|
 I
am told that two “elders” (?) all of twenty years old, asked
their host if he believed the scripture re. “witnessing”;
i.e., “in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may
be established.”? he answered that he did: and then one young
man turned to his companion and asked him to bear witness.
The
youth said, “I bear witness that Joseph Smith was a prophet of
God.” Whereupon, the first youth also said, “I bear witness
that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God.”
Well,
that settled it! Joseph Smith must have been a prophet of
God for both young men “bore witness” — or did they??
In
genuine trial, does God or the court consider every one who can
speak — utter words — a “witness”? We know better! To
qualify as a witness, one must have knowledge of that to
which he testifies. John could “bear witness” of Christ
because he had heard, seen, and touched Him; and because Christ
had been “manifested” unto him. (1 Jn. 1:1-3) The
manifestation of “that eternal life” was Deity “made known”
in the life, works, and heaven’s declarations concerning Jesus
of Nazareth. (Jn. 5:31-47 14:7-9) John, like Peter, had been
with Jesus in the holy mount (2 Pet. 1: 16-21) and spake as he
was moved by the Holy Spirit. Now there’s a WITNESS for
you.
But
some have concluded there can be no “witnessing” or “testifying”
today. This is hasty! We have as much right — and obligation
— to be a witness, as did any saint of the past. What we have
seen, heard,
|
|
touched — i.e., what we have come to
know, we may tell — “testify”. If you believe Jesus is the
Christ, you may tell others THAT YOU BELIEVE JESUS IS THE
CHRIST. If you were baptized on July 6th., you may tell others
WHAT YOU DID, AND WHAT YOU FEEL ABOUT IT!! But don’t get the
idea that your “testimony” makes a thing true — or
even that your “testifying” is on a par with that of the
inspired Apostles.
“Witnessing”
and “Testifying” have a sectarian or denominational
connotation — enough so that I do not use the words in the
current “religious” sense — because what can be no more
than purely subjective, has been used as though it were a
voice from God. In fact, this is one of the modern or
neo-orthodox concepts of how God speaks to man. A bit earlier,
sectarians thought the Holy Spirit moved them to “witness”
in some direct way. Of course, both concepts are erroneous and
harmful — leading gullible people to accept as “testimony
from God” something that originated in the mind of the
speaker.
Mormon
“elders” may testify THAT THEY BELIEVE SMITH WAS A PROPHET
OF GOD, and I would have no reason to doubt their testimony.
They are qualified to tell me WHAT THEY BELIEVE, but that is a
long way from proving that what they believe is true.
When people tell me their religious experience, I believe they
had some sort of “feeling” or “experience” — there is
really no way I could “testify” that they had not. But I
refuse to accept an interpretation of their “feeling” that
contradicts the Bible.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
