Jesus, Disciple of the Kingdom. Osvaldo D. Vena
is at times blurred, as is the case in Acts 5:3, where lying to the apostles is equated with lying to the Holy Spirit. The twelve apostles are the ones who, together with the elders (15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23; 16:4) and the Holy Spirit, make the big decisions (15:28). The difference between the disciples and the apostles is clear in passages such as Acts 6:1–7, where a number of deacons are chosen by the apostles from amongst the disciples to serve the growing needs of the community.
Another feature of the book of Acts is that it refers to the early movement as “the Way” (9:2; 18:25; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22). This talks about the movement as a people in motion, on their way, following as disciples the teachings of the apostles, those who had witnessed the ministry and the resurrection of Jesus from the dead (cf. Acts 1:22). Unlike them, Paul’s claim to apostleship depended on his having had a vision of the risen Christ. He knew nothing about Jesus’ earthly ministry. He did not witness it, and because of that, his authority was questioned many times; he had to defend himself by saying that he had received his apostleship directly from the Lord, as a revelation, not from any human leader such as Peter or James (cf. Galatians 2). He distinguished himself clearly from the apostles in Jerusalem, and yet he spoke of himself as an apostle, called by God to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. Using the term “disciple” would have amounted to recognizing a link to the earthly followers of Jesus or to the beginning stages of the church, where believers were called by that name. Paul would not have any of that. His preaching had to do with the power of God manifested in Christ’s resurrection. He emphasizes the lordship of Christ, not his teachings. Rather than following the teachings of an earthly Messiah, the believers were to experience the power of the Holy Spirit as it is manifested in the ekklesia. For Paul, Christ was the Son of God, not the Son of Man of the Gospels; he was the Lord of the universe, not the prophet from Galilee. As the Lord, Jesus required unconditional allegiance and obedience, not simply adherence to his teachings. No, Paul could not use the word “disciple” to talk about those who believe in Jesus as the Christ. He used the word “believers,” for that is what they were. Coming as they did from a Gentile background, they lacked the knowledge of the Jewish traditions, which would have qualified them as followers of a Jewish rabbi. They were more accustomed to experiencing the power of the Greco-Roman deities in the liturgical context of the Greek temples. They did not have a doctrine that they could follow, or books with the teachings of the founder that they could read. They came to the temples and engaged in liturgical practices (prayers, sacrifices, etc.) that assured them that the gods’ blessings on their lives would result in good fortune. Paul switched the pagan gods with the Lord Jesus Christ and assured them of much more comprehensive benefits, such as life after death in God’s presence, or being taken up while still living at the Parousia of Jesus Christ from heaven, which would put an end to their suffering. Good fortune was not in Paul’s mind but rather eternal life. What Paul preached was not a way of life, but a way out of a life of enslavement into which humans have been brought by two cosmic powers: death and sin. By sharing in Christ’s death and resurrection through baptism, people were sanctified, becoming members of the body of Christ, empowered by the Holy Spirit with gifts to nurture the body while they waited for the coming of the Lord from heaven. In Paul’s mind, there is no time for forming disciples, only time to snatch people from the fires of hell preparing them for God’s glorious reality which was about to be revealed.
If we take a sample of Paul’s terminology from Romans 16, we see that he refers to people using a variety of terms, but he avoids the word “disciple.” He uses terms of endearment to express how he felt about certain people who were emotionally very close to him: “beloved” (vv. 5, 9, 12), “beloved in the Lord” (v. 8), and “eminent in the Lord” (v. 13). He uses technical terms to refer to some people’s specific function in the church, for example, “deaconess” (v. 1) and “apostles” (v. 7). He uses descriptive terms to talk about people’s relationship to him, whether as an individual: “mother to me” (v. 13), “benefactor/helper” (v. 2) or as an apostle: “fellow workers” (vv. 3, 21), “compatriot” (vv. 7, 11, 21), “fellow prisoners” (v. 7), “fellow worker in Christ” (v. 9), “approved in Christ” (v. 10), and “workers in the Lord” (v. 12). Finally, he uses terminology that refers to people in the ekklesia in a more general way, namely, “sister” (vv. 1, 15), “brethren” (vv. 14, 17, 23), “saints” (v. 2, 15), and “convert” (v. 5).
Perhaps the closest Paul gets to using discipleship language is when he refers to believers as those who are “called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2; Rom 1:7) or “those who are the called” (1 Cor 1:24). Obviously, God is the one who calls (1 Cor 1:1; Rom 1:1; 8:30), but whereas God called him to be an apostle, God called the believers to be saints or to be part of “the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9). There is here a hierarchical difference not present in the Gospels, except perhaps in the distinction between the Twelve and the other disciples or the crowd. Inasmuch as he has been given a special revelation that made him an apostle to the Gentiles, Paul distances himself from the rest of the believers. It is clear that, even though there are other apostles (cf. Rom 16:7; 1 Cor 4:9; 9:5; 12:28; 15:7, 9; Gal 1:17, 19), there is only one apostle to the Gentiles, Paul himself.
The expression “apostle” may of itself have a hierarchical connotation not conveyed by the term “disciple.” Paul may have wanted to use it precisely because of that. In other words, Paul may have been intentionally hierarchical, reproducing in his letters a system of dominance and obedience that replaced the Roman kyrios with Jesus the kyrios.65 In the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, W. Bauer says that “apostle” was used in classical Greek and later writings for a naval expedition and its commander, or for a ship ready for departure, and that in isolated cases, it meant ambassador, delegate, and messenger.66 This last meaning is the primary usage of the term in the NT, where it is applied primarily to “a group of highly honored believers, who had a special function.”67 Paul, as a ship ready to depart in search of new regions to colonize, or new cities in which to sell merchandise, understood himself as the apostle to the Gentiles, God’s messenger of good news—the gospel, but not any gospel, rather Paul’s version of the gospel (cf. Rom 2:16; 16:25)—to the world. Yes, “apostle” is the term he needed to use, not “disciple,” which conveys the idea of pupil and apprentice.68 Even though, according to Luke, Paul the Pharisee was a disciple of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), Paul the missionary to the Gentiles received the gospel from no one. He received it from God, through a direct revelation. He did not have to consult with any human being; he did not go to Jerusalem to receive it from James and the other apostles. And when Paul finally went to Jerusalem, he said that “those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders . . . contributed nothing to me” (Gal 2:6).
We conclude then by saying that the discipleship terminology is missing in Paul’s letters, because it did not fit his understanding of both the kairos he thought he and his communities were living in and the kyrios he was proclaiming. He did not see much time left for the world, for this was the moment when God’s final word, spoken in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, was about to be fully realized at the Parousia (cf. Rom 13:11–12). Disciples were not what the world needed, but apostles and believers. Apostles were sent by God. They did not follow any earthly teacher. Since in his view, Jesus had become the Lord (kyrios) of the universe, one much more powerful than the one of the present day, Caesar, he did not necessitate disciples to propagate any of his teachings. In fact, his teaching were not the focus of Paul’s gospel but, as he himself states it, his death and resurrection as the power of God for salvation for everyone who enters in a trusting relationship with God through Christ (Rom 1:16–17). And Paul saw himself as a vital instrument in that economy. His role in the divine plan of salvation was eschatological, for it was taking place at the end times, but also because in many ways, Paul came to fulfill the role of the eschatological Elijah of Malachi 4:5–6. 69
2. There are numerous references to disciples in the Synoptic Gospels and John.
From a literary and theological perspective, one might say that the higher the Christology of a given document, the lesser the need for discipleship terminology. Is this true? Well, Paul’s Christology is higher than that of the Synoptic Gospels. Therefore, he does not use discipleship terminology. Paul uses “apostle,” which is “sent” terminology. Sent by whom? By God, obviously.
On the other hand, disciples are sent by