Musings on the Dilemma of Testimonies

  • Posted on:

Traditions are outward expressions of worldview and are vital to preserving culture and civilization. It is not a stretch to say that without them, there are no roots; no moor anchoring us to our fundamental beliefs. In short, there is no established core, and we can shape (in the case of our faith) Christianity into whatever we want. Needless to say, this is a very dangerous situation. Sharing one’s testimony is a tradition that has lasted for centuries and survived the onslaught of “outdated ideas” even within the broader, secular, pseudo-Christian, world. I do not believe this to be coincidental. As someone who will almost always side with tradition, it came as a shock when I began to wonder if testimonies are actually harmful. There are many considerations, not least of which is the audience, but my conclusion is that the current state of the practice may very well do more harm than good, not only to potential converts but to our brothers and sisters and also even to the Gospel itself. Perhaps, even the greater mystery is their purpose.

What Is A Testimony?

The funny thing is that there is no definitive objective that testimonies serve. While discussing this subject with Admin, we realized that our understanding of why they even exist were different. I had always considered them to be primarily a tool for evangelism, whereas he viewed them as a means of encouragement among believers. This, in itself, can be seen as a danger. For something that is generally considered of such high importance, oughtn’t there be an agreed-upon understanding of what it is? Neither of these interpretations appear to be false, but they are separate. So it begs the question: “Should there be one definition? One objective?” Is one view a Biblical “testimony”, and the other something else? I will spare you any suspense. I haven’t the foggiest. We are given two basic options. Either: 1) “Testimony” is a broad umbrella term that allows for multiple interpretations, or 2) the word has a precise meaning, and Christians confuse two different words entirely. My purpose here is not to define the term but simply to wonder. Even using a single definition, is it possible for both perspectives to be true? When considering who you are addressing, your testimony is bound to change. A testimony shared on a Christian website intended to be read by other Christians will naturally read differently than a testimony shared by a Christian to a non-Christian co-worker, for example. The prior has no intention of converting since the conversion has already taken place. Instead, it would remind the believer of the power and open the door for the Holy Spirit to encourage and continue Its work. The latter seeks to open the door for the Holy Spirit to introduce Itself. Is one more “true” than the other? In most cases, not. After all, there are times when a Christian is in need of a testimony as much as a non-believer. Will the words change? Yes. Will the reason for the testimony be different? Yes. But is it still a “Testimony?”

A glance in the concordance of my Bible under “Testimony” provided a few passages, in particular, that seem to be useful in grasping an idea of what it means. Revelations 19:10 reads: And I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “See that you do not do that! I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren who have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” If Jesus’ testimony is the spirit of prophecy, then the act of declaring that spirit is to prophesy. In the way that prophecy is the revelation and truth of God, a “testament” is the proof1https://www.christianity.com/wiki/christian-terms/what-is-prophecy-meaning-of-prophesy.html2https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/testament. So, too, as Prophets prophesied the things to come and the coming messiah, a Testimony would be the declaration of the proof.

This is further confirmed by the words of John the Baptist in John 3:30-34. 30 He must increase, but I must decrease. 31 He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. 32 And what He has seen and heard, that He testifies; and no one receives His testimony. 33 He who has received His testimony has certified that God is true34 For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure.” How can a man claim to testify when his words are of earthly things alone? Of course, the answer is that such attempts are folly. According to 1 John 5:10: 10 He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son. The use of the words “witness” together with “testimony” lends itself to consider a legal gathering. A witness gives his testimony to the court in defense of the truth of what happened. For our purposes here, that would be the Heavenly Truth found in the Son. As we offer our testimonies, then, we are fulfilling the command found in 1 Peter 3:15. 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear;”

This does not, however, limit itself to instances of ministry. Church services are a gathering of believers to worship and to refresh themselves through, partly, the declaration of the Gospel. Are the sermons preached every Sunday a form of Testimony? By the understanding I have laid out, they would not be precluded; however, I am but of the earth and can speak only of earthly things. What do I know?

Perception and Reception

Here I will primarily be concerned with the standard Before/During/After the work of the Holy Spirit testimony. Generally, these consist of a “past wallowing in sin until one day, [X] happened, and I realized the state of my soul, and I was lifted out and onto the path of righteousness.” There is nothing inherently wrong with this expression of faith if told correctly. And depending on who you are witnessing to, this may be exactly what they need to hear. But knowing that is important before taking this route. There are essentially three major problems with how the unbeliever might interpret these attempts at displaying God’s mercy and power. Of course, when talking about being saved from sin, the question becomes, “What is sin?” and the source of morality becomes the point of discussion. Naturally, the source of morality is God, but the source of our knowledge of morality is the Bible. This point of fact is unavoidable when confronted by the curious or antagonistic. When presented with this information, a common response is, “So a book is all that keeps you from committing atrocities?” The answer to this is not a simple yes or no. While it is the Holy Spirit that sanctifies us, the Bible is not a bystander in the process. This is, expectedly, the cause of ridicule from some, and convincing them otherwise becomes increasingly difficult, especially in the West, where Christianity (and Christian morals) has had a profound influence to a point where they are (to a much less extent nowadays) the default. There are few who are unfamiliar with what it professes (or, at least, what they believe it professes). Most people have an established opinion of God, Christ, and the faith that worships them. This leads to the second problem, which is those who claim to already have a good sense of morality. They don’t need to believe in the Bible to be a good person. On the one hand, that is true. On the other, their “morality” was directly influenced by Christian civilization. The source of their “goodness” is still God, whether they realize it or not. This is true, both in the sense of being in a Christian environment their whole lives and also in the truth of the Scriptures. “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (James 1:17) Another variation of this argument, when hearing one’s testimony can be “I don’t suffer from major sins, so I guess I don’t need salvation.” Considering that many testimonies talk about God saving you from a bad life and major sins, when the focus is on a life turned around, it is difficult to argue against this. Only the Gospel can act as a counter-argument, which would, ironically, serve to undermine the original testimony.

“We have a tendency to prefer telling dramatic stories about dark, reckless pasts turned around at a sudden moment to grab the attention of the crowd and stir their emotions rather than describe the ebb and flow of real-faith stories.”3https://relevantmagazine.com/faith/what-we-get-wrong-about-giving-our-testimony/

Becca Vandekemp (“What We Get Wrong About ‘Giving Our Testimony’”)

Another issue arises when a person simply has no desire to be moral – or thinks that it doesn’t matter. At this point, even the most profound testimony does no good and will be left with emotionless indifference. In all of these cases, the receiving party will discredit any attempt to proselytize.

Strangely, rifts can be created among even Christians when dealing with testimonies. We know that sanctification is not immediate; nor does salvation completely eliminate sin from our lives. As Christians, both individually and as groups, we have tendencies to view brothers and sisters with separate experiences differently than we do with those who have had similar. This section is not making statements as to what happens broadly or on a regular basis. Instead, it deals with possibilities considering our sinful nature.

A simple assessment of the first hypothetical is when someone says, “That person isn’t a real Christian unless…” Paradoxically, it is possible for some who have had a real struggle to doubt the sincerity of those who grew up in the faith and also for those who haven’t known the really bad sins to have a tendency to look down on and doubt the true faith of the others. The latter, it seems, would be the most prevalent and often attributed to criminals, celebrities, and politicians – anyone who might gain from our sympathy. The reason is obvious. It is a common ploy. “I used to be bad, but I swear I’m better now.” Appealing to the power of God is a very strong argument among Christians because it is a very real power. The problem is that because of that, it can be abused and our faith taken advantage of. As a result, when a reformed sinner with a high profile professes Christ it is easy to doubt them. Conversely, when a person grows up in the Church, knows nothing else, and is sheltered from tests, conflicts, and other spiritual hardships (at least, for a time), how can one truly know? You have, on one hand, a seasoned and hardened Christian who has gone through hell and back, and on the other, a pastor’s kid from an affluent and faithful neighborhood. Who’s faith are you more sure of?

Just as individuals have their own histories and experiences, so too do Churches and even entire denominations. Historically some Churches might have engaged in dubious practices. Redemption is not for people alone but also for groups. Even so, reputations are difficult to shake. Even entire countries are not immune. Did not Nineveh repent before the prophecy/testimony given by Jonah?

And so I will show my greatness and my holiness, and I will make myself known in the sight of many nations. Then they will know that I am the LORD.

Ezekiel 38:23

Case Study: Asbury Vs. The Gospel

According to the scientific method, a hypothesis can not be supported with a single example but by testing the theory over and over. The most recent example of testimonies being shared en mass is the revival that took place at Asbury College. Sadly, few to none of them made any mention of the work of the cross or any such spiritual revelation or growth. The primary focus of the majority of them involved earthly hardships and blessings. When separated from the larger picture and the greater Heavenly blessing (ie Salvation), these personal stories cannot be separated from the teaching of a health and wealth gospel. The “being physically healed,” which is quite common (and inspiring), is one such example. The issue is when the testimony ends with being discharged from the hospital or “believe, and you can be healed, too.” While the power of the Holy Spirit involved in their lives is not in dispute, it is difficult to not question the purpose or motivation of the testimonies themselves. One such example is when a student told of his struggle to find a job. This is a very real struggle which I do not mean to underplay. The strange part is that the “glory be” moment of his testimony was when the crowd began to throw money on stage. Is charity a Christian virtue? Absolutely! Was the Holy Spirit at work to move the crowd to give? I will not deny it. Is this a testament to the work of Christ on the cross? I would argue not.

Tale of Two Cities

Hitherto, we have looked at the perception of giving testimonies, both from Christians and non-Christians. What are the doctrinal considerations? Are the modern use of testimonies even Biblical?

Previously, I wrote about how the use of testimonies could be counter-intuitive to convincing the non-believer with thoughts they might have or retorts they might provide. Let us assume, for a moment, that it proves successful. Even supposing the testimony is effective, the focus is on works and earthly behavior before and after conversion. Of course, we have dual citizenship, on earth and in Heaven, and Godly living is essential for Christians “Therefore by their fruits you will know them.” (Matt 7:15) While it is imperative that we live accordingly here, Jesus’ death and Ressurection was not so that we can live better lives on Earth. He died, was buried, and rose from the dead so that we could live for eternity. With testimonies, all too often, the focus is on this world instead of the next. Perhaps the earliest example of a testimony found in Scripture – which most closely resembles what modern testimonies attempt to imitate – comes from Romans 6:1-11. Throughout this passage, the focus is not on life before and after conversion but instead on the principle of the Resurrection and Salvation. In other words, the best [only] testimony is the Gospel.

“What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.”

Romans 6:1-11

Sources:


  • Sydney Carton Avatar
  • Author Information:

Suffering And Judgement Among The Nations

Every day, we engage with suffering. It’s often described as “a fact of life” and, at other times, viewed as a “means to an end.” Philosophers throughout history have wondered if this pain is merely an indelible mark on our existence, while others argue that it is the forge by which our virtue is […]

Towards a Christian Understanding of Religious Liberty

As far as metrics are concerned, quantifying Religious Liberty is a nearly impossible task. The current methods of appraising persecution have proven themselves to be woefully inadequate, often confusing democracy itself with the true object of Christian martyrdom. Even the act of defining Religious Liberty is a complicated undertaking. For starters, it is impossible […]

Mustering the Redeemed Right

Francisco Franco, like every other dictator, is a controversial figure. Some time ago, as he came up in conversation, it occurred to me that I didn’t know much about the man. Charles Haywood’s article, On Franco, soon came to my attention, which I read with great interest. At the end of it, he asked […]

Why Christianity Lost the Race Debate: Definitional Disaster

The White Christian will, at one point or another, be called racist, so it is important to properly understand the topic so as to not be caught off guard, confused, or manipulated. A simple gander online will reveal the obvious: there are many conflicting definitions people use to define “Race” and “Racist,” making it […]

The Enemy of America

For better or for worse, the title of this post could very easily have been “The Enemy of the World.” The combined fate of both Europe and America are, in many ways, inseparable. “The Enemy of Europe,” Published in 1953, is where Francis Parker Yockey asserted that Europe should view the Soviet Union as […]

Evola, Mishima, and the Modern Right

I will begin by stating the obvious: the United States is in bad shape. Many have written about the cause of our current predicament and more, still, on the solution. I am not so arrogant as to attempt to do here what others have done much better than what I could hope to do, […]





Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *