The Poached Egg Christian Worldview and Apologetics Network

Tactics: A Game Plan For Discussing Your Christian Convictions (Book Review)

Follow @ThePoachedEgg

Switch to mobile friendly version

Tactics: A Game Plan For Discussing Your Christian Convictions (Book Review)

by Luke Nix

Introduction
I was introduced to the apologetic work of Greg Koukl almost ten years ago. I remember when his book "Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions" (softcover, Kindle) was released I could not wait to get my copy. I was still trying to get my footing on how to defend the Christian worldview, and this book provided a foundation for my approach that has lasted since then. Because it was so important and vital to my confidence in sharing the reasons for the hope that I have, I decided to bring it out again and do a review for those who are not yet aware of the value of this book for, not just apologists but, every Christian. This review will be a chapter-by-chapter summary of the contents of the book. I have deliberately left out many details but given enough to hopefully pique your curiosity enough to get your own copy to read and be blessed by.

Part One: The Game Plan
Chapter 1: Diplomacy or D-Day?
Koukl introduces his book by describing a situation that seems all-too-common for Christians: even though we have been called by Christ to tell people about Him, we do not out of fear of not being able to defend what we believe. Koukl explains that this fear is unnecessary and demonstrates by recounting a conversation he had with a skeptic. He uses various tactics in maneuvering through the conversation that kept the exchange natural, comfortable for both parties, yet caused the skeptic to question her worldview. Koukl reminds the Christian that it is important to maintain a calm and collected demeanor while discussing, and he explains that the keys to that is to be prepared. Preparation includes having some working knowledge and being able to skillfully steer the conversation.

If Christianity is true, then the Christian has nothing to fear from discussing worldviews. If they pay close attention to the skeptic's claims they can not only identify the faulty reasoning but be able to highlight it in a way that causes the skeptic to think hard about the implications of their view. Koukl offers several tactics that he will explain throughout the book to help the Christian gain confidence to winsomely initiate and navigate discussion regarding the Gospel.

Chapter 2: Reservations
Several concerns often arise when promoting the idea of developing "tactics" in presenting the Gospel. Koukl's "tactics" are part of defending the Christian faith, formally called "apologetics." Apologetics involves arguing for the truth of the Christian worldview. However, the "arguing" is not the "fighting" type that threatens unity (as many Christians fear apologetics is); it is rather a presentation of accepted facts in a reasonable way to soundly conclude the truth of Christianity. Koukl explains that if arguing (in the proper sense) is discouraged in  the Church, then no real knowledge can be obtained, so it is necessary if we wish to grow in our faith…

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Faithful Thinkers | Book Review: Tactics: A Game Plan For Discussing Your Christian Convictions

The Best One-Sentence Answer to Show Why God Is True

Follow @ThePoachedEgg

Switch to mobile friendly version

The Best One-Sentence Answer to Show Why God Is True

by Greg Koukl

I would like to offer you, in a nutshell, what I think is the simplest, most powerful way, strategically, to make your case as a Christian. I have been using it a long time in a variety of ways, though it really came together for me quite by accident recently when my eldest daughter, then about eight years old, asked me an important question.

“Papa,” Annabeth asked, “How do we know God is true?” She was already a Christian, baptized at six, but was now trying to connect the dots, not regarding the “What?” but regarding the “Why?”

What do you say to a youngster who already believes in God, but is not sure why belief in God is defensible? That was my challenge. And nothing technical would do, not at her age.

I thought for a moment how I could say something meaningful in a simple way.  Then a thought crystalized in my mind. “Annabeth,” I said, “the reason we believe God is true is that God is the best explanation for the way things are.” The minute I said it I realized I had summed up in a single sentence a major thrust of how for decades I have approached defending Christianity.

When I wrote Relativism almost 20 years ago, my goal was to show that objective morality was an undeniable feature of the world. That’s why people complain so readily about the problem of evil. There can only be a real problem of evil if real morality has been violated.

The atheist cannot easily deny the problem of evil, but he cannot make sense of it, either. What accounts for something as odd as a genuine moral obligation? Transcendent moral laws require a transcendent moral lawgiver, it seems. Make-me-up morality simply will not do. God is the best explanation for the way things are…

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Stand to Reason | The Best One-Sentence Answer to Show Why God Is True

"Faith" No More: It's Time We Did Away with the Notion of Religious Wishful Thinking

Switch to mobile friendly version

Follow @ThePoachedEgg

"Faith" No More: It's Time We Did Away with the Notion of Religious Wishful Thinking

by Greg Koukl

I don't like the word "faith." It's not that faith isn't valuable. True biblical faith is essential for salvation. But faith is often deeply misunderstood in a way that hurts Christianity and harms Christians.

Some think that having a level of certainty about the truth of Christianity makes faith unnecessary or irrelevant—that this kind of knowledge undermines genuine faith and offends God. The reasoning goes something like this: We all know that God wants us to have faith. In fact, without faith, it's impossible to please him (Hebrews 11:6). However, gathering evidence for God and Christianity leaves little room for faith. After all, how can one have faith in something that he knows is true? Faith, then, is opposed to knowledge. Therefore, apologetics undermines the faith project and displeases the Lord.

In this view, faith is believing the unbelievable, clinging to your convictions when all of the evidence is against you. Faith is a "leap"—a blind, desperate lunge in the darkness. When doubts or troubles beset us, we're told to "just have faith," as if we could squeeze out spiritual hope by intense acts of sheer will. This view of faith reduces Christian conviction to religious wishful thinking. We can hope, but we can't ever know.

But this will never work. Someone once said, "The heart cannot believe that which the mind rejects." If you are not confident that the message of the Bible is actually true, you can't believe it no matter how hard you try. The "I just take Christianity on (blind) faith" attitude can't be the right approach. It leaves the Bible without defense, yet Peter directs us to make a defense for the hope that is in us (1 Peter 3:15). Also, the biblical word for faith, pistis, doesn't mean "wishing." It means "active trust." And trust cannot be conjured up or manufactured. It must be earned. You can't exercise the kind of faith that the Bible has in mind unless you're reasonably sure that some particular things are true.

In fact, I suggest that you completely ban the phrase "leap of faith" from your vocabulary. Biblical faith is based on knowledge, not on wishing or blind leaps. Knowledge builds confidence, and confidence leads to trust. The kind of faith that God is interested in is not wishing. It's trust based on knowing, a sure confidence grounded in evidence. The following biblical examples make my point…

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>> 

"Faith" No More by Greg Koukl

Loving God with the mind is not a passive process

Follow @Apologetics_Qts

Switch to mobile friendly version

Jesus said, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength” (Mark 12:30). Loving God with the mind is not a passive process. It is not enough to have sentimental religious thoughts. Rather, it involves coming to conclusions about God and his world based on revelation, observation, and careful reflection. — Greg Koukl (from, Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions)

Greg Koukl explains the right way to handle an angry, aggressive atheist

Follow @ThePoachedEgg

Switch to mobile friendly version

Greg Koukl explains the right way to handle an angry, aggressive atheist

Wintery Knight

Greg Koukl is one of the scholars who got me started in apologetics. In his “Solid Ground” newsletter for January/February 2009, he talked about dealing with angry, aggressive atheists.

Let’s start with the question “what is a steamroller?”:

The defining characteristic of a “steamroller” is that he constantly interrupts, rolling over you with the force of his personality. Steamrollers are not usually interested in answers. They are interested in winning through intimidation.

Greg breaks down the techniques for handling steamrollers in 3 steps.

Step 1: Stop Him.

Your first move when you find yourself in a conversation with a steamroller is a genial request for courtesy. Momentarily put the discussion on “pause.” Ask to continue making your point uninterrupted.

One of the ways you can do that is using body language. You can raise your hand in the stop motion to emphasize your verbal attempt to pause the conversation so that you can finish responding. Ask for a specific amount of time to make your point, and make sure that you him to agree that you will get that time to respond! But the most important thing is to not lose your temper.

Be careful not to let annoyance or hostility creep into your voice. That would be a mistake, especially with this kind of person. Don’t let a steamroller get under your skin. Being defensive and belligerent always looks weak. Instead, stay focused on the issues, not on the attitude. Talk calmly and try to look confident.

…don’t take unfair advantage of the time you buy with this little negotiation. Make your point, then ask, “Does that make sense to you?” This invites him back into the conversation. Give him the courtesy of offering you a reply without interruption.

I hear J.P. Moreland saying “Does that make sense to you?” all the time in his lectures, and now I’ve started doing it too! And so should you! But what if “stopping him” doesn’t work? Then we go on to step 2…

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Greg Koukl explains the right way to handle an angry, aggressive atheist | WINTERY KNIGHT

There Is No Truth?

Follow @ThePoachedEgg

Switch to mobile friendly version

There Is No Truth?

by Greg Koukl

. . .but at least fifteen things have to be true before this statement can even be uttered in English. What are they?

Recently, I was asked a question that I get asked a lot. It's a common challenge on the campus. It was offered as I spoke in the lecture hall at Oregon Institute of Technology in Klamath Falls. Though it was primarily a Christian group who came from the outside, this was the facility they used. The question is one that is asked all the time on campus.

I was reflecting on that question as I flew back this morning. I started jotting some notes down and was quite surprised at what I came up with in response to this question. They were things I'd been aware of before, but it was interesting the way it all fell together. The question was this, how to deal with somebody who says there is no truth.

Now this is very popular on campus, with deconstructionism and postmodernism, this radical skepticism that's swept the academy. It's this idea that you can't know anything for sure, nothing is set in concrete; everything is influenced by our culture, our upbringing and our suppositions, so it's impossible to get at any objective truth.

I flatly reject such a thing. I think there are a number of things we can count on as being true simply because the opposite is not possible. If we can even utter the sentence, "There is no truth"-- and, of course, we must at least utter the sentence to make the claim-- then several things must be objectively true.

First of all, if someone holds that there is no truth, then there's at least one thing that's true…

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Stand to Reason | There Is No Truth?

A Clever Tactic to Take on Tough Questions

Follow @ThePoachedEgg

Switch to mobile friendly version

A Clever Tactic to Take on Tough Questions

by Greg Koukl

Disagree with the Christian on this and you disagree with Christ. That’s why this should be your first line of response when answering this query.

A while back I stumbled upon what I think is a clever way of dealing with certain types of challenges that I face as a follower of Christ. I thought I’d pass it on to you hoping you’d find it useful, too.

For example, I used it recently with the culturally tricky issue of same-sex marriage.

I’d received a note from a dad whose daughter was in a competition where she knew she’d be asked her view on this issue—an obvious attempt to disqualify anyone who doesn’t toe the politically correct line on homosexuality. He wanted my opinion on the safest way to answer the question, “What do you think about same-sex marriage?” and still be faithful to Jesus.

Since Jesus said we should be innocent, but shrewd, I worked out a response I think satisfies both requirements: “Since I am a follower of Christ, my view on marriage is the same as Jesus’ view, one He made clear in Matthew 19: One man, with one woman, becoming one flesh, for one lifetime. So, on the definition of marriage, I stand with Jesus.”

You get the point. Disagree with the Christian on this and you disagree with Christ. That’s why this should be your first line of response when answering this query. Since Jesus still has credibility with most people, this puts the opposition in a bind.

Here’s the general principle: Pit the challenger against Jesus whenever you can.

That was my approach when I faced off with New Age “guru,” Deepak Chopra, a few years ago for a national TV debate on Lee Strobel’s Faith Under Fire…

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Stand to Reason | A Clever Tactic to Take on Tough Questions