Evidence for God from Science

I've only been on this site a very short time, but one thing I've noticed on several threads is the use of the word "witness" or "witnessing". I've never been able to understand this term relative to the way many are currently using it. I'm familiar with the various witnesses in scripture, however this word is being inaccurately used today. To be a witness, one MUST actually be physically in person having first hand comprehension of the situation they are testifying about. It seems that those who freely use this word are confusing it with belief which then springs into faith which prods them into wanting to tell others. Because of their honest and true convictions, they then feel that they have become a "witness" to the things which they "testify" about. Folks, this just isn't correct. A witness is still a witness, was then-is now. If you weren't living during the times of whatever point you are trying to teach (from scripture) then you cannot be a witness. We believe because there WERE actual witnesses, but this doesn't mean we now become one! We must be careful in our every word and understanding of God and HIS words not only because God has told us so, but also because of the many who misunderstand these teachings. OUR words can be wrong and misapplied.. God's word can only be misrepresented by those who seek to do so in their own interpretations and thus proliferate misunderstandings.

I will certainly agree that the usage of the word is not perfectly true to the definition you are using. We weren't there so we cannot offer testimony to the actual events, and therefore we are not witnesses to the events.

That being said, however, we are witnesses to how Christ lives in us, and in that respect we are true to the definition. The fact that I can offer somebody an eyewitness account to how Christ works in me fulfills the definition. Christ is alive in me and I can witness to Him.

Many thanks, "zoegirl" for the reply! I certainly do understand the point you've made and don't necessarily disagree with it. However there should be a better descriptive word other than witness used because it infers ones own personal observance and experience which can be altered by many emotions/situations . I don't mean to be "nit-picking" by any means, but the main point that I was trying to make is that often we say things just because it's the "thing to say" without really thinking it through. Another example is the word "Pastor". It's become synonymous with a person who is a preacher. The biblical pastor was always an elder who was also a teacher. An elder can be a preacher, but not every preacher is a pastor. Therefore if we call every preacher our pastor, then it follows that we are also calling him an elder. Not every preacher is an elder. Just a bit of "food for thought"...MYSELF included!

After thought and study, it appears a more correct word would be "discipling" rather than witnessing. The activities of the disciples of scripture did the things that people of our time are calling a witness. So, as we keep within the holy scriptural instruction, examples, and inferences... let us openly and lovingly DISCIPLE!

thanks for letting me put in my "two cents" dear readers!

So would the term "Testimony" be a better word?

And by testimony I mean: The communication of our experience in how Christ changed our lives, whether by words or by deed.

Our testimony can have an effect on people to where they want to know more.

But of course the REASON our testimony has an effect is because we are being lead by the Holy Spirit.

But the term used is not nearly as important as the what a person understands it to be, whether you call it "witnessing" or "sharing your testimony", the key importan part is that we should do it.

YLTYLT wrote:So would the term "Testimony" be a better word?

And by testimony I mean: The communication of our experience in how Christ changed our lives, whether by words or by deed.

Our testimony can have an effect on people to where they want to know more.

But of course the REASON our testimony has an effect is because we are being lead by the Holy Spirit.

But the term used is not nearly as important as the what a person understands it to be, whether you call it "witnessing" or "sharing your testimony", the key importan part is that we should do it.

Whenever we represent the word of God, it is of ultimate importance to be accurate in that representation. The words we use carry meanings that can be, even though understood by us, misunderstood by the one we are wanting to convince. If we are being "lead by the Holy Spirit", then we must make sure that we, ourselves, aren't putting "words in the mouth of God" that weren't meant...simply because that word feels right to our purpose. A person that knows the world, but little about God will interpret our words by what they mean to him through the dictionary understanding that he was taught or can refer to. You are SO right that we should be doing the teaching..but still we must be accurate in our presentation.

While I agree that we should be as accurate as possible with our words when giving testimony, I think it is also important to understand how the person to whom we are testifying use the language with which we communicate. An example might be when we are talking with an elderly person(s) who use an older definition of testimony; "To bear witness to." or "A solemn declaration or affirmation made to establish some fact."-WEBSTERS NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY copyright 1953 by G. & C. MERRIAM CO. Rather than being so concerned with the words we choose, it is important to be "in tune" with how others may interpret our words and phrases. In some cases, we may have to employ "linguistic gymnastics" in order to be clear and concise in our "delivery." (Are you "seeing" my "point"?)

A lawyer friend of mine was the person who explained this concept to me some years ago while talking about how a jury can be on a totally different "page" than the case being presented-i.e. the jury was more concerned about evidence in the car than they were about evidence found on the alledged perp after the attorneys had made the presentation with little said about the contents of the car. In other words, it wasn't what the lawyers had said, but it was what the jury had thought the lawyers had said!

Whether we give testimony or witness to someone, we would do well to also listen to the person to whom we are trying to help if for no other reason than to be sure we are in the same "venue."

It's not what I have said here that counts-it's what you think I have said.

Yes definitely we need to teach the person not just say the words.

Teaching is transference of truth. If truth has not been transferred then teaching is not taking place. But I also think the Holy spirit can take our most inept communicaiton skills and convict the heart of someone that wants to learn.

YLTYLT wrote:Yes definitely we need to teach the person not just say the words.

Teaching is transference of truth. If truth has not been transferred then teaching is not taking place. But I also think the Holy spirit can take our most inept communicaiton skills and convict the heart of someone that wants to learn.

Good point. I'm certain the Holy Spirit has helped me communicate to others. I believe this because of my inability to come up with the right words at times and then the right words are spoken from me but not of me. What else but the Holy Spirit could do that? There have been times when a very remote thought(s) has entered my conscience and the thought became words, even when the remote thought was seemed lost in obscurity or perhaps oblivion.