I agree with many things he says but God does put me in front of soft hearts continually and I ask Him to only move me toward those folks. Don’t Put God in a Box.
Remember, it's all about tactics and strategies and tricks, as well as not answering any questions...just probing for weakness in the unbeliever's position and pouncing on that.
There is a lot that could be said about the Socratic method which basically what is being taught here and i am not saying it doesn't have its place but I think we are called to more than put a pebble into someones shoe. The thing is Jesus said if they hated me then they will hate you. Basically you can't get away from that and if you don't offend someone then your you are not preaching the gospel because it is offensive to the world. BUT it is the Power of God unto salvation.
True, but at least this method enables one to sometimes get to first base and beyond. When jumping in to share the gospel right away by making statements, I have often been immediately shut down. Many people have heard the basic gospel message and have rejected it for various reasons. If we can delve into a person's reasoning, we can sometimes expose their weaknesses and get them to doubt their own beliefs. You might not be the one to lead a person to Christ, but if you have at least planted a seed, in the future they might be more likely to accept the gospel. Just thinking.
𝗤: 𝗗𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱? This uses two fuzzy concepts: • moral crime • ought Can you set out what you mean by them?
@@timabdiukov Thanks for the response. I'm asking what Mr. Koukl means by saying something is a "moral crime", and also what he means by saying something "ought" to happen. This isn't related to an objection by me or anyone else...just trying to grasp the intent of Mr. Koukl's original question.
@@axolotl5327 Oh I believe the fuzziness *actually* part of the charm 😊. The question unpacks to this: "With your convictions about morality (or lack thereof), does the moral crime exist, and if so, do you believe moral crimes ought to (whether you believe 'may', 'should' or 'must') be punished?" One way to think about what Greg does is this, suppose you end up in unknown country with your driver's licence. You approach the police officer and ask if your driver's licence is valid. From the response you may find out if the officer speaks English, whether they accept the driver's licence issued my your home state, and so on.
@@ACE-pm3gh Lots of physical evidence for Alexander. Siege works, ramps, coinage in his lifetime, contemporary dated public monuments. Got anything for Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua etc? If you have no physical evidence that your alleged JC was at least a living physical man then what are we to think of your greater claims that he was divine?
@@robertlight5227 none of what you presented as physical evidence can successfully attest to a human named Alexander the Great anymore than the evidence pointing to Jesus. The monopoly man has his own money too, that doesn't prove he is real. statues don't prove human existence either, people made all kinds of statues dedicated to mythical gods...are you implying that makes them real? Mickey mouse has a huge statue dated contemporarily lol...Military and civil works have been attributed to Zeus, Mars and many other mythical beings by the Greeks, Are you implying that makes them real also? None of what you presented can actually attest that Alexander the Great was an actual being anymore than the writings of the new testament authors and witnesses attest to the existence of the literal human called Jesus of Nazareth. And you don't think there is any recorded evidence of Jesus Christ outside of the Bible? If you reject the attestations of Jesus, you must reject the attestations written about Alexander the Great. There are sources outside the Biblical compilation...all mentioning this being that people called Jesus. Unless you are just throwing out the notion that dozens of the most influential people in the middle East and Western Europe were all continuing on the fairy tale of this make believe human called Jesus. Even the people that had absolutely nothing to gain by mentioning him understood he existed, even if they didn't believe in his deity. This real life human Jesus claimed all authority and He believed in the law and prophets so Abraham Isaac and Jacob seem to be covered by Jesus. "Adam and Eve" doesn't have to be a literal undertaking if you understood anything about Hebrew or Aramaic language. It's especially clear when you have an understanding of the second temple period Judaism why the author was giving a polemic comparison to the mythical stories surrounding the Israelites. It's a narrative describing THE REAL GOD of creation in comparison to the mythology of the pagans surrounding them at the time it was written. It's pretty easy to notice all the differences when you study pagan belief systems and compare them to the Word of God. The difference is in the details and it makes a literal world of difference 😂 but I already know you will have some snide remark showing your lack of understanding. Genesis doesn't claim there was a literal talking snake in a literal garden with a literal tree that can kill you or make you live forever..that's what the profane and uneducated assume and read into the text.
Disappointing about the take on the Holy Spirit’s work. OH YES you have to tune in. If we are listening God is faithful to speak directly to us using His Word and the still small voice of His Spirit. Greg is telling on himself here. 😢
The vast array of fly-by-night hacks like this guy and their acceptance by Evangelicals has hurt Evangelicalism as much as anything. Also, the just general lack of real discernment among Evangelical "leaders" has just sent the whole movement down the drain....Ugh.
You are saying Greg is a "fly by night" hack?? What is your evidence? Are you implying he doesn't know what he's talking about?? Tell us where you believe his knowledge is lacking...
If you had actual evidence, you wouldn't need tactics and training to try and convince anyone. Apologetics is damned near the best evidence that your God is made up.
Thank you, Lord! Thank you for this timely message. God bless you, dear brother.
Love this series. Thank you for posting.
Love love love this! ❤️🙌🏻🕊
I agree with many things he says but God does put me in front of soft hearts continually and I ask Him to only move me toward those folks. Don’t Put God in a Box.
Remember, it's all about tactics and strategies and tricks, as well as not answering any questions...just probing for weakness in the unbeliever's position and pouncing on that.
If that's your heart in approaching evangelism, I hope you ask God to it before you open your mouth.
@@lisasachleben1655 Greg himself called them "strategies" and "tactics"...just like a salesman would.
He's talking about tactics to beginning a conversation, developing relationships, and planting seeds. There's nothing wrong with that.
@@samuelbell3281 No, it's a strategy of attack.
@@mashah1085 what do you mean by that? 🧐
👍👋👋👋
There is a lot that could be said about the Socratic method which basically what is being taught here and i am not saying it doesn't have its place but I think we are called to more than put a pebble into someones shoe. The thing is Jesus said if they hated me then they will hate you. Basically you can't get away from that and if you don't offend someone then your you are not preaching the gospel because it is offensive to the world. BUT it is the Power of God unto salvation.
True, but at least this method enables one to sometimes get to first base and beyond. When jumping in to share the gospel right away by making statements, I have often been immediately shut down. Many people have heard the basic gospel message and have rejected it for various reasons. If we can delve into a person's reasoning, we can sometimes expose their weaknesses and get them to doubt their own beliefs. You might not be the one to lead a person to Christ, but if you have at least planted a seed, in the future they might be more likely to accept the gospel. Just thinking.
41:00 you need to know theology too
𝗤: 𝗗𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱?
This uses two fuzzy concepts:
• moral crime
• ought
Can you set out what you mean by them?
What do you mean by that? Upd: Are you raising an objection, or are you asking for a response to the objection somebody raised?
@@timabdiukov Thanks for the response.
I'm asking what Mr. Koukl means by saying something is a "moral crime", and also what he means by saying something "ought" to happen.
This isn't related to an objection by me or anyone else...just trying to grasp the intent of Mr. Koukl's original question.
@@axolotl5327 Oh I believe the fuzziness *actually* part of the charm 😊. The question unpacks to this: "With your convictions about morality (or lack thereof), does the moral crime exist, and if so, do you believe moral crimes ought to (whether you believe 'may', 'should' or 'must') be punished?"
One way to think about what Greg does is this, suppose you end up in unknown country with your driver's licence. You approach the police officer and ask if your driver's licence is valid. From the response you may find out if the officer speaks English, whether they accept the driver's licence issued my your home state, and so on.
They are punished.
Moral crime: missing the mark (archery
term) of what a good God commands.
Ought: moral imperative. Something that must be done or not done.
Any physical evidence for your claims of JC?
You have Any "physical" evidence for Genghis Kahn? Or Aristotle? Or Alexander the Great?
@@ACE-pm3gh Lots of physical evidence for Alexander. Siege works, ramps, coinage in his lifetime, contemporary dated public monuments. Got anything for Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua etc?
If you have no physical evidence that your alleged JC was at least a living physical man then what are we to think of your greater claims that he was divine?
@@robertlight5227 none of what you presented as physical evidence can successfully attest to a human named Alexander the Great anymore than the evidence pointing to Jesus. The monopoly man has his own money too, that doesn't prove he is real. statues don't prove human existence either, people made all kinds of statues dedicated to mythical gods...are you implying that makes them real? Mickey mouse has a huge statue dated contemporarily lol...Military and civil works have been attributed to Zeus, Mars and many other mythical beings by the Greeks, Are you implying that makes them real also? None of what you presented can actually attest that Alexander the Great was an actual being anymore than the writings of the new testament authors and witnesses attest to the existence of the literal human called Jesus of Nazareth. And you don't think there is any recorded evidence of Jesus Christ outside of the Bible? If you reject the attestations of Jesus, you must reject the attestations written about Alexander the Great. There are sources outside the Biblical compilation...all mentioning this being that people called Jesus. Unless you are just throwing out the notion that dozens of the most influential people in the middle East and Western Europe were all continuing on the fairy tale of this make believe human called Jesus. Even the people that had absolutely nothing to gain by mentioning him understood he existed, even if they didn't believe in his deity. This real life human Jesus claimed all authority and He believed in the law and prophets so Abraham Isaac and Jacob seem to be covered by Jesus. "Adam and Eve" doesn't have to be a literal undertaking if you understood anything about Hebrew or Aramaic language. It's especially clear when you have an understanding of the second temple period Judaism why the author was giving a polemic comparison to the mythical stories surrounding the Israelites. It's a narrative describing THE REAL GOD of creation in comparison to the mythology of the pagans surrounding them at the time it was written. It's pretty easy to notice all the differences when you study pagan belief systems and compare them to the Word of God. The difference is in the details and it makes a literal world of difference 😂 but I already know you will have some snide remark showing your lack of understanding. Genesis doesn't claim there was a literal talking snake in a literal garden with a literal tree that can kill you or make you live forever..that's what the profane and uneducated assume and read into the text.
@@robertlight5227 do you have any pictures or videos or eye witnesses accounts of Genghis Kahn?
If you sit on the fence the devil loves that because he owns the fence.
When they call me a homophobe I say get a Bible and scream at it and call God and Jesus a homophobe because I’m just listening to them.
Whelp that was fun until this went into cessation worldview. 🤦♂️
Worldview ? We all have a worldview, because we "live in the world".
Disappointing about the take on the Holy Spirit’s work. OH YES you have to tune in. If we are listening God is faithful to speak directly to us using His Word and the still small voice of His Spirit. Greg is telling on himself here. 😢
If you know absolutely nothing and you don't want to say, "how did you come to that conclusion?", you could do the equivalent and just say, "duhhhhhh"
Do you know anything?
I think you might be self-deceived because everybody knows something.
The vast array of fly-by-night hacks like this guy and their acceptance by Evangelicals has hurt Evangelicalism as much as anything. Also, the just general lack of real discernment among Evangelical "leaders" has just sent the whole movement down the drain....Ugh.
You are saying Greg is a "fly by night" hack?? What is your evidence? Are you implying he doesn't know what he's talking about?? Tell us where you believe his knowledge is lacking...
False
And cue the sexism from 56 seconds and onward.... Ugh. This guy.... Stop listening to people who just speak well in public....
More ad hominem attacks without evidence? Seems to be a habit with you...
If you had actual evidence, you wouldn't need tactics and training to try and convince anyone. Apologetics is damned near the best evidence that your God is made up.
Lol where is your proof?
@@californiahighdesertpreach2261 ah, the usual attempt to shift the burden. That’s what religious folk do. Lol
@@6502Assembler Lol Ok then please tell me what you believe in?
😄😄😆😆your hilarious, because you liberals are schooled in your unbelief.
@@lkascrammers3236 Your statement does even make sense. Also, it's "You're", not "your". LOL