A Brief Guide to Disciple Making Movements, Part 2

The Gospel of Obedience Based Discipleship (OBD)

This fundamental underpinning of Disciple Making Movements (DMM), known as OBD, is deeply problematic precisely because it builds a method upon a deeply problematic understanding of the gospel, conversion, and the work of the Holy Spirit. These issues are simply too important to leave unaddressed.¹

Therefore, we will briefly look at the gospel message that is foundational to OBD.

First, what is the gospel message taught and assumed in OBD? Is the gospel of OBD in any manner necessarily distinct from the biblical gospel?² While the word “gospel” is used often by DMM authors, it is difficult to find an actual explanation of the content of the gospel. The Watsons provide the most comprehensive definition of the gospel when they write about a series of Discovery Bible studies that “...leads them to discover a holy and loving God, face their own sin, find God’s provision for their sin through Jesus Christ, come into a grace/ faith relationship with Jesus, and commit to a life of faith that obeys His commands regardless of consequences.”³

We see that their gospel message professes five elements: 1. God as loving and holy, 2. man and sin, 3. God’s provision in Jesus Christ, 4. a grace/faith relationship with Jesus, and 5. commitment to a life of faith that obeys His commands. There is not much definition given to any of these elements. For the sake of argument, however, we will assume the Watsons would define the first three elements in the same manner as any Protestant. This leaves us with the fourth and fifth element.

It is the fourth and fifth elements of the Watsons’ gospel that OBD necessarily redefines in a manner not consonant with a biblical gospel. The definition of faith, and the basis of the “grace/faith” relationship with Jesus, in OBD is a false gospel. We realize this is a serious charge. We are not arguing this false gospel is malicious in intent. We hope and pray it is mere ignorance that will be realized and corrected.⁴

Proponents of OBD show their cards in their understanding of faith in the very title. Discipleship is “obedience-based.” This is not gospel-based or grace-based discipleship. The basis for our discipleship relationship with the Lord Jesus, according to OBD, is our own obedience. Here is how faith is defined in OBD, “In this form of teaching, faith is defined as being obedient to the commands of Christ in every situation or circumstance, regardless of the consequences.”⁵ Faith is defined as “being obedient.” Faith = obedience. OBD makes these the same in substance.

Equating faith to obedience is not a one-time accidental statement made by the Watsons.

This definition of faith is the very essence of their whole method of disciple making. As they write a second time, “In this model, everyone is trained to ask the question, ‘In this situation, how will I [or we] be obedient to the Word of God?’ Faith is defined as the continuous act of choosing to be obedient to God’s Word regardless of what it may cost, even our lives.”⁶ Here faith is expanded to “continuous acts of obedience” (by unconverted unbelievers, no less!).

It could be objected that surely in the use of the term “grace/faith relationship with Jesus” they do not intend to say that the reception of grace is somehow predicated upon obedience? Yet, here is how they define our reception of grace, “Every time we open God’s Word, He invites us into relationship. We call His invitation ‘grace’ because we can’t do anything to deserve it. Obedience is how we accept His invitation.”⁷ How do we receive grace? “Obedience.” They have redefined faith or replaced it with obedience.

These men are clearly writing of a Father who loves me, a Messiah who saves me, and a Holy Spirit who indwells me, if I am obedient. My obedience is a condition that when met receives these benefits that come to those in relationship with the Lord. It is true that the Watsons also wrote, “Even though Christ is our righteousness through faith, we must make every effort to be like Him in every way.”⁸ They are clearly stating here that we receive the grace of Jesus Christ from God through faith. They consistently argue, however, that this “faith” is “obedience.” They have turned the gospel, unintentionally, we trust, into “justification by grace through obedience to Christ.”

The Roman Catholic Church, following Thomas Aquinas, argued that faith was insufficient as a condition to the reception of justification. Aquinas argued that our faith must be “formed by love.”⁹ In other words, the Roman Catholic teaching is that love makes faith justifying. Further, Jesus taught us that if we love him, we will obey his commandments (John 14:15). Thus, if faith is formed by love, and love is shown through obedience, then obedience becomes necessary as a condition to justification.¹⁰ In this manner, Roman Catholics smuggle good works into the basis for justification. DMM proponents argue for essentially the same definition of faith. They argue faith is defined as continuous acts of obedience, motivated by love, of course. This is a complete rejection of the Protestant understanding of the gospel.

The Protestant Reformers argued that faith expresses love and obedience as fruit, but not as its substance or essence. They defined faith as, “not only a certain knowledge whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in His Word; but also a hearty trust, which the Holy Spirit works in me by the Gospel, that not only to others, but to me also, forgiveness of sins, everlasting righteousness and salvation are freely given by God, merely of grace, only for the sake of Christ’s merits.”¹¹ We do not have space to rehash the debates of the Reformation. It is assumed here that Christian faith is confident trust in Jesus Christ as our righteousness. It is believing he is the Christ, the Son of God, and by believing we have faith in his name. Faith is receiving and resting upon Christ’s work in his life, death, resurrection, and present session.¹² Sadly, those who hold to OBD seem to have adopted Rome’s understanding of faith. Their understanding of faith shines through in their method of discipleship.

Person of Peace

What is a Person of Peace (POP hereafter)? The POP serves a number of roles in DMM methodology. First, the POP is a bridge-builder, a significant part of Jesus’ strategy for reaching lost people. The people of peace “...are God’s pre-positioned agents to bridge the gospel to their family, their friends, or their workplace. This element of Jesus’ strategy for engaging lostness is perhaps one of the most significant principles, and also one of the most neglected principles, for entering unreached people groups.”¹³

Second, the presence of a POP is how the missionary determines whether this is an area God wants him to engage. While this is not absolute, it is generally true that, “If there is no Person of Peace, then you move on.”¹⁴

Disciple-makers join God where He is working. The presence of a Person of Peace lets the disciple-maker know God wants him or her to engage the community deeply, that the harvest is ready. We partner with God to bring in the harvest. If the harvest isn’t ready, we don’t need to bring it in early! Instead, we move on to another field, another community, and look for Persons of Peace there.¹⁵

Third, according to DMM advocates, finding the POP is really the only job of the missionary. Technically, they would argue that the missionary still must come alongside the POP and guide them. But finding the POP is so central to DMM that it can be spoken of as the missionary’s only job:

The Person of Peace teaching is an entry strategy to new communities. In the Great Commission Jesus commanded us to “go.” What do we do when we get to where we are going? We find the Person of Peace. This is radically different from traditional disciple-making methods. In the Person of Peace strategy, the disciple-maker has one job—find the Person of Peace. This person may be from any walk of life, but he or she will welcome you, listen to your message, help you with your livelihood, and allow you to stay in his or her home and influence his or her family and the community for the sake of the Gospel. The disciple-maker does not do any of the traditional things required by traditional disciple-making. He does not preach or teach. He does not hand out tracts or sell books or give away Bibles. He does not do mass rallies or healing services.¹⁶

Once the missionary has identified the POP, he is not encouraged to instruct the POP individually, but in the context of the family. Further, the missionary is serving primarily as a group facilitator since the primary leadership duties in Bible study are given to the POP.

When the Person of Peace reveals him- or herself, the disciple-maker shifts the focus to the Family of Peace. The disciple-maker starts a Discovery Group to help the family discover on their own who God is and how they must relate to Him. The disciple-maker teaches them how to study the word of God, but does not lead the Bible studies or do any of the preaching and teaching. The focus is on the family learning directly from God through His word. The disciple-maker guides the direction of the study, but does not conduct the study, except to model the process a few times in the beginning.¹⁷

The question is raised as to whether the POP is a biblical idea and how the POP is identified. DMM proponents argue this strategy is taught by Jesus and seen in the ministry of the twelve in the book of Acts. The Watsons argued, “The Person of Peace strategy was developed from a composite view of Jesus’ teachings when He sent out His disciples in Matthew 10, Luke 9, and Luke 10.”¹⁸ Further, Trousdale stated, “Examples of people of peace in the book of Acts would include: Cornelius and his household (Acts 10), Lydia and her household (Acts 16), and the Philippian jailer and his household (Acts 16).”¹⁹

Did Jesus Teach POP?

Jesus never taught POP in the manner that is being asserted by DMM proponents. Given that finding the POP is so pivotal to the DMM method, in fact the missionary’s “one job,” a proper reading of Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 10, Luke 9 and Luke 10, exposes that “the emperor has no clothes.” It is not merely one component of DMM, but the central strategy of DMM that comes unraveled through proper interpretation of these biblical texts.

We will walk through each of the key Gospel passages, as well as the passages in Acts to determine if POP is indeed a biblical strategy and what it means. Before approaching the text, let us remember the claims of DMM regarding the meaning of POP. The Watsons defines the POP thusly, “Persons of Peace have three primary characteristics: They are open to a relationship with you. They hunger for spiritual answers for their deepest questions. And they will share whatever they learn with others.”²⁰ Here is a list of the primary characteristics of POP germane to our consideration of the biblical passages:

1. The POP is a spiritually interested unbeliever whom God has prepared for faith in Christ.
2. The POP is hospitable, though not merely hospitable, and helps with the needs of the missionary.
3. The POP is ready to share what they learn with others in their family and community. Thus, the POP is the person whom God has prepared to lead a DBS, and through whom a church will likely be planted.²¹

Given that Luke 10 provides us with the language, “Person of Peace,”²² we will begin with Luke 10 and look at it closely. We will then consider whether Luke 9 and Matthew 10 are consonant with what we see in Luke 10.

After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go. And he said to them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few. Therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest. Go your way; behold, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. Carry no moneybag, no knapsack, no sandals, and greet no one on the road. Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace be to this house!’ And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him. But if not, it will return to you. And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house. Whenever you enter a town and they receive you, eat what is set before you. Heal the sick in it and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ But whenever you enter a town and they do not receive you, go into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet we wipe off against you. Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’ I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.²³

Jesus appointed and sent out seventy-two disciples, in addition to the Twelve, two by two. He sent them out to proclaim the gospel. He gave them instructions for how they were to approach their missionary task. Let us list first those instructions of which there is likely no debate.

1. Pray. (v. 2)
2. Prepare for opposition. (v. 3)
3. Trust the Lord to provide. (v. 4)
4. Accept the hospitality and care of the POP. (v. 7–8)
5. Care for the physical and spiritual needs of the people. (v. 9)
6. Do not remain in a town that rejects you. (v. 10)

The question to which we now must turn is the identity of the POP. What did Jesus mean when he said, “Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace be to this house!’ And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him. But if not, it will return to you” (Luke 10:5–6)? Further, does Luke 10:11–12 play into our understanding at all? How do those verses fit into this pericope?

Jesus began these verses by teaching the “seventy-two” to declare, upon entering a house, “Peace be to this house!” What does this blessing of peace mean? Are the disciples being commanded to declare an end to conflict in the house? Are they being commanded to declare that they hope for a generally happy environment in the home? Or is there something more that is being stated here?

The word “peace” is a well-known one among 1st century Jews. The Old Testament context for this kind of language runs deep and wide across the revelation given to our fathers by the prophets. The Hebrew “shalom” is a word of blessing. The supreme blessing is reconciliation with the LORD. This is seen clearly in the famous Aaronic blessing.

The LORD bless you and keep you;

the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;

the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace. (Numbers 6:24)

This is also the prayer of Psalm 29:11, “May the LORD give strength to his people! May the LORD bless his people with peace!” There is no greater blessing than to be at peace with God. The people of Israel longed for the day that this great benediction would be fulfilled in their coming Messiah. The Messiah was promised to establish a New Covenant, a covenant of peace (Ezekiel 37:26). His feet would be “beautiful upon the mountains” as he heralded the good news of peace and salvation (Isaiah 52:7). The Messiah would be crushed for our iniquities, his chastisement, would bring us peace (Isaiah 53:5). The covenant of peace the Messiah brings shall endure forever (Isaiah 54:10).

This “peace” which is the blessing brought by the Messiah, and heralded by his ambassadors, is what is announced throughout the gospel of Luke in reference to Jesus. The father of John the Baptist, filled with the Holy Spirit, prophesied that Jesus is bringing the “peace” promised in the Old Testament (Luke 1:67–79). The angels sang on the night of Jesus’ birth that Jesus has brought “on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!” (Luke 2:14). Simeon, filled with the Holy Spirit, declared upon holding Jesus that he now had “peace” for his eyes had looked upon the Savior (Luke 2:29). Jesus regularly told those who trusted in him that they were saved and should “go in peace” (Luke 7:50, 8:48). Jesus wept over Jerusalem’s rejection of himself as Messiah, stating, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace!” (Luke 19:42). When Jesus stood among the twelve after his resurrection he gave them the benediction, “Peace to you” (Luke 24:36). Further, Peter taught Cornelius that God sent this word to Israel, “preaching good news of peace through Jesus Christ” (Acts 10:36). Finally, Paul taught that through faith in Christ “we have peace with God” (Romans 5:1).

Thus, the disciples of Jesus were to enter a house and proclaim the gospel. They were to herald the good news that Jesus is our peace. He is the Messiah. He reconciles us to God. He is the “yes and amen” to the Aaronic benediction. Jesus also taught the disciples that if there is a believer in Jesus, then they are to stay, but if the gospel is rejected, they are to depart. Jesus said this in Luke 10:6, “And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him. But if not, it will return to you.” This POP is better translated “son of peace.” It is a reference to someone to whom the “peace” of the Lord Jesus belongs. In Matthew 13:38 we see a parallel description with the phrase “sons of the kingdom.” The kingdom of God belongs to them.

This understanding of the “son of peace” being a believer in the gospel message is secured by the language of “if they receive you” (Luke 10:8) and “if they do not receive you” (Luke 10:10). “‘Receive’ is used elsewhere with respect to welcoming and receiving God’s word (8:13), Jesus (9:48, 53), Jesus’ followers (vv. 5, 48), and the kingdom of God (18:17).”²⁴ Matthew also employs the language of “whoever receives you receives me” as a reference to those who believe the gospel message about Jesus (Matthew 10:14, 40–41).

How were the disciples to respond to towns who did not “receive them?” Jesus said they were “go into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet we wipe off against you. Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’ I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.” In other words, they were to declare judgment upon that town. The town had rejected the gospel of salvation and needed to be warned that judgment was coming for them. In Luke 9:5 Jesus gave the Twelve the same instruction, “And wherever they do not receive you, when you leave that town shake off the dust from your feet as a testimony against them.” We see Paul follow this instruction after being persecuted and driven out of the area by the Jews in Antioch in Pisidia (Acts 13:51).

Finally, Matthew’s language adds to our understanding of Jesus’ instructions to the Twelve, and the seventy-two, when he recorded Jesus saying, “And whatever town or village you enter, find out who is worthy in it and stay there until you depart. As you enter the house, greet it. And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you (Matthew 10:11–13).” It is our contention that the “worthy” person, and the “worthy” house, is the person, or house, who receives the gospel. It is a synonymous way of referencing the “son of peace.” This is clearly how this term is used throughout Matthew. You are not “worthy” to be a disciple of Jesus if you love this world more than him and refuse to bear your cross (Matthew 10:37–38). Further, those who paid no attention to the invitation to the wedding feast given by the sent servants of the King, in Jesus’ parable of the wedding feast, were not “worthy” for the wedding feast (Matthew 22:1–14).

The phrase “son of peace” is not a description of an unbeliever who has been prepared for the gospel. It is a description of someone who, upon hearing the gospel preached, receives the gospel, and thus “peace” belongs to them. This POP is not someone who will slowly discover the gospel as he leads a Bible study in his home. The POP is not a spiritually interested unbeliever who is hospitable, and who will lead other unbelievers in the process of discovery. The “son of peace” is someone to whom reconciliation with God through Jesus Christ belongs.

What about Acts? Is it correct to say that Cornelius, Lydia, and the Philippian jailer were POPs? No, a cursory reading of those passages (Acts 10 and 16) in their contexts makes it clear that the DMM idea of POP is nowhere to be found. In Acts 10, Peter was sent to Cornelius prophetically as an important development in the revealing of the mystery of Gentile inclusion in the gospel of the Jewish Messiah. This explains Peter’s vision of all things being clean. Further, this is why we see the debates that occur within the church over Gentile inclusion in Acts 11–15. Peter did not lead a Discovery Bible Study in Cornelius’ home, nor did he ask Cornelius for help in facilitating a study. Peter preached the gospel to Cornelius and all present. Cornelius’ only role was as one who was taught. They became believers, received the Holy Spirit, and were baptized. They were then taught for some time. Cornelius was not a generic, spiritually- interested person whom Peter used to gather friends and family for a Bible study facilitated by unbelievers. Cornelius is a Gentile God-fearer who knew the Old Testament and who received the gospel preached to him.

In Acts 16 Paul was sent in a vision to Macedonia. When he arrived in Philippi, he went to the river to look for “diaspora Jews” who might be meeting for worship. Paul met a woman, named Lydia, who believed the gospel Paul preached. The Lord opened her heart to listen to Paul’s sermon. She was then baptized prior to the church being established in her home. This again is not the story of a spiritually-interested person whom Paul used to gather other unbelievers to facilitate a Bible study.

The same holds true for the Philippian jailer in Acts 16. He came to the prison cell of Paul because of the commotion from a supernatural earthquake that threw open the prison doors. He feared for his life that Paul may have escaped. When he discovered Paul was still present he asked how he could be saved. Paul preached the gospel to him. Then they went to his house and Paul taught the word to them and baptized them. The pattern we see in every one of these passages is not the pattern argued for by DMM. In every case, the gospel was preached by the missionary. Those who received the gospel were baptized and instructed by the missionary. There is no evidence of groups of unbelievers meeting in the home of a particularly “spiritually- interested” person, as that unbeliever leads them in a Bible study. Inasmuch as DMM is predicated upon the POP, it is crushed under the weight of its own error in understanding the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles.

‍

This is the second part of a three part series. You can continue reading A Brief Guide to Disciple Making Movements in Part 1 and Part 3, or by downloading the PDF copy at the top of the article.