“One of these questions was “Why are you a Christian?” It’s amazing how overwhelming the response was “Because that’s what I believe.””

Interesting, that seems like an utter failure to answer the question. Being a Christian means believing something, right? Saying “that’s what I believe” is not an explanation, but a restatement of their Christianity. Perhaps a more honest answer would be, “I don’t know”.

Jon wrote,

It seems as if Isaiah 53 might be a good place to take someone who asks why you are a Christian considering it was written more than 700 years before the birth of Christ. This would help establish the credibility of Scripture.

Presumably the people who wrote the NT had not already read the “prophesies” of Isaiah? They had? Well, then it’s hardly surprising that their stories (whether true or not) about an alleged messiah would include similar ideas. To write a piece of fiction that didn’t gybe with existing traditions would surely cause people to ignore it. If the scripture is in some places consistent with other parts of the scripture this does not establish its credibility. Isaiah’s prophecies are discussed in detail by Deacon Duncan at Evangelical Realism.

Demian,

It seems this is a dilemma. On the one hand you’re right to say that personal testimony is of little use for establishing the truth. As you point out, if it was you’d need to accept the truth of every religion with an enthusiastic believer telling you how their life has been changed. Which I’d guess is most of them.

On the other hand I don’t think many people are converted simply by being left alone with a Bible and maybe some apologetics books. It could be regarded as believing for the wrong reasons, but I think people are converted by personal testimony, although probably not a single personal testimony. I just don’t think they should be. However, many people clearly feel that their personal testimony should be enough to convert anybody. Witness “Lady Two” in Steve Butterfield’s experience of the Alpha Course.

It probably depends on the person, but of the 2.2 Bn Christians in the world, I’d guess few have investigated the history of their beliefs, yet most have experienced some form of personal testimony from another.

I had a bad experience with personal testimony a while ago. A Christian friend of mine told me how his brother started spontaneously speaking a foreign (modern) language at a Christian festival. He did so well enough that native speakers could understand him and in spite of never having taken the time to learn it. When I heard this story I am left in the awkward situation of saying either:
1. Well that proves it – your beliefs must be true!
OR
2. Sorry, it seems your brother is a fraud.

This is sort of how I understood your post to be, as I didn’t think at all you would consider throwing our testimonies out the window. I watched a debate against Matt Slick (Christian Apologetic Resources Ministry) and some Atheist professor concerning the existence of God. If Matt were to use his testimony as a tool for debate, he would have totally lost his credit. Instead, he used a great argument; the origin of logic. Now, after the debate, he did address the audience and used a bit of testimony of how the God he had done a great job proving can impact their lives. I would consider this the public square.

Now, when I’m in church, I want to hear testimony sometimes. Actually, I include testimonies sometimes in the messages I preach. But this is a different kind of setting; one I would not include in the “public” square.

For what it’s worth,
—Jonathan

You’re usually much more precise in your choice of words, so I knew something was amiss.

My intention was simply two-fold:

1. Know what you believe and why, cause it’s WAY more than how your life’s been changed. We need the steel architecture of a historical risen Savior to sustain us, support us AND separate us from experiences that some would brush off as mere behavior modification.

2. And JUST sharing your personal testimony isn’t evangelism nor is it the gospel. And that’s important.

Romans 10:14 tells us why:

How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?

Mark Dever speaks to this well in a sermon called 5 Things That Aren’t Evangelism. As does Michael Horton in a recent podcast called Question of Tolerance.

Bottom line: Emotions are important. Our story is important. Our intellect is important.

But the biblical record trumps all. Especially when it comes to sharing your faith.

As most of you know, my own personal testimony is a great compliment to my articulation of the gospel. So in practice I use it. But not to defend my faith or prove what I believe to a public audience.

That’s all I’m saying. Does that make sense? Let me know. I appreciate everyone’s feedback and thoughts.