John Lennox Shares SECRET to Debating | Debate Teacher Reacts

What is it that's important in thinking about.

What principles should we bring when we engage in public with about our Christian beliefs?

We need to take people's questions seriously.

But not only that, we take the questioner seriously.

Even though he may seem mild -mannered and soft -spoken at first blush, we're actually dealing with

a formidable debate opponent in the person of John Lennox.

He's not to be trifled with.

Did you know that the secret to effectively engaging others can be discovered by paying attention to something Jesus said

to the Pharisees 2 ,000 years ago?

John Lennox, one of the greatest Christian apologists of our time, recently discussed his secret to effective debating strategies,

and his comments actually point us all the way back to Jesus in the Gospels.

If you are looking for ways to be effective when you engage others for Christ, then this video is definitely for you.

Welcome back to Wise Disciple.

My name is Nate, and I'm helping you become the effective Christian that you were meant to be.

Before I jumped into this ministry full -time, I was a debate teacher and a pastor.

And it is from that unique intersection that I make these videos.

Make sure to like and subscribe to the channel.

It's crazy, guys.

We're almost at 200 ,000 subs, and I'd love to party with you when we reach that milestone together.

Also, if you think this is an important discussion, would you share this video with someone else?

Finally, definitely check out the awesome discounts we're running through Logos Bible Software.

I use it every morning to study the Scripture.

It's a game -changer for you if you pick it up and use it yourself.

We're rocking new features and discounts and even free books.

Go to logos .com forward slash wise disciple for more.

What is it that's important in thinking about what principles should we bring when we engage in public about our

Christian beliefs?

Well, I've enjoyed today very much as well, Daryl, meeting you essentially for the first time and finding such a lot of common

ground.

I suppose the first thing I would say is when we engage in public, we're facing a barrage of questions, either

spoken or unspoken.

And my first attitude is we need to take people's questions seriously.

But not only that, we take the questioner seriously.

And I, perhaps because I'm so embedded here in Oxford, I believe in the good old -fashioned Socratic method, that is,

asking questions.

So I like to try to get to know people that I'm conversing with, especially if they don't share my worldview, my Christian worldview,

and ask them questions and get to know them that way.

So there's two tracks or, you know, two ways to consider this kind of advice.

By the way, John Lennox is an amazing debater.

His ability to conceptualize and explain topics is top shelf.

He can utilize helpful illustrations and really bring high abstract material down to a

lay level in a way that is both helpful but also incredibly folksy and interesting.

I've always said that the true mark of a genius is being able to take difficult concepts and

relay them in ways that the average everyday person can understand.

So, you know, we're dealing and that's what Lennox can do.

And I just, I think it shows us that even though he may seem mild -mannered and soft -spoken

at first blush, we're actually dealing with a formidable debate opponent in the person of John Lennox.

Whenever we get into advice for engaging folks, we have to consider advice on

stage and advice in one -on -one encounters with friends and family off the stage.

Those are two separate categories and require two different types of advice.

So hopefully Bach and Lennox will explore that a bit more.

But for now, what Lennox said about asking questions, so incredibly helpful.

However, be careful because questions can be used as helpful tools to understand the person you're

talking to.

And they can also be used as weapons to tear down the person you're talking to.

And sometimes I think a lot of us, we use questions as weapons.

We don't even realize that we're actually doing it.

So I would say as a debater, you really need to listen and practice the art of active listening so that you can better engage

with someone's claims and arguments, whether you're on stage or off the stage.

Yes, I'm very much similar.

I say when you're meeting someone and talking about the faith, you want to get a spiritual GPS reading on them, which is understanding

their whys and wherefores.

And you put your Christian meter on mute, just mute it and listen for

their whys and wherefores, how they put their life together, what they think drives life, etc.

And what you're looking for are those values that you may share with them, but they take in one direction and you may take in

another.

And it opens up a place to have a conversation in which there's something shared between you.

Yes, because there's a real danger, sadly, on the part of some Christians of coming across

superior as if we got all the answers to every question.

And I want to come at it the other way and look at each man and woman quite independently of their worldview

as of infinite value made in the image of God.

And I try to treat them as such as human beings, as people with questions and people with their own

answers.

And we can only have a profitable conversations if we, as you say, and I like the metaphor, take a GPS reading.

This is so good and it cannot be overstated.

So right now they're not talking about debating people on the stage.

They're talking about engaging folks in regular conversations where you are differing with people's worldviews from your own

Christian perspective.

And that's probably the primary focus of this discussion, just looking at the title.

In this environment, you absolutely must acknowledge that you do not know everything.

And if you don't know everything, then it frees you to treat the person you're talking to as someone who can

perhaps teach you something that you don't know.

Why?

Because you don't know everything.

But it also frees the person listening to you when you say that phrase that they can do the

same too.

When you go into a disagreement in regular conversation, particularly with someone you don't know very well, all kinds of walls and

defenses are up around the person you're talking to.

And when those walls are up, they're not going to budge on their position.

So that means your job is not just to keep running into those walls of defenses.

Your job is, well, one of the jobs is to bring those walls down.

And doing something as easy as admitting that you don't know everything is incredibly helpful with the right people.

Now, this does not help you at all on the debate stage.

So just understand, this is not advice when you get into formal debates.

And I think the value of that is it communicates a respect for the person because all difficult conversations have a

variety of elements in play.

I tell people when I'm in a difficult conversation, there are three things happening simultaneously.

So it's like a broadcast happening on three channels.

There's what you're talking about.

There's the lens through which you see that subject.

And then there is the identity issues that you tie to what it is that you're talking about.

And it's really those latter two that are driving the conversation, even though you think you're talking about the top -level thing, the topic

alone.

No, it's those other things that are the conversation drivers that you need to pay attention to and look for as you're having the conversation.

I was talking to a student recently about his doubts here at Summit, and I was just trying to listen

up for this very thing that Bach is mentioning.

Because more often than not, the objections to the Christian faith only exist because of flawed assumptions that shape the objection.

And so to answer the challenge directly, if you receive one as a Christian, is to miss

the opportunity to truly deal with the objection in a meaningful fashion, which is you need to get

underneath the question.

You need to get underneath the challenge and get at those assumptions.

For example, if someone were to ask, why would God send me to hell for not believing in

Jesus?

Right?

Think about that challenge.

They're already off on the wrong foot.

What sends people to hell, according to the scripture, is not that they did not happen to believe in a certain

proposition.

That's not what the Bible teaches at all.

The Bible says that folks will go to hell because they reject a relationship with their creator, who is the source of eternal

life.

And so your job as a Christian is to identify those assumptions so that you can truly address the

challenge and help folks to understand the truth.

And that's what I think Bach is getting at here.

People are very sensitive with their antenna.

If they sense they're not appreciated or not being taken seriously.

So I think that's ground zero for all public engagement, that the public as well see that

we take our opponent, if they're in that category, very seriously.

And also that we take their questions seriously before we engage them.

And when you learn to do that, the other thing that you do is you create a tone for the conversation, which when it becomes your turn to speak,

gives you the same amount of space to share what you're going to share as well.

And it opens up the door for a better conversation.

Absolutely.

You're not trying to win an argument.

In that sense, my view is you try and befriend a person.

And I mean befriend, not just communicate to them, but show them that you're open to friendship and to

developing it.

It can be difficult to do that in public, but I think it's certainly worth trying.

Not only is it wise to do what Lennox is proposing, it's also biblical, guys.

Take a look at this.

This is what we do when we engage others.

Notice what we as Christians are fighting here.

We are not in combat with a person.

Somebody needs to hear me say that again.

We are not in combat with a person.

We are battling ideas and every lofty opinion raised up against the knowledge of God.

And so that means for you, you are leading the actual people you're engaging out of

their strongholds and into the freedom of Christ.

Again, you're not trying to hit them.

You're trying to hit the stronghold, the arguments, the things that they are imprisoned inside, their

beliefs, their worldview.

Some of you struggle to differentiate between a person and their ideas, but that is precisely what God expects you

to do.

Remember, I just said this in last week's video, 2 Corinthians 5, 16.

From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh.

That means we do not see people the way that the world does.

We look at them and we see the image of God in them.

We see that they have souls and have value as God's creatures.

We see that they have potential, particularly if the Lord would have mercy on them and they would repent and follow after

Jesus.

Amen.

So it's incredibly biblical what Lennox is proposing.

And we need to get really good at doing this kind of thing day by day.

I'm very much the same mindset where there's the content of what you're talking about, and then there's what's happening relationally between you and

the person you're interacting with.

And I want to communicate a care at a relational level, even in the midst of what may be a disagreement at the content level.

Yes.

Now there are different formats of public engagement.

Of course, one of them is just a straight lecture.

But the other is where you have ideally not more than one person who takes a different worldview.

So you're given the opportunity to say things.

They're given the opportunity to say things.

And you have to rely very much on a moderator to keep the thing going.

And I think there, one of the really important things is this, that you do not allow the other

person to set the entire agenda.

That's always the risk, particularly in confrontational debate, which I'm delighted to say is dying.

I have debated a lot.

Okay.

Did you hear that?

Did you hear what he just said?

Let me play it one more time.

One of the really important things is this, that you do not allow the other person to set the entire

agenda.

That's always the risk, particularly in confrontational debate, which I'm delighted to say is dying.

That is one of the fundamental components of being effective on stage, ladies and gentlemen.

I'm so glad that Lennox pointed this out.

And I'm not surprised that he knows this because, like I said, he's a formidable opponent on the debate stage.

He's not to be trifled with.

I'm going to let him finish his thought and then circle back around.

I have debated a lot in that way with atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens and Peter Singer and so on.

But I find now even the atheists don't like it because it really tempts people to cut

corners by just trying to win an argument.

Therefore, entering emotionally and trying to sway the vote rather than communicating the

facts and ideas that you want to do.

And I think we need to avoid that like a plague.

So if I were in the room, I would probably ask clarification on what Lennox was referring to when he's talking

about setting the entire agenda.

But what I heard him talk about is laying a framework.

And it inevitably comes back to this time and time again.

When two people get on the debate stage, if it's a more formal debate, they've already agreed to a resolution.

And who is taking which side of that resolution?

So AF or affirmative and neg or negative.

Right.

So Lennox cannot mean any of those things because those are already predetermined before anyone walks out on that

stage.

But there is something that I call laying a framework where a debate opponent will seek to narrate to the

audience how they should think about the resolution.

Particularly with regard to definition of terms and then how they should judge the debate as it goes on.

A good opponent will do a lot of work to lay that framework and then do it over and over and over again.

And the sort of unspoken rule along these lines in debate is whoever lays a better framework wins.

Because if the audience adopts your opponent's framework, that means they're thinking about the debate the way

that your opponent wants them to.

And if that happens, you most likely lose.

This right here is part of the chess match that is entailed in good debate.

And Lennox says, don't let your opponent do that to you guys.

And he's absolutely right.

You should be laying your own framework and giving the audience what they need to see things the way that you do.

So for those of you keeping track, debating is more than just making arguments.

There is an art to it and it takes hard work to become proficient at it.

I think the hard part of this kind of conversation and setup is when it becomes a debate, obviously people walk in already having a side

and having a particular approach.

So I find myself having to remember that when I'm in this conversation with someone who's been purposely positioned to

be different than I am in terms of how they approach things, to say my goal may not be to persuade the person who's sitting

in the chair opposite me, but I've got an audience out there trying to decide where they land between us.

And they're in many ways more my primary audience than the person I'm having the conversation with.

Yeah, that's up to you.

It's funny.

You know, I recently engaged an atheist philosopher named Peter Boghossian.

He invited me on his channel to ask him questions about what it would take for him to believe in God.

I remember seeing a number of comments from that initial exchange critiquing me

because I didn't go after him hard enough.

And the reason I didn't, though, was because I wanted to model what it looks like to talk to a real

person off the debate stage.

And I think a lot of people just didn't expect that.

I thought I think they thought that I was actually trying to debate him.

If I was actually debating him, my demeanor would have been a lot different and more aggressive.

But if I really was trying to debate him, then that conversation probably never would have happened, too.

Right?

So, Bogh is right.

When it's a formal debate, your opponent is not going to change their mind.

So, that means that you need to appeal to the audience and connect with them.

Try to get the audience to sway their opinions, not the person you're talking to.

And the best way to do that is to do the work of attacking your opponent's position so that the audience realizes they have no good reason to

adopt it.

So, you see again, there are two different categories altogether when it comes to this kind of

conversation.

One involves talking to a person in regular conversation.

The other one involves debating them on stage in front of an audience.

Both require different strategies and tactics.

Absolutely right.

I remember having some very good advice from one of the leading journalists here just before I debated with

the late Christopher Hitchens.

And I said, have you anything to say to me?

And he said, plenty, because I know Christopher.

And he said, first of all, don't try to outsmart him because you'll lose.

But secondly, make sure he doesn't set the agenda.

And try to set in your mind that by the time you've finished, you have presented to the audience

out there beyond him what you really believe.

Otherwise, they'll not know what it is they have to decide about.

And I find that excellent advice.

I've reacted to Hitchens debates before.

And actually, you can find them here at the channel.

There were a number of debates that Hitchens participated in where it is clear as day he had no desire to

debate the actual topic.

Instead, he simply desired to get up and talk about whatever he wanted.

And for a lot of folks in the audience, that was actually effective because they didn't realize what he was doing.

So again, it comes back to laying a better framework.

Unfortunately, whoever lays a better framework for the audience doesn't necessarily have to make the better arguments.

That's how powerful this really is.

All right.

We are actually reaching the moment that I wanted to highlight with you all.

The secret to being an effective communicator on behalf of the Lord.

It's actually connected to something that Jesus was teaching 2 ,000 years ago.

Boy, thank you so much for watching this video.

Did you know that the majority of people who do watch are not subscribed to the channel?

If this video is blessing you, would you do me a favor and like and subscribe to the channel?

It just really helps me to get the word out about this ministry.

I greatly appreciate it.

One issue that tends to come up is the idea of taking a person's question sincerely with sincerity.

And I think what some people would say is, well, how can I take a question to be sincere when I think it's coming from a potentially destructive

or problematic place?

How do we bridge that gap?

Well, you can't judge the answer to that without getting to know the person.

And I see that public engagement is one side, but private engagement like this is slightly different.

And on the personal level, I first want to do your GPS research and find out where they're

coming from.

And the way I do that, and I've got a little rule, and because I'm Irish, I tend to break it.

And that is when I meet somebody new, I keep asking them questions until they ask me one.

Because I mean just ordinary questions, not questions about philosophy or Christianity, but questions about what

motivates them and all this kind of thing.

And it's that that enables you to get to know them, something about their family or something about an experience they've

had that has really affected them deeply.

And once you can get those emotional and personal and social dimensions out into the open, the conversation

then tends to go a great deal deeper.

And you find out just how disturbed the background is.

And we're all disturbed in a way.

And find out where we can share through experiences we've had.

And it's important to be very honest about those.

Many people will watch this video and they're going to skip right over this part.

Ah, whatever.

They won't even watch this because they think it's a waste of their time.

And then they get out there and start slinging facts at people like it's a battering ram running up against a castle wall.

And then they wonder why nobody is changing their minds.

Listen very closely to me, friends.

The deepest, most effective secrets that can be discovered about this world, about

being an effective ambassador on behalf of our creator, are just sitting in plain sight.

And most people don't pay attention.

But this is it right here, guys.

So listen very closely.

In regular conversations, if you want to be effective when you engage others, you have to see more than the question.

You have to see the assumptions underneath the question.

You have to see the experiences and the motivations behind the question.

Think of a challenge or a question as a three -layer chocolate cake.

Okay.

Actually, I'm hungry right now.

So there's that explains the illustration.

A lot of us make the mistake of seeing the top layer of the cake and thinking, well, that's all there is to it.

Right.

So in other words, somebody throws a question at us and we only choose to see that question.

What is being presented to us right in front of our very eyes?

The top layer represents the specific question or challenge that someone gives you

in regular conversation.

But in order to be effective and truly address a challenge, you need to go deeper.

You need to think deeper.

You need to get proficient at identifying what's going on with the other layers beneath the question.

Now, maybe there's some assumptions that a person is making when they ask the question.

Maybe there are some experiences that also shape the question.

Maybe there are some assumptions that you are making as a believer in God when you hear the

question or the challenge that the nonbeliever gives you.

A lot is potentially going on when you engage with someone else.

So to simply jump into answering the question directly, especially if it's like a yes or no answer,

it doesn't get at all those other potential issues.

So Lennox is right here.

Asking questions and seeking to be fair -minded in order to get to know who you're talking to is absolutely key,

guys, in these kinds of exchanges if you want to be effective and winsome.

And that takes patience.

It takes mercy.

It takes graciousness, which almost nobody values in today's day and age.

Yes, and I've got two directions I want to go, so let me try and let me sort them out.

On the one hand, it seems to me that and this is a distinction that I like to make when I'm having difficult conversations, and it goes something

like this.

It's one thing to understand somebody.

It's another thing to assess that understanding.

And so my first goal in being a good listener is to first understand the conversation we are actually having

before I jump to assessment.

I'm a little afraid that sometimes because we tend to come into conversations with an agenda, we push the assessment

button and not make the effort to really understand where the person is coming from.

That's what I just said.

Only, you know, Bach is saying it his own way.

Well, a very serious mistake in my view.

You find it made by various leaders in the Bible.

They thought that because they could analyze the situation, they knew the solution to it.

And just understanding it doesn't necessarily give you a solution.

And often you have to explore that very carefully with the person themselves and step by step bring

certain biblical principles, if you can, into that conversation.

And now we've reached the moment that I wanted to highlight with you in this video.

What Bach and Lennox are talking about right now, not only is this a mistake that a lot of people in the

church are making today.

Maybe you're making this mistake too.

Okay, so I'm glad you're watching.

This was the fundamental error that the religious leaders were making with Jesus in the Gospels.

I just put a video out, I think it was last week, on how to study the Bible that focuses on Matthew chapter 12

verses 1 through 8.

Okay, and here we are again looking at this passage because it's just that powerful, guys.

The lesson that Jesus teaches here is just that powerful.

In verses 1 through 8, the Pharisees questioned Jesus because his disciples eat on the Sabbath.

Now, this is after the same people have witnessed Jesus' teaching.

They've witnessed his incredible miracles.

They're noticing the large crowds that are following Jesus.

At this particular point, people should be thinking to themselves, at the very least, this is someone sent by

God.

That's exactly what Nicodemus said when he visited Jesus in John 3.

And the point here is, the Pharisees have massive amounts of evidence to see Jesus

as at least a divinely appointed figure to the Jews.

But they don't.

As a matter of fact, they go out of their way to claim that Jesus is performing miracles by the prince of demons.

And so the question is, why are they so blind?

Why don't they recognize their Messiah?

How is it possible that when God is doing something wonderful in their very midst, these Pharisees, these

teachers of God's law, who should probably be the first to identify these things, right?

These guys don't see Jesus for who he is.

And even worse than that, they're angry at him and they want to destroy him.

Jesus gives the answer right here.

Look at verse 7.

And if you had known what this means, I desire mercy and not sacrifice,

you would not have condemned the guiltless.

This right here, friends, is the secret.

Do you see it?

Not only is this a spiritual condition that Jesus identifies in the Pharisees, this is also a

psychological condition.

The reason the Pharisees failed to recognize God in their very midst is because they were

not merciful in their hearts.

In other words, they were rigid and inflexible in their understanding.

They had a paradigm of understanding based on their teaching and experiences.

And as it turns out, that paradigm was flawed.

And so when God did something that was outside the bounds of their understanding, they immediately dismissed him and his

disciples as guilty lawbreakers.

Now, the clues were there.

And all they had to do was be humble and merciful enough to see where Jesus was coming

from.

But in their minds, there was no way they were wrong in their assessment.

Jesus did not obey their regulations on Sabbath.

Therefore, he should not be taken seriously.

He should be dismissed.

Did they still engage him and ask questions of him?

Yes, but they were not listening.

This is the very same problem that many of us today have when we engage others.

Now, obviously, the situation is different, but the principle remains.

You want to know the secret to effectively engaging others for Christ?

Don't be a Pharisee, guys.

Be merciful and humble and open to seeing people as the multifaceted creatures that they really are.

Why?

Because when we do that, when we slow down and truly listen to what others are saying and even ask

questions to get to know them, we will be able to understand what's underneath the

challenge and the question.

We'll be able to understand the assumptions, the experiences, and the motivations that mold and shape their rejection of

Christianity.

And it's precisely in those areas that we need to focus as effective communicators.

Amen?

I know a lot of you who watch have a desire to engage others, to even get out

on the debate stage at some point.

You need to understand people.

Do you hear what I'm saying?

And that begins by first being merciful and listening to what they're really communicating.

It's not just the challenge that you hear.

It's also the assumptions, the motivations, the experiences underneath that pave the way for

you to effectively respond.

Let me give you a couple of recommendations for follow -up here, okay, if you want to go further in this area.

In a couple of weeks, I'm going to teach my signature method of communicating the Christian faith.

It trades on exactly the things that I've been discussing right now.

It's a combination of the teaching methodology of Jesus as well as the cross -examination skills of a good

debater.

So I encourage you, if you haven't already, to jump over to the Patreon so you don't miss out on that training.

Also, definitely check out my friend Greg Kokel's book.

It's called Tactics.

It will help you probe deeper and ask questions as you engage others.

So if you haven't read that book, then definitely check that out.

And finally, for those of you who are interested in more formal debates, as soon as I'm done

here at Summit, which is just about another week, I'm going to go away, and I'm going to film and create an

online debate training series.

It should go live sometime this fall, so very soon.

And I'm going to teach you how to hone your skills to stand on the debate stage, okay?

So if that excites you, it excites me, definitely stay tuned for this channel for announcements when those things go live.

All right, that's all the time that I have here.

Now it's your turn.

What stood out to you as the most important tip that Lennox gave?

What has helped you as you engage others for Christ?

Let us all know in the comments below.

Let's share stories and our victories on behalf of Jesus.

As always, if you made it this far, you've got to join the Patreon community.

What are you waiting for, guys?

Come on.

Jump over to the discussions.

Jump into the live streams.

Jump into the Zooms.

You can meet up with me one -on -one.

Let's go.

Let's do it.

The link for the Patreon is below.

I'd love to see you over there.

I will return soon with more videos, but in the meantime, I'll say bye for now.