Greg and Amy offer advice on how to respond to difficult questions without sounding evasive, reminding believers that it is okay to acknowledge when you do not have an answer.
Transcript
Question: Do you have any good tips for how to use apologetics without sounding like I’m avoiding answering the question? I get a lot of eye rolls, like “Here we go.”
Amy: They don’t want to hear the answer, it sounds like to me.
Greg: Well, as I understand the question, it has to do with people confronting her, and then she’s responding with a question, and then she gets an eye roll.
Amy: She wants to know how to use apologetics without sounding like she’s avoiding answering the question. So, they ask her a question, and as she’s trying to answer, they accuse her of trying to avoid the question.
Greg: Of course, our approach is you’re asking some questions to get clarification. “What do you mean by that? How did you come to that conclusion?” So, therefore, there’s no avoidance going on at this point. There is just a request for more information so we can have a clearer idea of what we’re up against, what we need to respond to, and what the concern is.
Now, if the Christian can go no further, what they can say is, “I can go no further. I don’t know what to say to this. I don’t have an answer that might be satisfying to you, and that’s the best I can do. Sorry about that.” That’s not avoiding the question. That’s just acknowledging you don’t have an answer. Sometimes, if it looks like you’re avoiding the question because you don’t have an answer, then it’s just better to fess up and say, “You know, that’s a tough one. I’m going to have to think about this.” Incidentally, those are the magic words. “I think I’m going to have to think about this a little bit.” Because when you say, “Let me think about this,” or something like that, you are acknowledging your inability, and therefore you have no responsibility to give any further response. You’re not avoiding it. You’re just acknowledging that you are not adequate to the task at the moment, and you need more time to think about it. Hopefully, after you’re done, you think about it, and whatever the particular issue is, you research it a little bit better.
Amy: Well, what if it’s a situation where, let’s say, they ask you a yes or no question, and she has to actually explain more than just a yes or no answer?
Greg: Well, that’s like, “Do you think if I don’t believe in Jesus, I’m going to Hell, and all Jews that don’t believe in Jesus are going to Hell?” Well, there is a yes or no answer to that—in this case, yes, it’s true that a person who doesn’t put their trust in Christ to pay for their sins has to pay for their sins themselves. Now, notice, I can give more explanation so it doesn’t sound so stark and really end up being misleading. Some questions will have a yes or no answer, but even giving yes or no—whatever the accurate answer is to the question—may end up misleading people about the nature of the answer, and so, you have to go into more detail, and that’s what you need to do.
I was actually asked that question about Jews almost seven years ago. It was Dennis Prager and a group. I was on the stage with Dennis, and there was the whole group in High Holy Days of Jews. Dennis asked me, “If the Jews don’t believe in Jesus”—something to that effect—”are they going to Hell? Do they have to believe in Jesus to go to Heaven?”—or something like that. And I told them, “Just giving you a yes or no answer—just giving you a simple answer—is going to be misleading to the rest of the people, because it will sound anti-Semitic. So, I need to put it in a different way so at least you can get the sense of what the claim is.” And that’s when I went into a more thoroughgoing explanation that had nothing to do with Judaism but had everything to do with sinners. It’s not that God plays favorites, like religions or clubs—he used to like the Jewish club, and now he likes the Christian club. No, it’s a whole different thing. By explaining it, at least it was more clear what we meant when we said that one must believe in Jesus in order to go to Heaven. Here’s the calculus of that whole thing.
I guess some might consider that to be evasive. “Why don’t you just get to the point? Why are you beating around the bush?” Well, what I’m trying to do is make it more clear.
Amy: I like that way of putting it—of saying, “Look, I could just say yes or no, but I think whatever I say will be misleading because you’re probably thinking things I’m not thinking when I say yes or no.” So, I think if you could just explain that and then say, “So, are you okay if I actually explain the answer so you’ll understand my answer? I just want to make sure that it’s clear and that you understand what I’m claiming here.”
Greg: By the way, sometimes, especially in a public situation—I was just thinking of a BBC interview I had on the abortion question a long time ago that was very hard—what they’re trying to do is, “I want a yes or no answer because I want you to look as ridiculous as possible to the rest of the audience.” Now, obviously, they don’t say that, but that’s the gamesmanship that’s going on in that situation and also in some other conversations. So, you want to try to sidestep that so there’s clarity about what you’re claiming.