It's not pulling from front; it's walking alongside. |
So has anyone realized that the term "follow-up" was non-existent throughout the 66 books in the bible? Much like the term "apostle" was missing in the Old Testament, "follow-up" has only been put into the frame of Christian ways of doing church quite recently.
In the Old Testament, prophets took up important roles in advising the kings, and in the New Testament, the kings became figurehead. The last addressed prophet in the likes of John the Baptist was more persecuted than heeded. So came the apostles. In 1 Corinthians, apostles were ranked first, followed by the prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists. Of course I don't have much basis for this hypothesis, except my very brief understanding of the contexts.
Likewise, follow-up is put in place with the end goal of achieving discipleship. That, is a familiar term, and today they have become somewhat of an unhealthy synonyms.
Follow-up is a secular term in the mold of a task: When I say I want to follow up on you, it's akin to saying that now we have gotten over the first phase, let's get on to the next phase. Where else do we hear this term most commonly? Right, insurance agent- now that you have filled up the survey for me, I will follow up on you.
On the other hand, discipleship comes in the form of a relationship. It's genuine investment into the lives of the disciple such that both grow in their relationship with Christ in an intimate way. It goes beyond bible studies but it focuses on doing lives together. It means becoming vulnerable with each other, with the disciple submitting and trusting the discipler, and the discipler honoring and guiding the disciple.
It's ok to actually mean discipleship when we say follow up, but that must be done in the assurance that the heart of discipleship is caught.
No comments:
Post a Comment