Restoring Apologetics to Evangelism, Part 4
Problem: Personal testimony is not only unbiblical, it also creates a conflict in Biblical texts.
In
the CRI article referenced earlier, I explained why various texts used
to support the idea of “personal testimony” in the Bible are wrong. To
this I can add that personal testimony – which encourages the measuring
of behavior as a criterion for conversion – creates an obvious conflict
with many Biblical texts in which Biblical characters are (or seem to
be) “behaving badly” – which in turn either compels us to defend these
figures, or live with an epistemic inconsistency.
I
don’t need to name too many of these Biblical examples: Whether it’s
Abraham lying to Pharaoh about Sarah; whether it is Jesus or Paul using
harsh language against their opponents, doesn’t matter: If we’ve
encouraged nonbelievers to check behavior in order to validate the truth
of Christianity, we’ve set ourselves up for the task of defending not
only our behavior, but that of Biblical figures. (Of course, as noted,
many such charges against Biblical figures are either blown out of
proportion, or false; but that is beside the point.)
Relatedly,
my ministry vice president made an excellent point. Josh McDowell once said that “no one can argue”
with your personal testimony. More specifically, he has said:
For
example, let's say a student comes into the room and says, 'Guys, I
have a stewed tomato in my right tennis shoe. This tomato has changed my
life. It has given me a peace and love and joy that I never experienced
before, not only that, but I can now run the 100-yard dash in 10
seconds flat.'
It is hard to argue
with a student like that if his life backs up what he says (especially
if he runs circles around you on the track). A personal testimony is
often a subjective argument for the reality of something. Therefore,
don't dismiss a subjective experience as being irrelevant.
Indeed?
My ministry vice president ministers to inmates in his local jail, and
he encountered an inmate who gave a glowing “personal
testimony” of how his life had been changed – by converting to Islam. I
met such inmates myself while I worked as a prison librarian. By
McDowell’s logic, this inmate and his conversion to Islam suggests that
Islam is a valid faith; we can’t dismiss his subjective experience as
being irrelevant.
But in fact, we should –
because following this line, any time any professing Christian feels
depressed, or falls into sin, or even shows an uncritical nature, it is
an argument against Christianity. Likewise, if anyone becomes a
Scientologist, a Mormon, or even an atheist, and finds their lives
positively “transformed” it is an argument “for” their belief system –
and by default, against Christianity, since the implication of
McDowell’s point is that Christianity does the best (if not the
exclusive) job when it comes to transforming lives.
I’ll have one more entry before we turn to a positive case for how evangelism ought to be conducted.
Comments
Thank you again for your posts and all your hard work.
God bless
Tony
"No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, 'Know the LORD,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest," declares the LORD. "For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."[NIV]
That does not mean you just have my relationship with God, you must have your own. Nor does it mean you must have a dramatic testimony because that is a mold, having your own relationship means it's the way you and God work it out not the way you imitate a mold.
What I really advocate is following the leading of the Spirit. If you feel led to tell your testimony do it. If you feel led to make logical arguments do so. If you don't know what God is leading you to do then do what you know to do.
As for the tomato: replicate that. And for the inmates: Islam is a tree you will know by its fruit. Christianity is a different tree with different fruit. I wouldn't deny for a moment that Islam can change peoples' lives. Let the reader understand.
When it comes to Christianity, the good news is Christ showing God's love for the world, and a new covenant based on forgiveness. It is absolutely founded in the world of objective facts; whether the ripples reach us personally is still part of that picture and part of our credentials to carry that message.
Take care & God bless
WF
Then it's not a very solid basis for evangelism, is it?
>>> The truth of any faith doesn't depend on the life of its followers -- but those lives will still forever be part of the picture.
And it was our mistake to allow that to happen.
>>>And for the inmates: Islam is a tree you will know by its fruit. Christianity is a different tree with different fruit. I wouldn't deny for a moment that Islam can change peoples' lives. Let the reader understand.
Understand what, exactly? That my point is valid? Because that's all that can be taken from it. Amen?
You're having a different discussion with Joe than the related point here. Evangelism isn't about us, & that's a good thing for people to understand. But we're always going to be part of the picture. If we're like a 450-lb person advocating a health system, we're going to have credibility issues. If we present the message of forgiveness and come across as a jerk, we get the "noisy gong / clanging cymbal" effect that St Paul wrote about. We are ambassadors; how we conduct ourselves can support -- or undermine -- the One we represent. It will always be that way.
Re: Christianity v. Islam (Jesus and Mohammed): If people can see different fruit, they will more easily see that they're dealing with different trees.
Take care & God bless
WF