Talk:Disciple (Christianity)

Untitled
''This page was listed on Votes for deletion in May, 2004. The result of that discussion was to keep the article. For an archive of the discussion, see Talk:Disciple/Delete.''

Old
I've tried to make this article more encyclopedic by clearly deliminating the various uses of the word disciple. I don't see this as an disambiguation page, but I found that structure very useful. --Acjelen 01:25, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah, this really doesn't seem to be a dab page, in my opinion either. Maybe we should remove the template? - grubber 17:45, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

There's no reason to delete it, and expanding on it is a good idea. For instance, a separate extensive definition of "Disciple" as a verb.

Added cleanup tag, removed disambig-cleanup.
I think that this page would work better focusing on the religious connotations and Jesus's disciples, even though this page becomes moderately misnamed then (though the disambig page I just created could then be moved here, and a "disciples of Jesus" page created). The dictionary definition stuff seems somewhat superfluous at the moment. SnowFire 05:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * On second thought, the amount of "disciple" related content that isn't Christianity-related on this page is pretty darn small, which reduces the argument for keeping this page as an encyclopedic overview of Christianity. Perhaps this page should be moved to Disciple (Christianity), and the disambig page I just created should come back here again.  Any thoughts?  SnowFire 13:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow. This article looks a lot better now. Anyway, I figured I'd bring this over here; I removed the following line-


 * This deepest sense of discipleship is espoused by writers such as Lee C. Camp in his book "Mere Discipleship".

This seems a bit hyperbolic, almost like an ad. Mr. Camp only gets around 430 hits on Google, so he doesn't seem that important, even if his book was good? Maybe I'm off, but just saying. SnowFire 00:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The Great Commission
Odd that there is no mention (as of today) of the clause, "and make disciples of every nation" which is part of the Great Commission as recorded in Matthew 28:18-20. DFH 14:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Rectified in the new see also section. DFH 16:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I also made a connection in the discipleship section

Use of the word disciple in the book of Acts
Perhaps it is worth mentioning that the word disciple occurs numerous times in the book of Acts to denote the early followers of Jesus, i. e. Christians. See for example, Acts 11:26, part of which reads, And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. DFH 16:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In my mind, a section covering both the Great Commission and "the disciples" in Acts would benefit this article. -Acjelen 20:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Discipleship Paradigm ?
The exact phrase "Discipleship Paradigm" only had 697 hits in Google. Such a low hit count would make me question whether the term should even be mentioned in this article, especially as no citation was given. DFH 16:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that neither the subsection in which the phrase is mentioned, nor the following subsection meet Wikipedia's NPOV criteria. DFH 16:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have therefore just removed both subsections. For details, look at the article's history. DFH 16:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Love one another
Acjelen, as for the link you reverted back into my edit (perhaps you did this by accident?), "Love your neighbor" is not the same topic as "Love one another". If you want to discuss why you want to replace it, please do so before replacing it again. I removed it from an initial anonymous edit for which there was no discussion of why it was added.
 * Um, Chrismon, I'm not sure what differences you mean between our last two edits. -Acjelen 02:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The four
I've always been reluctant to have this article split the listing of apostles. Nonetheless, the gospels emphasize an initial calling of three to five apostles, so I can see a justification. I would like, however, the treatment to be brief. All of the apostles (and, in fact, all of the named disciples) have their own articles. -Acjelen 02:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Weasel Words
I debated whether to put up a NPOV dispute or a weasel words dispute, but decided that, in my opinion, most of the NPOV issues would be removed along with the weasel words. Things like "...the faith of all modern Christians worldwide." There are a fair amount of these things that I think need to be clarified in this article (ie: ALL Christians? Improbable to the point of untrue. Which ones specifically? Worldwide? Where worldwide?). Thank you Finn zee Fox 04:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll admit that the Discipleship section is too flowery in its language, but are you suggesting that the Disciples are not the forebearers of the rest of Christianity? -Acjelen 18:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

You raise a good question against my wording. I really was just trying to point out the "flowery" language (as you so well put it) and perhaps I used a bad example. However, I do think that it's best to avoid vague, sweeping statements like "all" because I bet you could find at least one branch of Christianity that claims not to identify with the original disciples. Finn zee Fox 06:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you would consider putting up the dispute after discussing it instead of the other way around? Your only claim in its defense is that the words are "flowery", but you give no definition of what that means. One definition I've read of "flowery" is "Full of ornate or grandiloquent expressions; highly embellished: a flowery speech." I have edited, or even authored, a decent portion of the Discipleship section, and while I admit I try my best to give a good, historically hermeneutical description, to give a feel for the interplay of ideas and force that make a disciple different from someone who is not, I do not find terms like "socio-political" do be particularly "grandiloquent". As I read through it now for the first time in a while, I think I could concede that the phrase "the very heart of the ministry of Jesus" is a bit flowery. Changing "heart" to "center" (which I just did) might kill a few flowers :)  Other than that, however, I'll need your help in seeing this section as "flowery". As for Acjelen's comment, I agree with his inference.  In all my reading on historical theology, I have never come across a Christian sect that does not find the disciples as the pioneers of their sect.  Often, many sects (From Catholics and Orthodox to Baptists and even Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses) see themselves as some sort of directly authoritative, spiritual descendants of the original Disciples (particularly the Twelve) as part of their claim to legitimacy.  Chrismon 07:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Something else comes to mind, is the POV claim because the POV is Christian? Do you think it gives a particularly (christian) sectarian POV? I would submit that since this is the "Disciple(Christianity)" page, a Christian POV is appropriate.  If you think it is unduly sectarian, please explain.  In my contributions I tried my best to convey a literary and historical view of the text -- things which, in my studying, I have found to be generally agreed upon by biblical scholars/historians (though, not necesarily theologians). Chrismon 17:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

general information
Again with the picture of white Jesus. *sigh*. But seriously, I'll have to do a bit of looking to see what images can be found to represent this period in history; they all seem so similar and unrealistic based on what we know of the region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.29.113.26 (talk) 03:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm adding material to the lead and body. There's a lot of interesting stuff that can go on this page. It needs some citations, too. Like, where did this list of disciples come from? Leadwind (talk) 04:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Further information that could be added:

Jesus summoned people to discipleship in his earthly ministry. Discipleship with Jesus is marked by specific characteristics.


 * Permanency Unlike rabbinic discipleship in which the disciple could change rabbi without changing orientation of study towards the Law, discipleship with Jesus was possible only with Jesus. Leaving Jesus meant taking a totally different direction.


 * Personal attachment Following Jesus was a matter of getting to know him more and not simply a matter of getting to know about him and his teaching. Jesus was more then a teacher, he did things. The multiplication of the bread, his walking on the water, his healing the sick, and his delivering the people from satanic oppression touched the heart and mind of his disciples and contributed to their building up as disciples. Personal attachment with Jesus is an important mark of Christian discipleship that culminates in Jesus' being the absolute men for all others and offering his life for the ransom of many. So that it is impossible to benefit from discipleship with Jesus without personally being attached not to any particular event of Jesus but to the totality of his personality.


 * Participation in Jesus' charism Seventy-two disciples were sent by Jesus to announce the Good news of the Kingdom of God. He gave them authority to heal the sick and over the evil spirits. The same ministry in which Jesus was engaged, was extended to these seventy two disciples - refer to Luke 10.


 * Participation in Jesus' destiny The kingdom of God proclaimed by Jesus is to be a kingdom enjoyed by his disciples for it is the sheep that belong to him that hear his voice and it is to them that Jesus gives eternal life (ref. John 10, 27). Further, Jesus ascends into heaven to 'prepare a place for his disciples (ref. John 14, 2).

The term Christian denotes discipleship with Christ.

Alan347 (talk) 07:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Disciple (Christianity). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203001244/http://blog.exponential.org/2012/11/warren-on-discipleship/ to http://blog.exponential.org/2012/11/warren-on-discipleship/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150625142206/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19651118_apostolicam-actuositatem_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19651118_apostolicam-actuositatem_en.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111215081327/http://www.christian-discipleship.com:80/christian-discipleship/christian-discipleship-resources.html to http://www.christian-discipleship.com/christian-discipleship/christian-discipleship-resources.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140121043822/http://rlb.org/content/discipleship-movement-india/ to http://rlb.org/content/discipleship-movement-india/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:10, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Undesirables
There is insufficient connection between the people mentioned in this section and the term "disciple" given. Either the "disciple" nature of these people should be more clearly evidenced, or the section should be removed. 144.138.35.48 (talk) 06:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Very few called by name & qualified as disciples
hi. It is worth noting that in the vast majority of cases, the disciples are treted as a group (of 2 or 12), or a mass of people, without naming them specifically. This fact is worth mentioning, with an analysis of its significance. Who knows a reliable source?

I have checked on Biblegateway and searched for 'disciple', so this is OR, but quotable scholars must surely have noticed and discussed the issue. There are 265 hits from the New Testament. The vast majority refers to the disciples w/o naming them, as either The only exceptions are in John (by far the most), Acts (4), and one in Matthew. John is the most generous in this regard. In Acts, all 4 references are to otherwise unknown disciples. Mathew only mentions Joseph of Arimathea explicitly and nominally as a disciple. The Burial of Jesus: Matthew 27:57 — When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who was also a disciple of Jesus. John 19:38 — Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus John 1:35, 40 — The next day John again was standing with two of his disciples... One of the two who heard John speak and followed him was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. John 6:8 — One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother... Acts 9:10 — Now there was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias. Acts 9:36 — ...a disciple whose name was Tabitha, which in Greek is Dorcas. Acts 16:1 — ...Lystra, where there was a disciple named Timothy... Acts 21:16 — ...Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple... John 11:16 — Thomas...said to his fellow disciples... John 18:15 — Simon Peter and another disciple...
 * "my/your/his/the/twelve/two disciples", so in the plural, or as
 * "one disciple" or "the other disciple", so in the singular, but also without a proper name or other identification.
 * Joseph of Arimathea
 * Andrew:
 * Otherwise unknown disciples from Acts:
 * Indirectly: Thomas and Simon Peter
 * Without a name being mentioned

John 9:28 — A Man Born Blind Receives Sight: "You are his disciple...", but it comes as a direct quote of what the Pharisees are calling the healed man, not as what the evangelist sees him to be. John 19:26-27, 20:2, 21:7, 21:20+23 — "the disciple whom he/Jesus loved" Only in the end of the Gospel of John comes an explanation, itself slightly ambiguous, as it is both slightly indirect or possibly added by an editor (it comes at the end of the book, and it can be understood as either a conclusion or explanation to John 21:20-23, which deals with "the disciple whom Jesus loved"; or as a closing word for the entire book), and in the third person, not the first: John 21:24 — This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true. Arminden (talk) 15:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "The disciple whom Jesus loved", apparently John the Evangelist


 * - there's a difference between disciples and apostles - disciples are students or dedicated followers - apostles are authorized to spread the teachings - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 16:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * hi. What does this have to do with anything I wrote? I am talking of the actual text of the NT. The evangelists didn't know the distinction. They probably didn't read the books you did ;) This is anyway completely outside the subject of this section. The point is: what does the Bible say? More exactly: why doesn't the NT usually identify disciples, even the more prominent ones who are carrying entire episodes, by calling them by their name? Btw, all the apostles started off as disciples, some not even of Jesus, but of John. Arminden (talk) 16:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)


 * - more important to Wikipedia than what primary sources, such as the NT, say is what secondary sources say, WP:PSTS - "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources..." - also see [[WP:PRIMARYCARE, WP:SCHOLARSHIP, WP:NOR and other guidelines that cover the use of primary sources - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , really, please read first before writing back. What is the only part of my posting which I highlighted in bold? "Who knows a reliable source?". So no need to comment again and again if it's not to the point. Thanks for considering. Arminden (talk) 13:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * - there's a guideline somewhere, but I can't find it right now, that says something like, "don't expect other editors to do your work for you" - it is up to you to provide reliable secondary sources, as per WP:BURDEN - and please don't tell me when I can or cannot comment - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 14:43, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Does the term μαθητής come from the culture of craftsmen?
A teacher of mine claimed that the Greek word μαθητής, usually translated as "disciple" in English-language bibles, is specifically a word from the culture of skilled craftsmen (those who learned how to do their work by working, and usually living, with a master craftsman for a period of years, such as, in the bible, carpenters and fishermen), and should therefore be translated "apprentice" in preference of any other translation. Also that the word implies someone who is a good bit younger than the "master", usually a person in his teenage years. Can someone elucidate on that, if possible within the article. Thanks! -- 79.217.167.85 (talk) 11:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)