|
Tally HO The Fox! Chapter 7 The Genius of Jesus’
Strategy I Thessalonians 3:8 The Genius of Jesus’
Strategy We will begin this chapter by “dropping in” on an innocent-sounding
text. In fact, you might read Paul’s First
Thessalonian letter a hundred times and give little or no attention to this
verse. But, and this is quite often
the case in Scripture, God hides the genius of Heaven in seemingly “obscure”
or inconspicuous texts, and here is a perfect case in point. Hidden away in this text is the glory and
the genius of Christianity. The verse
is I Thessalonians 3:8, which says (KJV), “For now we live, if ye stand fast
in the Lord.” Note that every word is
a monosyllable, so this text is certainly very simple. But the glory of it is far out of
proportion to its apparent simplicity.
Remember that the New Testament was originally
written in the Greek language, and one advantageous feature of the Greek language
is that the placement and arrangement of the words in a sentence reveals
whether any of the words carry emphasis, and, if so, whether the emphasis is
minor (the Holy Spirit raises His Voice) or major (the Holy Spirit shouts). In I Thessalonians 3:8, the words are so
arranged that one word carries emphasis, and it is major emphasis (the Holy
Spirit shouts this one word from the page to us). Again and again, I have asked audiences to
guess which word they think the emphatic word is. Note that there are only eleven words in
the entire verse, and yet the normal audience will go through six or eight
guesses and still not be correct. You
see, we cannot with our human minds guess right about God. Even if we stumble onto a correct answer,
our answer is wrong in that it is still a guess. This is the reason we must study the Bible,
“rightly dividing the Word of Truth” (II Timothy 2:15). The one emphatic word (stressed with major
emphasis) is the word “ye.” Take a
moment and read the verse aloud, and shout the word ”ye.” Can you now unravel the meaning? Can you now see the genius of
Christianity? Can you see clearly why
the word “ye” would be the emphatic word?
Let’s explore further until we have a firm grasp of this handle of
understanding. There are two kinds of lives that human beings
may live. There are two lifestyles
that human beings may pursue. Most
human beings never realize this, but one of these patterns is Satan’s
lifestyle while the other is the Savior’s lifestyle. One is the normal lifestyle of a sinner
(and it is the only lifestyle a lost man may live), and the other is the
normal lifestyle of a practicing saint.
I use these words carefully, because any saved person may still at any
time lapse into the practice of Satan’s lifestyle.
Let me draw a simple diagram that will enable us
to clearly see these contrasting lifestyles.
I
call this pattern the “outside-in” lifestyle.
This is the inevitable, necessary lifestyle of every person who has
never been born of God. He lives like
a sponge, always sucking resources from his environment for his own selfish
advantage. This is Satan’s
lifestyle. This is what created Satan:
“I will,” he repeated again and again, transferring his trust from God to
himself. This is the classic
definition of sin: “S-I-N,” “self - ish - ness.” Sin is the “self-curl” of life which makes
every human being turn everything back into himself. Sin is man’s attempt to find meaning and
fulfillment in life for himself and in himself without God. Now,
the sad and tragic admission must be made that a born-again person may also
revert back to this lifestyle. Because
he carried the “flesh” into his new life in Christ (to understand the word
“flesh,” remove the letter “h” and reverse the letters: “self”), he may at
any time trust himself and seek self-advantage instead of trusting Christ and
living for God’s glory. When a
Christian lives selfishly, he falls into one of two categories. He falls into a course of “selfish” living,
or into a course of “survival” living.
Everything he does puts him into the discomfort of living for his own
self-advantage or his own survival.
Even if he reads the Bible, prays, and tries to serve God, he does it
for some self-centered reason. The
Bible calls this self-centered motive by the word “carnal.” The
other lifestyle may be seen in this diagram.
The
figure on the left represents Jesus, and the other figure represents the
born-again believer. The saved person
has transferred his trust from self and self-effort to Christ. An interaction has occurred between him and
Christ. Christ's life has entered into
him and the "the center of gravity" in him has shifted from self to
Christ. This is called
"salvation," "conversion," "regeneration,"
"the new birth," in the Biblical vocabulary of faith. All of these words depict an absolute
miracle of God which shakes a sinner at the very core of his being and
"un-selfs" him, putting the glorious Lord Jesus Christ at the
center of his life instead of the old Satan-programmed self. I say again, this is an absolute miracle of
God! Unsaved people will always
misunderstand the new birth, reducing the term to a mild new beginning or
dismissing it as a fanatical religious term.
Could an unborn person possibly understand human life? What an absurd question! The
second diagram pictures what I call the "the inside-out" lifestyle,
the lifestyle of God. Jesus "gave
Himself for us," expressing God's normal modus operandi. And the practicing Christian lives in a
faith relationship with Jesus Christ, always receiving the remarkable
resources of such a true life of true faith.
These resources pass through him and satisfy him as they move out
toward someone else. Now
read the verse again: "Now we live, if YE stand fast in the
Lord." The typical Christian
misunderstanding sounds like this: "I live if I pray enough." "I live (as a Christian) if I read the
Bible enough." "I live if I
am committed enough." "I
live if I am loyal enough." "I
live if I am good enough."
"I live if I am motivated enough." "I live if I am dedicated
enough." "I love if I am
effective enough." But all of
these good-faith statements have the subtle tendency to turn the individual's
life back upon and into himself again.
This is the subtle self-curl of the flesh, and it deceives many saved
people. Jesus
said, "He who would save his own life (the self-advantaged, self-curled,
survival life) shall lose it, but he who would give his life for My sake and
the Gospel's shall save it." So
the lifestyle pictured in the first diagram is a life of loss, but the self-forgetful,
self-giving, self-disinterested lifestyle of the second diagram is the saved
life. Now
change the figure just a bit.
The
same thing is true of churches that is true of individuals. Churches also may be turned in on
themselves, living selfishly or for their own survival (even while seeking
people, the course may still be only one of implosion!), instead of extending
and exhausting their supply lines in such a way that they constantly test and
tax the miracle resources of God. The
Christian lifestyle is to live so relationally, so unselfishly, so
self-forgetfully, so other-orientedly, that the individual Christian only
truly lives if his disciple is standing fast in the Lord. Paul said, "I only live if you stand
fast in the Lord." So the
Christian lives in, by means of, for, and through his disciples! Is
this not Jesus' entire method, manner, and means of world impact? He so built Himself into twelve men that,
after a three-year training period, he said, "Good-bye! Now My life is totally in your care. I only live if you stand fast!" That, dear friends, is what disciple-making
is all about. How I wish I could
explain this again and again, exploring its many facets like the facets of a
bright and priceless diamond, until every reader was overwhelmed with the
glory, the possibilities, and the vocation of this "inside-out"
lifestyle. Almost
all Americans will recognize this familiar adage: "Practice makes Perfect." I was taught this as long as I can
remember. It was expressed to me as if
it were an invariable, invisible, infallible law. But I want to raise a serious
question. Suppose the standard
practiced is an imperfect standard.
Can all the practice in the world ever "make perfect?" Certainly not! You see, practice only makes permanent; it
does not necessarily make perfect. Now
the application. Could it be possible
that the If
the premise of these studies is correct, that the Great Commission presents
the only "Marching Orders" Jesus Christ gave to His church, and if
the understanding of the Commission presented in these studies is correct,
then the typical strategy of the typical church is wrong. Has institution-building to a greater or
lesser degree replaced individual-building in today's church? Remember that the interpretation of
"turning people into disciples" is determined by the method and
mandate of Jesus. His mandate is
clearly stated in the one command of the Great Commission: "turn people into
disciples." And His method is
shown in His internetworking small-group strategy with twelve men. Let
me ask the question again. Would the
Christianity presently represented in your church have produced the Book of
Acts to begin with? This is an
embarrassing question, and thus it will not receive a ready answer. To put it another way: would the Christianity of the Book of Acts
tolerate the world situation of today, a situation in which nearly half of
the human race remains unevangelized (2,000 years after Christ!), and in
which 4/5 of the human race are (at best) only poorly evangelized? Would the Christianity of the Book of Acts
tolerate the situation in the church in almost every evangelized country of
the world, a situation which is described with monotonous refrain in Patrick
Johnstone's Operation World: "This country suffers from a desperate lack
of trained leaders"? The
embarrassing answer to all of the above questions is a resounding
"No!" Then, will the present
strategies and methods correct these failures? Well, they have not succeeded as of this
writing. Should we not back away,
boldly re-examine the original strategy of Jesus, and see what variations
have carried us away from His strategy? There
is a common term used in the church, another of those church terms which we
have superficially presumed upon. It
is the term, "Christ-like."
Almost all Christians would admit that the goal of the Christian life
is to make the individual believer Christ-like. In fact, this is God's clearly-stated goal
for each of His children. Romans 8:29
indicates that it has always been God's purpose to "conform us to the
image of His Son," or to make us like Christ. But again, we have stopped far short of the
Biblical mark in defining this term.
We define it typically in terms of "the fruit of the Spirit"
of Galatians 5:22-23. Who could fault
this definition? If a person bears the
fruit of the Spirit, his inner character is like that of Christ. But follow the analogy of fruit a bit
further. Does fruit only have an inner
essence, or does it also have an outward form? To illustrate, when a shopper goes to the
supermarket to buy lemons, does she look for "lemonness"? No, she looks for a small fruit that has a
small round shape, a yellow, thick skin, and a rough surface. In other words, a lemon has a clearly
distinguishable outward form, conspicuously different from the outward form
of a plum, a strawberry, or a cantaloupe.
I suggest that the fruit of the Spirit is only a good beginning in
defining Christians. Does
Christ-likeness have an outward form as well as an inner essence? Let
me put it in one sentence: you will
never do anything more Christ-like than the training of groups of people to
live in union with Jesus Christ inwardly, and to reproduce, multiply, and
impact the whole wide world outwardly.
The basic strategy words are "training," (with the strategy
and curriculum patterned by Jesus), "groups" (with the approximate
size of each group again patterned by Jesus), "union" (thus making
Christ's life, ministry and motivation ours), "reproduce and
multiply" (the responsibility of every single child of God), and
"impact the whole wide world" (which should provide the moment-by-moment
goal of every single child of God).
And all of this is to determine the strategies by which we accomplish
the goal. In
John 19:30, in history's holiest moment, Jesus spoke the one word which is
probably the most important single word ever spoken. The word is tetelestai,
"finished," "complete," "done." The work that was finished at that moment
is the work of REDEMPTION, the one inclusive word which describes all that
God has done to fully save sinners. In
John 17:4, Jesus used that word again (KJV): "I have glorified Thee on
the earth: I have finished the work
which Thou gavest me to do." What
work had Jesus finished at this point?
Most commentaries say that this statement also applies to the work of
redemption which Jesus accomplished on the cross, but this clearly cannot be
the case. Jesus used a past-tense
verb, and the cross was still in front of Him! No, He was not speaking here of the work of
REDEMPTION, but the work of REPRODUCTION.
At this point, His entire training process for His men was
complete: So Jesus came to accomplish
two primary and essential works:
REDEMPTION and REPRODUCTION.
Without the indispensable work of Redemption accomplished by Christ's
death on the cross, there would have been nothing worth reproducing, but
without the indispensable work of Reproduction through enlarging numbers of
Christians, the work of Redemption would be only partially, poorly, or
pitifully known (the exact situation of today's world, and even of today’s
church, as well). Again
a crucial question is forced upon us.
What does "reproduction" mean from a New Testament
standpoint? How many people are
expected to reproduce, and how much reproduction is to be expected of
them? Is the reproduction mere
duplication (the standard of soul-winning, or converting sinners to Christ),
or is it to produce multiplication? If
multiplication, on how large a scale?
And how are valid goals in these categories to be reached? Again, the method and manner of Jesus are
to provide our model. Let's
take one model for a momentary examination.
What model did Jesus follow in reproducing? How did He produce multipliers? How did He
produce a mind-set in twelve men that eventuated in massive world impact to
the farthest reaches of the known world of His day within 60 years after His
death? Read the last sentence again
and let its truth saturate your mind.
Let its question stir your heart.
How? How did He . . . ? "How did he produce a mind-set? In twelve men!!?? That eventuated in massive world
impact? To the farthest reaches of the
known world of His day? And within 60
years after His death? He didn't have
television, telethons, telephones, telecommunication means
just tell-a-person! How? How?
How? Negatively, nothing of His
program depended on a crowd. Nothing
of His program depended on preaching (though He used mass communication to
minister, to teach, and to emerge potential disciples). Nothing of His program was institutionalized
(this is a mere admission of fact, not an evaluation of institutionalism). Nothing of His program centered in going to
church (although He went to church regularly). Then What was his strategy? His technique? His method? We
can get a hint by examining the Biblical lists of the men whom He called as
“Apostles.” Let it be said first that
He trained them to send them away from Him, not to centralize increasing
masses where He was. This strategy is
conspicuously unlike today’s church, which tends to evaluate its success (and
the success of its leaders) almost totally by the measurement of size. The four lists of the Apostles are found in
Matthew 10, Mark 3, Luke 6, and Acts 1.
The compiling of the lists should stimulate ceaseless study. There are incalculable and eternal lessons
to be learned from studying these lists over and over again. Let me place them on the page: |
|
Matthew |
Mark |
Luke |
Acts |
|
Simon
(called Peter) |
Simon (named Peter) |
Simon (named Peter) |
Peter |
|
Andrew |
James, son of Zebedee |
Andrew |
John |
|
James,
son of Zebedee |
John |
James |
James |
|
John |
Andrew |
John |
Andrew |
|
Philip |
Philip |
Philip |
Philip |
|
Bartholomew |
Bartholomew |
Bartholomew |
Thomas |
|
Thomas |
Matthew |
Matthew |
Bartholomew |
|
Matthew |
Thomas |
Thomas |
Matthew |
|
James,
son of Alphaeus |
James, son of Alphaeus |
James, son of Alphaeus |
James, son of Alphaeus |
|
Thaddaeus |
Thaddaeus |
Simon
the Zealot |
Simon
the Zealot |
|
Simon
the Zealot |
Simon
the Zealot |
Judas,
son of James |
Judas,
son of James |
|
Judas
Iscariot |
Judas
Iscariot |
Judas
Iscariot |
|
|
Note
the most obvious features. The same
name comes first on each list. Let me
correct myself. It is the same person,
though the name is not the same throughout ("Simon Peter" and then
"Peter"). Let me correct
myself again. He is the same person
throughout and yet he is clearly not the same person! The trip from "Simon" in control
to "Peter" in control is a colossal study of the strategy,
technique, method, and process of Jesus in building disciples. Was that (building disciples) not the only
command in His great Commission to us?
Surely, then, the strategy, technique, method and process of Jesus are
to be followed as nearly as possible by us (or we can fully expect a
different product, which is precisely what has sadly occurred in today's
church). It is an unbelievably
rewarding study to trace just the training process Jesus followed with Simon
Peter alone. If the passages of
encounter, exchange and construction between Jesus and Peter are to be the
standard for building disciples in today's church, then it is very easy to
see why we are suffering from a gigantic crisis of product (unbuilt
Christians and a largely unevangelized world). I would recommend this study to any
Christian. To examine the process by
which Jesus reduced "Simon" (his pre-conversion, fleshly name) and
emerged "Peter" (the name that is normally used for him in the Book
of Acts) is an eye-opener for anyone wishing to know Jesus' technique in
building disciples When
you examine the second line across the lists, you see that the names are not
the same. The same is true in the
third line, and the fourth. Bur
eureka, line number five contains the same name all the way across. This will prove to be crucial in
understanding the training strategy of Jesus.
Line six does not contain the same name, nor does line seven, nor does
line eight. But aha! We
may now be seeing a primary technique employed by Jesus in building
world-visionary, world-impacting, reproducing multipliers of others in
kind. We know without any doubt that
Jesus' strategy was totally centered in a small group of twelve men. We know, too, that Jesus put all of His "eggs"
in that one small "basket."
His total plan for world impact was placed in the hands (and the
productivity) of twelve men! And the
lists of the Apostles also strongly suggest his method in building these
men. He apparently (and it is far more
apparent than a first glance will see) divided His twelve men into three
equal groups of four each, with an assigned leader for each group. What evidence do we have for believing
this? The evidence is too overwhelming
to be mere coincidence. All the men in
the first group (and only these, as far as we know) were followers of John
the Baptist who came to follow Jesus upon the selfless encouragement of their
leader. All the men in the first group
are dynamic and impulsive men, just like their leader, Simon Peter. James and John were nicknamed "Sons of
Thunder" by Jesus Himself! They were
dispositionally like developing thunderstorms. Andrew is apparently far more dynamic than
we normally think. After all, he was
the first home missionary (John 1:40-42), the first youth worker and social
worker (John 6:8-9), and the first foreign missionary (John 12:20-22). It is very unlikely that a timid man would
have accomplished any of the things attributed in those passages! These were dynamic men. The
second group is headed by the Apostle Philip, who has throughout the Gospel
the profile of a highly philosophical man.
And every person in his group is also highly philosophical, men like
"doubting" Thomas and Levi Matthew, who wrote the Gospel of the
philosophical teachings of Jesus.
Notice that Jesus did not install a philosophical man as his primary
leader He would have never accomplished anything! Philosophical men make great doubters,
great questioners, great investigators, great protestors, great
procrastinators, and finally, great contributors to their Christian
mission. But out-front leadership was
not given to philosophical men.
However, we are not to under-estimate the importance and necessity of
these men in evaluating this statement.
It just reflects another important factor in the strategy of Jesus. The
third group - are you ready? The third
group is made up totally of political revolutionaries! The leader, James, the son of Alphaeus, was
probably the mildest one in the group!
Judas' surname, "Iscariot," may well derive from the
"sicarii," the little dagger carried by certain revolutionaries,
with which they had pledged themselves to kill any Roman official whom they
could reach in a crowd (or anywhere, for that matter). Here is an interesting feature. There is substantial evidence that James
and Matthew (both called "sons of Alphaeus") were brothers. Does this stimulate great thought in
you? Why was one (Matthew) a traitor
to When
the famed comedian, Charlie Chaplin, was alive, a "Charlie Chaplin
Lookalike Contest" was held in Do
not misunderstand this chapter. There
is no clear command which necessitates our following the exact group
form. However, wisdom would suggest
that "Christ-like" means "Christ-like." That sounds simple enough, but its truth
has proved to be very elusive in the church.
The size of Jesus' group appears very wise, as well as the divisions,
affording accountability, assignments, fellowship, etc. But surely these were not closed and rigid
groups. The outcome proves that Jesus
was the Master of internetworking group dynamics. Would we not be wise to do the same? Are we really wise if we don't? I
repeat: you . . . you . . . and you .
. . and you . . . will never do anything more Christ-like in all your life
than the training of individuals by the strategy of Jesus ("turn people
into disciples") for total world impact. Isn't
it time we checked all our activity to be sure we are fulfilling solidly,
fully, and consistently, the Commission of Jesus? |
Copyright © 2005, by
ToBeLikeHim Ministries