The KJV obscures something here, by translating both διδάσκω and μαθητεύω as “teach”. Jesus is speaking to the “eleven **disciples**” (ἕνδεκα **μαθηταὶ**), and commands them to “**disciple**” or “**make disciples of** all the nations” (**μαθητεύσατε** πάντα τὰ ἔθνη).

Two parts of this process are identified: “baptising them” (βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς) and “**teaching** them” (**διδάσκοντες** αὐτοὺς). Note that “to disciple” and “to teach” are distinguished from each other, both by the choice of words and by the sentence structure.

When people who have just been identified as *disciples* are told that their job is to *make more disciples*—and not just a few of them, but *of all nations*—it is reasonable to conclude that this is intended to also be part of the role of these new-made disciples.

The case for this is strengthened even more by what it is that Jesus tells them to teach these new disciples: “to obey all things, whatever I commanded you” (τηρεῖν πάντα, ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην ὑμῖν). One can imagine a question coming from one of the eleven: “*Everything* you commanded us? Including this command you’re giving us right now?”

---

*Does* μαθητεύω “disciple” (verb, transitive) mean “make disciples”? Well, in my mind, it’s tautological that it does. But I can see how someone coming at the question with certain connotations or preconceptions in mind might want to draw a distinction between them.

As an analogy, compare “teach” and “be a teacher”. On the face of it, these would seem to be simply synonymous. But one *could* distinguish them, with the former bearing the plain meaning of “give teaching, impart knowledge”, and the latter taking on all of the baggage and ancillary roles involved in working in the education sector. (Fair disclaimer: I’m a teacher by trade, and I wish it involved more of the former and less of the latter.)

But such connotations had, and have, no part in my answer. I don’t think this says anything at all about how these disciples are to be governed, and it certainly doesn’t suggest that the *only* purpose of a disciple is to make more disciples. (It used to be part of the role of a master of *any* trade or profession to pass on their knowledge to others. But you wouldn’t say that carpenters *only* existed to make more carpenters!)

No, my only intention was to answer the question you asked: “Where did this idea come from?” Jesus says that his **disciples** are to **disciple** others. That implies that “discipling” is part of the role of a “disciple”, and so is inherited by these further disciples. (This implication is strengthened by the need to go to “all nations”—surely a job for more than eleven people—and by the instruction to teach these new disciples to observe *all* that Jesus commanded those first disciples.)

My views or beliefs are irrelevant; even if I didn’t believe in this myself, it would be an answer to your question. You in turn may not agree that this is how it *should* be interpreted, but you would no longer need to say that you had seen *no* evidence. And what else is asking questions for?