If you haven’t already, please take the time to watch Ravi Zacharias dialogue with David Rubin:
What do you notice about how Ravi treats Dave Rubin and the other people he mentions?
What points or illustrations do you find most helpful in advancing the conversation with friends?
A few quotes:
We can’t seem to disagree without bringing the person down… We don’t go with ad hominem arguments, that’s a sign of weakness. Anybody who attacks you personally is telling me they can’t deal with your arguments, so they are dealing with you.
Our only hope without coercion is to put the ideas out there and hope that hearts will change and that truth and beauty will win out in the end rather than that which is hideous and that which is false.
God doesn’t just change what we do he changes what we want to do.
I think what it has to start with is, this bottom line question to me, David, what does it mean to be human? If we don’t answer that question, everything else is footnotes without the body of the substance.
Fascinatingly, Jesus didn’t persuade he spoke to. There were some that walked away…. The cost of truth is huge. But conviction with compassion is indispensable.
The way I come at it is this. There are tests for truth and there are objects of those tests. And I say its this: there are really four questions of life, David. Origin, meaning, morality, and destiny. That forms our worldview. Where did I come from? What does life actually mean? How do I differentiate good and evil? What happens to a human being when he or she dies?
And therefore you put the two tests of truth: correspondence and coherence. Are my answers corresponding to reality? When my answers are put together, is there a coherence to them? And to me, in that Judeo-Christian worldview, meets the two tests of coherence and correspondence to the four questions of life.
We need examples to model it, not just to speak it.