Matthew 28:16-20, author’s translation
“But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. And when they saw Him, they worshipped [Him]; but some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go, therefore, and make disciples in all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I, Myself, have commanded you; and remember, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’”
Introduction
A portion of Matthew’s report from the mountaintop has become known throughout recent church history as the Great Commission. To help grasp the overwhelming church-wide emphasis placed present day on this piece of scripture, one needs only to reflect on the contemporary sentiments of a renowned Bible expositor and pastor. He holds the Great Commission is the focal point of all scripture. Further, he goes on to lament the misunderstanding of God’s people about the Great Commission’s significance, and their unwillingness to fulfill it. He concludes the unfulfilled Great Commission is the only reason the church remains on earth.
One reason for church saints’ misunderstanding and confusion about the critical importance God allegedly places on the Great Commission is that Jesus’ commands to “Go . . . and make disciples . . .” appear only in one place in the entire New Testament—at the very end of Matthew’s gospel. For example, the epistles are completely silent about Jesus’ injunction.
One might conjecture that such an important command would be repeated often, or at least alluded to, in the rest of the New Testament. Some with missionary fervor have noticed this anomaly of silence, and have speculated that the Great Commission’s great significance has been propagated throughout the ages by oral tradition, or by implication from the rest of scripture rather than by direct apostolic reference. Therefore, the Lord did not deem it necessary to have His spokesmen mention the Great Commission again.
However, an explanation other than oral tradition and implication may account for the Commission’s solitary mention by Matthew. Jesus’ disciples understood from their mountaintop experience that His commands did not apply to them. Nor did it apply to the church formed some weeks later at Pentecost.
Seven issues need to be resolved before one can accurately comprehend Jesus’ Commission-encapsulated instructions to His disciples. Resolution of these seven issues clearly presents a scriptural understanding for the New Testament’s silence about the Great Commission in letters to local churches and their leaders, as well as for the Commission’s dormancy in saints’ lives. The seven issues are: Jesus’ ‘heads-up,’ the disciples’ doubt, disciple making, disciple makers’ curricula, baptism and the baptismal formula, Jesus’ presence at the age’s end, and Paul’s missionary endeavors.
A “Heads-Up” for Jesus’ Disciples
Just weeks before Jesus gave His post-resurrection Great Commission in Galilee, He sat on the Mount of Olives across from the temple and delivered what has become known as The Olivet Discourse. The discourse may be divided into two sections. The first section was His prophecy about what would take place from the time of His death and resurrection to the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem. The second section was His prophecy related to events of the Tribulation that would take place between the rapture of the church and His Second Coming. The Great Commission passage is actually a parallel passage, but in more detail, to Jesus’ statement about the kingdom gospel and all nations in His Olivet Discourse.
On the Mount of Olives, Jesus gave His disciples a one-sentence ‘heads-up’ on what would take place during the period from the church’s rapture to His Second Coming. He said, “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations, and then the end shall come”—the end being a permanent halt to gentiles trampling Jerusalem underfoot terminated by Jesus’ return. Without question, preaching the kingdom gospel to all the nations was addressed in further detail through the Great Commission. So the Commission relates to a generation that will see the Second Coming, and not to the immediate generation of Jesus’ disciples in Galilee.
The Disciples’ Doubt
At Jesus’ clear and direct instructions following His resurrection, eleven disciples of the original twelve headed to Galilee, to a particular mountain designated by the Lord. Upon their arrival, Jesus appeared on the mountain. All eleven disciples worshipped Him as King even though some of the eleven were doubtful.
Some commentators believe that all the eleven disciples were doubtful. However, skilled, articulate, and knowledgeable grammarians point out from word use that only a portion of the eleven disciples was doubtful. Further, most English translations read, “some doubted.” The question then arises, “About what, exactly, were some doubtful?”
Doubt had run rampant among most of Jesus’ disciples after His crucifixion. On the third day following His death, the news of His resurrection spread haphazardly among His followers. At least one of the disciples was so skeptical that he earned for himself the nickname ‘doubting Thomas’ because of skepticism and doubt upon hearing the resurrection news. But Jesus had proceeded to effectively resolve all doubts in dramatic and thorough fashion so that, when the disciples set off for Galilee per His command, uncertainty about the reality of His life beyond the grave had been removed beyond doubt. Yet, when some saw Him on the mountain, they were doubtful, but not about His resurrection.
To understand the cause of their doubt, we recall that the Lord Jesus entrusted three of His disciples with a special vision—a vision that He ordered them not to communicate to the others until after “the Son of Man had risen from the dead.” Those three disciples followed Jesus’ orders to the letter.
But after Jesus’ resurrection—and probably on the way from Jerusalem to the Galilean mountain—the three, no doubt, eagerly and openly discussed with the other eight their experience of something extraordinary that had happened previously on a particular mountain quite possibly located in Galilee—that “holy mountain,” as Peter referred to it. Peter, James, and John had witnessed “the Son of Man coming in His kingdom,” something referred to as the Transfiguration. So it’s possible the three’s account met with doubts.
Peter likely addressed skeptical responses to the Transfiguration report. He said, “We [Jews] have an altogether reliable thing—the prophetic word.” In other words, if anyone doubts our eyewitness accounts of what took place on that holy mountain, he can consult God’s word for reassurance. The ‘prophetic word’ likely referred to Daniel’s prophetic vision wherein he saw one like a son of man coming up to God and receiving from Him dominion and glory as well as a universal and everlasting kingdom.
Peter concluded Jesus was the Son of Man in Daniel’s vision Who received the kingdom from God. The Transfiguration experience eliminated any doubt from Peter’s mind that Jesus was King. Since He was also Israel’s Messiah, the kingdom Jesus received is sometimes called the Messianic Kingdom.
Remember, Elijah was present on the Mount of Transfiguration. God had promised, according to Malachi’s prophecy, to send Elijah as a missionary and herald to the nation Israel before the King inaugurated the kingdom. And Moses was also present on that holy mountain, the one born outside the land that God had sent to bring His people out of Egypt (a pseudo-diaspora) and into the land He had promised to the fathers. Peter’s reaction to the vision shows all doubts were dispelled about who was King on that mountain, so he offered to build three Sukkot booths—a certain indication that he, as a Jew, expected the King to immediately launch His kingdom. So perhaps Moses and Elijah exemplify Jewish activity leading up to His return as King.
Now, back to the mountain in Galilee where the group of eleven was then standing—perhaps the very mountain where the Transfiguration had taken place (some believe Mt. Tabor in Galilee was where the Transfiguration took place). The Transfiguration, either by personal experience or by a doubt-free acceptance of the recent eyewitnesses’ reports, naturally divided the group of eleven in two: those who had no doubt Jesus was King, and those who found it difficult to accept what other eyes had seen, and other ears had heard—like Thomas with Jesus’ resurrection. Since the three eyewitnesses unreservedly worshipped the King on the Galilean mountaintop, based on their prior personal experience and subsequent understanding, the others instinctively followed the trio’s lead. But some had nagging doubts.
Not having the benefit of seeing the vision firsthand, nor hearing the voice of the Majestic Glory announcing His pleasure with His beloved Son, some of the disciples very likely had doubts about the kingdom’s status. The doubts probably went something like this: “If He is coming in His kingdom, why are we worshipping up on this mountain in Galilee instead of at post-coronation festivities in Jerusalem?”
To assuage their doubts on that Galilean mountain, and to reassure them that kingdom matters were going along according to God’s will, “Jesus came up and spoke to them [the doubters], saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.’” Jesus thereby asserted that He was indeed the “Son of Man” in the prophet Daniel’s vision, Who, “. . . came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion . . . and a kingdom . . .” Jesus’ reassurances for the doubters amounted to Him saying, ‘My Father made Me permanent King of everything; it’s OK to believe the Transfiguration accounts despite the Jerusalem leaders demanding, and being granted, My crucifixion.’
Our analysis has suggested that those doubts of some of Jesus’ disciples arose because, even though the King was present, the anticipated kingdom was nowhere to be seen in a form that corresponded to revelations made by Israel’s prophets. Nevertheless, they worshipped Him, even in the face of their doubts. Against that Messianic Kingdom backdrop, and in accordance with His position as King, Jesus issued The Great Commission.
In such a context, the Great Commission’s goal would be to fill the ranks of gentile citizens in the Messianic Kingdom as well as the ranks of Jewish citizens from both the nation, and the Diaspora—hence the command to go into all nations. The word ‘Diaspora’ refers to Jews living in gentile nations.
One further point is worthy of note. During Jesus’ post-resurrection ministry, the major topic of discussion with His disciples was the kingdom.
Prophetical Significance of the Galilean Mountain
In his superb book about the sequence of prophetic events, Dr. Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum discusses the significance of the mountains of Israel mentioned in Ezekiel 39:1-4 (Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. The Footsteps of the Messiah. Tustin, CA: Ariel Ministries Press, 1983, p. 75). Ezekiel revealed an invasion of Israel by a Russian coalition from the north. In that revelation, God declared directly to the invading armies that, “You shall fall on the mountains of Israel . . .” (Ezek. 39:4).
Fruchtenbaum points out that the mountains of Israel “extend the length of the center of the country beginning at the southern point in the Valley of Jezreel at the town of Jenin in Galilee (emphasis mine) . . .” (op. cit., p. 75). Further, Fruchtenbaum notes that until the Six Day War of 1967, “all of the mountains of Israel, except for a small corridor of West Jerusalem, were entirely in the hands of the Jordanian Arabs,” concluding the stage has now been set for the prophecy’s fulfillment (op. cit., p. 75).
A significant event will then happen upon those mountains. God will make known His holy name (Yahweh) in the midst of His people Israel, and the nations will know that He is the Lord, the Holy One in Israel (Ezek. 39:7). Could it be that Jesus’ post-resurrection commission to the eleven—on the designated mountain in Galilee—to go into all the nations and make disciples was based upon Ezekiel’s prophecy, and intended for a future generation?
Disciple Making
Here is an interesting New Testament statistic: the words disciple/disciples are found 224 times in the gospels, 30 times in Acts, and 0 times in the epistles and Revelation. What might one discover from this precipitous drop-off in word usage as the chronology in the New Testament progressed? One might say that emphasis on disciple making decreased dramatically as the nature of the church was revealed.
To elaborate on this point, the word ‘disciple’ identified an individual who assumed the long-term responsibility of learning from a specific teacher. In the gospels, John the Baptist had disciples. Jesus was addressed by the title, ‘Rabboni,’ which meant ‘teacher.’ Hence, Jesus had identifiable students who became known as His disciples. Why, even Moses had disciples! Since John the Baptist had disciples, and Jesus had disciples, at least two distinct disciple groups sprouted, and were identified by their respective teachers. After Jesus departed, who would assume His role as ‘Teacher?’
The apostle John likely pointed to the Teacher Who would take Jesus’ place. John informed his local church audience, “As for you, the anointing [the Holy Spirit] which you received from Him [Jesus] abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you . . .” So while teachers existed in the churches, the Spirit likely replaced Jesus in His role of personal Teacher. In the epistolary literature, therefore, no one was ever instructed to ‘make disciples’ because all had the indwelling Holy Spirit’s personal ministry.
As the church’s nature began to unfold after Jesus’ departure, it became apparent that no distinction was to exist among church disciples (even though the church was omni-national) as had been experienced between Jesus’ disciples and John’s disciples. In fact, the apostle Paul admonished the Corinthians because each one was saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I am of Apollos,” and “I am of Cephas,” and “I am of Christ.” Such Corinthian claims may well have highlighted the practice of claiming a certain superiority by virtue of the one with whom he identified himself in the hierarchy of personal teachers—Christ being the preeminent one.
Paul’s argument against this practice was conveyed by the simple question, “Has Christ been divided?” The church became a unified entity wherein no one stood above another, or even claimed self-aggrandizing distinctions. Hence, the word ‘disciple’ may have lost relevancy in the church and stopped being used. In place of ‘disciples,’ the terms ‘brethren’ and ‘saints’ came into vogue. The plethora of traveling church teachers may also have resulted in fewer saints assuming the responsibility of learning from the necessarily abbreviated ministry of a specific traveling teacher, and so they were no longer called disciples. Finally, as a corpus of letters from itinerant teachers accumulated in, and were circulated among, local churches; preachers using those epistolary resources replaced disciple makers.
Some wish to infer that the other gospel writers alluded to Jesus’ sentiments given to the eleven on the mountain in Galilee. However, inspection of what the other gospel writers said shows that not even one echoed Jesus’ specific instructions to the eleven.
The foregoing review suggests that Jesus’ command, “to make disciples in all nations,” may not have been directed to the eleven disciples of His generation, but perhaps to a future generation. That may explain why the words ‘preach,’ ‘proclaim,’ and ‘witness’ were popular among those of Jesus’ generation when referring to the ministry. Not one of the gospel writers, or any of the epistle authors, repeated Jesus’ command to “make disciples.” Matthew is the only one who records this particular command because his gospel was written to Jews to explain the status of the kingdom—both present and the future.
For an example in the future, Jews in the land during Elijah’s ministry will likely become Elijah’s disciples, and Jews in the Diaspora (as well as gentiles) will probably be discipled by some of the 144,000 ‘sealed’ Jews referred to in Revelation.
The Disciple Makers’ Curricula
Per instructions, disciple making was to begin with baptism upon belief in the gospel. The gospel would highlight the nearness of the kingdom of God, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins was obligatory for kingdom citizenship. The Baptist had proclaimed this gospel. Jesus, Himself, emphatically echoed the Baptist’s gospel of the kingdom from the outset of His ministry until the Pharisees blasphemed the Holy Spirit. This kingdom gospel may be differentiated from the church gospel. The kingdom gospel addressed national Israel as separate from all other nations as well as individual citizens from those national entities, while the church gospel addressed people from all nations, including some from Israel, as a single entity.
Matthew made it abundantly clear by his word choice that the content of what the disciple makers were to teach was everything Jesus Himself had commanded the eleven disciples. Emphasis on the commands that Jesus alone had taught the eleven limited the teaching curricula of His Commission. For example, rabbinic traditions alluded to in the gospels would not be taught to disciples, nor would Pharisaic practices. Jesus’ teachings from the Sermon on the Mount would be especially pertinent in the curricula of kingdom disciples. But probably church doctrine, briefly sketched in the gospels and explicitly developed in the epistles, would be marginalized. Because of similarity to Daniel’s prophecies, the material in The Revelation of Jesus Christ would also be properly included in the content of teaching material for disciples of the tribulation generation—that generation living between the church’s rapture and the Lord’s second coming.
From our vantage point of a completed canon, we can clearly discern that Jesus’ instructions about teaching content in fulfilling the Great Commission—content limited to what He personally had commanded during His earthly ministry—could not logically apply to the church. For example, Jesus revealed to Paul several unique details of church doctrine not included in His earthly-ministry commands. These details were later recorded in the apostle’s epistles, and would prove essential to spiritual growth and maturity of Jesus’ body—the church—but would have little value to tribulation disciples.
Baptism and the Baptismal Formula
It might be helpful to review the practice of baptism. John’s baptism was intended to mark publicly the moment when a Jew of the believing remnant removed himself from that generation of Jewish nationals facing judgment. This became known as John’s baptism. Following Pentecost, the believing Jewish remnant was baptized in Jesus’ name to identify Jews in the church as distinct from Jews in the rest of Israel. Gentile converts were immediately baptized in Jesus’ name in public recognition that they did not have to become proselytes to Judaism to become part of the church.
Jesus’ Great Commission instructed that disciples be baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Yet one of the more tantalizing facts of the New Testament is that there is no record of anyone ever being baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit! On the day of Pentecost, Peter commanded that those baptized with the Holy Spirit be baptized in the name of Jesus. The same name of Jesus was used for the believing Samaritans’ baptism, as it was for the baptism of Cornelius and those gentiles assembled at his house.
One might note that the Great Commission instructed baptism in the name of the Deity for those disciples that were in nations outside Israel. Thus, a more rigorous test of the correct baptismal formula for the church might be converts made beyond Israel’s borders. And we have just such a test case. In Ephesus—well beyond Israel’s boundaries—the apostle Paul found about twelve men who were John the Baptist’s disciples. After Paul instructed them about Jesus, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, not the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, it is likely they no longer retained the sobriquet of John the Baptist’s disciples.
It is unequivocal that Peter, one of the very disciples who heard firsthand Jesus’ Great Commission, consistently disregarded Jesus’ commandment, as did Paul, the apostle sent by Jesus to the gentiles (e.g., Ephesus). What might account for this blatant and consistent violation of Jesus’ instructions? Close scrutiny of the baptism formula itself may help resolve the apparent disregard for our Lord’s commandment.
Let’s start by asking the question, “What is the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit?” The description, “the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,” is not a proper name but a description of the Deity’s fullness. This is somewhat analogous to the use of the name ‘Pharaoh’ for Amenhotep II of Exodus fame; ‘Pharaoh’ is not a proper name, but likely a title for Egyptian rulers. The Exodus monarch’s proper name was actually Amenhotep II. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit might function as the Deity’s full title.
So what is the proper name of Israel’s Deity? The answer to this question takes us back to Moses and the burning bush. Most are familiar with the story. The angel of the Lord (probably the pre-incarnate Christ) appeared to Moses in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush. The Lord identified Himself to Moses and eventually said, “. . . I will send you to Pharaoh [ruler of the gentile nation Egypt] so that you may bring My people, the sons of Israel, out of Egypt.”
Anticipating His peoples’ response, Moses posed the scenario: “Behold, I am going to the sons of Israel, and I will say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you.’ Now they may say to me, ‘What is His name?’ What shall I say to them?” God responded with His proper name: “I AM WHO I AM.” God said, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM’ (‘Yahweh’ in Hebrew) has sent me to you.” Then God made clear the implications of His name: “This is my name forever, and this is my memorial-name to all generations [of the sons of Israel].” Years later, Moses extolled God, identifying that ‘I AM’ is His name.
Jesus instructed that disciples from the nations should be baptized in the Deity’s name—i.e., ‘Yahweh.’ The disciples of Jesus’ generation were quite aware of the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit. But their inclination not to use the name Yahweh when baptizing church saints likely resulted from their realization that ‘Yahweh’ was the name of Israel’s God, while ‘Jesus’ was the name of the church’s “God and Savior.” (The Son and the Father are One, but have different proper names.) The disciples of Jesus’ generation were preaching or proclaiming the church gospel; a future generation of His servants would be making Jewish and gentile disciples for Israel’s worldwide Messianic Kingdom—hence baptism would be in the proper name of Israel’s God. Baptism in the kingdom would be in God’s name (Israel’s deity) rather than in Jesus’ name, which was reserved for the single, but omni-national entity—the church.
For example, Peter—who certainly was present on the mountain in Galilee—had to be commissioned by a vision plus God’s Spirit to take the gospel to the gentile Cornelius. When initially facing Cornelius and his household, Peter related how inappropriate it was for him, a Jew, to be in a gentile house. Had Peter understood Jesus’ instructions on the mountain in Galilee as applying to himself, he would certainly have willingly and enthusiastically embraced the idea of making Cornelius a disciple. However, Peter tarried only a few days with Cornelius. Not only did he not spend enough time to make Cornelius a disciple, he ordered Cornelius be baptized in Jesus’ name and not in the name Jesus had instructed on the mountain in Galilee. Peter’s behavior with Cornelius clearly indicates Peter rightly understood the Great Commission was intended for another generation of Jews and not his generation.
Of course, if the church replaced Israel–as some in the early church believed–then the appropriate baptismal formula would be in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (a preterist’s perspective). This historical fact may help explain the popularity of the Father-Son-Holy Spirit baptismal formula. However, if nation Israel still has a future (the futurist’s viewpoint), then baptism into the church would be in Jesus’ name.
Jesus’ Presence And The End Of The Age
To encourage the disciples who would execute the Great Commission, Jesus instructed them to remember His ever-present presence, “even to the end of the age.” Such a promise may be reminiscent of the Lord’s encouragement to Moses, “Certainly I will be with you . . .” in carrying out his commission in a gentile nation—hence Jesus’ instructions to “remember.” The phrase, “end of the age,” likely refers to fulfillment of the times of the gentiles, and is nearly co-terminal with the end of the Great Tribulation and second coming.
Jesus taught in the ‘Olivet Discourse’ that His second coming would occur when “all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.” It is the ‘end’ Jesus mentioned earlier in the same discourse when He said, “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” Jesus’ prophecy about the gospel and its relationship to the end of the age is likely a seminal summary of His detailed commands later given the disciples atop the mountain in Galilee.
When the kingdom is restored to Israel before the tribulation, the spiritual revival and salvation of Israel as a nation will begin and God’s servant, Israel, will be responsible for making Jewish and gentile converts who will become citizens in the pending Messianic Kingdom. As we know, reassurance of the Lord’s protective presence for those disciples fulfilling the Great Commission will be critically important because of the terrible and devastating resistance mounted against their efforts by an earthbound Satan, the beast, and the false prophet as prophesized in Revelation.
Remember, the kingdom will be restored to Israel when the Lord God fulfills His promise reported by Ezekiel: “My holy name [I AM] I will make known in the midst of My people Israel; and I will not let My holy name [I AM] be profaned anymore.” The initiation of Israel’s national conversion will occur immediately upon the church’s removal from earth because two administrative entities cannot have stewardship of God’s kingdom simultaneously—only sequentially, and without any hiatus. Making disciples of all nations “even to the end of the age” would be nonsensical if applied to the church because the church will not be present on the earth in that time period.
The Apostle Paul—Missionary to the Gentiles
Approximately a dozen-and-a-half years after the Great Commission was given, Jesus gave a specific task to His apostle Paul to make disciples in the gentiles nations of Asia Minor, Greece, Europe, and possibly Spain. Was Jesus’ commission to Paul necessary because His eleven disciples had failed to obey His Great Commission?
The answer is that the Great Commission was never intended for those eleven disciples, but rather for a future generation of Jews who would be spiritually awakened almost simultaneously with the rapture. The reason one can be assured that Paul was not Jesus’ substitute for the disobedient eleven is that Paul claimed God had set him apart from his mother’s womb for preaching Jesus among the gentiles. Of course, such a claim by Paul meant that at the time the Great Commission was given, God was at work preparing a contemporary of His Son who would become His missionary to the world.
Less than ten years into his missionary work, the apostle asserted that the gospel had successfully been made known to all the nations. The task had been completed for both the Jews in the Diaspora and for the gentiles. Paul and others had fulfilled the intent expressed in the Great Commission in their generation.
Summary and Conclusions
- Before Jesus’ death and resurrection, our Lord gave His disciples instruction about the Tribulation that included the preaching of the kingdom gospel to all nations thus pinpointing activation of the Great Commission.
- At the promulgation of the Great Commission, some disciples doubted Jesus’ God-given supremacy because some did not have the benefit of being eyewitnesses to His Transfiguration. Jesus’ reassured the doubtful by verbally asserting His God-given universal authority.
- Disciple making is a Messianic Kingdom convention and not a church practice.
- Baptizing disciples according to the Great Commission is to be in Yahweh’s name, not Jesus’ name.
- Teaching of disciples is organized around Jesus’ personal commands made during his earthly ministry, and does not extend to rabbinic, Pharisaic, or church doctrines.
- Jesus will accompany the besieged Jewish disciple makers from the rapture to the end of the Great Tribulation.
- God prepared and commissioned the apostle Paul to make disciples in all nations, a task never intended for the original eleven or the church. Paul successfully completed his commission.
The astounding conclusion to which these analyses point is that Jesus addressed the Great Commission to disciples not of His generation. He had spoken in similar fashion almost three weeks earlier. On the Mount of Olives during His final week, Jesus spoke directly to four of His disciples, yet actually addressed a future generation who would be living in the Great Tribulation. He did this without any signal, except context, indicating a switch in those addressed as subjects. Thus, Jesus addressed the eleven on the Galilean mountain, speaking prophetically in reference to a future Jewish generation.
The Great Commission is for Jews of the tribulation generation. The Great Commission does not apply to the church. Corroborating this conclusion is the fact that the apostle Paul wrote on three different occasions that the gospel had been made known to all the nations—even “to all creation under heaven.” Paul maintained the commandment to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ had been fulfilled during the apostolic era, as early as 57 A.D., roughly some two decades after his conversion but well within his lifetime. The apostolic era ended almost two millennia before the end of the age will end. Therefore, even proclaiming worldwide the gospel of Jesus Christ could not possibly pertain to the contemporary church. Because of the terminus ad quem, the Great Commission pertains to a period yet future, and is intended to recruit and develop qualified citizens for the Messianic Kingdom: first, Jews in Israel and of the Diaspora, and then gentiles.
The Great Commission was never repeated as a command to local churches in any of the epistles. This anomaly was not because the commandment was promoted by oral tradition or implication from scripture, as some have speculated, but because Jesus’ Jewish disciples understood His commands on the Galilean mountain did not apply to them or His church.
Although the disciples’ doubt about Jesus’ identity as King had been alleviated on the mountain in Galilee, the kingdom’s status was still at issue in the disciples’ minds. Moments before Jesus’ ascension, Luke noted His disciples asked, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” Jesus’ response amounted to keeping them in the dark, strongly indicating other matters were at hand—matters more timely, pertinent, and pressing than fulfilling the Great Commission. Jesus’ response probably confirmed the disciples’ suspicion that the Great Commission did not apply to them.
Understanding that the Great Commission applies to a post-church generation resolves Jesus’ apparent conflict between His restriction about teaching church doctrine, and His disciples John and Peter doing just that in their generation. As the prophet Daniel was informed, “knowledge will increase” in the tribulation generation. The knowledge phenomenon likely occurs because Jewish disciple makers come to believe the New Testament is indeed joined to the Old as the very Word of God. However, some of the New Testament is relevant only to church matters and may, therefore, be disregarded in teaching tribulation disciples.
Making disciples during the tribulation answers the problem of creating disunity in the church because the church will have been completed by the rapture before tribulation teaching begins. Tribulation disciples will have Jewish teachers and maintain their distinction as separately discipled groups—unlike the distinction-less members of the ‘new man’ known as the church. Gentiles with Jewish teachers will be a likely reality as pictured by Zechariah, “In those days, ten men from all the nations will grasp the garment of a Jew, saying, ‘Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.’”
Would-be disciples will be taught that the Messianic Kingdom is about to be reality, and that unless their righteousness exceeds that of the Hassidic Jews’ righteousness, they cannot enter the kingdom. Belief on Jesus for forgiveness of sins will be obligatory for both Jewish and gentile citizenship. Teaching the Talmud will be irrelevant because Jesus had not taught the then nonexistent Talmud to His disciples.
The explanation of the baptismal formula has become clear—a clarity Peter and Paul would have recognized immediately. The generation of Jews coming out of Egypt had been baptized into the name of their great teacher, Moses; but Moses’ name was far too parochial for the Great Commission. Another formula was required to focus on both national Israel and on the forthcoming nationally-inclusive kingdom. That formula would be the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit in contradistinction to the end-of-the-age worldwide kingdom of the unholy trio: Satan, the beast, and the false prophet. The apostle Paul knew the Great Commission did not apply to the church, for he stated to the Corinthians, “Christ did not send me to baptize . . .” Such an assertion by saint Paul could only be true if he were not commissioned under the Great Commission. Thus, Peter and Paul never violated the Lord’s baptismal instruction.
Paul was God’s agent in spreading the gospel of Jesus to gentiles as well as Diasporal Jews in all the nations. He stated repeatedly that the task had been effectively completed. The apostle’s words should effectively reduce the mania of modern mission.
What difference do these conclusions make for the contemporary local evangelical church? After all, the Lord has used modern missions as a conduit for some into His church. The difference is this: irrespective of what local churches and mission agencies propound, missions is not presently the central mission of the people of God. Love from a pure heart, pleasing God in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God are closer to the church’s central mission. Modern mission mania is perhaps a diabolical scheme to distract God’s children from pursuing holiness.
The enormous expenditure of local church resources in funds and prayers is currently being misdirected because of the myth of modern missions. Individuals from local congregations need not feel guilty because they remain at home leading a quiet life, attending to their own business, and working with their hands as the apostle Paul commanded the local church of the Thessalonians. A caveat: of course, if, while the Jewish and gentile elders of a local church are ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit says, “Set apart for Me elder (insert his name) for the work to which I have called him,” then by all means, “Go!” Finally, an elite class of saints known as missionaries who expect, and enjoy, preference in allocation of local church assets was never in view in the Lord’s plan for His church.