Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 4
John argues that “Jerusalem was strategic, not home,” and notes that “Jerusalem was home to exactly zero of the disciples”—how does that push back against the common “start at home and move out” missions narrative, and what might early Christians have assumed about the purpose of Pentecost and the nations “under heaven”?
Another way to ask: If Jerusalem was a strategy and not “home” for the disciples, how does that challenge the idea that missions should always start at home first? What do you think early Christians thought Pentecost meant for the nations?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
John pushes back by saying the disciples were not told to begin in Jerusalem because it was their comfortable “home base,” but because God was strategically gathering the nations there at Pentecost. Early Christians could have seen Pentecost as a launching point for the gospel to spread outward through people from “every nation under heaven.”
- John says he “disagree[s] with what’s often said…that it means, start at home and move out from there.”
- He states bluntly: “Jerusalem was home to exactly zero of the disciples.”
- He argues the opposite: “Jerusalem was strategic, not home.”
- Reason given: “the Lord was gathering people from every nation under heaven…for Pentecost so that all these nations will be reached.”
- He frames the Great Commission chain with Romans: “How will they hear without a preacher…How will they preach if they are not sent?” implying intentional sending rather than gradual, comfort-based expansion.