STUDIORUMÂ
NOVIÂ TESTAMENTIÂ SOCIETAS
Seminar 11: The
“Making Disciples” (Matt 28:16-20) and
                                          Â
“Being Witnesses of Christ” (Acts 1:8):
Joseph Pathrapankal
           Interpreting
beyond borders has recently become a fundamental and indispensable need of our
times in all branches of knowledge. In Christian theology it focuses on the
emerging trans-border biblical and theological interpretation of basic issues
that constitute the faith and praxis of the church transmitted through the
centuries. Liberation studies, subaltern studies, post-colonial studies as well
as diasporic studies have all come up as part of this new branch of discipline.[1] I do
not want to confine the topic of our present study to any one of these newly
emerging studies; but I still hold the view that this is a study beyond the
borders or rather a study “on the margins”, a term suggested to me by the
recent book of John P. Meier on Jesus, A Marginal Jew. [2] Ever
since the Crusades organized by the church and the colonial expeditions
undertaken by the Christian West during the past centuries, the mission of the
church in the world was understood and defended more along historico-political
as well as psycho-sociological categories than on sound biblical and
theological premises. Even after the
termination of these painful burdens of history there remain several trends of
thinking which seem to violate the sound principles of critical reflection in
theological and biblical studies. The main reason for such a phenomenon is that
a post-colonial mindset is still very much operating in several branches of
theological and biblical reflection. And one such area is the study on the
mission of the church. From the time of the Roman emperor Constantine,
Christianity grew up as a religion of domination, imperialism and intolerance
towards other religions. The missionary activity of the Church during the past
several centuries, associated with colonialism, was an exercise of this spirit
of domination. In fact, Christianity has a long history of being an intolerant
religion, and it has played a very decisive role in creating and perpetuating
hatred and intolerance among religions as a result of its claim that it is the
only true religion, and that it has superiority over all other religions. The basic question in our times is this: What
is the scope and goal of our study and discussions on mission? Is it to analyse
some biblical texts philologically and form-critically and defend our
traditional positions, or is it to critically examine biblical texts and relate
our studies to several other issues that constitute the mission of the church
in the world?    Â
What we have in mind is the presence of two
biblical passages, which are presented as the concluding directives of the
risen Jesus to his disciples about what they have to be doing in the future.
One of them is found at the end of the gospel of Matthew as a command of the
risen Christ to his disciples to go and make disciples of nations (Matt
28:16-20) and the other is in the Acts of the Apostles as a directive of the
same risen Christ given to the same disciples to become his witnesses
throughout the world (Acts 1:8). The emphasis in the first passage is on what
the disciples have to do in relation to others, by making them also the
disciples Christ. The focus of this mission, as it was understood in the
history of the church, was all about a spiritual conquest of the world through
which Christianity had to expand itself. Implied in it also was an assumption
that Christianity is the only true religion which had to take care of the
salvation of the whole world. The emphasis in the second passage is on what the
disciples themselves have to become during their mission, namely, to be the
true and authentic witnesses of Christ in the world. Here the obligation and
the burden of bearing witness were on the missionaries themselves. The truth
about these two passages had been that during the past few centuries exclusive
attention was given to the first passage by the missionaries of the churches in
recruiting members, as if in obedience to a divine command, while very little
attention was paid to the equally demanding directive to become the authentic
witnesses of Christ in the world. It seems that a closer and systematic study
of these two passages is very important because of the inner tension and
challenge these directives of the risen Chrisit constitute in the mission of
the church in our times. Hence it is a study in contrast. Here contrast means
two distinct and different orientations. It is true this was not at all an
issue in the past, when many things in the practice of the church were taken
for granted. But times have changed and issues are to be discussed in a
globalized world, which presents not only economic and cultural issues but also
religious and theological issues. Moreover, the study of this issue is to be
seen within the larger context of several other challenges which the church and
her theologians and exegetes are facing in the contemporary world. Â
           The most important
challenge that the church faces in our times is the challenge of religious
pluralism. More than ever before humankind is becoming aware of its being in a pluralistic world. Pluralism
means the acceptance of the other as the other with all its uniqueness. Once
pluralism is accepted as a basic reality of this world and its historical
process at all levels, it becomes easier for all to see the legitimacy of the
other to exist and to operate at all levels of life. There is a rich variety of
pluralism, such as ethnic, cultural, linguistic, ideological, religious and
even theological. Religious pluralism seems to be the most challenging one.
World Religions are beginning to experience that their future does not consist
in any kind of domination but in their readiness to respect each other.
Religious pluralism deeply affects the churchÂ’s self-understanding and her
mission in the world. There is no more question of understanding Christianity
and the church in terms of uniqueness, exclusivism and superiority over other
religions. Closely related to the challenge of religious pluralism is the
challenge of secularization, a challenge that has both positive as well as
negative aspects. Secularization basically means the affirmation of the
positive meaning of the temporal order as something planned and willed by God,
and it is a teaching well founded in the Bible. The church itself is advocating
some basic principles of secularization, and liberation theologies in our times
are the outcome of these new trends. But it has also aspects that eventually
influence the religious thinking of humans. Science and technology have been to
a great extent responsible for this process of secularization. As a result,
several religious values and priorities, which were considered sacrosanct, have
become neglected and rejected in course of time, without anyone raising any
question about them. Some would even speak about this new phenomenon as a
post-christian syndrome. Others would qualify this state of affairs as a
healthy sign of a world come of age. But the basic point is that we have to
live with this situation and face the consequences.Â
           Thirdly, in the field
of biblical studies we have the new challenge of a more contextualized
understanding of the Bible. We would call it a contextualized interpretation of
biblical texts. What is proposed here is something different from the study of
the original context of the biblical text, which we could call the ‘author
contextÂ’. Contextualization here means the transcending of the original
context, by which the biblical text is made to speak to the context of the
reader and the interpreter. It may be called a ‘situative context’. The
biblical text, as the inspired Word of God, is to be further interpreted by
successive generations of readers in their respective social, cultural and
religious situations. Therefore the biblical text has not only a past history
accessible to historical criticism, but also a kind of openness to the present
and to the future which far surpasses the past. It means that the biblical text
has a life of its own as it moves through history, assuming new dimensions and
connotations as it relates itself to new contexts.[3]Â What is
aimed at here is not a demythologization of the word from the event, rather a
re-application of the original message of the biblical text to the new
situations with their new challenges, problems and promises. In other words,
the meaning of a biblical text is not exhausted by what was intended by its
author or what the text, in fact, says; it is also what the readers today
understand as part of the dynamic meaning of that text within their own historical,
cultural and religious context. As a result, the interpretation of biblical
texts, which have a strong bearing on the faith and praxis of the church, is to
be re-examined and re-interpreted and re-applied, taking into account the
changed historical, cultural and religious contexts. This observation is of
profound significance with regard to the interpretation of biblical texts that
are related to the theology and praxis of the mission of the church.
           These preliminary
observations have been made precisely to examine the inner meaning of two
biblical texts mentioned above, which have two different orientations and two
different implied meanings. The first of
these, the Matthean text, has been interpreted in the past and applied in such
a way that through the centuries it has become a classical passage to specify
the mission of the church in the world. This Matthean text is also known as the
“Great Commission” or the “Great Command”, given by the risen Jesus to his
immediate disciples about what they have to be doing after the earthly ministry
of Jesus. Jesus said: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to
me. Go therefore 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 that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to
the end of the age” (Matt 28:18-20). When this passage in Mathew was linked to
another commission by Jesus recorded in the longer ending of the Gospel of Mark,
the implications of the mission command of Jesus became all the more crucial:
“Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The
one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not
believe will be condemned” (Mk
The Great Commission and the Making of Disciples (Matt
28:16-20)
           The Great Commission in Matthew is the conclusion of what
can be understood as a mountain epiphany of the risen Jesus in Galilee (Matt
28:16-20) according to a promise Jesus had made, which we have in the passion
narrative (Matt 26:32).[4] The first part of this
narrative describes the journey of the eleven to the mountain to which Jesus
had directed them and it also explains the reaction of the disciples when they
encountered him, some adoring him and other doubting. It is very important to
keep in mind that the entire scene takes place on the mountain, which is not
named.[5] It is quite probable that
here Matthew is referring to the mountain wherefrom Jesus is said to have given
his radical teaching about discipleship, which is known as the Sermon on the
Mount. Through this linking of this final meeting of the risen Jesus with his
disciples on the mountain Matthew tries to show that the mission of the
disciples is precisely to educate the nations on the values of the
           At
the end of this theophany in Matthew, a divine assurance is also given to the
disciples for the fruitful realization of their ministry, namely, the continued
presence of the risen Lord in their midst (28:20). While the other evangelists
refer to the ascension of the risen Jesus, Matthew speaks about the continued
presence of the risen one with them. When
the prophets had to speak to the people, Yahweh always promised them his
assistance: "I am with you" (Jer 1:8). Gideon was promised divine
assistance in his campaign against the Midianites (Judg
           Insofar as Matthew is a didactic
gospel, the author had to conclude it with a catechetical note and that is what
we have in Matt 28:16-20 as the only post-resurrection narrative about the
risen Jesus meeting with his disciples. Moreover,
           But what has happened with this
Mathean text is something entirely different. In missionary circles
much of the discussion about Matthew has been obfuscated by the high prominence
given to the significance and interpretation of this so-called “Great
Commission” (Matt 28:18-20).[8] It may be observed that in
the past New Testament scholarship for a long time appeared to have been very
little interested in this passage. Matt 28:18-20 became a basic text for
mission only from the 16th century onwards. The early church took
this passage as a directive given only to the immediate disciples of Jesus.[9] According to Ulrich Luz it
was through William Carrey, the English Baptist, through his writing in 1792:
“An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the Conversion
of Heathens” that this Matthean text became the Magna Carta of
           It was around 1940
that biblical scholarship, pioneered by O. Michel[11] and E. Lohmeyer began to
pay serious attention to these concluding words of Matthew. Michel says that
the entire gospel was written only from the perspective of the presuppositions
embodied in this pericope. Since then there has been a sustained and expanding
interest among the New Testament scholars in the closing lines of MatthewÂ’s
gospel. Scores of theologians have tried to explain the origins and
significance of this passage. In 1973 Joachim Lange devoted a monograph of 573
pages to a tradition- and redaction-critical study of this pericope. In a
recent essay Friedrich lists some phrases scholars have used to give expression
to the importance of these verses for understanding MatthewÂ’s gospel, such as:
“theological program of Matthew” (J. Blank); “a summary of the entire gospel of
Matthew” (G. Bornkamm); “the most important concern of the Gospel” (H.
Kosmala); “the ‘climax’ of the gospel” (U. Luck); “a sort of culimination of
everything said up to this point” (P. Nepper-Christensen): “a ‘manifesto’”(G.
Otto); and “a ‘table of contents’ of the Gospel” (G. Schille). Friedrich
himself says: “Matthew has, as if in a burning-glass, focused everything that
was dear to him in these words and put them as the crowning culmination at the
end of the gospel”. [12] Today some scholars tend
to argue that the entire gospel points to these final verses: all the threads
woven into the fabric of Matthew, from chapter one onward, draw together here.
Hence, the great mission command
in Mathew (28:18-19) was the rationale within which the theory and praxis of
the mission of the Church were built up. Presented as a post-resurrection rendezvous
between Jesus and his eleven disciples, this passage refers to the total
authority, which the risen Jesus has been given, on the basis of which he was
sending out the disciples. Though it is clearly stated that the authority is
given to Jesus, it was spontaneous on the part of the church and its
missionaries to presume that this authority was given to them also. Since there
was no one to question this usurpation of authority, it got accepted and
established through the centuries. Â
           As a consequence of this new
emphasis on the Matthean text in the Protestant circles, Roman Catholic
theology also began to concentrate on this passage as central to mission
theology.[13]
C. Spicq formulated his views in the following
words: “En virtue de la puisisance reçue de son Père (Mt 28,18-20), Jésus
communique à ses Apôtres le pouvoir d’enseigner. Aucune restriction n’est
apportée à cette autorité. C’est à la hiéarchie qu’il appartient de promulguer
la doctrine et les préceptes du Christ ».[14] Even
in the Catechism of the Catholic Church,Â
Matt 28Â :19-20 is referred to as the key text for the missionary
task of the Catholic Church, although this task is referred to as related to
the eternal love of the Holy Trinity. It could even be said that in the
conflicting attempts of the various churches and christian denominations to
expand themselves this Matthean text has been used as a convenient passage to
reinforce and enlarge oneÂ’s own ecclesial and denominational boundaries under
the pretext of a “divine command”, an expresion sometimes having an aggressive
as well as a military nuance. The multi-religious world of ours will not any
more appreciate such terminolgies, if only we remember that Jesus only preached
the good news of the
           Among the scholars it also came up
for a lively discussion during past decades whether the panta ta ethne
in Matt 28:19 refers to all nations consisting of Jews and Gentiles, or only
the Gentiles, since, for Matthew, the
Jews had already rejected the Gospel.[15] It would then mean that
the prohibition Jesus gave in Matt 10:5 is reversed in Matt 28:19 in such a way
that now the gospel is to be preached to and members are to be recruited only
from among the Gentiles. All these trends in the interpretation of Matt
28:16-20 show that the way the “Great Commission” has been traditionally
utilized in providing a biblical basis for mission has to be challenged or at
least modified. It is inadmissibile to lift these words out of MattewÂ’s gospel,
as it were, allow them a life of their own, and understand them without any
reference to the context in which they first appeared. Where this happens, the
“Great Commission” is easily degraded to a mere slogan, or used as a pretext
for what we have in advance decided, perhaps unconsciously, that it should
mean. We then run the risk of doing violence to the text and its intention. One
thing contemporary scholars are agreed upon, is that Matthew 29:18-20 has to be
interpreted against the background of MatthewÂ’s gospel as a whole and unless we
keep this in mind we shall fail to understand it. No exegesis of the “Great
Commission” divorced from its moorings in this gospel can be valid. It is also
important for us to remember that the entire weight of mission theology placed
on the Matthean text was also the result of an implicit fusing of Matt 28:18-19
with a similar passage in the Longer Ending in Mark. There it is clearly stated
that only those who believe and are baptized will be saved (Mk
Â
           The mission
command was also linked to Paul's rabbinic argument about the whole process of
salvation as something based on preaching, faith and its confession of ‘Jesus
as the LordÂ’, the need of hearing the gospel for such a confession, which, in
turn, is based on the proclamation of the gospel and ultimately on the
importance of the preachers for such a proclamation (Rom 10:9-15). With all these texts as the basis of their
theology and praxis, missionaries went around the world baptizing millions and
making them disciples of Christ, and thereby they were assured eternal
salvation. In course of
time some other biblical texts were also added to the mission command in order
to reinforce the need and intensity of the praxis of mission. They were mainly
Christological texts, which presented Christ
as the unique and universal mediator of salvation for the whole humankind. Thus
we have PeterÂ’s solemn statement before the Jewish Council: "There is
salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among
humans by which we must be saved" (Acts
           If the Matthean text, supported by a
few other New Testament passages were the most important one for understanding
the mission of the Church, what about the many other texts in the Synoptic
gospels where Jesus is said to have sent out the 12 and the 70 for announcing
the kingdom of God, for healing the sick and for driving out the demons and
above all for bringing peace to the people? In particular, Luke with his
universal vision has taken extra care to understand the mission of Jesus and
the mission of the 12 broaden itself into a universal mission, but having the
same objectives as in the mission of the 12. Every aspect of making disciples
and baptizing is excluded from these missions. In fact, what we have in the
mission of these disciples is the continuation of what Jesus himself did in
response to the mission he received from God. It all means that mission in the
New Testament is to be understood from a broader perspective as renewing and
transforming the face of the world. The church had enough of proselyting
mission in the past and now we have to turn our eyes to the future and develop
a new theology of mission. It is in this context that we try to analyse the
inner dynamism of another New Testament text, which uses a powerful language to
articulate the mind of the risen Christ about what his disciples have to be
doing, once his historical presence has come to end through his ascension. This
crucial text is given in the very beginning of the Acts of the Apostles, which
is also the summary of the entire Acts.
          Â
           The Acts of the Apostles is rightly called a “Missionary Document”
insofar as this is the only New Testament document, which describes the
movement of the gospel from
           It is interesting to
note that martyria, martys and other word groups acquired their
specific importance in biblical theology, more precisely in Acts and the
Johannine literature. Thus of the 76 instances of the verb martyreo, 43
are found in John and the Johannine letters alone, a further 4 in Revelation,
11 in Acts and 8 in the letter to the Hebrews, while there are only 6 instances
in Paul and only 2 in the Synoptics. Of the 37 instances of martyria, 21
belong to John and the Johannine letters, and 9 to Revelation, and the word is
entirely lacking in Paul and the letter to the Hebrews. With 35 instances, the
noun martys is found a total of 13 times in Acts, 9 in Paul (including 3
in the Pastorals) and 5 times in Revelation. It is also clear that a new aspect
of the concept of being a witness is revealed by Luke in Acts. The verbal form martyreo
is used in the sense of human attestation for good conduct (Acts 6:3;
           But in the beginning of the Acts, Luke has taken special care to dwell on
the uniqueness of this witnessing mission of the disciples of Jesus by
contrasting this task with the still human way of thinking that was prevalent
in the mind of his disciples. After a brief summing of the events narrated in
the gospel, the author looks into the future as an era of the Spirit who would
empower the disciples in their future task. But the immediate reaction of the
disciples is something entirely different. It all begins with a serious misunderstanding
on the part of the disciples about their expectations of an earthly messianic
kingdom. So their question: "Lord, is this the time when you will restore
the kingdom to
          Â
           We shall try to see the major themes
of this instruction of Jesus in Acts 1:8:
               Â
a)Â Â Â Â Â
You will receive power (dynamis) when
the Holy Spirit has come upon you (v.8a)
b)Â Â Â Â Â
You will be my witnesses (martyres mou) (v. 8b)
c)Â Â Â Â Â
(i) In
           The concepts of Spirit and power are interrelated. It is a
power from above, a power that operated right in the beginning of creation and
the same power was active in the history of
           Here it is
important to examine the inner meaning of witnessing as the new dimension and
new content of the evangelizing mission of the disciples of Jesus. Witnessing
to some one in the biblical sense means to reproduce the personality of the one
whose witness one claims to be. The disciples of the risen Jesus are asked to
reproduce in their life the personal qualities of Jesus, whose historical
witnesses they were during his earthly ministry. Hence we see the importance
attached to the historical witnessing of the one who had to be elected to the
group of the Twelve in the place of Judas Iscariot (Acts
           As such, this creative witnessing is
beyond the power of humans, characterized as they are by their basic
selfishness, pride and ambition. Hence Jesus promises the power (dynamis) of the Holy Spirit, which will
come upon the disciples and empower them to carry out this mission. It was all
natural to Jesus of Nazareth but difficult for the disciples, as we see them
struggling to understand the very mystery of the mission of Jesus (Mk
           This witnessing mission has to take
on chronological and geographical sequence, through which the disciples have to
start from the same place where Jesus had concluded his earthly ministry,
namely,
                          Â
     Â
ChurchÂ’s
           The concept of witness (martys) has
certain basic and in-built associations, which we have to review before we
proceed towards a more flexible and broader understanding of this concept in
our times. With its probable origin from the root smer, meaning to “to
bear in mind”, “to remember”, “to be careful”, martys meant “one who
remembers, who has knowledge of something by recollection, and one who can thus
tell about it”. [16] In the evolution of this concept in
non-biblical Greek we still see the use of this concept as a witness to facts
in the legal sphere and also wintess to truths as well as views. In the LXX martys
is the equivalent of the Hebrew ed, and in a religious sense it is
presented when Yahweh arranges before the nations a kind of trial in which
Israel is presented as martys (Is 43:10, 12; 44:8). We have the same
religious sense continued in the New Testament in the sense of witness to facts
and witness to truths, and the devlopment of the distinctive Christian use of
the term is the result of their application to the content of gospel
proclamation and to the circumstances in which this took place. It is LukeÂ’s
usage, which takes us far beyond its general usage, in such a way that for him
also the emphasis is on the facts known to him. But the facts are those related
to the history of Jesus, especially in relation to his resurrection. Since
resurrection is a concept transcending historical verification, witnesses
cannot be borne to these facts uncless their significance is also known to
them. However, the effect of their witnessing is not a mere knowledge of facts
and truths by the hearers, but rather their faith. But Luke has taken special
care to establish the historical foundations and the trustworthiness of those
who are witnessing. These witnesses are those who are qualifed to be witnesses
because they themselves lived through the events. It is to these same wintesses
that the risen Jesus gives the final directive: “You will be my wintesses” (esesthe
mou martyres) (Acts 1:8). But to restrict the meaning of witnessing only to
this group of disciples who were historical witnesses of the ministry of Jesus
would be totally wrong. In this regard the subtle distinction proposed by
Strathmann in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
seems to be unwarranted because that would mean that the entire weight of
witnessing is based on the historical witnessing and no due importance is given
the power of the Holy Spirit which is the real transforming power behind the
witnessing in the theology of the Acts. Moreover, since it is a witnessing that
is leading to faith, the historical witnessing cannot be the entirely normative
factor. Hence Paul is called a witness (Acts
           A
closer study of the New Testament would make it clear that the concept of
witnessing is a dynamic one and it has two major aspects that need to be
emphasized. The most important aspect of witnessing is that in the Acts of the
Apostles it is basically a personalized one. The legal as well as the factual
aspects are elevated to the personal dimension insofar as the person of Jesus
Christ has to thoroughly transform the witnesses to stand for his cause and the
cause of the
           It
seems fitting to ask what the witness theme of Acts of the Apostles can further
add to the mission of the church in our times. First and
foremost, the witness theme of the Acts of the Apostles stresses the importance
of the historical foundations of the Christian movement. For all the major New
Testament writers the historical facts of Christian origins are of paramount importance.[17]
Christianity is not an idea, it is not a mere message. It is a historical fact.
The principal events of the public ministry of Jesus were wrought in the
presence of his disciples and in the midst of the people. The testimony of the
apostles rests upon the great acts of God in Jesus Christ, and the resurrection
forms the very core of this. Has historical scholarship taken this factor
sufficiently seriously? Current preoccupation with historical criticism, form
criticism and redaction criticism must not blind our eyes to the New
TestamentÂ’s unmistakable stress on those who were the actual witnesses to the
primary events. At a time of widespread scepticism about Christian origins this
contribution is both timely and significant. The witnesses must be faithful not
only to the bare facts of the Christ Event, but also to their meaning. This entails presenting Christ and his message
with the significance, which genuinely belong to them. To cite a clear
formulation of this holistic witnessing: “To be faithful witness we must ever
keep before us and before our hearers, the fully rounded, finely balanced,
many-sided yet unitary, significance of Christ”.[18] Witnessing to Christ is the summarizing
of the various aspects of the mission manifested in the person of Jesus Christ,
his healing ministry, his option for the poor and the marginalized as well as
his critical attitude towards religious issues.Â
          Â
           We are very much in need of a shift of emphasis and a change of
perspective in our understanding of the mission of the church in our times. It
is a change called for not only from the changes that have arisen at the
social, political, religious and cultural levels throughout the world but also
from an indepth study of the biblical passages themselves that have been used
and also abused for the carrying out of mission by the various churches and
their missionaries during the past few centuries. The emphasis on making
disciples and giving baptism was motivated not so much from a commitment to Christ,
but rather from a commitment to oneÂ’s own denomination and its competitve
growth. This has been a departure from the holistic understanding of mission as
we find spread out in the gospels, especially in the mission of the 12 and the
70Â in the Synoptic Gospels, where the
focus is on announcing the
           As we look at these facts and face
the question about what mission today means, the obvious answer is that we need
to recognize a shift of emphasis from our traditional concepts and approaches
in order to focus on the centrality of the
          Â
           As this is a study coming from the multireligious
background of India, it is fitting that I make some observations made by
Mahatma Gandhi, the father of India, who was more a Christian at heart than
many Christians then and now, about what he understands by Christians bearing
witness to Christ and to the Christian values. In particular, he was speaking
to the Christian missionaries who were going to
           Gandhi’s critical remarks about some of the Christian
claims are distant reminders of issues that are being discussed in theological
circles today. He believed it absurd and dangerous to speak of superiority in
matters of faith. One should leave it to the absoluteness of God, and carry on
deepening the bond with oneÂ’s fellow humans. To claim a monopoly of truth is an
arrogant attitude lacking in humility and not recognizing GodÂ’s absoluteness.[21]
In Harijan  he wrote: “Today they
(missionaries) tell people that there is no salvation for them except through
the Bible and through Christianity. It is customary to decry other religions
and to offer their own as the only one that can bring deliverance. This
attitude must be radically changed”.[22] All the principal religions of the world have
produced great saints. One should not turn the holiness of each religion into
instruments of division and subjugation. The fact of sanctity in every religion
should affirm the fundamental truth of
every religion and their validity in themselves, and not in comparison with one
another. Respect and reverence for other religions and religious founders were
in the very nature of Gandhi. He worte:
“All religions are divinely inspired, but they are imperfect because they are
products of the human mind and taught by human beings. Hence the necessity of
tolerance which is as far from fanaticism as the north pole is from the south.
True knowledge of religion breaks down the barriers between faith and life”.[23]
                                Â
           Though we have not seen the historical Jesus with our
eyes nor heard him with our ears, and thus cannot be the factual witnesses of
Jesus, still we believe in him on the basis of the faith that has been handed
on to us from the historical witnesses (Jn 17:20), and we participate in the
blessing Christ has pronounced on all who believe in him without seeing him (Jn
20:29). This faith in Christ should grow through a closer understanding of the
Gospels and a personal experience of Christ and his Spirit. A life that is
rooted in faith and experienced in the Spirit naturally expresses itself in
words and deeds. If the apostles and the early believers preached the word of
God, it is no less the duty of the
convinced believers in Christ today to proclaim the Good News of salvation to
their fellow humans. But direct preaching and all that is involved in it must
take into account the religious and cultural context of our society. It is here
that the word of preaching has to take the form of “dialogue and collaboration
with the followers of other religions, and in witness of Christian faith and
life, acknowledge, preserve, and promote the spiritual and moral goods found
among these men, as well as the values in their society and culture.[24].
This kind of dialogue and cooperation arising from a spirit of understanding
and appreciation can bear fruits only if it is the result of a radical conversion
within the Christian believers themselves. There is no question of opportunism
and diplomacy in it; that would go counter to the very meaning of witnessing.
It should come from a deep conviction that God is present and active in all
world religions.
                                              Â
           Biblical
exegetes in our times have a greater responsibility to explore the wider
dimensions of the word of God and make them available to people in their search
for a meaningful life in the changed circumstances of our contemporary society.
Times are gone when exegetes spent their time in exclusively literary,
historical and textual criticism and philological analysis, bringing out some
dry and insipid arguments and views which did not mean anything for the people
in ther everyday struggle of life. Now it is question of re-reading,
re-conceiving and exploring the richer means of biblical text. To an introvert
community, which was brooding over its own security, survival and prosperity
after the sad experiences of the Babylonian captivity, Deutero-Isaiah wrote the
following exhortation: “Widen the space of your tent, extend the curtains of
your home. Do not hold back! Lengthen your ropes, make your tent-pegs firm, for
you will burst out to right and to left” (Isa 54:2). This exhortation is very much
applicable to the exegetes of our times who are also challenged to go out of
their centripetal world of exegetical reflection to the wider world of God,
which is facing a variety of problems and issues. It is not a call to abandon
the sound principles of exegeis and hermeneutics, but rather it is an appeal to
go beyond one’s own established and
well-defined borders and see things from a wider perspective. In a global
village of ours it is only natural that the world of theologians and exegetes
comes closer and shares their convictions and discuss their problems, which
will add beauty and meaning for their ministry. It is heartening to see more
and more theologians from the West and East opening themselves to the wider
reality of the world, which presents to them issues which they never knew
about, such as the challenge of religious pluralism, the challenge of
terrorism, the problem of globalization, poverty and misery facing a vast
section of the human community. According to a recent study, after 1990 within
a short span of 13 years 54 countries in the world have become poorer than
before. In the context of these radical problems the world is going through, we
have to discuss the issue of the mission of the church in a more concrete and
realistic manner.   Â
                      Â
[1] Fernando
F. Segovia (ed) Interpreting beyond borders, Sheffield Academic Press,
[2] John P.
Meier, A Marginal Jew,
[3]
Cf. Joseph Pathrapankal, Text and Context in Biblical Interpretation
(Bangalore: Dharmaram Publications, 1993) p. 1-16.
[4] Cf. B.J. Malina, “The literary structure and form of Matthew 28:16-30” NTS  17(1970) 87-103.
[5] In the Matthean text it is oros with a definite article and this would mean that it is not any mountain, but a specific mountain in the Matthean tradition.
[6] It
was Paul who has given his profound insights about the meaning of baptism as an
entering into the mystery of the Christ event (Rom 6:3-11; Gal
[7] J.D. Kingsbury, “The
composition and Christology of Matt 28:16-20” JBL 93(1974) 573-584.
[8] Joseph Pathrapankal, The
Christian Programme, Dharmaram Publications,
[9] Justin, Apol 1,31,7; Aristides, Apol 22,8
[10] G. Warneck, Evangelische
Missionslehre I: Die Begründdung der Sendung,1892 (ZHPT xvii), 94.
[11] O. Michel, “Der Abschluss des
Matthäusevangeliums” Evangelische Theologie  10(1950) 19-21.
[12] These details are taken from
chapter 2 of David Bosch, Transforming Mission, Orbis Books, Maryknoll,
1991, chapter 2: Matthew: Mission as Disciple-Making, pp. 56-57.
[13] J. Schmidlin, Einführung in die
Missionswissenschaft, 1925 (MWAT 1), pp. 133 ff.
[14] C. Spiicq, “L’église du Christ” in G.
Florovsky et alii, La sainte Eglise
universelle. Confrontation œcuménique, 1948 (CthAP hors série 4), 208 ff.
[15]
D. Hare and D. Harrington, “Make Disciples of All the Gentiles (Matt 28:19)” CBQ
37(1975) 359-369; W. Trilling, Das wahre
[16] Cf. Stathmann, ThDNT, martys. p. 475.
[17] Cf. A. Barr, “The factor of Testimony in the Gospels” ExpT 49(1937-38) 401-408.
[18] N. Alexander, “The United Character of the New Testament Witness of the Christ-Event” in H. Anderson and W. Barclay, eds., The New Testament in Historical and Contemporary Perspective, 1965, 32 f.
[19] CW xxvii, p. 436; Young India, July 1925, p. 28.
[20] CW
xxvii, p. 438.
[21] Young
[22] Harijan, 14, 7. 1947.
[23] Cf.
Rahavan Iyer, The Moral and Political Writings of Mahatma Gandhi, Clarendon
Press,
[24] Ad
Gentes 2