I finally have a few minutes to wrap this up. I have had someone say that they needed me to finish this so that they could use the tactics I've been presenting so I want to apologize for it taking a few days.
The last tool that I want to give you is very simple and it's another question. Actually it's two questions, but you generally will want to use them in tandem so I'll combine them. When you find yourself outmatched, with nowhere to run, and in a difficult situation the most powerful thing that you can do is ask the person a question. Even if you're not outmatched and you just want to strike up a conversation the most powerful thing you can do is ask the person a question.
Yes, it's that simple. Even if you cannot identify the Big Idea behind the person's argument you are still fine as long as you can ask a question. However, you probably will never get around to this is you don't have that "Reality" tool in it's proper location.
The two questions that you will want to ask are: #1. What do you mean by that? #2. How did you come to that conclusion.
You may not always ask those questions in the same way but you will be asking a variation of those questions and the point of asking them is threefold:
1. It shows the other person that you are interested in what they have to say.
2. It takes the pressure off of you and forces the person making the assertions to explain themselves.
3. It gives you a chance to think as well as the opportunity to ask more questions about what the person is getting ready to explain to you which again starts this threefold cycle.
So, in the case of the lady and the POTUS here is how it could practically work out.
When the POTUS asks the lady about her PhD she could have said something like, "Mr. President, I'm curious about why you're asking me about my PhD. Why are you asking me that?" Well in this case the POTUS answers that very question (see 0:54-1:29). He very quickly transitions into the list of Jewish Law, but if the lady would have had time she could have asked some more questions to expose the Big Idea such as: "Mr. President, if I had advanced degrees in all of those areas would that give me the right to call homosexuality an abomination in your eye? Why or why not? Don't you think there are people with advanced degrees who share my opinion, Mr. President?" or "Mr. President, do you have advanced degrees in those areas? If not does that make your opinion on the matter as valuable as you seem to be suggesting mine is?" or "Mr. President, why does a person have to have advanced degrees in subjects to know the truth? Are you saying that only people with advanced degrees can know what is good/evil, right/wrong, correct/incorrect?" You can come up with more if you think about it. These are all ways of asking those two questions and forcing the person to explain what they mean by what they are saying.
In the segment from 1:30-2:45 you could ask questions such as: "Mr President, do you think that the entire Jewish Law is bad? If so then is it ok to murder? If not, then how do you decide which ones still apply and which ones don't?" A question like this immediately disarms the rapid fire and snowball effect of all of the questions he is asking the lady and forces him to explain what he thinks about the Jewish law and if you were to ask some follow up questions he would have to tell you how he comes to those conclusions at which point you will..........wait for it.........ASK MORE QUESTIONS!!!
Now the POTUS may have well thought out answers for all of those questions, which would be wonderful because you are not trying to take advantage of the other person by asking these questions. We are actually trying to learn something. If they have well thought out answers then you can learn something and continue to ask more questions until you have a grasp on the situation and find yourself in a place where you are comfortable taking a more active role in the conversation, as opposed to the passive one you take on in asking questions.
However, you will probably find that if you ask these questions the vast majority of people you are talking to will contradict themselves or talk themselves into a corner or say, "I'm not sure, I've never really thought about it that way before." within a couple of minutes. At least this has been my experience so far. The reason for this is because most people (on both sides I might add) do not really think about what they are learning or saying, they only parrott what they have heard someone else say that seemed persuasive to them at the time it was said, but has never taken the time to think critically about.
We all have these areas in our lives (Christian and non-Christian) and if you are wise you will thank each and every person who points those areas out to you. After all, we should NOT be trying to guard our turf or prove OUR point, but we should be pursuing what is TRUE. If what you believe is true then no question or challenge is off limits.
Now, these 3 posts are a summation of a part of what I have learned from a man named Greg Koukl. The tactic that I have spent 3 blogposts sharing with you is called the "Columbo Tactic". If you would like to listen to the expert on the subject it explain it more thorougly and understandably than I just have feel free to watch these videos or buy his book.
This first video is the short 4 minute version for those who don't have the time.
This second video is 60 minutes for those who want a more in depth discussion. I have also provided a link to his book below this 2nd video.
Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions
I hope you found all of this helpful. May God bless you all and give you all mercy in pursuing Truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment