Conclusion: Putting It All Together
People Skills
The Art of Sharing
A 'ho you are speaks more loudly than what you say. We have all been
around difficult people. One person constantly talks without allowing
you to get a word in. Another is only interested in talking about himself. Still
another always has bad breath, frequently has food stuck between his teeth,
and smells like his shower only works on Saturdays. Many of these people are
brilliant. But sometimes it seems that no one wants to listen to you in return. It
is important that, in addition to having solid evidence in support of Jesus' resurrection, we present ourselves in a manner that helps others to be open to what
we have to say. So here are a few tips that may enable you to be more effective
when talking with others.
Be loving
What are you like around others? My family and I (Licona) were together in a car that was struck by another vehicle. The bumper of our car was banged up pretty well, and the car that hit us had buckled its hood in the event. As I was waiting for the police and talking with the driver of the car who hit us, a young man with his hair slicked back, wearing a white shirt, dress trousers, and a tie, walked up to us both, handed each of us a gospel tract and said, "Here. Read this while you wait." He smiled and walked off into the sunset, never asking if anyone was hurt or if there was anything he could do to help. If I were a skeptic, that well-meaning brother would have become the subject of ridicule in future conversations. He left no positive impression of love behind the gospel of Christ.
If we want others to take our message seriously, we need to become credible messengers. Perhaps we can do this best by reflecting the love of Christ in our lives, the very thing we desire to communicate with others. What are you communicating? Are you so concerned about offending others that you refuse to take a stand on virtually any issue? This is far from the way Jesus was. Many were offended by his teachings.
On the other hand, are you the company preacher who walks around with a scowl? Do people smell your brimstone aftershave as you pass by? This was not Jesus' general approach either. While he did not hesitate to confront the Jewish leaders of his day who were more concerned with their position, power, and traditions than with an intimate relationship with God, Jesus appears to have spent most of his time ministering to people and sharing the gospel with them. If we allow the world to see that the Christian worldview has much to offer over a secular worldview, perhaps nonbelievers will be more interested in what we have to say. Don't forget that beyond truth itself, we want to model the changed life that is present by the grace of Jesus Christ.
Be humble
Having learned the evidences presented thus far, it is easy to gain a confidence when dialoguing with others that can turn to arrogance. The apostle Paul wrote, 'Knowledge makes arrogant, but love edifies" (1 Cor. 8:1 b). Keep a check on your heart. It is certainly thrilling to experience new confidence in sharing your faith as you obtain new knowledge and skills. We may start out with the right motives, only to have them change in the process without our even realizing it. Pretty soon we find that all we want to do is win an argument. We have been there and speak from experience. Such an attitude is not glorifying to God and may bring about failure in your discussions with skeptics. The object is not to win an argument but rather to lead a sincere person to the truth. Present the evidence in a humble, patient, and loving manner.
The Bible teaches us about the attitude we should have while sharing our faith. Consider the following verses (emphasis added):
A gentle answerturns away wrath. But a harsh word stirs up anger. The tongue of the wise makes knowledge acceptable. (Prov. 15:1-2a)
Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person. (Col. 4:6)
And the Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will. (2 Tim. 2:24-26)
But sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence. (1 Peter 3:15)
Have mercy on some, who are doubting. (Jude 22)
Notice that God urges us to be kind, gentle, and merciful toward those who hold views other than our own. Unfortunately, too many of the Christians whom skeptics and seekers encounter are unprepared and become extremely defensive and unpleasant. This, of course, is not the response that will encourage someone to become a Christian. Many will embrace the truth if someone will simply show it to them. That someone may be you. Dare to be different by having a response that is both sound and loving.
Even with the best intentions, it is easy to become upset with someone who disagrees with you on the subject of God. A few years ago, I (Licona) really failed in a discussion with a Jehovah's Witness who came to my door. She was going around the neighborhood with her teenage daughter and I invited them in. Our time together turned into a heated discussion, and I had to ask her to leave. Although she was initially quite unpleasant when I told her that we disagreed on the issue of who Jesus is, my attitude was bad from the start. I was more interested in winning the argument than compassionately sharing the truth and patiently attempting to reveal the errors of the organization to which she belonged.
How often do we listen with an open mind when someone angrily or arrogantly tells us that we are wrong? Rarely or never. We shut off our minds to whatever that person tells us, even if deep down inside, we have a feeling that what he is saying is true. Skeptics and seekers are people too, of course. If our attitude is bad, they may close their minds to us as well. We will get nowhere and mistakenly blame their unreceptiveness on a disinterest in truth. Remember that Satan has led many down the wrong path. Lead them to the right path. Many of these are sincere and committed people, just the kind you want in your church.
Christian philosopher Terry Miethe writes, 'I have known several famous Christian debaters who won the 'argument,' but lost the'debate'! They had the best content and the worst personality. Consequently, the audience went away with more emotional sympathy for the atheist opponent, and therefore for his position!"' It has been said that people do not care how much you know until they know how much you care. Your genuine love will have a greater positive impact on a person than any other character quality.
Be a good listener
Have you ever been in a conversation with someone who would not let you say a word? Was it more of a monologue than a dialogue? Did you begin thinking of ways to excuse yourself graciously? When sharing the evidence with others, do not make the mistake of doing the very thing that turns you off in a discussion. Let the other person fully express his or her views and feelings. Do not interrupt. In fact, ask questions to provide the speaker additional opportunity to expound on his views. Have a genuine interest in the person. By listening to his views, you can learn a lot about what issues are really bothering him. If the person believes that you truly understand the issue(s) with which he struggles, he is more likely to listen to your answer.
Stay on the subject of Jesus' resurrection
It is easy to be drawn off the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Frequently this can occur when your skeptical friend does not have an answer to what you presented. For example, let's say your friend begins the dialogue by saying that she could never become a Christian because it is a first-century fairytale with no evidence to support it.
Sara: "This is the twenty-first century. We know that people don't come back from the dead. It's ridiculous to believe that Jesus did. There's no evidence, either, to support your belief."
You: 'I can appreciate what you're saying. However, a strong case can be made in favor of Jesus' resurrection."
Sara: "I find that hard to believe. How?"
So you begin to share how several facts surrounding the event can be established, even from non-Christian sources. In Sara's experience, no one has been able to do this before. Confused, she realizes that she cannot keep up with you on this discussion. So she changes her objection:
Sara: "Well, if God is so loving as you say he is, why does he allow all of the evil in the world?"
If you elect to switch course in the discussion and now go with the problem of evil, you may be treading on ground on which you are not as familiar and, most importantly, you move away from your central subject. Stay on the subject of Jesus' resurrection:
"That's a great question. And I think it would be enjoyable to discuss it with you sometime. But an unanswered question does not nullify the resurrection of Jesus. You mentioned that you were unaware that there is strong historical evidence for Christ's resurrection. What do you think about the evidence I've just provided?"
Then continue the discussion. This type of response will keep the issue in perspective and keep you on track.
During one of my (Licona) email discussions with a skeptic, the latter brought up a number of objections with Christianity. For example, he claimed that God contradicted himself when he said "Thou shalt not kill" when giving the Ten Commandments, and shortly afterward commanded the Israelites to kill their enemies. Moreover, he brought up occasions when God commanded that enemy women and children be killed as well. I attempted to answer these problems for him. But he either did not like my answers or had decided to be difficult. So I finally said:
As I consider your thoughts, it sounds like we will continue to quibble over issues that are not of great importance to our discussion since they do not invalidate Christianity. Remember this: If you accept the inspiration and trustworthiness of the Bible, you have no argument against Christianity's being true, because the God-inspired Bible says it is. On the other hand, if you reject the inspiration and trustworthiness of the Bible, you have no argument against Christianity, either, since your objections about a horrid God depend on the accounts being true! Either way, the issues that trouble you about Christianity do not invalidate it. This is because the truth of Christianity is not tied to the inspiration of the Bible, since I can demonstrate the truth of Christianity apart from accepting the inspiration or even the general trustworthiness of the Bible.
I suggested to him that we limit our discussion for the moment to whether Christianity is true by looking at Jesus' resurrection, since Christianity stands or falls on that event. I continued, 'If Jesus' resurrection did not occur, then we can just laugh at the problem passages in the Bible. However, if you decide that Christianity is true, then we can discuss these passages later that are troubling you. 02
This focused the discussion back on the most important issue already before us, instead of moving into smokescreens that obscure the main point. A smokescreen is precisely what many of these introduced objections are, barriers behind which the skeptic can hide the true reason for rejecting Jesus' resurrection. Many times this is simply an objection of the will rather than of the intellect. Perhaps this person simply does not want to have a relationship with God. Some enjoy the position of unbelief too much to want to give it up. A familiar position in which pride is invested would be lost if the questions about God really found answers. There are often motives behind our beliefs.
Some of these motives may seem far-fetched to those who have not spent much time sharing their faith with others. But those who have know how often people have a stake in their own unbelief. I used to struggle when I read about Jesus' account of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. In it, the rich man who is in hell asks Abraham to send Lazarus from paradise to warn his brothers lest they, too, end up in hell and be tormented. Abraham answered, "If they do not listen to [the writings of] Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."3
I used to wonder how that could be. If someone really appeared from the dead with a message from God, would others look at this person and not accept what he had to say? Then I developed a friendship with an atheist. As we became closer friends, we discussed the topics of God and Christianity more often. He moved slowly from atheism to agnosticism. Then he became a skeptical theist. Finally, he admitted that he was certain God existed, that Jesus rose from the dead, and that God was offering him eternal life. Nevertheless, he still refused to accept Jesus into his heart because he wanted to be the master of his own life. His rejection of Jesus was not due to a lack of any evidence. Rather this was a refusal on the part of his will. He was very straightforward about his real reasons.
We may never know the motives in the people we dialogue with. Nevertheless, in order to help prevent us from getting discouraged when the person remains an unbeliever, it can be helpful to remember that the majority of the people we talk to will reject Christ, not because of any lack of evidence, but because they simply want to do so. One way to recognize this is when the person clearly has no more questions about the facts of the gospel. Yet they still are not ready to go further. The skeptic in the e-mail dialogue mentioned above, agreed to focus on Jesus' resurrection. I presented the evidence, answered a few objections, and I never heard back from him.
So stay focused on the topic of Jesus' resurrection. Not only will this help you to concentrate on the most important topic, but it will also prevent you from wasting a lot of time with those simply seeking a sparring partner for debate. When you wrestle a pig in the mud," runs the old farm saying, "sooner or later you realize that the pig is enjoying it."' Jesus said, "Do not throw your pearls before swine."5
Anchor a conclusion before moving on
Conclude one matter with your skeptical friend before moving onto another topic. Once you have engaged in several dialogues with skeptics, you will discover that because of human nature he will rarely acknowledge that you have effectively answered his objection. He will often simply move on to still another objection. It is easy for this to go on over a period of time. It can be helpful to bring closure to a matter before moving on to the next. This assists in preventing your skeptical friend from coming back later and saying, "Yes, but remember it still could have been ... ," even though you answered that objection fifteen minutes prior. Let's look at an example of how anchoring works.
'So you can see from the reasons I've just provided, hallucinations fail to explain Jesus' resurrection."
Rick: "Well, maybe Jesus didn't really die on the cross and he later just came out of a coma and some who thought he had died now thought he had risen."
"Hey, that's an interesting point, Rick. But before we go there, will you agree with me that hallucinations fail to account for all of the data that we have, or should I give you some more reasons why scholars have rejected that theory?"
Learn common objections and be comfortable answering them
In the process of inquiry, it is normal to question the claim that a supernatural event occurred and to raise other potential explanations for the data. After talking with a number of skeptics, you will realize that the same opposing theories to the Resurrection are raised most of the time. These were covered in part 3. Review the information in that section, especially the charts, until you have a good grasp of the facts that refute various opposing theories. The more experience you gain fielding common objections, the more comfortable you will become in responding to them.
Be prepared to address objections for which you do not know the answer
No matter how much you have read on a subject or how often you have discussed it, occasionally someone will bring up something you have never heard before. If you do not know how to answer it, what should you do? Our natural reflex is to "wing it" and say something that may not be altogether true, or it may be hard to defend. By doing this, you dig yourself into a hole that will be more difficult to get out of if the skeptic decides to probe further.
Our recommendation is to be honest. There is no shame in admitting that you do not know the answer to something. Moreover, by doing this you establish credibility about the answers you do provide, since your listeners will know that you were not winging it when you provided them. Honesty may also encourage the person with whom you are talking to be just as candid about what he or she does not understand. By admitting that you do not know all of the answers and would be willing to research further, you may facilitate a more open discussion, whereas "winging it" may begin to shut down communications.
You may want to say: "That's a good question. I honestly don't know the answer. So rather than say something that may not be totally right, I'll have to look into it, and I'll be happy to get back to you if you like." Then return to where the discussion left off before the question.
Before you do this, however, you may surprise yourself with a good answer. Here's a two-step approach that may be of help: (1) Ask yourself whether this objection, if true, would refute Jesus' resurrection. If it does not, point this out to your skeptical friend. For example, suppose someone were to object that he does not like all the "dos and don'ts" in the Bible. I might respond by saying, 'Even if these are present, how does that answer or refute the historical evidence for Jesus' resurrection I have just presented?" You will find that many objections actually do nothing to call Jesus' resurrection into question and are unrelated. However, if his objection to Jesus' resurrection would refute it if true, proceed to the second step. (2) Quickly reflect on your minimal facts approach and determine whether any of the five major facts (4 + I )h you presented remain unexplained if this objection is true.
For example, let's suppose you have presented the evidence for Jesus' resurrection when your skeptical colleague asserts that the Gospels were not written by the four authors to whom they have been attributed. Thus, your claim that the original disciples taught that Jesus rose cannot be supported. Perhaps you haven't involved yourself in matters of New Testament higher criticism and are unprepared to discuss the authorship issue. That's okay. You may be surprised that you can still answer your colleague. Remember that in a minimal facts approach you do not have to defend theological positions such as the inspiration or trustworthiness of the New Testament or the traditional authorship of the Gospels. Doing so may even detract from the more important issue of Jesus' resurrection.
So you quickly reflect through your five facts that are strongly attested and granted by the majority of scholars who study the subject of Jesus' resurrection, even the rather skeptical ones. Then you can reply with the following: "I haven't based my argument that the disciples saw the risen Jesus on a specific authorship of the Gospels. Rather I have presented nine sources in three categories that provide early, multiple, and even nonbiblical testimony that they were making this claim."'
For this objection, we did not even have to reflect on the facts. We only needed to understand the minimal facts approach.
Let's try another one. It may be suggested that Jesus' disciples gave him something to drink that contained some common herbs prior to being crucified. Shortly afterward, the herbs in the drink made him appear dead and substantially reduced his oxygen needs. The soldiers mistook him for dead and removed him from the cross. The disciples, perhaps Luke the physician, then gave Jesus some other herbs that restored his health. The disciples then proclaimed that he had risen from the dead.
Now let's think through our minimal facts and see if these alone can provide a formidable defense. The death of Jesus by crucifixion is our first minimal fact. Thus, this theory is dead from the outset.
Second, we have the sincere belief of the disciples that they had seen the risen Jesus. Remember that their continual willingness to suffer and even die for those beliefs indicates that they sincerely regarded their beliefs as being true. Yet our conjectured Swoon-Fraud 1 theory earlier presents the disciples as deceivers and does not seem compatible with the known data. Remember that people may die for what they believe is true. But it is not reasonable to think that an entire group of men would be willing to suffer horribly and die for something they all knew was false.
Another problem with this theory is that it does not take into account the conversion of the church persecutor Paul, who himself claimed to have seen Jesus risen. If the herbs were common as suggested, then an educated Paul should have been aware of their existence and would have multiple doubts in his mind, especially given his beliefs that a crucified man was cursed by God and could not possibly be the Messiah. We also might ask ourselves if these herbs had such powerful healing powers, why they are not employed today in modern medical treatment for knife wounds, gun wounds, and injuries sustained from serious car accidents. Besides, Paul's description of Jesus' appearance to him was glorious. Thus, the normal appearance of a Jesus who had swooned and been healed will not do. Paul would probably have remained skeptical, and a glorious appearance would, of course, eliminate a swooned Jesus.
Notice that in these examples we simply focus on whether the objection really calls into question Jesus' resurrection. We apply the minimal facts approach. In many instances these minimal facts alone provide decisive refutation to objections with which we are unfamiliar.
Skeptics will always come up with theories that attempt to explain Jesus' resurrection in natural terms. Most if not all of these are simply nuances on old theories. If you understand the minimal facts approach and the five facts (4+ 1), you should be able to refute many if not all of those new theories without prior knowledge of them.
Don't be taken in by false information
In 2001, I (Licona) was asked to debate a mystic who claimed that Christianity was invented by some pagans and Jews who got together and concocted the whole account of Jesus and his disciples, all of whom are mythical figures. She also claimed that the Christian fish was not invented for Christians to identify themselves secretly when being publicly identified as a Christian could have meant death. Rather, she asserted, these conspirators invented it to signify the inauguration of the age of Pisces.
A secular radio talk show host thought a debate between the two of us would make an interesting show. However, the mystic declined the opportunity, and I was instead invited to answer her claims on a show that followed one where she appeared as a guest. When I researched her major claims, I found that they were completely without merit. I would not claim that she invented the data. But it became clear that someone in the past had done precisely that.
For example, regarding the Christian fish representing the ushering in of the age of Pisces, I contacted a professor of astronomy at a prominent university who specialized in the practice of astronomy in antiquity. When I informed him of her claim, he replied that her claims were not worth answering. He added that her claim that those in antiquity formed the Christian fish as a symbol for the age of Pisces was an obvious anachronism. Although constellations were recognized in antiquity, the method employed by astrologers for recognizing an astrological age did not develop to the point of identifying an 'age of Pisces' until the twentieth century. Checking revealed that a number of her claims had similar serious flaws in foundation or evidence. However, for the average listener, who will not investigate claims such as those the mystic was making, this false information can have devastating results. It can cause severe doubts concerning the validity of Christianity.
On another occasion on the radio, the talk show host, a guest who was an atheist, and I (Licona) were discussing the evidence for Jesus' resurrection. We began to take calls. Halfway through the program, a man called and claimed that Licona was making up this whole thing about ancient sources such as Josephus, Tacitus, and others mentioning Jesus. He claimed that he was a serious student and writer of ancient history and that no ancient sources mentioned Jesus, so these citations were lies. He went on saying this for a good three minutes or so. Finally, I said that it was one man's word against another. I provided the locations in these sources and said that anyone who wanted to check it out could go to their nearest bookstore and purchase the works of any of these ancient authors for under $15 and read them personally.
The man responded with several new false assertions that may have been believable to the uninformed. A commercial break followed and when we came back a new call was taken and the opportunity to respond to the previous guest was gone. Some people oppose Christianity so much that they will do whatever they can to thwart attempts to articulate the truth.
Most of us will never be involved in a public debate for which we spend months in preparation. Therefore, if the skeptic shares false information that he has innocently received, or if he decides to stretch the truth on a certain matter, there is very little chance that we will have had an opportunity to research the views of our opponent in order to see if what he is saying is true. What should we do? First, recognize that people often stretch the truth and treat it as an objection to which you have no answer. Second, if you are suspicious of the skeptic's response, ask for evidence: "That's new to me. What are your sources?" After all, you have to provide sources to support your view. Why not require that your opponent do likewise?
Prepare for the battle in prayer
The other author of this book, Gary Habermas, has represented the Christian view in several public debates. He is fond of pointing out that anyone who has argued the Christian view in a public debate setting realizes that it is more of a spiritual battle than an exercise in logic. Paul wrote that our battle "is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph. 6:12). Our main struggle is not against humans (i.e., flesh and blood), but against spiritual forces.
Therefore, it only makes sense that we should prepare ourselves for this kind of battle. Paul says that the way to do this is to put on the proper spiritual armor: truth, righteousness, peace, faith, salvation, and God's words. We must remain alert and pray both for the words to say and the courage to say them (see Eph. 6:10-20). So, study and prepare as though it all depends on you; pray as though it all depends on God, because it does. The main reason for this is simple: Changing hearts is God's business. In fact, it is not even within our power to "convince" someone to trust Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, so we need to rely on the work of the Holy Spirit.
Resist the temptation to overstate your case
You may be very excited about your new knowledge. It can be extremely uplifting to discover that what the Holy Spirit revealed to you is largely supported by historical investigation. Moreover, as you discover that most people cannot effectively address the issues you present, it is easy to give in to the temptation to claim more than is accurate by saying something like, "I will prove to you beyond any doubt that Jesus rose from the dead." As discussed earlier, virtually nothing can be proved with that degree of certainty. The problem with making this type of statement is that if the person walks away with any doubts after you have claimed you would prove Jesus' resurrection beyond all doubt, you have failed to support your view in his eyes. It is much better to state your case accurately or even understate it: "I believe there is good evidence for Jesus' resurrection" or "There is enough evidence for Jesus' resurrection that the Christian is rationally justified in accepting it." When the person with whom you are having dialog realizes that you have fulfilled your promise, he or she may be more inclined to consider the matter further.
Always be calm
It is easy to become defensive when someone attacks your beliefs. Our natural impulse is to respond with anger. The result is a heated argument. You must resist the temptation to do this at all costs. Not only will anger hurt your Christian testimony, your "opponents" also will lose whatever receptivity and good will they had to begin with, and you will feel badly afterward. Do not be offended when someone brings up an opposing theory. As you have seen, there are good answers to these. Each opposing theory is an opportunity to show the strength of the argument for Jesus' resurrection. I (Licona) find it effective to respond to an objection as though the person wants to believe and simply has a few questions that stand in the way: "That's a great question [or point]. In fact, there are some scholars who once raised that same issue. Here are some things for your consideration...."
Remember the words of Solomon in Proverbs 15:1: "A gentle answer turns away wrath."
To be proficient, practice
As with anything else in life, if you want to excel, you cannot do it without practice. The more you present the evidence, the more proficient you will become. To become a good hitter at slow-pitch softball, one must practice in a batting cage with a pitching machine, as well as on the field with the team. However, even with all the practice, a real game is different. The opposing pitcher will throw much the same as did the machine in batting practice. However, the emotional setting of a game makes a big difference, and it takes experience to become more comfortable.
When I (Licona) played softball, I practiced diligently, going to the batting cage several times a week. By the time the season began, I was hitting the ball very well. However, in the game, I produced a slew of weakly tapped ground balls until I was greatly frustrated. One hot afternoon during a tournament game, I stepped up to the plate, my confidence gone. Then a teammate encouraged me with the words, "You're at the batting cage, Mike." The mental image of the cage immediately relaxed my body and I hit a long ball to the outfield, and got on base. The batting slump was over when I realized that it was the tension of a live game that caused the problem. It took the experience of playing the game to lead to new levels of competence.
It is the same with sharing your faith with others. Work on mastering the information. Practice alone in the car. Imagine that there is a skeptic sitting in the passenger's seat and have a discussion as you drive. What would you say? How would you defend the truth of Jesus' resurrection? How would you answer specific objections? How can you say it succinctly? Practice.
Then get in the game. There is nothing like a real conversation with a skeptic to show where you need improvement. It was discussions with the toughest skeptics that prompted the authors to study further and find better answers and ways of communicating. When confronted with a weakness, return to this book and CD. Study the relevant sections and take a look at relevant endnotes and the detailed outline in the appendix to become better prepared for the next conversation.
Now it is time to pull everything together. How does our argument for Jesus' resurrection look? And how do we share it with others? Answers to these questions will be our focus in the next chapter.