Asking a difficult question

So you think I’m going to hell?

In our conversations with others about God – we will eventually encounter difficult questions like these:

“So you think I’m going to hell?”

“Do you think everyone who doesn’t believe like you are going to hell?”

“But why do I need Jesus?”

How do we answer such a pointed questions without sounding judgemental and bigoted?

Rather than being caught out – these questions are actually wonderful opportunities to share the good news of Jesus Christ. Check out this short clip where Greg Koukl outlines a tactical and gracious way you can answer these questions so you’re not caught out:

3 replies
  1. Dave Smyth
    Dave Smyth says:

    Doesn’t this video basically say to avoid answering the question because it makes you look bad?

    He tries to form the argument that people who do wrong things should be punished with the premise that God exists. His example makes no sense. If he said this to an atheist, when an atheist says that he has done “wrong things”, he is not admitting he is a sinner because he does not believe sin exists.

    It’s a pretty convoluted attempt at a logical argument that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

  2. Bnonn
    Bnonn says:

    Dave, I don’t follow. Could you lay out the argument you think he’s making, showing where the question-begging premise fits in?

    What I understand Greg to be saying is that he is responding to people who are asking about what we believe as Christians. That is the frame. It is an implicit accusation, along the lines of, “Your belief should be rejected because it is so unreasonable and offensive.”

    His response is to illustrate that even by the objector’s standards, the belief is not unreasonable or offensive:

    1. People who do bad things ought to be punished
    2. You have done bad things
    3. Therefore, you ought to be punished

    There’s no premise in which God is assumed to exist in the argument above. Rather, Greg’s point, in light of this argument, is as follows: Given our Christian belief in a God who is the source of moral values and duties—this is the context of the discussion—clearly it is neither unreasonable nor offensive for us to think that he will punish evildoers. Which includes the objector, by his own admission. Indeed, it would be unreasonable and offensive to think that a perfect moral authority would not punish evildoers.

  3. Dave Smyth
    Dave Smyth says:

    An atheist agreeing that people should be punished, in no way means the atheist agrees that god exists and punishes people. It in no way says that the atheist is telling Greg he’s a sinner because he doesn’t believe there is any such thing as sin. So the atheist has not told him he’s a sinner at all.

    In this case, he’s talking about Deepak Chopra (not Christian) and non-Christians in general. In other words… atheists with regard to Christianity. It’s a child-like attempt at logic.Greg can frame it any way he likes (given his belief) and say he has “pieces on the table” when he actually has nothing… nothing at all. He relies on the person being weak-minded enough to believe that responsibility for the bad things they have done in their life can and should be taken by Jesus. A thinking, good person would regard that as immoral.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *