“It’s a bad testimony,” she insisted.
The speaker was an older friend, the “bad testimony” a younger friend, and the evidence a report from a third party about a political opinion the younger friend had posted to social media where the whole world (or at least people who follow him, depending on his settings) could read it and react, pro or con.
Almost immediately, I was on the fence. A “bad testimony” is often very much in the eye of the beholder. Or at least it depends on the lens one is looking through.
‘Official Narrative’ Decay
It’s also time- and information-dependent. A year or two and a little movement in public opinion can change one’s perspective on the morality or profitability of expressing this or that viewpoint. Or a critic might do some in-depth study and find out he or she was wrong. The “official narrative” and “science” as authorities have taken a serious credibility beating in the last few years. Far too often, the emperor has no clothes, especially when he writes for The New York Times, reads the news for CNN or poses as the chief medical authority advising the President of the United States.
My favorite example is the COVID vaccine. No shortage of pro-vaccination Christians called vaccine skeptics a “bad testimony” in social media posts online. They were “conspiracy theorists”, unloving, paranoid and potentially dangerous. No shortage of Christian magazines and websites did the same. Some were worse, calling dissenting opinions about vaccine efficacy “lies”. As it turns out, those critiques did not age well, inspiring at least three Christian magazines who took “bad testimony” believers to task to move their commentaries behind a paywall, edit them after the fact, or bury them altogether. Who’s the “bad testimony” now, Christianity Today?
Where Did That Overton Window Go?
Moreover, in the US at least, progressives have shifted so far to the left that classical liberals are now labeled hatemongers, Nazis and crazy right-wingers for holding the same views that made them middle-of-the-road only a decade ago. Electoral opinion splits so evenly on policy that commentators say the House could flip in the mid-terms, overturning a historic mandate for a Republican president. In a country divided so close to 50/50, one person’s “bad testimony” may result in him getting his thumbs-up icon clicked at least as often as his thumbs-down icon. How then do we define “bad”, unless we take the position that Christians ought never to express any political opinions at all? Some do.
Fair enough, but passivity does not play well with many of our fellow believers of Reformed persuasion, especially when one man’s “disputable issue” is another man’s article of faith.
Hills to Die On
I said I was on the fence, and that’s the truth. I have no problem with Christians expressing controversial opinions online or dissenting from the current approved narrative about issues where there are (or may be) lives at stake. In such cases, there are times when having an unpleasant dialogue becomes a moral imperative. Abortion is certainly one of those issues, and there are others. Trans surgery for kids is a big one right now. In Canada, MAID is exceedingly relevant. You can’t do much witnessing to people who just took their own lives or had them taken from them.
On the other hand, I’m not sure any Christian anywhere needs to weigh in online on the side of the flat-earthers, or about who was funding Jeffrey Epstein and why or, worse, whether he’s still alive. That will eventually come out, or it won’t, but nothing much is gained by pooling our ignorance on the subject or wildly speculating to generate clickbait. Certain issues generate a flap disproportionate to any conceivable moral victory that might be declared by coming out early on one side or the other.
Wait and See
For people active on social media, the felt need to express an opinion about every hot topic on earth right this second can be intense, even when the available information about the issue is brand new, thin on the ground, or hotly disputed. I’ve seen young people attacked only not for their opinions but for failing to express one. For Christian youngsters, 2026 may be a good year to dial that sort of thing back a notch. “Wait and see” is almost always a good strategy, not just for Christians with political opinions, but also for Christians with opinions about other Christians with opinions.
A bad testimony is admittedly difficult to retract once it’s out there. It’s also very often in the eye of the beholder.
No comments :
Post a Comment