Conversations Archives - CrossExamined

Tag Archive for: Conversations

Before You Hit Send by Emerson Eggerichs- Audio Book Highlight

Culture CrossExamined, Theology and Christian Apologetics

Introduction

If you consume a large portion of your material through audio, it is hard to get past a good deal on an excellent audio book. Twice every year ChristianAudio.com runs a sale on most of their collection, and you can usually pick up these great audio resources for $7.49. The time has come for the first sale of 2021 (and beyond), so I will be highlighting some of my favorite audio books. I’ll include a few of my favorite quotes from the books, my recommendation from my chapter-by-chapter reviews, links to posts that were inspired by the books, and, of course, I will include links to the audio book deal throughout the article. Today, I am highlighting Before You Hit Send: Preventing Headache and Heartache by Dr. Emerson Eggerichs.

Before You Hit Send– My Recommendation

I was first introduced to Dr. Emerson Eggerichs’ work about a decade ago when my wife and I were at the local Christian bookstore, and one of his books about communication in marriage was on sale. I picked it up and found that it was on target with what Scripture taught about male and female communication and what my wife and I had experienced in our own marriage. After reading his flagship book “Love and Respect: The Love She Desires Most; The Respect He Desperately Needs” and listening to the podcast he produced for a couple years, I (along with many others) realized that the communication principles he drew from Scripture rang true in all relationships, not just marriage.

When I found out that he wrote a book on general communication in all relationships and focused on communication in the age of social media, I was ecstatic! As a defender of the Christian worldview, I am constantly engaging skeptics and presenting the evidence for the truth of what I believe. The common passage of scripture that is quoted to support this aspect of evangelism is 1 Peter 3:15: “Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you, and do so with gentleness and respect.” This passage emphasizes not merely the content of our defense but also the delivery of the content: “with gentleness and respect.” Learning to be wise communicators is necessary for anyone who wishes to obey Peter’s command in full.

“Before You Hit Send” is an incredible listen. Because of the fact that I have dedicated my life to defending the truth of the Christian worldview, which has eternal consequences for my audience, along with being in constant prayer, I am always looking for ways to ensure that I am communicating my case as persuasively as possible. As we defend the truth of Christianity, we may be removing intellectual stumbling blocks, but we may be introducing emotional ones. Kind, necessary, and clear communication are equally as necessary as true communication. In so thoroughly covering the possible pitfalls in all four aspects of our communication, Dr. Eggerichs has provided an indispensable resource.

The principles discussed, of course, apply to all of our communicative relationships on all topics, whether at home, at work, at church, at the coffee shop, or on social media. We must remember that every time that we communicate with another person, as Christians, we are giving them an impression of Christ, so we must guard that impression to ensure that we accurately reflect Him. Whether we are actively looking for the opportunity to evangelize and defend or not, at some point, we will be called upon to give a reason for the hope that we have to those we have communicated with, and we do not want our past failures to taint the answer that we provide. I highly recommend “Before You Hit Send.” Every Christian needs to listen to this book thoughtfully and prayerfully.

You can read the complete chapter-by-chapter summary review by clicking or tapping here.

Before You Hit Send by Emerson Eggerichs- Favorite Quotes

“When people cannot win on the merits of their performance, products, or positions, they are tempted to cross a line and speak horribly of the opponent, perhaps even lying.”

“Some people enter politics because they derive personal fulfillment from the ‘gotcha’ approach to issues. It isn’t about what is true but about the political chess game. The key is to put a better spin on a matter than the other candidate and to put the opposition in checkmate.”

“It makes no difference if our spin is compelled by our compassion or career advancement or the suppression of opposite positions; little good comes to us when we refuse to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

“Being a person who communicates what is true frequently demands tact, and at times it can feel like side-stepping land mines. It takes work to be both truthful and tactful.”

“When you are truthful all day long while being unkind, hateful, and contemptuous, you are making more enemies than friends…Our hostility and disdain close off the spirits of others to the very truth we wish them to hear.”

“Truth carries its own weight, and we should feel confident about this. When we yield to ‘might makes right,’ there is something inherently wrong in what we believe, and we know it.”

“Perhaps in many cases we didn’t know it was untrue. No harm, no foul. Even so, an honest error in judgment does not make it okay, especially when we repeatedly make such mistakes. The real point here is to the lazy and neglectful individuals who keep making mistakes and claim they did not know the truth. They may be innocent, but one becomes guilty of carelessness and inattentiveness. We must aggressively get our facts straight to avoid a routine of ‘honest’ mistakes.”

“The more important the communication the less I can afford making glaring mistakes.”

“Our communication is very important to God. As odd as this sounds, God is reading our mail, and when we are not truthful, we are not truthful with Him. It isn’t that we cannot lie, but we ask, Why would I when I love God and He loves me, and my communication is really a reflection of my communion with Him? This is our deepest mind-set before hitting send. We have an audience of One.”

“Truth without love is comparable to heart surgery without anesthesia.”

“The Golden Rule says, ‘Treat others the same way you want them to treat you.’ (Luke 6:31).. What I find fascinating is that some people—some very smart people—compromise at this juncture. They want to be treated with the Golden Rule of true communication but do not want to be bound by it.”

“Oftentimes, other’ perceptions behind our communications are just as important as our intentions behind what we were sharing. Though we may have spoken truthfully with kindness and respect, and at the necessary time, if the communication is not perceived in the way we intended, then we must ask ourselves if we were as clear as we could have been.”

“When we conclude the other person needs the light of the truth, and we can speak it lovingly, respectfully, and coherently, then we ought to communicate it. We must speak up for the sake of the truth and for the sake of the other person.”

The 5 Most Illogical People You Will Meet on the Internet

Atheism, Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Alisa Childers

It has happened to many of us. We post an encouraging Bible verse like Psalm 145:9 on Facebook: “The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made.” By noon an atheist from somewhere in social media land has found the post and leaves a lovely comment:

Really? Your god is good? He’s so good and compassionate that he decided to literally drown the whole world in a flood? So good he’s okay with slavery? That god? Yeah—he sounds awesome.

The person who leaves comments like these probably isn’t looking for a real conversation, but they are a great example of the abundance of bad logic waiting to be discovered in the dark corners of cyberspace. Here are the 5 most illogical people you will meet on the internet, and how to spot their fallacies:

1. The Straw Man

How easy do you think it would be to knock down a pretend man made entirely of straw? It would be a lot easier than knocking down a real man—that’s for sure. This happens in the world of social media disagreement All. The. Time. The “Straw Man” is a fallacy in which someone oversimplifies or misrepresents the view of their opponent (builds a straw man), and then argues against that false view (knocks the straw man down). Straw men can often be found in discussions about abortion:

You: “I think there is good scientific evidence that life begins at conception.”
Straw man: “So what you’re saying is that women should lose their rights and this country should be sent back to the ‘50s? That’s ridiculous.”

You made a claim about scientific evidence—not women’s rights. The straw man has misrepresented your argument and created one that is much easier to refute.

2. The Red Herring

The “Red Herring” fallacy is committed when someone brings up an irrelevant point that diverts attention from the original point being made. Changing the subject doesn’t actually win an argument, but it can make people forget what they were disagreeing about in the first place.

You: “I believe the Bible teaches that Jesus claimed to be God.”
Red Herring: “The Bible is just a human book—no different from any other book.”

The red herring has diverted attention away from what the Bible teaches to the credibility of the Bible as a book. It’s a worthy discussion, but it’s a different discussion—don’t take the bait.

3. The Character Assassinator

This fallacy is called “Ad-Hominem,” and attacks the character of the person making the claim, rather than addressing the person’s actual argument.

You: “I believe it’s in the best interest of children for marriage to be between one man and one woman.”
Character Assassinator: “You only believe this because you’re a bigot.”

The character assassinator has shifted the focus from your claim to their perception of the motive behind it—thus avoiding the actual argument. The straw man, red herring, and character assassinator can all be handled in a similar way—by gently bringing them back to your original point.

4. The Self-Defeater

The self-defeater is a person who makes a statement that refutes itself. You can spot a self-defeating statement by taking the claim that is being made and applying that claim to the statement itself.

You: “I believe Christianity is true.”
Self-defeater: “There is no such thing as truth”

If you can spot this self-defeating statement, one simple question will bring the fallacy to the surface: “Is that true?”

5. The Gish Galloper

The “Gish Gallop” is a fallacy in which someone introduces so many (often individually weak) arguments in one space, that you could never possibly answer them all. This tends to happen more often in live-debate settings, but there are internet gish gallopers as well!

You: “I believe Jesus was resurrected from the dead.”
Gish galloper: “We can’t trust anything the Bible says because the Gospels were written hundreds of years after the apostles were alive, and they all tell different stories. In fact, the Old Testament flood and creation stories were simply copies of myths from the surrounding culture, and frankly, resurrection can’t happen because science has proven that miracles are not possible. The story of Jesus is just a re-telling of other myths about dying and rising gods in agrarian Mediterranean societies. Paul wasn’t really an apostle so we can’t trust what he said, and Jesus probably never even existed anyway.”

Notice that the gish galloper has introduced several possibly related but unsupported statements which no person with a life or a real job would be able to sit down and answer in one sitting—it would take all day! There are a few different ways to handle a gish galloper but the simplest would be to stay within the scope of your original claim. You didn’t make any claims about the Bible, flood or creation narratives, or Paul’s status as an apostle. You DID make a claim about a miracle, so that’s a good place to start.

Conclusion:

It’s easy for any of us to fall into some of these traps, so be looking for these 5 illogical people as you interact on social media—and be careful to not be one yourself!

How To Have A Challenging Conversation With Someone You Love

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Jason Jiménez

Let’s be honest. No one looks forward to having a challenging conversation with a friend or family member. The very thought of saying something that might hurt their feelings sends quivers down your spine. And so rather than confront the problem, you keep avoiding the talk and land up tossing it aside with the other unresolved issues.

But ask yourself, is avoiding hard conversations with a loved one improving or damaging my relationships?

As a Christian, it’s not wise to suppress your feelings or avoid expressing how you feel about something with someone you love, especially if there’s a problem hindering your relationship. A genuine relationship is one built on openness and honesty.

So, whatever the challenge or difficulty you are having with a loved one, here are five priorities to follow that will motivate you to have that uncomfortable conversation.

Priority One – Pray Before The Difficult Talk

You might be thinking the first priority seems a bit obvious. And you’re right. Prayer is evident because it’s essential. Yet, so many Christians skip over prayer and dive right into whatever is bothering them. However, the Bible states very clearly, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God” (Phil. 4:6). When you and your friend (or family member) come together to talk about some sensitive matters, praying together will help settle the nerves and transfer the focus to the Lord. It’s also important to express your gratitude for one another and ask God to give wisdom and understanding to work things out.

Priority Two – Converse, Not Lecture

When someone wrongs you, the natural thing to do is attack the person who hurt you. But, according to 1 Peter 3:8, you are to “have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind” as a Christian. Therefore, the last thing you want to do (no matter how innocent you feel you are) is to take an accusatory tone with your friend. Your approach is to honor them as a person made in God’s image—not disparage them if they don’t conform to your point of view. Your starting position isn’t “I’m going to set you straight for hurting me.” It should be, “I want to understand why you did what you did because I love you.”

Priority Three – Show Respect

As human beings, we crave respect. A good technique when engaging in a challenging conversation is to focus on honoring the other person above yourself. When you “show proper respect” (1 Pet. 2:17) to someone, it not only acts as a diffuser but will also invite the other person to address you with respect. Think of it this way, honoring one another leads to respectful dialogue.

Priority Four – Be Open And Honest

It follows that if you properly employ the first three priorities, the fourth one will likely fall into place. However, there are so many terrifying prospects that can hinder vulnerability: insecurities, failures, fear of rejection, and issues of trust. Yet, both of you have to be willing to express real emotion and a willingness to work things out for the two of you to make any progress. This will take time, so make sure you don’t rush or fake it.

Priority Five – Ask For Forgiveness

Jesus tells his followers, “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First, be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift” (Matt. 5:23-24). The word “reconciled” conveys an immediate response to make peace with the offended person. Instead of making excuses for your actions, it’s always best to take responsibility for any wrongdoing and quickly resolve matters before they get out of hand.

The two kinds of skeptics and how to deal with both

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Erik Manning

We can gain knowledge about the subject of Christian apologetics until our eyes bug out of our heads. But knowing how to apply that information in our everyday lives is another animal. And a big part of learning effective communication is knowing our audience.

I’m old enough to remember those cheezy WWJD bracelets from the ’90s. I’m sure they decorated the wrist of many a Newsboys concert-goer. They do raise a good question that we’ll apply here. What did Jesus do when faced with doubters? Let’s look at a couple of examples:

The open-minded doubter – John the Baptist

Yes, even a spiritual stalwart like John the Baptist went through a period of doubt in his life. Despite being a prophet who emphatically preached that Jesus was the coming Messiah, John went through a crisis of faith near the end of his life.

We read in Matthew 3 that John confidently believed he was God’s messenger in fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. (Isaiah 40:3) He said that he wasn’t worthy to even carry Jesus’ sandals and that Jesus would be Israel’s divine judge. He saw the Spirit of God descend on Jesus and heard the voice that Jesus was God’s divine Son. (Matthew 3:12-16)

But then things went south after he confronted Herod for marrying his brother’s wife. Herod imprisoned John, and John sent a few of his disciples out to Jesus with the question, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?”

Apparently, being locked up in a dungeon for speaking truth to power shook him up. Maybe he was expecting Jesus to set up the Kingdom of God a little more quickly and spring him from the pokey. John started to question his calling, and if what he was giving his life for was real.

Jesus replied, “Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.” (Matthew 11:2-6)

Jesus pointed to the miracles as evidence of him being the Messiah. He was also referring to Isaiah 35:4-6 and Isaiah 61:1, showing that he was fulfilling the Messianic prophecy to tighten the case. Jesus started preaching after John was imprisoned (Mark 1:14) so he might not have been fully aware of Jesus’ miracles.

Furthermore, as John’s disciples were leaving but still within an earshot, Jesus went on to say that John was a great prophet and the messenger of the covenant that Malachi prophesied about. (Matthew 11:7-12, Malachi 3:1) This was just the kind of shot in the arm that John needed. Notice that Jesus didn’t slam John for having a question or tell him to have blind faith; instead, he gave evidence. Jesus then talked about how great John was to the crowd, many of whom were probably baptized by John.

Jesus exemplified the command of Jude “have mercy on those who doubt” (Jude 23). As Christians, it’s vital we recognize who around us is going through doubt but are still open and humble enough to receive from us. John wanted to believe but was struggling. We need to see the ‘why’ behind some doubter’s questions and give them the ammo they need to persevere.

The Hostile Crowd – Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Says he wants evidence, but…

The religious experts were entrenched in their belief that Jesus was a false teacher. In the very next chapter in Matthew, they demanded that he would demonstrate a miraculous sign as evidence. Jesus didn’t mince words with them. Let’s take a look at Matthew 12:38-42:

“He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here. The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here.”

It’s interesting to note that Jonah didn’t perform any miracles. The Ninevites didn’t have the evidence that Jesus was providing. The Pharisees and Sadducees were well aware already that Jesus was healing the sick. They could interview eyewitnesses. They even saw him cast out demons and said he did it by the power of Beelzebub! (Matthew 12:24)

But in the case of Ninevah, they did respond to evidence. They instinctively knew that they were breaking God’s moral law and needed to repent, that’s why they listened to Jonah. So the men of Ninevah would rise up and condemn them because they responded to the ‘lesser’ evidence – the moral facts written on their heart and their own conscience convicting them.
(Romans 2:14-15)

Jesus next gives the example of the Queen of the South as someone who would rise up and judge them for their disbelief. Think about it for a second. You have this queen, deep in Africa, hearing about a wise king in Israel who knew God. For days she traveled thousands of miles (no cars or planes back then) just to seek out his wisdom. She said, “The report I heard in my own country about your achievements and your wisdom is true. But I did not believe these things until I came and saw with my own eyes. Indeed, not even half was told me.” (1 Kings 10:6)

So she didn’t believe it at first, but because she valued truth and wisdom enough, she went to great lengths to at least check it out. By contrast, these Pharisees who stood in the presence of the miracle-working Jesus and said, like the famous skeptic Bertrand Russell, “not enough evidence, God!”. Jesus refused to give them more evidence and pointed to the fact that there are those who had less evidence responded correctly because of their hearts.

What do we learn from Jesus about responding to doubters?

We need to not only be ready to give a reason for why we believe what we believe, but we need to be able to read our audience. For those who saw the importance and were open to believing, Jesus took a merciful approach and gave them more info.

For the crowd that demanded that eyewitness testimony wasn’t enough, Jesus wasn’t having it. He told them that others have responded with lesser-but-sufficient evidence and that they didn’t have any excuse. The Ninevites just had Jonah’s preaching and their own consciences. The Queen of Sheba just had someone’s word for it and decided it was well worth looking into, even at great expense.

Jesus saw through their fake inquisitiveness and looked at the heart behind the question. The takeaway here is this, and don’t miss this: Don’t waste your time with the rude and bombastic skeptic! Don’t feed the trolls! It doesn’t mean you can’t respond to them for the sake of those who might be listening, but it’s also OK to call them out on the attitude of their heart.

I like to ask these types of skeptics what kind of evidence would convince them. Often the response I’ve received is that “Jesus would have to personally appear to me” or “God would have to write my name in the sky.” Well, OK, then. That’s not a person I’m going to be able to help much. That’s a double standard that they don’t apply to anything else. They get onto airplanes, buy computers, cars, and homes with far less evidence.

In a podcast, Christian apologist William Lane Craig addresses this sort of hypocrisy:

“I’ve noticed this with people in the free thought community. They have a sort of skeptical dial that they can ratchet way up when it comes to Christian beliefs so that almost nothing could provide sufficient evidence for these, but when it comes to their own worldview and commitments they dial it way down so that they don’t need to provide virtually any justification for their own beliefs in order for these to be rational. That, of course, is just hypocrisy. That is self-serving. If they are going to extol the virtues of doubt with respect to religious beliefs, they need to also extol those same virtues with regard to their own atheistic beliefs.”

So again: Have mercy on the Christian having doubts. Help the skeptic who is beginning to doubt their doubts. But for the convinced and rudely aggressive skeptic, don’t cast your pearls before swine. (Matthew 7:6) They’re hypocrites, and we know that Jesus called out hypocrites. Love them, pray for them, but if they’re going to be unreasonable, be kind but firm. And then move on to people who aren’t so prejudiced.

Apologetics as Conversation

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Mikel Del Rosario

Hey, Can We Talk?

Seeing apologetics as a conversational ministry

There’s an Indian proverb that says, “You don’t cut off a man’s nose and give him a rose to smell.” I first heard this from Ramesh Richards, who applies this idea to apologetics. He says that sometimes, in the midst of talking about God, Jesus, or the Bible with skeptics, some Christians seem to “destroy them in the process of contest and debate.” That stuck with me.

While apologists often cite 1 Peter 3:15, focusing on the command to be “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you,” some tend to neglect the rest of the command, “yet do it with gentleness and respect.” Think about apologetics training in a church or school context. Each lesson usually focuses on philosophical, theological, or historical issues, and the instructor often gives less attention to the personal aspects of practical engagement in everyday conversations. The content isn’t bad, but we need practical training for having conversations, too.

So how can we approach difficult spiritual conversations? At the Hendricks Center, we’ve dedicated a number of episodes on the Table Podcast dedicated to exploring the concept of dialogical apologetics—a practical approach which sees apologetic engagement not merely as a debate but as genuine dialogue.

In this post, I’ll share three ideas we need to incorporate into the way we think about engaging in apologetics: First, we need to see apologetics as a ministry. Second, we need to adapt our approach to a shifting culture. Third, we need to earn the right to be heard–especially in difficult spiritual conversations.

See Apologetics As Ministry

While some Christians seem reluctant to discuss the faith with their skeptical friends, others seem almost too eager to tear down objections and refute people’s challenges to Christian truth claims. What kind of attitude should we have as we prepare for difficult spiritual conversations? How can we alleviate some of the tension, so we don’t automatically get defensive? On an episode of the Table Podcast called, “How to Engage in Spiritual Conversations,” Mary Jo Sharp talked about seeing apologetics as a ministry. She said:

The first thing I want to demonstrate to a person is that I care about them. So, what we’re about to discuss is all wrapped up in, “Do I really want to serve this person?” I’ve had atheists tell me they felt like Christians made them a project. Like they just wanted to throw their [talking] points at them, and if they weren’t ready to accept those points, they just walk away. That makes them feel like a project rather than a person. I want to avoid that…

Many Christians don’t talk to other people about their faith because they don’t know their faith. They are not trained in essential Christian doctrine. They’re not comfortable in their Christian skin… We have to know what we believe and why we believe it. Early on in Christianity, I felt intimidated to share my faith with others, because I didn’t know why I believed it. And that’s just vital to having an effective conversation where you don’t get defensive—knowing your own beliefs.

So, knowing what you believe and why you believe it can give you the confidence you need to engage in spiritual conversations. But even before we start to engage, let’s look at apologetics as a ministry. Who says apologists have to be stern or super serious all the time? Sometimes we get a bad rap as the kinds of people who walk into conversations looking for a fight. But ministry means service. I believe there is apologetic value to remaining calm in difficult spiritual conversations and genuinely serving the other person.

When you have confidence in the truth of the Christian worldview, it should allow you to minister to the person by listening to their views and the stories behind them. Approaching these encounters with a desire to minister to the person can reduce the tension you feel. And it can help you avoid getting defensive or becoming argumentative.

Adapt to a Shifting Culture

While the truth hasn’t changed, challenges to the Christian worldview have evolved. And we need for a new generation of apologists who are sensitive to current conversations around transgenderism, religious freedom, and the intersection of faith and vocation. What kinds of issues are people already talking about as they try to sort out the tensions of life? These kinds of hot-button issues especially need to be approached from the standpoint of dialogue, not debate.

On an episode of the Table called, “Truth, Love, and Defending the Faith,” I sat down with Sean McDowell to talk about how the next generation of apologists can engage the culture in rapidly-shifting times. He said:

Truth remains the same, but culture changes. A new kind of apologist is [a Christian who says], “Let’s take stock, because a lot of things have changed around us today. Let’s make sure that we’re communicating the gospel and defending the faith in a way that’s God-honoring and effective in our culture today.”

Back in the second century, there was a group of Greek Apologists like Justin Martyr who defended the faith in a pagan, Greco-Roman context. They had to learn to “read and react” to what was going on in the public square. In the same way, we need a new generation of apologists who are able to address a variety of cultural issues as they make the case for Christianity in the public square today.

Earn the Right to be Heard

So a new kind of apologist sees apologetics as a ministry and adapts to a shifting culture. But he or she also knows how to earn the right to be heard in a society that often pushes back against Christianity. On the same episode, I asked my mentor Darrell Bock about this. Here’s what he said:

There are three important elements: One is earning the respect and credibility of someone by the way you relate to the person next to you, the way you engage them, their seeing your sincerity. Christianity has an inherent critique of the way people live. That’s not an easy thing to deal with. They won’t care about your critique unless they know you care. That’s step one.

The second requires a significant adjustment…We’re used to saying, “The Bible says [a proposition is true] and so it’s true.” That’s how we think about it. “It’s true because it’s in the Bible.” I like to reverse that and get people to think about maybe it’s in the Bible because it’s true…So what makes this true? What makes this authentic about a way to live that we need to probe in order to understand why God would put it in his inspired word?

Because what God is communicating to us are the realities of life and if we appreciate why those realities are the way that they are, why the truth is true…you don’t have to appeal to the Bible for it. You can also appeal for what this means for quality of life, or for human flourishing, the common good, [what] makes it valuable, and you can lead people into reflecting on the nature of what it is you’re arguing for in and of itself without appealing to the Bible for the warrant. For someone [for whom] the Bible is not a warrant—to say “The Bible says it” doesn’t do them much good.

Third, there’s a way to have a conversation across a table with someone that emphasizes that aspect of the equation…[to see] apologetics as a conversation rather than thinking about it as a debate…that is the right tonal way into the conversation.

So there are three things here. One is how you relate, the second is knowing how to make the argument, and this third one is understanding you’re not in a debate, you’re in a conversation and it’s important to draw a person into the topic that you’re talking about.

Conclusion

The Indian proverb gets it right. There’s no point in giving someone a rose to smell if you’ve cut off their nose. But the flip side is also true. A gift of a rose and its smell is especially sweet when it comes from someone who actually cares about you. Let’s see apologetics as a ministry, adapt our approach to a shifting culture, and earn the right to be heard–especially in difficult spiritual conversations.

5 Keys To A Respectful And Persuasive Conversation

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Michael C. Sherrard

You can have respectful and persuasive conversations about controversial issues like politics, morality, and even religion if you check your P.U.L.S.E. When you feel yourself getting angry and sense the conversation is ready to spiral out of control, ask yourself these five questions:

Am I being too Preachy?
Am I Using good questions?
Am I Listening?
Am I Staying on Topic?
Am I being Encouraging?

Conversations with people that disagree with you do not need to become ugly. There is no reason why discussions on politics, morality, and religion cannot be cordial and beneficial to both parties. Practicing these five conversational strategies will greatly improve your ability to be pleasant, heard, and more persuasive.

This lecture was given to the Georgia Tech FCA on November 7th, 2016.

P.u.l.s.e

Audio Player

00:00

Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

1. P.u.l.s.e

30:23

Michael C. Sherrard is a pastor, the director of Ratio Christi College Prep, and the author of Relational Apologetics. Booking info and such can be found at michaelcsherrard.com.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2l3cubc

June 19, 2018/by Guest

Tag Archive for: Conversations

Before You Hit Send by Emerson Eggerichs- Audio Book Highlight

Introduction

Before You Hit Send– My Recommendation

Before You Hit Send by Emerson Eggerichs- Favorite Quotes

Recommended resources related to the topic:

How To Have A Challenging Conversation With Someone You Love

Priority One – Pray Before The Difficult Talk

Priority Two – Converse, Not Lecture

Priority Three – Show Respect

Priority Four – Be Open And Honest

Priority Five – Ask For Forgiveness

Recommended resources related to the topic:

The two kinds of skeptics and how to deal with both

The open-minded doubter – John the Baptist

The Hostile Crowd – Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees.

What do we learn from Jesus about responding to doubters?

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Apologetics as Conversation

Hey, Can We Talk?

See Apologetics As Ministry

Adapt to a Shifting Culture

Earn the Right to be Heard

Conclusion

Recommended resources related to the topic:

5 Keys To A Respectful And Persuasive Conversation

QUICK LINKS

FEATURED RESOURCES

SUPPORT CROSSEXAMINED

Tag Archive for: Conversations

Introduction

Before You Hit Send– My Recommendation

Before You Hit Send by Emerson Eggerichs- Favorite Quotes

Recommended resources related to the topic:

2. The Red Herring

​3. The Character Assassinator

​4. The Self-Defeater

Conclusion:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Priority One – Pray Before The Difficult Talk

Priority Two – Converse, Not Lecture

Priority Three – Show Respect

Priority Four – Be Open And Honest

Priority Five – Ask For Forgiveness

Recommended resources related to the topic:

The open-minded doubter – John the Baptist

The Hostile Crowd – Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees.

What do we learn from Jesus about responding to doubters?

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Hey, Can We Talk?

See Apologetics As Ministry

Adapt to a Shifting Culture

Earn the Right to be Heard

Conclusion

Recommended resources related to the topic:

3. The Character Assassinator

4. The Self-Defeater