An Easy Way to Remember the Principle

“He that complies against his will is of his own opinion still.”  Samuel Butler, 19^th century British novelist.

Socratic Evangelism

Once a team of skeptics confronted me. It was during a weekly Bible study for first year college men in a dorm room. The host, in whose room we met, had been telling us for weeks of his roommate’s antagonistic questions. This week, the roommate showed up—along with a handful of likeminded friends. The question of the gospel’s exclusivity arose, more as an attack than a sincere question.

“So, I suppose you think all those sincere followers of other religions are going to hell!”

“Do you believe in hell?” I responded.

He appeared as if he’d never seriously considered the possibility. He looked so puzzled, perhaps because he was being challenged when he thought that he was doing the challenging. After a long silence, he said, “No. I don’t believe in hell. I think it is ridiculous.”

Echoing his word choice, I said, “Well, then why are you asking such a ridiculous question?” I wasn’t trying to be a wise guy. I simply wanted him to honestly examine the assumptions behind his own question.

The silence was broken my another questioner, who chimed in, “Well, I do believe in hell. Do you think everyone who disagrees with you is going there?”

I asked, “Do you think anyone goes there? Is Hitler in hell?”

“Of course Hitler is in hell.”

“How do you think God decides who goes to heaven and who goes to hell? Does He grade on a curve?”

From there, the discussion became civil for the first time, and serious interaction about God’s holiness, people’s sinfulness, and Jesus’ atoning work ensued. Answering questions with questions turned out to be a more effective, albeit indirect, way to share the gospel.

Excerpted from Questioning Evangelism: Engaging People’s Hearts the Way Jesus Did (Kregel Publishers). © 2002 Randy Newman.

Read the entire chapter

Difficult Conversations: From Argument to "Learning Conversation"

Asking questions and listening closely to the other side's answers is at the heart of the recommendations by Doug Stone and colleagues in their book Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most (Penguin, 1999). Here's a quick excerpt:

Despite what we sometimes pretend, our initial purpose for having a difficult conversation is often to prove a point, to give them a piece of our mind, or to get them to do or be what we want. In other words, to deliver a message...

Instead of wanting to persuade and get your way, try to understand what has happened from the other person's point of view, explain you point of view, share and understand feelings, and work together to figure out a way to manage the problem going forward. In doing so, you make it more likely that the other person will be open to being persuaded, and that you will learn something that significantly changes the way you understand the problem.

Changing our stance means inviting the other person into the conversation with us, to help us figure things out. If we're going to achieve out purposes, we have lots we need to learn from them and lots they need to learn from us. We need to have a learning conversation.