Customer Reviews

Disciple-Making Church, The

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Hull outlines what a church based on discipleship principles looks like. He casts a good vision of why discipling is important, talks about the core values, and then outlines the progression in the early church from first church, to mission church, and finally discipling church. He discusses how Jesus developed formed a group of twelve leaders to carry out ministry, and how every church needs this type of approach in the 21st century. His appendix on building a leadership community is relevant and exciting -- especially to those planting cell-based churches. There is also a good section on how to structure small groups. Hull's best work thus far. This is a book that every church planter and pastor wishing to increase the leadership quotient in his church should read.

The "Disciple-Making Church" by Bill Hull was somewhat of a disappointment. Though he made several good observations about the modern church, I felt the template he applied to the NT was forced, and overall I found his argument to be a little flat. On the one hand, he proves his case that all believers should be disciple makers, and the structure of the church should be decentralized. But I think he makes too much of the difference between the method of Jesus and the disciples. In addition to the "First Church, Jerusalem Church, and Disciple-Making Church" being a somewhat contrived pattern that he overlays on the text, he also gets the reader lost in diagrams and flow charts that appear circuitous and difficult to follow. My advice is to get the "Simple Church" by Thom Rainier. It's a far better researched and practical book.

This is a review of the book entitled The Disciple-Making Church by Bill Hull. It was published in Grand Rapids, Michigan by Revell; who copyrighted the material in 1990. It includes five chapters and a three-part appendix. It also includes a short forward and introduction. The introduction asks the question: "Is Disciple Making for Everyone?" Hull begins by dredging up the problems with discipleship in the past and in the contemporary church. He mentions how the church has neglected discipleship at home for the sake of evangelism abroad; and how leaders that are committed to discipleship face challenges and conflict. The writing of Hull's book may be explained in part by the three goals that he has set. The first is to "make discipling more acceptable to the established church;" the second, "to encourage pastors and church leaders to accept their biblical mandate;" and thirdly, "leadership development." These certainly are good goals; even though they seem altogether ironic that the church should be reminded of these basic ideas. It is in Hull's introduction though, that include probably the most spectacular statements about models of discipleship. If there are any fireworks created to gain the reader's interest or commotion that would create discussion; it would include what he calls, "a full-bodied discipling model." Spectacle for the whole beginning of the book begins with these words: "I have attempted to document the biblical transition of discipline from the Christocentric model, which relied on Christ's leadership alone, to the churchocentric model, which developed leadership within the congregation." After I read those words, I had to very closely read the following ideas concerning why it would be an issue for a disciple to rely on the leadership of Christ Jesus and be developed out of that relationship. In addition to that, Hull also talks about "three major tracks to guide a church through a transition" .... and a "three-tiered seminar course that offers the inspiration and know how to make a discipling church." Frankly, along with it sounded like a carefully crafted sales pitch. A third characteristic of Hull's book is the definitive sections that are labeled appropriately. It is simply and definitively written into strict topical sections. These three aspects of Hull's introduction simply made me both skeptical because of the `pitchy' introduction and curious because of an emphasis on something other than a `Christocentric' approach.
When one thinks of a `Christocentric' model; it is natural to assume that Christ would be central to development in discipleship. What could possibly be wrong with that? Although I was instantly skeptical and somewhat confused by Hull's argument; I personally gave him a little latitude because he did seem to relegate the `churchocentric' idea to things that can only be influenced by a principle of church work. In other words, aside from understanding that people are influenced through the Holy Spirit and that Christ is the head of the organic discipling church; the `churchocentric' model appears to be in addition to that. One must read several pages of Hull's book to gain clarity concerning the differences of `Christocentric' and `churchocentric' models. Even then, the descriptions are not totally clear. Generally, I think he is referring to the differences between discipling that took place in the early church that was given directly by Jesus; and discipling that was given in the church after Christ's death on the cross. It is similar to the differences between the apostles that Jesus walked with and Paul; who simply knew Christ after an experience in meeting the exalted Lord. Time had passed and things had changed. He says, "I believe that the change came about because the church moved from the Christocentric to a churchocentric model." This is indicative of the historical time period and the historical changes that occurred in the church. Later in the book; Hull clarifies this:
During the five-to-seven-year time frame Acts 2:42-47 describes, the Jerusalem church moved from the formative stage into the developmental one. Naturally it shifted from the Christocentric to the churchocentric model. The ascension of Christ, the arrival of the Spirit, and the giving of spiritual gifts all called for the switch.
Certainly, we do not experience the physical appearance of Jesus; but only of the Holy Spirit guiding us in Christ. Therefore, Hull makes the distinction; but again at times, some of his descriptions give us the idea that he favors learning through other people, as opposed to personally being discipled by Jesus through the Spirit of God. Hull further makes this distinction by citing how some people are more self-disciplined than others; and that the self-disciplined and self-motivated ones are able to be discipled in the Christocentric model, while the others may not. Hull explains that the models are different in that: one is more of a one-on-one relationship, while the other is more of a community relationship. He says, the "Christocentric model does work in a group `fully committed to a clear and narrow goal'.... `task-oriented,' and having a `common-vision nature." In the churchocentric model; there exists `corporate teamwork,' and `different gifts,' which are exhibited "within the community of Christ" through love. Hull writes, "When the narrow corridors of the Christocentric model are torn down and replaced by the large rooms of the churchocentric model, many who have rejected discipling as a viable church priority will take a second look." Although Hull spends much time attempting to make a distinction between these two supposed models; I found that he was ultimately unclear in his definitions or descriptions. For example, and this is my final point concerning this section of the book; Hull describes the Christocentric model by saying "....Jesus was enough for the twelve: He could lead them, meet every need, and develop each follower. No one had to make guesses about God's will or decide where to do outreach. Just ask Jesus." But in making these distinctions; how could the author possibly imply that Jesus does not still lead, meet every need, and develop every follower. I think that we must assume that the author is not arguing against this relationship; but that there should be something beyond a personal relationship with Jesus. And to Hull's assertion that the "Christocentric model simply cannot reach or interest enough people to become the heart of the church;" I would respond, I do not know that the church's failure to disciple is dependent on attempting to gain people's interest so much, as it is people's individual failure to accept the leading of God in Christ.
In further describing his churchocentric model; the author Hull gives five points: First, in leadership; everybody has something to offer. Second, in guidance; we are to be disciples and make disciples. Third, in training; there should be multi-leveled training or development. Fourth, in outreach; there should be an effective combination of love and feet, along with strategically placed verbalization. And finally, in pastoral care; members minister to one another.
In a section about how the contemporary church should be like the first church in Jerusalem and consequently the church in Antioch; Hull writes, "the apostle's priorities and practices--to which Christians intensely devoted themselves -became a way of life. True spiritual formation requires such commitment to consistency of practice. The actions of the first church confirm discipling was at its heart...." In fact, concerning the evangelistic aspects of discipleship; he says, the "greatest apologetic for Christ's strategy is the disciple's behavior. Their actions reveal His strategy."
In chapter six, Hull brings to our attention some barriers to effective growth and discipleship. Notably, institutionalism and an affinity to comfort helps prevent effective church outreach and spiritual growth.
Though instituting is good and institutions are fine, institutionalism cripples progress. It resists change and slows down or even punishes innovative minds and spirits. This absolutely normal, predictable, but difficult-to-recognize process may most blind those who were once its greatest visionaries.
It is easy to see how people can get comfortable in their circumstances....maybe in building a beautiful church building, or gaining huge attendance; but that same comfort can lead to a stifling of the very things that can make us productive and healthy. Just as physical exercise is good for the body, but painful; so it may be painful to grow into a healthy spiritual church body.
After Hull makes these points concerning stagnation, he begins a section of the book in chapter seven that discusses the differences between the established Jerusalem church, and the newly growing mission church in Antioch. The church goes through a process of growth as it moves from the formative, developmental and corrective stages, and finally the reproductive stages. Hull says, "like a performer who spins plates on the ends of sticks, beginning with one, two, then adding a third and a fourth, the church must concentrate on many things at the same time. The performer focuses on getting plates started while he keeps the others going. Added to this, he must keep them all balanced. The discipling church's balance includes all three phases of training and brings about healthy Christians and an evangelized world." Again, as I progress in this paper; I am reminded of how definitive and even comprehensive the author's work is here. Therefore, it is difficult to include so many of the most helpful ideas because there are many. But, speaking of the reproductive stage of development; one of the most pointed and helpful points made about discipleship is that we need to develop people. Hull says, "Either the average church member's work is as important as the clergy's, as Scripture reports, or it is not; we can't have it both ways."
The last two chapters of the book discuss priorities for both the congregation and the pastor. An interesting argument is made concerning what is termed "doctrinal dualism." Hull says, "Proponents of this theory teach that being is more important than doing and propose that being must go before doing. They teach that you need to build a deep relationship with Christ before you can effectively minister for Him." I think that one must admit that growth does not begin until the Holy Spirit indwells an individual. But, that should not be an excuse to avoid ministry because one feels that they are not close enough to Christ. In fact, it is ministry that propels one to learn and demonstrate the glory of God. Another interesting fact about this section is that it relates to the earlier discussion about Christocentric and churchocentric behavior or models. Certainly, this is manifested in sanctification as salvation is worked out from conception. Ephesians 2:8-9 says that salvation is by faith through grace. The substance of salvation is built on this grace. Faith without works is dead according to James though; therefore, ministry fosters and builds that salvation. I thought that one of the greatest passages in Hull's work was about the glory of God.
The grand, unchallenged purpose of God's gracious rescue of mankind is for His pleasure and glory. Gradually He reveals Himself by unveiling the mystery of Christ taking up residency in man's spirit and fusing all believers into a supernatural organism called the church. Revealing God's glory simply means revealing God. Now God reveals Himself through the church. "To him be the glory in the church" means God will use the church as his primary vehicle.

Every Pastor needs to read this book. It will place you under conviction and demolish the church mentality in exchange for a kingdom mentality. Learn to think outside the church.

This book helps bring the church back into focus of the Great Commission. You will want to make disciples after you have read this book.