The Great Commission is not so great

As a reference, here's the passage from Matthew 28 I am referring to:

Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

I've come to believe that perhaps this passage we Christians call the Great Commission is not so great for those of us trying to find a way in Christianity in 2010.

First off, let me say that I don't happen to believe that Jesus actually said this. I believe it was a later addition by whatever individual or set of individuals wrote what is now called the book of Matthew. At the time this was most likely written, these writers and prophets were shepherding a growing movement within Judaism and had recently witnessed the destruction of the temple. Given this context, the Great Commission can make some sense.

Here in 2010 -- some 2000 years later -- many the Christians continue to refer to this passage as something akin to a mission statement for the church, the effect of which has been profound. It is this passage that at least partially underlies the drive for new members, our evangelistic nature, and has been used to excuse and justify countless acts of imperialism and self-righteousness.

Seriously...to my ears the idea of 'making disciples of all nations' and 'teaching them to obey' is downright imperialistic and offensive. I reject this as a mission statement. I reject this even as an integral part of the Christian faith. 

Gaining new members or disciples cannot be an end unto itself. Again, I ask why would someone want to join a movement based on getting new members to join the movement. It's shallow or perhaps even hollow and extraordinarily self-referential. The beauty of living in the information age is that we know we have choices and are no longer bound to any set of beliefs out of duty or tradition. While we individually benefit from this freedom, Christianity is suffering.

Here's the interesting thing, there's no evidence that Jesus, himself, lived his life in this manner. As my brilliant friend, Tom, pointed out, we have no record of Jesus baptizing anyone. Nor do we have any record of Jesus being particularly commanding outside of "love the lord your G-d with all your heard and mind and love your neighbor as yourself." As people who follow G-d in the way of Jesus, how does it make sense for us to be engaging behaviors Jesus didn't himself undertake.

If Christianity is going to reform, it has got to happen with the understanding that we must have a renewed sense of how our language, our Scriptures, our behaviors - the very particularity of our belief - creates tensions in us as members of a pluralistic society. And it must give us opportunities to develop ways of knowing within ourselves how to navigate in this culture without betraying our Christian particularity OR our pluralistic sensibilities. If you look at the life Jesus lived I believe you will find a beautiful example of an individual who found a way to navigate a very complex and diverse society with profound meaning. 

I don't much believe Christianity needs a mission statement however this passage from Isaiah 61/Luke 4 has always resonated with my as both lyrical and deeply personally meaningful:

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me: he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and release to the prisoners; to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.

Amen.

Comments

[Rachel]

Amen.

[Ken Howard]

Hi Wendy,
While I agree that the Church's interpretation of passages like these has been imperialistic and oppressive, I'm not sure this particular passage is. After all, Jesus could have used the Greek term for "religious converts" here, but instead used the term which meant "learners." And the only commandment he gave was to love God and love your neighbor. If that is what he is asking his "learners" to teach, it is not so imperialistic, challenging perhaps, but not imperialistic.