I’m not sure where we modern evangelicals get the idea that our personal testimony is a “private” thing. We may not actually say that out loud, but by not sharing our personal testimony with others that is in essence what we are saying. It’s my testimony, something between me and my God. No where in scripture does it say this, so in light of hoping to be a doer of the Word and not just a reader of the Word, I went ahead and posted my own personal testimony on my blog today.
The Story of the Woman and the Well
I don’t know how many times I have read through the story in John 4:39-42 about Jesus and this “despised and immoral” woman at the well, but today, as I contemplated the reaction of the woman I thought about my own personal testimony and how many times (or I should say how few times) I have done what this woman did in verse 4:28-29. She left her water jar (her purpose for being at the well), went into town and gave her testimony to anyone who would listen.
This story is contrasted by the story of Nicodemus in chapter 3 who was a “religious” person of faith in that day, compared to the woman who was a despised by society, an immoral Samaritan. But look at the end result from the BKC chart below (click pic to see full chart), the woman was converted, she gave her personal testimony to others, and then others came to believe in Jesus Christ.
The “Faithless” in our Culture Today
Putting it in post-modern terminology we can understand, it was recently presented to me like looking at a modern church-goer (the Jew) and the homosexual or atheist (the Samaritan) of our twenty-first century society. While we evangelicals are quick to point out the sins of homosexuals and argue with the atheists who possibly represent to us the antithesis of faith and religion, it was this person who received the call of Jesus, and then proclaimed it to the world, not the church-goer.
When you look at our culture today the two groups I mentioned above probably know more about Christianity than evangelicals do, and they give their testimony loud and clear to whoever will listen. Those two minority groups in particular have educated themselves well in the arguments for their way of life, and how to oppose Christianity. Evangelicals though often stumble and fumble with what to say when asked simple questions about their own faith. Many today will not respond to apologetical arguments because they know their talking points so well they can refute all those common points of contention, but it’s hard to argue with a truly changed and transformed life. That’s the point of your personal testimony.
During part of my time in seminary it was required for us to actually write down our personal testimony. That exercise alone was an eye opener to me. I had to take a real look at what actually is my testimony, and until then, I’m not sure I was prepared defend my faith or give a proper testimony when needed.
True Faith Moves to Confrontation with Jesus Christ
Look what happened when she shared her faith with the town. “Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony”, but the key to this verse is understanding the next set of verses in 40-41 where the “witness of the woman led to the Samaritans’ personal confrontation with Jesus”, giving them true and lasting faith in Jesus.[1] Jesus didn’t need the testimony of this woman (John 5:34) but because of the rejection of Israel in chapter 3 her testimony was more effective than the “religious” person.
As we move into verse 42 we see that ultimately the person coming to faith solely based on the testimony of an individual is secondary. These Samaritans proclaimed for themselves “for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this [Jesus] is indeed the Savior of the world.” Moving from the personal testimony of an individual, true faith then moves to it’s own experience and the “confrontation” with Jesus Himself.
If We Claim a Saving Faith We are Called to Share It
While this isn’t one of those traditional “share your faith” set of verses for the modern church-goer, it was a call to me to make sure we don’t just play “religion” and end up totally missing the point. This post could head in so many different directions from here but it really was meant to be a simple straight forward post. If we claim to be believers in Christ, we are called to share our faith with others.
[1] John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, , The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Vol. 2, 2 vols. (Chicago, IL: David C Cook Publishers, 1983), 284-288.
Posts Related to This Topic:
Of course this is utter ridiculousness, but, that severely flawed logic seems to be what is prevailing in our culture today. This topic, which I usually just tend to leave alone, is overpowering the news, blogs, and culture lately (and is certainly nothing new under the sun, gay’s have been trying to justify their actions for millennia, see Why is Being Gay a Sin? for a civil discussion, Does Romans 1:26 Condemn Lesbians? for the absurd justification, and then an honest “Christian Perspective”, not forgetting to throw in Anne Rice who recently “quit” Christianity on Facebook [comments in pdf,] with Mark Driscoll’s response for the Washington Post, because she didn’t want to be “anti-gay anymore”, and the countless trash talk about Proposition 8 in California).
With Proposition 8 being overturned by the California courts, this seems destined for the Supreme Court (where they probably don’t want to deal with it either). The Boston Globe did a huge photo spread called Same Sex Marriage about a week ago and the responses to that article show why this, unfortunately, is THE topic of our day for Christians and the church. This discussion really wasn’t intended to launch into whether being gay is a sin or not, but to show the absurd arguments on both sides, which lack any careful thought.
This comment below is typical when reading trash talk on the news sites, and was made by someone who used the title “I Feel Drawn Towards Christianity, But I’m Gay”, which then received very complimentary responses, with little question for the lifestyle itself, or with sound argument for or against Christians and the homosexual lifestyle, and what scripture has to say about it’s effects and consequences.
I was surprised in a few ways, one by how openly acceptable the Christian responses were to this person. Not that they were accepting of the person, that’s great, but accepting of all aspects of the persons lifestyle, with not much need for contemplation (although some did suggest the person generically seek God’s direction). The other surprise was how utterly weak the reasoning and arguments were that were used on both sides.
I am certainly no expert on this topic whatsoever, and there are many who can soundly argue, on both sides, but those seem to be few and far between. No gay person I talk to (and many Christians for that matter) can give a sound theological argument, backed and based on scripture (since this person “feels drawn to Christianity”). The majority of the arguments put forth are emotional arguments, which are impossible to argue against in a rational manner. This is the argument that was given in this particular case:
The Bible also condemns divorce, the eating of pork and shrimp, and says that men shouldn’t sit on the same chairs as women who are menstruating.
The argument seems to lack even a surface level study of scripture, but most Christians responded with nothing other than an emotional response. As with much of Scripture in our culture today, these verses are taken so much out of context for the use of the argument for a homosexual lifestyle I am surprised they were made? I am not being mean or hateful in spirit here, but seriously, if you are gay, this is your argument?
- The Bible condemns the eating of pork.
- We eat pork today.
- Therefore, homosexuality is ok in the sight of the Lord.
There are so many things that could be addressed but at the basic level, in Mark 7:18-19 Jesus declared all foods to be clean, he didn’t declare all forms of sex to be clean. A better argument that perhaps shows a little more clearly why scripture says that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful in God’s eyes (and there are many things that are actually still seen as sinful in God’s eyes today, besides homosexuality), would be:
Point 1 on Sin:
- The Bible says sin is detestable in God’s eye’s.
- Therefore any continuous sinful act is not honoring to God.
Point 2 on Marriage:
- The Bible defines sex outside of marriage as sin.
- The Bible defines marriage as a monogamous union between a man and a woman.
- Therefore any nonrepentant sexual relationship of any kind outside marriage is sin in God’s eyes.
- Therefore a nonrepentant homosexual lifestyle is sin.
- Therefore a nonrepentant adulterous relationship is sin.
- Therefore any sexual relationship before marriage is sin.
I rarely see those “hateful” Christians everyone seems to refer to today that will acknowledge that the last three are equally sin, and equally condemned by scripture, but, that doesn’t mean that either is less or more acceptable to God as a way to live that honor’s God. I do not say that in a hateful manner but in an examination of scripture. I also recognize that many, or most, “gay Christians” will take issues with my argument above and defend it away in some manner. The statements above are all based on scripture and can all be backed theologically with sound argument.
Our culture as a whole is continually refusing to see objective truths in the Bible today. Whether we like to ignore them in our day or not, they still exist, there are still things that God says are good, and those things God says are bad, we just seem to have so much knowledge in everything that we have no knowledge in the actual truth anymore.
Posts Related to This Topic:
I wanted to go ahead and post an update to my post called Christian Photographer Refused Gay Wedding and Lost Lawsuit where the NM State Commission ruled against a photographer who refused to shoot a non-traditional (gay) wedding because of her beliefs.
This lawsuit has now been appealed by the ADF (Alliance Defense Fund) and you can read the Elane Photography Appeal Document.
According to the ADF, they are:
ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith.… …to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.
and they have now, as of July 1st, filed suit against the N.M. Commission’s ruling. In their press release, they say, in part:
The commission ruled that the company, run by a Christian husband and wife, was guilty of sexual orientation discrimination under state antidiscrimination laws for declining to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony.
Christians in the marketplace should not be penalized for abiding by their beliefs anymore than anyone else should, said ADF Senior Counsel Jordan Lorence… The commission’s decision demonstrated stunning disregard for our client’s First Amendment rights. read the rest here…
This is a very interesting case to me. The fact that a photographer was told, by the state, they had to take a job they didn’t want because it went against their beliefs (besides a whole host of other issues at hand), is just not what this country represents.
Hopefully the appeal will go well and we will not be confirmed into a state of sexual toleration over first amendment rights and basic freedoms we have by living in this country.
Posts Related to This Topic:
In January 2008 Elane, a freelance photographer who owns Elane Photography, refused to shoot a gay wedding between two woman and was later sued by Vanessa Willock for discrimination against a person’s sexual orientation. Elane has now lost the lawsuit and is appealing the ruling by the New Mexico State Human Rights Commission.
So, anything goes now, it’s official. Now I understand from the start of this article that I live in Alabama, where I would probably be sued if I did take wedding photography of a gay marriage, but this is just over the edge. This article is not about gay marriage, really. It is about the freedoms you have as a small business owner, and citizen of this country called America. Today, most of you are almost automatically bias and on a “side” depending on your current life situation, but still, this is really out of hand.
Vanessa Willock vs Elane Photography [HRD# 06-12-20-0685]
This morning while getting ready for service, I started reading my usual list of blogs and news articles when I came across the most ridiculous story I have seen in quite some time. In New Mexico there is a woman who has a wedding photography business called Elane Photography.
She was asked to shoot a wedding between two woman (one being Vanessa Willock, a professor at UNM) in New Mexico. When she refused to take the job saying she only shoots “traditional” weddings, she was sued.
Ok, nothing new here in this day and time I guess. Sad, but typical. In this country now, anyone can sue anyone for any reason at all, but one big difference in this case, she lost. The NM Human Rights Division found her guilty and required to pay damages. (See now also the Elaine Photography Case before the Human Rights Commission in the State of New Mexico, and their Final Ruling, see also the Alliance Defense Fund Fact Sheet for Elane Photography.)
Vanessa Willock Was Laying in Wait, it Seems
The gay couple who wanted Elane’s photography services, filed this complaint, but it looks like she was just waiting for someone to turn her down. Turns out of course that along with working for UNM, Ms. Vanessa Willock is also an EEO Compliance Representative with the Office of Equal Opportunity.
What does she do there? She investigates claims of discrimination and sexual harassment for the state, and to top it off, she is also a member of the Diversity Committee at the University of New Mexico. All that begs the question of the motives Willock has or had when trying to hire this photographer and a case could be made that she was just waiting for someone to say no!
New Mexico Now Picking Your Clients?
Last time I checked we still lived in a free country? This is not some big organization under equal opportunity laws, this is a two person husband and wife photography business. I don’t know anyone that does freelance work that is required to take a job, but now the state of New Mexico is telling this couple what business clients they have to accept!
News West 9: The state Human Rights Commission ruled in April that Elane Photography violated the Human Rights Act by discriminating against Vanessa Willock on the basis of sexual orientation.
Willock contended Albuquerque photographer Elaine Huguenin told her that she photographed only traditional marriages.
I don’t really care what the issue is pertaining to, how in the world can the state tell a two person business what clients they can and can’t take. I know there are a ton of photographers who have refused certain jobs for one reason or another. What happened if the “minister” refused to marry them (unlikely I know, they would have hand picked her) on the basis of Paul’s letter to the Romans or something. Is the state going to “force” religious institutions now to marry people just because the state says it is ok?
Any small business can be sued for any reason if they refuse their services to anyone now I guess. What ever happened to “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”? Guess those days are long gone and the only thing that remains is the actual sign on the business door.
A free marketplace dictates that if one business refuses, another will receive that business. You know, Supply and demand, expenses, profit, all that business type stuff. Obviously the money is less important to Elane Photography than the issue, so just take your business somewhere else. Do we have to sue EVERYONE now?
New Mexico Getting Slammed for Good Reason
I guess this is where New Mexico wants to be. Apparently there are also 20 others states that have these types of refusal laws in place. You take one tiny, and I mean TINY minority (the gay population is said to be around 2%) of any kind, doesn’t matter what it is, their rights supersede those of everyone else. There are so many issues with this particular case it is hard to know what to pick on, but leave it up to the bloggers and they will do a good job as always. So, blogs and news sites galore are slamming New Mexico for good reason. Just to name a few, we have:
- Christian Photographer Hauled before Commission for Refusing Same-Sex Job
- Christian Photographer tried before Human Rights Division in New Mexico
- Elane photography violated NM law, rules commision
- NM commission rules photographer discriminated against gay couple
and it really just goes on and on. I am sorry, but how stupid are these people on the New Mexico commission or the state in total for putting these ridiculous laws in place and for telling a two person business what clients they have to take. Not only is the state telling me how to run my business but they are requiring someone to do something that is against their religious principles in favor of something that most people in this country are against in the first place.
Have You as a Photographer Ever Refused a Job?
So, I know there are tons of Christian Wedding photographers out there. Are you going to do a wedding because the state tells you to? I really don’t care what the issue is, gay marriage, the intelligence level of the bride/groom, green men from mars, who cares, you own your own business so you can take the clients you want to take, right?
Well, the suit is now up for appeal and The Alliance Defense Fund‘s appeal asks the state district court to reverse the commission’s decision and dismiss Willock’s complaint.” Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and Ms Willock will have to pay for her own expenses and this won’t set a precedent across the states, making it illegal to not work, if that is the choice you make.
Update :: You can also see additional information at Willock vs Elane Photography Refusing Gay Wedding Update
Posts Related to This Topic:
This is my first post for the Blogger Small Group so I hope this is the format as intended for the group. I too am quite fascinated with the scripture reading for this week, chosen to be James, Chapter 2. My wife and I even discussed part of this chapter without even knowing it on the way home from our service on Sunday a few days ago, then I read it.
Great choice for this week, and I am already looking forward to the next week. If you would like to join in just visit the link above from Vagabond.
From the Book of James, Chapter 2
I made the mistake of reading Vagabond’s well thought interpretation and post on James 2 first, I think next time I will write mine out in full, then read everyone else’s. His point was on the basis of discrimination we as Christians have against the homosexual lifestyle. Very interesting comments, never equated these verses to homosexuality but that’s what makes these groups great, so many different opinions makes you think again.
To read my comments rant on his post, go read Blogger Small Group and you will see mine and everyone else’s comments from the Small Group on James 2.
This chapter was broken up into two pieces, The Sin of Partiality and Faith and Works (always a favorite topic among us Believers, huh). I will just take them in two sections. Some I see go verse by verse, I may do that at some point but I like a contextual look sometimes.
The Sin of Partiality
Chapter 2:1-13 This is one of those “sins” we often forget, I think. It is a natural process we try to go through (to be non-partial that is), of choosing who we think is worthy and not worthy. I think in our time, two distinct groups comes to mind. The homeless and family.
With these two groups as the focus, I think the next section fits right in, and it is no coincidence (to me) that the two groups here, are also the focus of the next section. How many times do we as Believers come across the poor, or the homeless type (I say type here because we have drifters around our cities but not many homeless) and we turn a deaf ear to them.
Homeless. I must have a bulls eye on my head because sometimes I feel like I can rarely go to a gas station without being approached by someone asking for money. It isn’t like I am dressed like some high falootin’ business man, I am usually in a t-shirt and jeans. But, I have to stop and think. How many other times have I talked to the person getting gas in the pump across the way, or someone inside getting a drink?
Family. How about family members. This one is a hard one because it hits home I think, but how often do we see the effects of a home that shows partiality to one sibling or another? I think it has been well documented that this sin has a great effect on the later lives of the ones involved in this type of sin, in the home.
We should not show partiality or favoritism to any group or people. If we talk someone at the gas station, we should be blind to their financial situation, and we certainly shouldn’t show favoritism at home.
Faith and Works
This next section is one of my favorites, and one that is used by churches to get people to do something. The key verse in this section to me is verses 24-26, and I love the way the chapter ends.
24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. 25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
The body without the Spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. What a powerful statement. It is important in how we live this life and what we do.
This is probably one of the most mis-interpreted scriptures as well, at least I hear it taken out of context quite often. What I think this verse IS NOT saying is that we are saved by our works. NO. Many non-believers think you can do good in this life and that will get you to heaven. Wrong. If we read the scripture, it is not by works along. Christ must be involved.
I think this section goes right along with the previous section because it talks about the poor, and the family.
v. 15-16 this clearly shows us that a person in need should have his basic needs met first. How can we offer up the Truth if the person is hungry. The less fortunate of our world, goes right back to the first section on partiality.
v. 21 this is the family section… Abraham was doing an unbelievable work of faith
Ok, so there is my run through on James chapter 2. Let me here your comments below and don’t forget to link back here if you have a comment you would like to share. Looking forward to next week as well.
