“Witnessing”

There appears among our churches a growing concern for evangelism. One can only welcome efforts of church members to speak up for Christ wherever He gives them the opportunity to do so. Such activity is commonly being called “witnessing” and our churches are in various ways encouraging such “personal witnessing.” While the activity is to be appreciated, a study of the Bible’s use of the words “witness” and “witnessing” suggests that our use of them for our evangelistic activity is at least questionable. It may both express and encourage some confused thinking about what we are really doing and called to do.

Consulting a concordance will show that the words in the Bible which arc translated “witness” refer to the giver or giving of testimony as in a courtroom of what one has seen as an “eye-witness.” Exactly as in our usage of such words today, they refer to people who were present and saw what happened and therefore can be called to give evidence from personal observation of what the facts were in a matter which may be disputed. Such witnesses (1) must have been on the scene to see and hear what happened and (2) must in giving their evidence confine themselves to facts, not embroider them with guesses or impressions or expressions of their own feelings. It seems to me that in our talk of evangelistic “witnessing” this is being lost from sight. In this authentic or biblical sense of the word we arc not and cannot be “witnesses” of the gospel for we were not there when the events took place.

The real and proper witnesses were the people who were on the scene. The clearest delineation of the role of those real “witnesses” is that given by the Apostle Peter when preaching the gospel in the house of Cornelius (Acts 10:39–43). “And we are witnesses of all things which he did . . . Him God raised up the third day, and gave him to be made manifest, not to all the people, but unto witnesses that were chosen before of God, even to us, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. And he charged us to preach unto the people, and to testify that this is he who is ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead. To him bear all the prophets witness, that through his name everyone that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins.” Although the prophets “witness” might not seem to qualify as such “eye-witnesses‘ testimony” we must not forget that Peter in his first letter (I Peter 1:11) explained that “the Spirit of Christ which was in them . testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that should follow them.” It is apparent in this whole passage as in many others throughout the Bible that the emphasis in the word “witness” is on giving direct testimony by one who was on the scene, especially by those who had walked and talked with the Lord after His resurrection.

In this direct and proper sense of the word later believers in Christ are not and cannot be “witnesses.” We are called and led to believe in Him on the testimony of others. Thomas, one of the original “witnesses” was told, “Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” (John 20:29). And Peter had to write such believers who had not been direct witnesses, “whom not having seen ye love; on whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice greatly with joy unspeakable and full of glory: receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls” (I Peter 1:8, 9).

“Confessing”

If our duty as believers is not in the strict and proper sense of the word to “witness,” what is it? It is, in the Bible’s expression, to “confess.” That word means, literally, “to say with” someone else. Who is the “someone” with whose words we are to agree? Is it the “apostle” such as Peter who was a first-hand “witness”? It is more than that. Consider the illuminating explanation of this point in I John 5:7, 9–12. “It is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.” “If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater for the witness of God is this, that he hath born witness concerning his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in him: he that belicveth not God hath made him a liar; because he hath not believed in the witness that God hath borne concerning his Son. And the witness is this, that God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath the life; he that hath not the Son of God hath not the life.” In other words our “confessing” is properly “saying with” God what He has said through the “testimony” of His witnesses.

The Bible’s Words Are Important

Are our use of such words as “witnessing” and “confessing” important enough to be worth discussing? As long as one believes in and tries to speak for Christ, does it matter how he regards and does that speaking? I believe that it does matter. Especially in our times a preoccupation with people‘s feelings and impulses is displacing concern about God’s Word and its teachings or “doctrines.” Our women’s liberation champions arc frankly telling the churches that they should be less concerned about Bible exegesis and pay more attention to. what the Spirit is saying through the convictions and demonstrated abilities of their women members. If the church is to escape the hopeless confusion into which such subjectivistic control by personal impulses and sentiments threatens to engulf it, it will have to look much more closely than we have often been in the habit of doing at what God in His Word has said His gospel is and at the way He has said that He wants it to be believed, obeyed and brought to the world. Only the clarity of His inspired Scriptures can deliver us and our labors from the confusion of our times.