<Theofragen>

In my last post I fleshed out a few implications of a program-focused approach to congregational life in light of a people-focused one. That was largely descriptive, although it was not difficult to ascertain which method I prefer. I would now like to move beyond description and maybe even deconstruction, to a prescriptive mode.

Growing up in conservative evangelicalism, I heard a great deal of lip-service being paid to a programitized aberration of being/bearing witness to God's goodness, called "witnessing." In youth group we were told to "witness" to our friends. This consisted of telling other people about what God had done for us in the person of Jesus Christ and offering them an opportunity to accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior. I followed this program rather strictly and "shared my faith" with anyone who would listen. The premise behind my verbal displays of persuasion was laudable, albeit misdirected. My method, however, was lamentable.

In high school I read every word of Josh McDowell's two-volume apologetic treatise, Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Somehow, being and bearing witness was supplanted by witnessing which was then supplanted by argumentation which was finally supplanted by antagonism. Before I knew it, my witnessing was reduced to verbal confrontations, judgmental critiques on the life-choices of my peers and religious elitism. For me, this program of witnessing became an end in itself. It was no longer about bearing witness to what God had done in my life. I had turned into a spiritual shylock, demanding remittance for God as payment from my victims for their 'wayward lifestyles.' Is that was Jesus had in mind when he commissioned his disciples (learners) to be apostles (those sent with a message)? Were the apostles collectors of delinquent debts? Does that make God some kind of a pimp?

Keep Reading...

Darrell Guder, notes:

By defining the character of the call to witness in this way, we emphasize that in the strictest sense, the commission to be witness is granted by God independently of any causes or motivations in our human existence. We present no abilities or needs or desires that would justify the granting of this commission; there is no form of human creativity or virtue that is a necessary prerequisite for this calling. It comes from outside ourselves and is, in fact, a constant surprise for us. It is the result of God's initiation of God's mission. (60)

It seems to me that witness is something we are commissioned by God to do and to be. Being/bearing witness is intrinsically people-oriented. Witnessing, on the other hand, is a program, it's task-oriented. Maybe I misheard my youth pastor and I'm way off base here, but I understood witnessing to be convincing other people that they should be Christians. It was like a theological debate club.

Guder rightly stresses the ambiguity of the word "witness" as referring both to the person as witness and to the activity of witness, testimony (p. 56, fn. 24). This is a central facet of the New Testament. The English word "martyr," which we usually reserve for those who died for their faith, is the same word in Greek that we translate elsewhere as "witness." Were the early Christian martyr's more likely killed for their words or their lifestyle? Think about it.

Within the emerging conversation, which is still dominated by recovering evangelicals, many have rejected the conservative program called 'witnessing.' I'm worried, however, that we have also placed a kind of moratorium on bearing witness. Again, Guder writes, "The life of the community is the primary form of its witness, and it is also the equipper and supporter of each individual Christian in the practice of his or her vocation as witnessing for Christ" (68). In many of the conversations I have had with unchurched folks in my area, they share with me that their biggest grievance against Christians is that, to put it colloquially, they talk-the-talk but do not walk-the-walk. In other words, Christians are hypocrites. It seems to me that bearing witness can often supplant being witness.

As Christ-followers, we are commissioned by God to bear the image of Christ in whatever culture we find ourselves in. We need to lead with an ontology of witness. Being a Christ-follower is to pervade who we are in culture. Only after members of our community have experienced us as individuals and communities bearing witness to the Missio Dei, ought we follow the Spirit's leading to give voice to the hope that subsumes us. Once we programatize being/bearing witness under the rubric of witnessing, we only bear witness to ourselves, not God. Peace.

Being and Bearing Witness not Witnessing

2 Comments: