Is There a Difference Between a Convert and a Disciple?

I realize this is a very similar thread started in the family forum, but I wanted to get the opinion of those who may study the Bible on a higher level.

Thanks in advance for your answers.

I'm not sure which word "convert" would most closely associate with in the bible. But using the KJV,

• A disciple: someone who studies, practices, serves, follows or learns from some text or person or doctrine(s). (whether they truly believe in it or not)
• A believer: someone who believes what is taught (whether they practice discipleship or not)
• A son (of God): to me this means someone who has the Holy Ghost. (not to be confused with someone who just SAYS they have the Holy Ghost.)
• A Christian: someone who may be a disciple and/or believer of a doctrine supporting Jesus as being the Messiah. In Jesus time this meant a disciple, but nowadays it seems to mean anyone who CLAIMS to be a disciple. ( they might be one, but it doesn't seem necessary for a person to call themselves one and be accepted by others who claim similarly).

That's my particular take on it. Acts 19 1-7(?) talks about a few of those classifications And like I said, I don't which word most closely associates with the word "Convert".

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

To your subject title, I should say simply, no, no difference. Anyone converted to Jesus-Yeshua will believe Him, and in so doing will be His disciple. Otherwise I am afraid it is simply a show.

Matthew 18:3 (KJV) carries the idea of conversion.

And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become
as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Also Acts 15:3 ~

And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria,
declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren.

Sure a convert is simply a disciple just starting out with Christ.

No.

If there is any further on this, you take it. I am old.

A disciple allows themselves to be disciplined because in so doing they further their conversion to Christ.

Conversion and Justification are events. It is Sanctification that is a process.

much wisdom in so many answers -
Thanks to All...

Isn't it amazing in Luke's versions of Matthew 28:19 Christ commands to do these things in His Name, not the Trinity:

47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

48 And ye are witnesses of these things.

49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

50 And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.

51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.


Makes you wonder which versions is accurate.

I don't see a difference

A new Convert is liken unto as a child needing Milk.
A Disciple seems more like one who is past this stage and now eating Meat!

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6

Jesus = the Name above every other name...

AMEN!

And John explains in Chapter 1 that the WORD was made flesh, Timothy claims He was Manifested into flesh. But we know the WORD is the Creator of all things (Colossians). I love how Christ has been seen in the Bible from word "GO!"

There is no difference and there is no conflict. We are required to harmonize all Scriptures. Matthew 28:19 corresponds to 1 John 5:7.

And I showed you how the KJV 1 John 5:7 is an add on that literally does not match the Aramaic, the Greek, nor the Latin Vulgate 1 John 5:7. Only a person who is not paying attention would accept the KJV 1 John 5:7!

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Jesus is occasionally called "The Word". The Bible is His story. We also see Jesus referred to as The Word in John 1:

John
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Nothing problematic about 1 John 5:7.

I am well aware of what you have offered and it is very much appreciated.

I am discussing an ongoing issue with the other poster and have shown him the manuscripts to which the KJV translated from and their 1 John 5:7 is nowhere the same as we find in the KJV. I'll give you an example:

The KJV claims 1 John 5:
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


Now compare that to the Older and more Original manuscripts the KJV would be translating from:

From the 78 AD Aramaic to which the Disciple who took Judas' place:
ܘܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܬܠܬܐ ܣܗܕܝܢ ܪܘܚܐ ܘܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܘܬܠܬܝܗܘܢ ܒܚܕ ܐܢܘܢ
7 And there are three testifying: The Rukha {The Spirit}, and The Water, and The Blood. And these three are in One.
.

From the oldest known Koine Greek version:
ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες,
7 seeing that three there are that are testifying, the spirit, and the water, and the blood.

From the Jerome Latin Vulgate:

7quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt
And there are Three who give testimony the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one.


As you can plainly see, the versions 1,100 to 1,600 years older than the KJV claim the 3 testifying are the spirit, and the water, and the blood.

But the KJV completely disregards and adds the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


The KJV should be word for word but is nowhere close to the originals.