Is it in the New Testament?
Arguably yes, depending on what you mean by “witnessing” (and “requirement”). There is, for example, the “Great Commission,” Jesus’s last words to his disciples at the end of the gospel of Matthew:
On the other hand, “witnessing” doesn’t necessarily have to mean “badgering passersby, family and strangers whose door you knock on at Ungodly O’Clock in the morning”, either. Frankly, the only time I’ve ever felt any kind of pull to punch the Jesus clock was by seeing Christians witnessing with their lives rather than their words. The words just make me roll my eyes, generally, especially when they have the air of command about them that the average street preacher injects.
There is a time and place, and manner, appropriate for saying what God has done in your life, to another individual or in the public forums of life. Too many evangelicals seem to think that that is always, everywhere, and in the same sin-denouncing manner as their pastor from the pulpit. What is far more effective is to live your faith in such a way that it testifies to the message you want to get across.
Anecdote: When our foster son C. was 17, he encountered one of our home town’s Frequent Witnessers, who gave himn an earful about why he needed to find Jesus, concluding it with the message “God loves youm C.” When he got home, he told us about it, and said, slightly scornfully, “Do you think God appeared to F.W. this morning and said to her, ‘Go tell C. that I love him!’?” I got a smirk on my face and answered him, “Those of us that He DID give those instructions are a lot more subtle about it.” His face was the definition of ‘gobsmacked.’ 
“Witness for Christ at all times. If necessary, use words.” – Francis of Assisi
Apparently both you and our friend Francis are unaware that as far as Christ, his Apostles, early followers and the early Church were concerned, words were always necessary. :smack:
It is a common SDMB theme that “witnessing” with one’s life and words are mutually exclusive. Frankly, it it most often looks like a ruse to avoid truly following both the life and command of Christ------who both walked his walk, and talked his walk.
Not only is it in the NT, there is overwhelming evidence that Christ, his Apostles and the early church practiced Evangelizing, or “Witnessing.”
While popular in some quarters, it was extremely unpopular in others, and Christians were often abused for it.
Modern Christianity has figured out a better path----one that is much more popular, even if historically suspect.
Frankly, I don’t really care what the average Christian does. I’m not Christian. I’d be perfectly happy if all the street preachers and doorknockers quit doing their thing tomorrow, but I don’t have a real dog in this fight, other than “Leave me the hell alone”. I just delight in calling out the hypocrisy of those Christians who are hypocrites. Because it’s fun.
You’ll get no argument from me on that…
Good Lord (used purely rhetorically), common ground! What happens now?
I don’t think Christ would find much fault with St. Francis of Assisi. You HAVE heard of the Franciscans, right?
I was always taught by the nuns that actions WERE far, FAR more important. However, as said phrase can be interpreted: “Make an example – people will WANT to follow along and be like you. Then, when they come to and ask, THEN you tell them the Gospel. You don’t get up in peoples’ faces and start screeching.”
That’s how you turn people off.
(At least, that’s how I remember it. I dunno, it’s been a while since I went to Church)
Exactly what I was trying to say. You get nowhere with, “Jesus wants you to turn into an obnoxious dick like me!” style witnessing – that’s what’s given it a bad name. But if you show people by how you live what Christ has done for you, they’ll want to know why. Then is when words are necessary.
To the extent a Christian “screeches”, or acts like a “dick”, then he/she hasn’t followed the example that Christ (and his followers) practiced.
But the fact remains that they did evangelize; they did carry “the Good News about the Christ” to their communities/ neighbors.
The notion that the Christian Model can be supported solely by being a fine person and Christian isn’t supported by Christ’s words, and life.
They lived their lives in accordance with what they were taught by Christ. (to the extent an imperfect person can) But in addition to living “The Word”, they carried the message to their neighbors. They were Evangelizers, like Christ himself.
Put another way, theres two issues here: One asks whether “Witnessing” is commanded of Christians. (and what the historical record says of Christ and his followers in this regard)
The second speaks of methodology. The historical record is clear, starting with Christ himself. (himself enough of a dick that he was crucified) If some Christians are shrieking in their evangelizing, than it is that much more incumbent upon the true Christians to lead the way.
Yet, from the comfort of the box seats we get all kinds of reasons as to why the Christian Model -----set by Christ himself ------ is invalid.
“My flavor of Witnessing is borne by my Christian lifestyle”, is only half the story, and only half the life led by Christ and his Apostles.
One other thought…
It is a historical fact that Christ (and Christianity) was polarizing. He was wildly popular in many quarters. Wildly popular.
Just the same, in as many quarters he was wildly unpopular. Wildly unpopular.
The Romans didn’t have him killed----his own people did. The Gospels are replete of his run ins with people of his own race and religion. That Christ was so unpopular in some quarters that was was crucified doesn’t begin to describe what his Apostles and early followers faced.
The NT speaks of the Apostles being beaten-----for Evangelizing; for carrying the message of Christ to the people. Paul wrote powerfully about beatings, imprisonments and other abuses he suffered—all for preaching about Christ. Even at his conversion Jesus told Ananias that Paul was a “chosen vessel the the Nations”, and that Jesus would “show him plainly how many things he will suffer for my name.”
It is disingenuous to caricature all Christians who choose to Witness as Fred Phelps like shrieking dicks (but a standard SDMB tactic), but it’s hardly accurate.
It just looks like another ruse to avoid actually doing what Christ himself did.
I don’t think anyone here is saying that. I know that some people, but right now, you’re preaching to the choir.
Of course, the real key is not just any words. 1 Cor 13:1-2 “If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal”
And the real key is not just any actions: 1 Cor 13:3-4 " And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing."
In other words, you have to be operating out of a motive of love. How do you know if that’s what you’re doing? 1 Cor 13:5-7 “Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, it is not pompous, it is not inflated, it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth.”
So, it’s not like the Bible has made it tricky to figure out the right balance. We just have to do it. (Which is the tricky part. When I get it right, I’ll let you know.)
Hand holding and a round of Kumbaya.
I agree with you. (But I suspect many would not)
It is essential that we are motivated by Love; that Christians have the right heart condition.
But in the end, you’re right: We just have to do it.
I received an PM once from a guy here who said [paraphrasing] that the day would come that *‘we would face the Lord and, where we were mistaken, we would be “lovingly corrected.”’
*
I think that was powerfully written. I think that’s the only time we will completely “get it right.”
Wow, GQ that I can answer that hasn’t already been (sufficiently) answered.
Yes, the verses already mentioned show Jesus telling his apostles to “go into all the world.” However, there are a lot of Christians who don’t believe that everything the apostles were supposed to do applies today. In fact, most don’t apply everything. I’ve yet to see anyone travel on foot with no supplies but the clothes on their back, like Jesus commanded his disciples at one point. Heck, they didn’t even do it later on; Paul points out that only the false apostles asked people for money.
My own personal thing is that, if you’ve already heard the gospel, why do I need to tell you again? People get really mad when you preach to them. They often will avoid you. This means you lose out on all those extra chances to show them the truth that you would have had if you just showed them.
The reason preaching was considered the best method at the time was because few knew the gospel, and you first had to get the word out. Now the word is out to the majority of people, and I think it is now our responsibility to show these people that Christianity works.
In what way was the OP insufficiently answered? The OP asks a simple, succinct question, the answer of which is ‘Yes.’
From there we are all editorializing. We agree that Jesus made the command to go and preach. We also agree that most Christians *‘don’t believe everything the apostles were supposed to do applies today.’ *
What you haven’t shown us is a compelling argument why this should be so.It is simply not true that “preaching was considered the best method at the time was because few knew the gospel, and you first had to get the word out.”
It should go without saying that there were no Gospels at all, but to the extent the Jewish religion had Holy Writings that governed their religion and doctrines they were exceptionally well known. Jesus was a Jew, and his followers considered themselves Jews as well. Their written laws were central to every day life and were very well known.
If a Christian wants to pick and choose what constitutes Christianity you’ll get no quarrel from me. But call a spade a spade: This New and Improved Flavor of Christianity cannot be supported biblically, and in many cases doesn’t look much like the Christianity that Christ practiced.