the team, so to speak. But curiously, in our current practices, we frequently flip the proper place of each.
In the New Testament, we see that discipleship primarily has a communal telos and an individual methodology. The ultimate aim is not a loose collection of mature individuals but rather a mature community. So, for example, Paul reminds the church in Ephesus, “In [Christ] the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit” (Eph. 2:21–22; emphasis added).
And a bit later in the same letter he teaches, “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (4:11–13).
In both cases, the goal is corporate maturity, as the analogies a building and body make clear. Paul does not envision a loose collection of holy bricks, but rather a holy temple (composed, undoubtedly, of holy bricks) in which God dwells by his Spirit. Likewise, he anticipates leaders equipping the saints for works of service that produce not just holy cells or holy body parts, but a holy body, with Christ himself as the Head.
The apostle Peter makes a similar point, and even draws on a similar analogy, when he writes, “As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 2:4–5).
It seems clear that God’s vision for the church is one of corporate maturity, in which the entire assembly grows in holiness together for the sake of his Name. The communal telos—the common purpose—is as clear as a team’s common championship dreams.
What about the individual methodology? (A quick aside: by individual, I don’t necessarily mean one-on-one, but life-on-life, which will often include small, relational discipleship groups.)
We see this most obviously in the ministry of Jesus himself. While Jesus certainly preached to the crowds, the focus of his ministry, and the greatest expenditure of his time and energy, was on the disciples: in Mark’s stunning phrase, “And he appointed twelve (whom he also named apostles) so that they might be with him and he might send them out to preach” (3:14). In this perfect example of life-on-life discipleship, Jesus called men to himself in order that they might simply spend time with him knowing that through this experience they would be equipped to continue the apostolic ministry.
Paul conveys a similar approach, though he only hints at it. In reminding the Thessalonians of his ministry there, he says, “For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory” (1 Thess. 2:11–12).
The key phrase for our purposes is “each one of you,” which strongly suggests an individual, life-on-life methodology. Again, this is not to say that Paul never preached to the crowds; the book of Acts records many such occasions. However, it seems that the bulk of his ministry—during the “work week” we might say—took place in his leather-working shop, as individuals or small groups of people would come in to receive training, instruction, and encouragement. We also see Paul’s individual dedication to young men like Timothy and Titus as further evidence of this approach.
So it seems that the New Testament envisions a communal telos achieved primarily through an individual methodology.
I fear that in much of our contemporary practice, however, we flip the two. That is, we have an individual telos achieved through a communal methodology. A spring training camp like this would involve every player, regardless of position, running the same drills, which is bad enough. But worse, they’re only putting in the work because they each want a fat new contract or sponsorship deal. Whether the team wins or loses doesn’t factor in the equation. Safe to say there will be nothing to show for this approach except an angry fan base!
Western society is overwhelmingly and self-evidently individualistic, so it is easy to see how we could unwittingly adopt our culture’s values. Generally speaking, we are concerned about our personal growth in holiness. Pastors routinely ask, “How are you doing in this area?” not “How are we doing in this area?” Rarely does one hear of corporate application in a message. Or consider the individual who switches churches because she didn’t feel she was “getting fed.” That might be the right choice, but notice the self-focus in the decision-making process. Are others underfed there as well? Could she invest more in the local congregation to bring change? Paul’s startling declaration in Ephesians 4:16 could—perhaps even should—spur her to strive for corporate, and not just individual, growth.
We all tend toward selfishness (cf. 2 Tim. 3:2), so this phenomenon is unsurprising, even if we need to challenge it more actively in our own lives and in our communities. However, our communal methodology has no such extenuating circumstances. I suspect it is driven by our peculiarly American pragmatism and our business mindset of streamlining and efficiency, rather than by any systemic spiritual dearth. Whatever the case, many churches adopt a community-wide, assembly-line approach to discipleship. Rather than a life-on-life approach, we provide a uniform curriculum and depersonalized programs or classes. While programs and classes have their place, they must not be the sole method, because the large-group setting and impersonal material can provide little impetus for true growth, even at the individual level. At its worst, those who complete the class see their “graduation” as the end of the process, giving no thought to generational legacy, how their growth should multiply as they serve within the community.
By contrast, the life-on-life approach practiced by Jesus and his earliest followers aims at the edification of the church as a whole and produces life-long and community-wide transformation. We have seen this at Cityview Community Church, where I pastor. Gathering in small, gender-specific discipleship groups, we are able to tailor a curriculum and model to the people in the room. The shared information and practices unite the church, giving us a common foundation, language, and vision as we set out on mission. But we engage at the heart-level with the individuals we seek to disciple, addressing universal truths to specific circumstances. We’re not perfect, and have much to learn still, but we are seeing the fruit of the New Testament’s vision for a communal telos achieved through an individual methodology.
The New Testament provides a wealth of information and instruction regarding discipleship in the local church, and many have returned to the fount for guidance in this area. I thank God for the revival of life-on-life discipleship happening across our country—and really, across the globe. I hope and pray that many more will choose the hard, slow way of relational disciple-making—the Master’s way—as they strive to become a community growing in maturity to the glory of God. That’s a trophy worth seeking.
Brandon Cooper (MDiv, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) serves as senior pastor at Cityview Community Church in Elmhurst, Illinois. He is the author of A Word to the Wise: Lessons from Proverbs for Young Adults (Deep River Books, 2010), and has contributed articles to both print and digital platforms, including The Gospel Coalition. Brandon founded Follow After Ministries to equip individuals and churches to make disciples passionately devoted to following Christ. He and his wife, Amy, have five children. You can follow him on Twitter.
Brandon Cooper (MDiv, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) serves as senior pastor at Cityview Community Church in Elmhurst, Illinois. He is the author of A Word to the Wise: Lessons from Proverbs for Young Adults (Deep River Books, 2010), and has contributed articles to both print and digital platforms, including The Gospel Coalition. Brandon founded Follow After Ministries to equip individuals and churches to make disciples passionately devoted to following Christ. He and his wife, Amy, have five children. You can follow him on Twitter.