159 - Lazy Approach to Evangelism with Eric Hernandez

Summary:
In this episode, Brian and Chad talk with Christian apologist and evangelist **Eric Hernandez** about his book *The Lazy Approach to Evangelism: A Simple Guide for Conversing with Non-Believers*. Eric discusses how evangelism and apologetics intersect, why every believer is called to defend the faith, and how to engage with skeptics effectively and biblically.


Key Topics Covered:
* Eric’s philosophy of evangelism and how apologetics fits into it
* The danger of emotion-based evangelism vs. truth-based evangelism
* Understanding “strongholds” (2 Corinthians 10) as false ideas that block people from knowing God
* Identifying and addressing major worldviews: postmodernism, scientism, and naturalism
* Paul’s example of adapting to the audience (1 Corinthians 9:20–23)
* “The Lazy Approach”: asking the right questions instead of having all the right answers
* The importance of theological triage—keeping the main thing the main thing
* Understanding the **burden of proof**, **rebuttals vs. refutations**, and **logical fallacies**
* Using Colossians 4:5–6 as a biblical foundation for gospel conversations
* How Jesus modeled effective apologetics with both compassion and precision
* Encouragement for Christians who feel intimidated by evangelism or apologetics
* Why apologetics isn’t optional—it’s commanded and part of loving God with all your mind

Quotes:
“If you’re not engaging in apologetics, you are in rebellious disobedience to the Word of God.” – Eric Hernandez

“You don’t need to know all the right answers; you need to learn how to ask the right questions.”

“Evangelism isn’t about winning arguments—it’s about tearing down strongholds.”

Mentioned in This Episode:
* *The Lazy Approach to Evangelism* by Eric Hernandez
* Previous Apologetics315 episode: *Eric Hernandez on the Soul*
* Greg Koukl – *Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions*
* J. Gresham Machen on false ideas as the greatest obstacles to the gospel
* 1 Peter 3:15; 2 Corinthians 10:4–5; Colossians 4:5–6

Resources:
* Book: *~[The Lazy Approach to Evangelism on Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/)~*
* Eric Hernandez’s YouTube Channel: ~[Eric Hernandez Ministries]
* Support Eric’s Ministry: Details and updates available via his upcoming newsletter and website relaunch

Takeaway:

Apologetics isn’t for specialists—it’s for every Christian. The “lazy” approach isn’t about being passive; it’s about being wise. Ask questions, listen well, keep the main thing the main thing, and let truth do the heavy lifting.


================================
We appreciate your feedback.
If you’re on TWITTER, you can follow Chad @TBapologetics.
You can follow Brian @TheBrianAuten
And of course, you can follow @Apologetics315
If you have a question or comment for the podcast, record it and send it our way using www.speakpipe.com/Apologetics315 or you can email us at [e-mail]

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hello, and welcome to the Apologetics three fifteen podcast with
your hosts Brian Auten and Chad Gross. Join us for
conversations and interviews on the topics of apologetics, evangelism, and
the Christian worldview. Well, we're just going to have to
use our brains. Hello, and welcome to the podcast. This

(00:23):
is Brian Auten and I'm Chad Gross, and we're really
excited to welcome you to this conversation. We have recorded
with Eric Hernandez. Now he's been on the podcast before
with Chad all alone without me, and it was an
awesome so you go back and listen, but it was
about the soul. But today we're talking about evangelism and

(00:44):
basically overlapping that with apologetics. Hey, apologetics is like there
for doing evangelism, not just for Christians only. Chad, any
quick little takeaways that you got from this conversation we had.

Speaker 2 (00:58):
I really enjoyed it, and I think anybody who is
first of all, trying to think about how apologetics and
evangelism go together. His book would be a great resource
for you. The Lazy Approach to Evangelism, a simple guide
for conversing with non believers. I also am always impressed
both times I've interviewed Eric, you get kind of more

(01:20):
than what you bargained for, in the sense that he
of course talks about what we're interviewing him about, but
there are little sidebars that he goes on that are
just full of little tidbits and wisdom that are so
helpful and encouraging, not only for discipleship, your own personal discipleship,
i should say, but also just with engaging with others.

Speaker 3 (01:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:39):
Well, it was a great interview, and the book's a
great resource as well, so well link at the show notes.
Let's go right to the interview. Let's get ready.

Speaker 3 (01:47):
Switch me on.

Speaker 1 (01:50):
Eric Hernandez. Welcome back to the podcast.

Speaker 3 (01:53):
I thank you so much for having me. It's good
to be with you. Guys.

Speaker 1 (01:56):
Well, I'm excited to meet you because Chad had a
great privilege of speaking to you in a previous podcast
about the Soul, So we're going to point people to
that in the show notes. That was a great episode
and that was awesome. We're going to be talking to
you today about evangelism, so we'll talk a little bit
about your book and such, But first, what is your

(02:16):
philosophy of evangelism and how it relates to apologetics.

Speaker 3 (02:20):
Yeah, great question.

Speaker 4 (02:21):
So I would say, first and foremost, of course, we
want our evangelistic strategies to be biblical. You know, when
I was writing the book that you're referring to, it's
called The Lazy Approach to Evangelism, A Simple Guide for
Conversing with non Believers. You know, when I was in
the process of writing that book, I remember looking at
other evangelistic material that I would you come across, you know,
some pamphlets, things like that, And what was interesting to

(02:43):
me is I would see a lot of stuff in
these material and granted I didn't it wasn't exhaustive, but
you know, from what i'd come across, you'd see stuff like,
you know, cut their grass, be their friends, help them
out with their groceries, invite them over for Super Bowl Sunday,
and all these other things to do with people. But
I never came across and again wasn't exhaustive, and everything
I looked at, but I didn't see anything in these

(03:04):
pamphlets say something like, oh and convince them and show
them why this is true. It seemed it seemed like
that wasn't even on the radar. That was really odd
to me on top of that. And then this is
where the apologetics comes in. What I often see today,
and this might some people might disagree, and that's fine,
But what I often see today is is our quote
unquote gospel pitches are not necessarily become a Christian because

(03:28):
it's true, but it's more like, become a Christian because
look at what God did in my life. Here's my
personal story. And the implication seems to be if you
become a Christian, you can get these things that I got. Well,
first of all, that's not the gospel. That is not
the gospel. Second, I cannot guarantee anyone as going to
get anything that I've had, like you know, say, oh
look my marriage improved or my finance has improved. But

(03:49):
again that's not the gospel. I can't guarantee that. And
then three, another one of the things that most troubling
about that is if this person quote unquote converts, then
it seems that they're the basis of their conversion is
going to begin with the mentality not that I exist
to serve God, but that God exists to serve me.
And interestingly, when when you hear these celebrity conversions, that happen.

(04:13):
You know, they usually say something like I'm no longer
a Christian and I'm so much happier. And my thought is,
what does happiness have to do with what this is true?
And then it dawns on me, Oh, I know why
they say that, because that's how the Gospel is pitched
to them. So if I convert to Christianity on the
basis of this happiness, but then begin to actually study
Christianity and realize that its doctrines are not, you know

(04:34):
all about my happiness, but it don't make sense to
find a different religion. And so first, Peter three fifteens,
I'm sure all the listeners here know it's a command,
it's not a suggestion to be ready to give an
answer and apologetic a defense. That that word answer or defense,
depending on your translation, is apologia, where we transliterate and
get apologetics. And then, so what you see here is

(04:54):
that every any believer is commanded, not suggested, to be
ready to give this answer a defense for what we
believe and why we believe it. And I like to
kind of put it a little more bluntly and say,
this means if you're not engaging in the discipline and
task of apologetics. Then you are in rebellious disobedience to
the word of God. And then you look at spiritual warfare.
In San Corinthians ten four and five, it says Paul

(05:17):
says that you know, when it comes to spiritual warfare,
part of the purpose is to tear down what Scripture
calls strongholds.

Speaker 3 (05:24):
We're supposed to demolish.

Speaker 4 (05:25):
He uses very harsh language, and then you know, you
might ask yourself of what's a stronghold. Well, we don't
have to guess, because he defines it in the next
verse and he says any basically, any false ideology, beliefs,
or set of beliefs that hinder someone from coming to
the knowledge of God. So when people have these strongholds,
these ideologies that are false in our culture, it will hinder,

(05:46):
it will become a stumbling block, it will become an
obstacle for them to receive the Gospel. And our job
is to demolish not the person, but the idea, the
false belief that they hold on to. And then the
last thing I'll say is, and Greg Cochle makes this point,
and I quote him in the book, that there's a
difference in evangelism there's a difference between harvesters and gardeners.

(06:06):
Jesus said in John, I have sent you to reap
where you have not sown. And then he says something interesting.
Others have done the hard work, but you have reaped
the benefits of their labor. Who are those others that
have done the hard work before the harvester? Will those
be the gardeners? And an ongoing theme in my ministry
I like to say is we want to learn how
to plant seeds and pull weeds. You know, we don't

(06:29):
need some new gospel presentation. We need to learn how
to have gospel conversations, and we need to learn how
to plant the seed to pull the weed. You know,
if someone's never heard the gospel, I want to plant
a seed.

Speaker 3 (06:38):
If they have, but they have these.

Speaker 4 (06:40):
Unbiblical expectations or theologically false assumptions, I need to help
pull those weeds of misconception that they have.

Speaker 3 (06:48):
Because I like to say, if you're going.

Speaker 4 (06:50):
To reject the God of scripture, I need to at
least make sure you're rejecting the actual God of scripture
and not some caricature God of scripture that scripture doesn't represent.

Speaker 1 (07:00):
I like your approach of talking about evangelism and apologetics
as a sort of a spiritual warfare aspect and tearing
down strongholds. It was nice to hear that in the
book because I think there's that quote by Jay Gresham
Macham or something where false ideas are the biggest hindrance
to the Gospel, and so you have to tear those
things down. And I also think of the gardening metaphor

(07:23):
where there's the four types of soil and you have
to prepare that soil, you have to break up the
rocky ground and things like that. So in the book,
you mentioned a lot of different sort of strongholds, if
you will, like postmodernism, different world views. Could you elaborate
sort of the idea of knowing who you're talking to
when you're having an evangelistic conversation.

Speaker 3 (07:44):
Yeah. Absolutely.

Speaker 4 (07:45):
So when we look in Scripture, we see Paul of
course as one of the greatest evangelists to ever live.
What's really interesting is there's a verse in Scripture where,
let me see if I can look up the chapter
in verse here, where he basically says something like to
the Jew, I became a Jew, you know, to the
Greek Greek, to the gentile gentile, and what he's basically

(08:07):
saying is what he did. He did all this so
that he can win some, you know, for the calls
of the Gospel. And what we see is that pause
essentially saying it's important that you know who you're talking to.
And then after you know who you're talking to, you
learn to adapt your approach accordingly. And so this is
in One Corinthians, chapter nine, verses twenty through twenty three,

(08:29):
and then at the end of that passage he says,
I have become all things to all people that by
all possible means I might save some. And so one
of the first things you want to do is identify
the person we're talking to, know who we're talking to,
and learn to adapt our approach accordingly. There are various
type of non believers. We don't have to go deeply
into this, but you have an atheist who says there
is no God or believes there is no God, agnostic

(08:50):
who doesn't hold a belief when we're the other. And
then you have skeptics who could be either atheist or agnostics,
and they're just concerned about whether or not we can
be quote unquote certain about things. That's a little bit
of a deeper conversation. But the point being is you
want to know who you're talking to, and then you
want to be able to identify this stronghold, as by
the Bible calls it that they're struggling with.

Speaker 3 (09:10):
Now.

Speaker 4 (09:11):
In philosophical or apologetic circles, we would call what Paul
seems to allude to as strongholds. We would call today worldviews.
And I would say there are three dominant strongholds or
worldviews in our culture today that what someone's holding to
is going to fall under one of these. You have
something like postmodernism or relativism, which is the idea that
truth is relative, there's no objective truth, you know, So

(09:34):
I if I were standing across of a table from you,
I could say, there's a dog to the right of
the table. But one of you guys could say, no,
there's a dog to the left of the table, and
I would Then someone could ask, well, who's right and
who's wrong. Well, we're both right, and it just depends
on your perspective. And in the same way says the postmodernists,
it doesn't matter what God you worship or what church
you attend, and if you're against same sex marriage. That's fine,

(09:56):
but don't tell someone they can't marry who they love
because it's your truth, not theirs. Don't tell this young
lady she can't make a choice that she thinks is
best for her body, because it's her body, her choice.
And you have this idea that truth is just relative,
then you have something known as scientism, which is the
idea that science is the best or only way to
gain knowledge about reality. So something cannot be proven scientifically,

(10:17):
or if you cannot show me the quote unquote empirical evidence,
as if a scientist can go to heaven with lab equipment,
take some tests and come back and show us the
physical data. You can't do that, then it's either not true,
we shouldn't believe it, or maybe you just cannot be
known if it's outside the realm of science. Then you
have naturalism, which is essentially the idea that the physical

(10:37):
world is all that.

Speaker 3 (10:38):
Exists, nothing more, nothing less.

Speaker 4 (10:41):
So things like when I talk to churches teach churches
about this, I like to kind of show how these
have even crept into the church and we haven't realized it.
I spent a chapter on each of the three strongholds,
and then how to identify them in three SE's, identify
them in the church, in the culture, and in conversation.
And yes, he's of all with the church in one
way or another. When it comes to the naturalism, I

(11:03):
like to do like a little audience interaction, if you will.
I will ask people, I say, can you please point
to what part of your body thinks? And then most
people point to their head. And then I say, okay,
so brain is it your brain that thinks? And they
say yes. And then I ask do you need a
brain to think? And everyone says yes. And then I ask,
well does God the Father? Does he have a brain?

(11:24):
And everyone gets really quiet, and I'm like, are we
in a Mormon church or a Christian church? You know?
And I check the sign just to make sure, and
then I say, of course no. The answer is God
does not have a brain. Mormons believe God has a
brain because Mormons believe that God is physical, but as
Bible believe in Christians, we know that God is spiritual
and those who worship him must worship him in spiritu

(11:45):
in truth. And then I say, okay, well he doesn't
have a brain, but does he think? Yes, he does.
And then I'm like, well, now it seems we have
a conundrum. Are you made in His image?

Speaker 3 (11:54):
Yes, you are?

Speaker 4 (11:55):
Well, then does your brain think? And then it is like, well,
let's not start all over and let me just come
clean and say the first question, what part of your
body thinks, was actually a true question. No part of
your body thinks. And throughout the history of Christianity there
has always been this doctrine that you are an immaterial soul,
meaning the image of an immaterial God with an immaterial mind.
And while I'm bodied, sure your mind uses your brain

(12:19):
as an instrument to communicate to your body. But that's
no different than me using a guitar to play music.
Just because I depend on a properly functioning guitar that
is rightly tuned to convey the music I want to play,
it doesn't mean that I am a guitar or that
the musical notes are inside literally inside the guitar, as
if I were to give it a good crack and

(12:39):
give it a good shake. After I crack it open,
the notes would fall out. Any more than your thoughts
and emotions and memories are in your brain.

Speaker 3 (12:45):
They're in your mind.

Speaker 4 (12:47):
Sure, again, there's a correlation between an instrument and the
musician and my soul or my mind and my brain.
But it doesn't mean it's the same thing. And I
pointed simply this, we live in a culture that is
saturated with naturalism. We engage in their language talking about
brains that think, and we hold that belief on the
one hand. But then we come Sunday morning, lift our

(13:07):
hands and worship a god that has no brain, and
things just fine. But we never let these two beliefs
cross are come together because quite frankly, we haven't really
learned how to take our theology that seriously. Hence strongholds
even with our own thinking, and we haven't even realized this.
That's good.

Speaker 2 (13:22):
So a couple things there. First of all, just if
listeners go back and listen to the interview I did
with you on the soul, I remember distinctly there was
a moment in that interview where you I was talking
to you, I think about compatibilism, which we don't need
to get into what that is, but and I characterized
to you what a what a popular skeptic you know,
had said about it. And I said, yeah, I said,

(13:44):
that makes my brain hurt. And I remember you said,
you mean your mind, and I remember being like, oh
my gosh, like whoa, like I know the difference, Like
that was our whole conversation, but yet that still slipped
into my talking to you. So so thank you for
that correction because it has helped because I still remember it.
I remember sitting here being like, oh, yeah, what am

(14:06):
I thinking with my mind?

Speaker 3 (14:08):
So that's first.

Speaker 2 (14:10):
Secondly, one of the things you said in the beginning
of your answer, see if this is a fair characterization
of what you said, is that you said that when
we get into conversations with people, we need to be
aware of what they think, what they believe, and then
adapt our conversation accordingly. Now, I could imagine somebody who's

(14:31):
kind of newer to apologetics or maybe doesn't know some
of the terminology you just used, thinking like, oh man,
I didn't follow everything he just said, Like I could
never engage in these conversations, you know, Would it be
fair to say that when we enter into conversations that
sometimes it is a matter of having that initial conversation,

(14:54):
you know, practicing collostions four, five, and six, which I
know is central to your approach to evangelism, and then
doing our homework and coming back to have another conversation.
In other words, we don't need to feel like we
have to have all of that sorted out in the
initial conversation.

Speaker 3 (15:14):
Yeah, and I'm glad you brought up the verse.

Speaker 4 (15:16):
So the biblical basis for what I call the laser
approach is Colossians chapter four, Verse five, and six. And
what I see here is pause giving us two biblical
principles for responding and conversing with the non believer. And
his overall theme is essentially keep the main thing the
main thing. In verse five, he starts with the first principle,
and he begins with the word of advice, and he says,

(15:36):
conduct yourself with wisdom in your interactions with non believers outsiders.
That's the advice. And make the most of each opportunity.
That second part, make the most of each opportunity, or
the most use of your time is his first principle.
So his first principle is essentially make the most use
of your time. And I like to call that theological triage.
And this is kind of getting into what you're asking.

Speaker 3 (15:56):
I like to put it this way. I suppose, so
what is triosh?

Speaker 4 (15:58):
Well, first of all, if you're doctors, suppose you're a
doctor and they rush a patient into the emergency room,
and this patient has three wounds. They have a broken wrist,
a scrape knee, and a bullet in their chest. Which
would you operate first? Well, obviously the bullet in the chest,
because they cannot live with that, but they can live
with the other two.

Speaker 3 (16:15):
So in the medical community this is known as.

Speaker 4 (16:18):
Triogh where you prioritize wounds in order of their severity. Well,
in the same way, we should apply this mentality to evangelism,
and we should think of it as theological triode. So
I'd like to say, suppose you're stuck in an elevator
with a non believer for one hour and you knew
that in one hour Christ is going to return. I'm

(16:39):
going to throw out four topics of conversation, and I
asked the people which would you focus on within this
one hour Age of the Earth, creation versus evolution, Biblical inerrancy,
or the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus.

Speaker 2 (16:53):
And of course the answer is age of the Earth
is obviously the answer.

Speaker 1 (16:58):
No, char oh Man, I failed to test.

Speaker 2 (17:02):
Okay, sorry, dispensation, I'm sorry.

Speaker 4 (17:08):
Yeah, Well that's funny, is I mean, I would say,
most people I asked this, get the give the biblical
answer right.

Speaker 3 (17:14):
The last two the resurrection of Jesus God exists.

Speaker 4 (17:18):
But you know, believe it or not. I have had
people mentioned some of the other two. And the reason,
of course we're joking is because it's it's so obvious
that you cannot be saved if you do not believe
the last two. You can get the other three quote
unquote right, but if you get that last one wrong,
you cannot be saying and I liked it when and
that kind of it. It makes people a little bit

(17:39):
uncomfortable to think of it that way. So that's why
I bring up the notion of triage, and I say, well,
you know, raise your hand if you're going to go
into the afterlife with some false theological beliefs. And that's everyone.
You know, some people should raise two hands. And the
point there being is that if I'm talking with someone,
and this has happened before, where I was talking to
a young lady. I won't get into the whole story,
but she comes up to me after her service and

(18:01):
she says, hey, can I answer some questions?

Speaker 3 (18:04):
You know? Is that all right?

Speaker 4 (18:04):
And I sid sure, She said, can you be a
Christian and believe in evolution? I said, well, technically yes,
I said, I I don't believe in evolution, but I
do have friends who call themselves theistic evolutionist and their
Bible believe in Christians. They believe God used evolutions. So
yes you can, although I don't yup, it's not a
it's not a it's not one of those heelvific issues.

Speaker 3 (18:24):
And then you know, she explained them where she works.

Speaker 4 (18:26):
She worked at a hospital, she worked, you know, with
the children. You know, she's you know, telling me about
some of the stuff she's experienced and seeing. And then
about five minutes later, she asked again about can you
be a Christian and believe in evolution? So I kind
of rephrased my answer. And then the third time in
this conversation she asked, I said, hey, if you don't
mind me asking, I know she'd keep going back to this,
are you a Christian? And she said no, but I've

(18:48):
been thinking about it, and boy, that that just opened
up a whole new door in that conversation. And she
basically said, you know, she's been she's been wrestling with
the idea and this and that and her brother invited
her to the service because there was going to be
an apologist there and she wanted to ask some questions.
All that to say, we talked a little bit more
and I gave her what seemed to be satisfactory answers

(19:09):
to the questions of suffering of evil. And then at
the end she said, well, thank you so much for
your time. And I said, well, hey, before you leave,
you know, I have to ask this after this conversation,
where do you think you're at now? I said, would
you like to begin a relationship with this God that
we're talking about?

Speaker 3 (19:25):
She paused and smiled.

Speaker 4 (19:26):
She looked at her feet, then she looked at me
and said, yes, I do, and she gave her left
to Christ. Now we have a sister now in the
kingdom who believes in evolution, and let's suppose she's wrong
about this. Here's my point. I would rather have someone
go to heaven with false theological beliefs than go to
Hell with false theological beliefs. And given that this seemed
to be her one hesitation, I'm like, hey, keep that

(19:49):
does God exist in to Jesus rise from the dead.

Speaker 3 (19:51):
It is Jesus God.

Speaker 4 (19:52):
I mean, you have to get these core issues together,
because again, if I'm wrong about evolution, and then I
would realize this not in hell but in heaven, because
it's not a selfific issue. So when I'm talking to
the audience about this, I'm like, you know what a
scripture say, confess with your mouth, believe in your heart
that Jesus is Lord, that God raised him from the dead,

(20:12):
and that the earth is only six thousand years old. Well,
you know, of course, my Bobby doesn't. My Bobby doesn't
say that last part, and now that does anyone else's.
So my point is again simply this, if we're all
going to go into the afterlife with some false theological beliefs,
and thank God that entrance into heaven is not predicated
on passing a theological exam, you I'd rather have someone

(20:32):
go to heaven with false theological beliefs than go to hell.
The second principle Paul gives us, I'll just touch on
this last one really briefly, because this is given this
as the basis for it. The next verse and verse six,
he says, again word of advice, let your speech be
gracious and season with assault. Then he says, know how
to answer everyone who questions you. Now, Paul is very
strategic with his words, so much so that he likes to,

(20:53):
you know, even tell dad jokes and give these punch lines,
or use a use a play on words. One quick one.
The play on words part. He says in Romans one
twenty that ever since the creation of the world, God's
invisible attributes become clearly seen. Well, how does something that's
invisible become clearly seen?

Speaker 3 (21:09):
Right?

Speaker 4 (21:10):
So Paul likes to play with words like that. So
he's very strategic, and he says, know how to answer
everyone who questions you, not what the difference being is.
If someone were to ask, let's say, I'll ask a
young man who I know is not married, have you
stopped beating your spouse?

Speaker 3 (21:23):
Yes or no?

Speaker 4 (21:24):
Well, it's a trick question, and yes or no are
not the only two answers, because if the assumption behind
the question doesn't apply to this young man, then he
shouldn't answer yes or no. He should actually question the question.
And in this instance it's important not to know what
to answer, like some script, but how to answer. And
this is why I go back to saying evangelism is
not some script you know where you know this If

(21:46):
this person says this, turn to page fifty eight and
you know, read this to them. That's not how conversations work.
So with this in mind, overall, you want to keep
the main thing the main thing. And then the first principle,
make the most use of your time, theologic countriof and
to know how to answer instead of what now. With
that in mind, what I call the laser approach. There

(22:07):
are four in the book. I label them tactical tools,
kind of a head nod to Coco there. The first
one is knowing how to ask questions, learn how to
use questions to make a point. And my go to
example for what I call the laser approach is I
was talking with this.

Speaker 3 (22:21):
Young lady once. It was after church service.

Speaker 4 (22:23):
I know she was part of this halfway Home group
that would come come visit our church and they would
get community service hours for attending writing a paper about
their experience. And what's funny is I read on her paper.
You know, she was taking notes, and I just kind
of glanced over and it said, like, hell Satan. You know,
these people are getting on my nerves, are so blended
to the truth. You know, I want to stand up
in your hell Satan you know that'll be funny whatever.

(22:46):
So I saw her notes and I'm like, care, are
you an atheist? And she got really embarrassed to close
her notes, but she agreed to meet after the service.
So after the service we're talking. I said, Okay, you
know clearly you don't believe in Satan. You're an atheist,
but you know you might if I asked why are
you an atheist? And she said, well, because I can
only believe things that are backed up by logic and evidence.
I said, interesting, I said me too, So what logic

(23:07):
and evidence do you have that there's no con So
I'm still just using her phraseology, and without missing a beat,
she said, because the Bible is full of contradictions. Now,
most people in that situation would respond to that by
either asking for examples or show me where the Bible contradicts,
or especially apologists, they begin they will begin to give

(23:30):
a defense of scripture. I'm going to say, don't do that.
This is part of what I call the lazy approach,
and the reason being is I want you to see
what just happened. I asked her why she's an atheist,
and her response was essentially to attack Christianity. But note
that attacking Christianity doesn't prove atheism, so my response was

(23:52):
not to ask for an example or to begin defending scripture.
When her response to why you're an atheist was the
Bible is full of cons I said, well, how does
that prove there's no God? And she looked at me
like a deer caught in the headlights, because no one's
ever asked her that before. She is so accustomed to
bringing this up as a as a quote unquote objection

(24:13):
that she's used to, you know, throwing that out there,
and then boom, you're in this long heated altercation or
debate on you know, whether or not there's contradictions in
the Bible, And in my opinion, you're just wasting time
because it's not a court issue. So to break the
awkward silence, which I love because it shows she's thinking.
I love awkward silence, I said, let me put it
this way. If God exists, did he exist before the

(24:36):
Bible was written? And she said, well, I don't believe
in God. I said, I understand that. Just just humor
me here. I'm simply asking if God exists, did he
exist before the Bible's written? And she says well, yeah,
if he exists, I said, great, and that means then
even if I concede, let's just pretend for the sake
of argument that the Bible is full of contradictions. I'm

(24:56):
having trouble seeing how that would make God stop existing
or prove that athe is it is true? What am
I missing here? And note with just a few minutes
and a few questions, I am making the most use
of my time theological triage. I'm knowing how to answer
instead of what, because a what answer is more like
a script. Oh they say that, ask them for an example,
and then show them why they're wrong on this point.

(25:17):
But note again I'm asking why you're an atheist. Her
response attacks Christianity, but attacking Christianity again does not prove atheism. Now,
without missing a beat, she said, okay, well, look I'm
an atheist because there's no evidence for God's existence. Again,
in that situation, a lot of people are going to
try to provide evidence or try to give some kind

(25:38):
of argument or case for God. But again, note she
is not answering my question. So my response was the
exact same response to the previous She says there's no
evidence for God. I said, and how would that prove
he doesn't exist. I'm still waiting to hear why you
think there is no God? And again awkward silence for
a little bit. So I said, let me put it

(25:59):
this way. I have no evidence that there's a flee
in this room. But does it mean from that that
therefore there is no flee in this room? No, it
just means I don't have evidence for it. But I
can't conclude therefore there's no flee. I said, So, even
if I concede that there is no evidence for God,
and again, I'm just doing this for the sake of argument.
I wrote a whole book with arguments for God's existence.

(26:20):
I say, even if I can see there's not quote
unquote any evidence, how would that prove there's no God?
So the first tool is learning how to ask questions.
I like to say, you don't need to know all
the right answers, You just need to learn how to
ask the right questions.

Speaker 1 (26:33):
Though, just to kind of summarize, when I was reading
the book, I thought, oh, the lazy approach. Well, then
as I got into the book, I'm like, well, by
a lazy approach, this does not mean this is an
easy simplistic book. Not simplistic if but it's simple, stay
on track, use a proper leverage. And so when I
was thinking, how would I summarize this lazy approach, Well,

(26:55):
asking questions would be a simple way to put it.
But as far as the lazy, which is like, as
a manager at a business, you're not lazy to get
other people to do the work that's your job. You're
a good manager if you're not doing the work and
you're delegating it to the people who needed to be
doing the work. A poor manager is someone who's doing
all the work and the employees are sitting around watching.

(27:18):
And so that's how I see this lazy approach is
that you're getting them to do the heavy lifting because
they're making the assertions and they have to defend what
they're saying. And maybe we could interject something here, because
when you're talking about getting your conversation partner to maybe
justify their beliefs, can you talk a little bit about
the burden of proof and how important it is to

(27:39):
understand that and not let it fall on you when
it doesn't need to.

Speaker 3 (27:44):
Yeah, great question.

Speaker 4 (27:45):
So in philosophy, there is something known as a burden
of proof, And it's essentially the simple idea that if
you make a claim, you bear the burden to prove
or give a justification or reason as to why you
believe your claim is correct. So and in this example,
if someone says there is no God, it's not my
job to prove them wrong.

Speaker 3 (28:05):
It's their job to prove that they're right.

Speaker 4 (28:08):
And I think this is this is one reason I
call it the laser approach because I see so many
Christians trying to disprove a claim that someone's made that's
not even an argument, it's just a claim. Or they're
they're they're doing too much work, so to speak. And
I like how you said it. You know, it's like
a manager properly delegating, you know, the responsibilities out as
he should as a manager, and so like, for example,

(28:28):
one of the tools in the approach is I think
this is my fourth tooll like, I call it discernment.
And we'll actually jump to the third real quick, because
it gets into this is to emphasize rebuttals. So when
you respond to someone, there's a difference between a rebuttal
and a refutation.

Speaker 2 (28:45):
Yeah, this part was helpful.

Speaker 4 (28:46):
Now you think, Yeah, this gets back to the burden
ap proof. Someone makes a claim, they bear the burden,
and then, in what I call the laser approach, I
emphasize rebuttals. Now, the difference is with the rebuttal refutation.
If I'm giving someone a rebuttal, I'm not necessarily saying
they're wrong, I'm just showing how they haven't proven themselves right.

(29:07):
By contrast, in a refutation, I am trying to show
that this person is wrong. So again, refutation, I'm showing
you're wrong, and I'm going to attack the conclusion of
your argument. In a rebuttal, I'm not saying you're wrong.
I'm just going to attack your justification to show that
you haven't proven yourself right. The example I give in
the book is suppose someone says it will rain today
because I'm wearing brown shoes. Now, if I'm going to

(29:29):
give a refutation, I have to prove the conclusion wrong.
The conclusion of this claim is it will rain today.
The justification is I'm wearing brown shoes. So to refute this,
I would have to say something like, no, it won't
rain today because the atmospheric pressure, temperature, whether and moisture
is insufficient to provide rain. Now, I don't know what
the atmospheric pressure, temperature, whether moisture is in the air.

(29:52):
So for something as silly as whether or not it's
going to rain, I couldn't provide a refutation even if
I wanted to, because I just don't have the information
at my fingertips. So refutations require more knowledge. Well, by
contrast a rebuttal, if you're just attacking the justification, then
it doesn't require more knowledge. It only requires knowledge of

(30:13):
their justification, and they're actually giving this to you.

Speaker 3 (30:15):
All you have to do is.

Speaker 4 (30:16):
Listen and pay attention. So, in the claim it will
rain today because I'm wearing brown shoes, the justification is
because I'm wearing brown shoes. So a rebuttal to that
claim would sound something like this, Well, no, it won't
necessarily rain today because didn't you wear brown shoes yesterday?
And I didn't rain. So note, I'm not saying she's wrong.
It could indeed rain, but I'm saying that her reason

(30:36):
for believing so is inadequate. Now, in the laser approach, again,
I am emphasizing rebuttals over refutations. And in the example
I just even gave with the young lady, and this
is I'm combining the tools. I'm using a rebuttal with
a question. I'm not saying she's wrong that the Bible
is full of contradictions. I do think she's wrong about that,
but note she's making the claim I don't have to

(30:59):
disprove that. And I say, fine, let's grant your claim
that the Bible's full of contradictions. How does it prove
there's no God? It doesn't if God existed before the Bible,
then even if there was a quote unquote Bible full
of contradictions, that wouldn't prove there's no God. And I
sit there and let her try and respond, because again,
it's not my job to prove her wrong. This is
why I mentioned the fourth tool, which is I call

(31:21):
it discernment, where you neither have to give a refutation
or rebuttal. And here's a go to a simple example.
Suppose someone says what Eric Christians are hypocrites. Now note
that there is no conclusion or justification, because this is
not an argument, it's just an assertion. So here are
three types of ways I use this tool to respond,
because what I'm basically trying to do is subtly imply

(31:44):
there's nothing for me to respond to. So if someone says, what, Eric,
Christians are hypocrites, I say, go on, and I just
sit in uncomfortable, awkward silence because there's nothing for me
to respond to. Or someone says, you know, here's this
takes this one, next one takes a little bit more works.
Someone says or Eric Christians are hypocrites, and I say, sure,
some are, but how does this prove there's no God?

(32:05):
And then sit in uncomfortable silence. Or Christians are hypocrites
and I say, well, sure, and some atheists are hypocrites too,
so what or a pastoral bonus response. Someone says Christians
are hypocrites and I say, yeah, that's true. The church
is full of them, but I'm sure we have room
for one more. And you just give them your church's
card to be at Sunday next week.

Speaker 1 (32:23):
Frank Turk has entered the chat.

Speaker 4 (32:26):
That's right, right, And then you know, and again the
point simply being is that I don't have to disprove
these things. These aren't arguments, and now I just serve
one more. On this end, I had an atheist tell me,
he said, my biggest obstacle to believe in God is
the existence of evil and I said okay. He said,
how can you believe in God when there's so achieve

(32:47):
in the world. And I said, well, are you saying
that if evil exists and God can't exist? And he
said yes. And I kept my response a short. I said, explain.
He said, well, it's just that if there's a loving God,
there shouldn't be any evil. I said why. He said,
because he's all loving. I said yes, and he said, well,
he won't want there to be any evil. I said
why not and he said, well, because he's all loving.

(33:07):
I said, go on, and I just stay quiet.

Speaker 1 (33:10):
Now.

Speaker 4 (33:11):
I want you to note here again the awkward silence,
which seems to be a reoccurring theme. It became clear
to him that he didn't provide an explicit contradiction, because see,
to me, this is like saying, well, grass is green,
therefore the sky shouldn't be blue. And I'm like, well,
wait a minute, explain that, and well grass is green, correct,
this guy's blue, that's right, but it shouldn't be that way. Yeah,
but why and just repeating yourself isn't an argument. Now,

(33:34):
This wasn't me trying to be cute or you know,
just trying to be argumentative, and he even at one
point said I think you know what I'm trying to say,
like he seemed to be a litt annoyed, And I said, well,
I think I may know what you're trying to say,
but here's here's what I'm getting at.

Speaker 3 (33:47):
Earlier. You're the one that.

Speaker 4 (33:49):
Told me this is quote unquote your biggest obstacle to
believe in God, and so I want to give you
a substantial answer. But before I can give you an answer,
I first need to know what you think the problem is,
because all you're doing so far is just reasserting your claim.
You haven't really made it an objection. That shows me
why there's tension here. Now this is me making the

(34:09):
point to really let him sit and realize, Wow, I'm
rejecting God on the basis of something that's not even
a good argument. Now, obviously, towards the end and once
my point kind of I saw that my point was
beginning to seek in, I simply said something like, Okay, look,
it seems like you're basically saying that if God existed,
then there wouldn't be any evil because of his character

(34:30):
because he wouldn't want it, or something like that, Right,
He's like, yes, exactly, And I said, well, me, as
a father, I have two kids. If I were to
take them to the dentists, which will include painful shots
and you know, discomfort, and you know it's scary for them,
would you still think I'm a loving father? Would you
think I'm trying to torture them? And he said, well, no,
you're being a loving father, but only because you're doing

(34:51):
this for a greater good, And so I smiled. I
let the point sink and I said, well, right, but
if I could allow suffering in the lives of my
children as an earthly father and still be considered a
loving father, and I'm having trouble seeing where your problem
lines with the existence of evil in the world, and
God is a loving father, couldn't the same principle not
apply to him?

Speaker 3 (35:10):
So again I am not.

Speaker 4 (35:12):
I have two hole trappers on evil and the problem
of evil and morality. And I could have gone there,
But note, he needs to do the work, he needs
to do the thinking. And if the argument's not a
good argument, or it's not even a sound argument to
begin with, I want to subtly, lovingly, gently, but also
bluntly point this out so it forces him to think

(35:32):
about his thinking, which is something a lot of people
have not learned how to do.

Speaker 2 (35:36):
That's good stuff, so much good stuff. One of the
things your book does a great job of giving so
many tools to use in evangelism and apologetics, which I
absolutely love. But I also love the fact that you
kind of addressed in the book Christians who seem somewhat
reluctant to engage in apologetics and evangelism because that it's

(35:58):
just that just always seems to come up right. And so,
first of all, it's a twofold question. The first part
of the question would be what do you think the
best way is to motivate Christians or distill some of
their concerns about engaging in this discipline. And the second
part of the question is is do you think pointing

(36:19):
to the fact like you do in the book so
well that Jesus actually used quality arguments and evidence and
displayed wonderful argumentation in his interactions would also be a
motivator for them.

Speaker 4 (36:33):
Yeah. Absolutely, so great question. I mean, there's so many
ways to answer that. But first I say, when people
ask me what is apologetics, let's say someone's at least
open to it, you know they're not yet at least
hostile or against it. I think this is in like
the first or second chapter of my book. I basically,
you know, people say, Eric, what's apologetics. I'm like, all right, well,
give me two or three minutes. Let me ask you

(36:53):
two questions and allow me to respond to your answers
as an eight years or skeptic would, and within two
or three minutes you'll know exactly what apologetic says.

Speaker 1 (37:01):
And I like that.

Speaker 4 (37:03):
And then I did this with one a seminary student.
I'm like, okay, ready, I'm an atheist or a skeptic.

Speaker 3 (37:08):
Why are you a Christian? Why should I be a Christian?

Speaker 4 (37:11):
So to answer the first question, he was like, well,
I'm a Christian because you know, God saved me from
my sin, and without him I wouldn't be And I said, well,
hold on, time out. First of all, I don't believe
in God, you know you know that. A second, I
don't believe in this sin concept. You know what do
you mean sin? He's like, well, it's like when bad
things happened to you. And I'm like, I thought you're
a Christian out a Hindu? That sounds like karma. And

(37:31):
he's like oh, okay, let's start over. I'm like, let's
start over. Why are you a Christian? And then he
got really serious. He kind of sat up in his
chair and said, well, I'm a Christian because my grandmother
was dying of cancer and my church prayed every night
and God just healed her.

Speaker 3 (37:44):
And how do you explain that if there's no God?
And playing the atheist?

Speaker 4 (37:48):
I said, that's interesting because it seems that the reason
for you being a Christian is pretty much the same
reason I'm an atheist.

Speaker 3 (37:54):
He said, what do you mean?

Speaker 4 (37:55):
I said, well, my grandmother too was dying of cancer,
and my church also prayed and she ended up dying anyways,
So either God loves your grandmother more than mine or
he simply doesn't exist when things just happen, right, So
putting them in the quote unquote hot seat, of course
in a loving way where you're not trying to embarrass them,
but you're trying to say, hey, let me play an atheist.
How would you respond to this? It's very sobering to see. Yeah,

(38:17):
thank god I wasn't an atheist, because boy, you just
either made this atheist, you know, feel a lot worse,
or just kind of solidified him in his thinking. The
second thing I'd say is you always want to go
to Scripture. I stress and hammer in over and over
that apologetics is not my idea. It's not my suggestion.
It's not like I'm saying, hey, this would be a
good idea for youth groups. I think it is a

(38:40):
good idea for youth groups. But it's not as if
Scripture puts an age cap on this verse that says
be ready to give an answer unless you've already graduated
and you're no longer in college and you have great hair.
But if you don't have great hair, and you're in
college or high school, be ready to give an It
like it.

Speaker 3 (38:54):
Does not say that.

Speaker 4 (38:55):
And this is why I like to tell people, Look,
if you're not doing this, you are being rebellious or
disobedient to God's word, not to me or my ideas.
Another interesting point is when you look in I believe
it's in Titus the qualification for elders, overseers, or deacons.
It has a list of those in there. One of
them is no sound. Well before that, one of them

(39:19):
is like a man of one wife. Right, So if
someone is married to more than one person, they shouldn't
be in those positions. It also says, a man who's
not given to wine not a drunkard. So you know,
if someone has on their staff an elder overseer, that's
a drunkard. You know you're gonna have to let them go.
But then at the end of it and Titus, it says,
and there's supposed to be someone who knows sound doctrine

(39:39):
and can refute false doctrine. So show me how many elders,
overseers and deacons in churches today can give a sound,
non heretical articulation of the Trinity, which is not deep theology,
that's just Christianity one on one, and could also give
me an explanation and articulate why Mormonism or Jehovah witness,
why those two cults are false. Because what that last

(40:02):
requirement and Titus for these elders, overseers or deacons is
essentially apologetics. Now we love to jump on like, oh,
you know, if you don't meet these criteria, you're not qualified.
Well that it would include the last one. So again,
not my idea. The greatest commandment, the greatest Commandment. I
like to ask people how many commandments are in the
Old Testament. Someone usually shouts out ten, and I say

(40:25):
close enough. It's actually, uh six hundred and thirteen, but
ten's pretty close. And out of all these tens, he
just says, the greatest is to love the Lord God
with your heart, mind, soul, and strength. Now that word
mind means your intellect. It's your rationality, your faculty of understanding,
your mind.

Speaker 3 (40:45):
He's trolling you right now.

Speaker 1 (40:46):
True, I know he's just like that.

Speaker 4 (40:51):
I know no love here, so so that that faculty
of understanding and basically who I've heard I put in
the book and I heard Morland say something like this.
You look holistically, whether you're lifting your hands in worship
and loving God with the heart if you will the emotions,
or lifting up a difficult book to read, loving God
with your mind, either one of these is fulfilling the

(41:12):
greatest commandment. And this is again the greatest commandment, not
the greatest suggestion. If when we do apologetics, you are
in part fulfilling this role of loving God holistically with
your heart, mind, soul and strength. So showing that on
going to the scripture, my goodest Paul, and I believe
it's Philippians either one sixteen somewhere around there. Paul says,

(41:33):
I am in chains for the defense of the Gospel,
and if you read that in the Greek, he literally says,
I am in chains for the apologetic or he was
arrested being persecuted because he was defending apologia. He was
doing apologetics for the Gospel. So, my goodness, it is
all throughout scripture. Jesus tears the religious leaders a new one.

(41:56):
And I like to say, you know, what I call
the laser pro is really Jesus's approach. I just put
a new label on it. We won't go into the
whole argument, but it basically, when the Sadducees try to
argue against the resurrection, they give Jesus this thought experiment
about this man, I mean, this woman who's married seven
different times, and they're like, well, the Sadducees didn't believe

(42:16):
in resurrection or an afterlife, and that You're like, Jesus,
how do you answer this? You know, if she's married
seven times in whose wife will she be when she
goes to heaven? That's your problem because you believe in
the resurrection.

Speaker 3 (42:26):
We don't.

Speaker 4 (42:27):
And it looks like you only have two options, but
both of you these options are going to be prohibited
by God because either she's committed adultery against the other
SIGs or she's married to all seven, in which case
he's a polygamous as a woman.

Speaker 3 (42:37):
You can't do that.

Speaker 4 (42:39):
So, Jesus, it looks like whatever option you give me,
both of these options that you have to answer this
question lead to absurd conclusion. So give up your belief
in the resurrection and my goodness, Jesus's first response, he
gives a rebuttal than a refutation. He starts to rebuttal
by saying, well, you're all wrong because you just don't
know the scriptures. And the crowd goes nuts because these

(42:59):
are the elites, these are the professionals, These are the
guys who know their stuff. And he says, we just
don't know scripture. And his response is, don't you know
that at the resurrection people won't be married. They'll be
like the angels. Now, what's funny is the Sadducees didn't
believe in angels, so why would you just mention angels?
Because his first point, it's a bit snarky. He says,
I know you don't believe in angels. I'm paraphrasing. This

(43:21):
is the Eric inspired translation the Eit. He says, I
know you guys don't believe in angels, but I do.
And on my view, angels aren't married and they're going
to be like the angels, no marriage in heaven. And
he's basically saying, so, although you don't believe in angels,
my first point is this, if you're gonna critique my view,
at least get it right.

Speaker 3 (43:37):
Please.

Speaker 4 (43:38):
There's no marriage in heaven, just like the angels. And
so what he essentially says is he demolishes their argument
by identifying their fallacies, which is my fifth tool learning
how to identify logical fallacies, and basically says, well, you're
begging the question assuming that there's marriage in heaven. You're
trying to accuse my view of being a reductio adapsurdum.
But these are false presuppositions about marriage in heaven, which

(44:00):
is led to this false dichotomy that I reject that
doesn't even apply to my view. So your entire argument
is based on a false premise that does not even
apply to my view, and so it collapses and doesn't work.
But hey, thanks for trying, and he just destroys her argument.
Then he goes to the refutation. Again, he adds a
little pinch of snarkins arcasm. He says, have you not read?

(44:21):
And then he quotes their favorite verse to them, and
you know, again the crowd goes nuts. And he basically
the argument. He quotes the Old Testament for a proof
text for resurrection, and he quotes Exodus three to six.
Now what's on here is Exodus three to six has
nothing to do.

Speaker 3 (44:36):
With the resurrection.

Speaker 4 (44:37):
It says I'm the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
And he knows this does not prove resurrection, so he
actually has to add to the verse to make his point.
But the reason I bring this up is if you're
going to use a proof text for resurrection for the
Old Testament, I mean, there's other books you can use.
There's Isaiah, I mean, excuse me, yeah, Daniel, Yes, And
Isaiah talks about the dead of raising does of the earth,

(45:00):
or waking up those who are asleep and the earth
will awake.

Speaker 3 (45:03):
But he uses Exodus three six.

Speaker 4 (45:05):
And I'll give you the short answer as to why
these sadducees, in their mind, the only thing they believe
that was God's in errant, inspired, authoritative word were the
first five books of the Bible and anything after that.
They didn't care what it said, They didn't believe what
it said, they didn't trust it as God's word. So
it becomes clear when you know this. This goes back

(45:25):
to Pau's principle know who you're talking to because you
know the the and knowing how to answer instead of
what to answer, because a what answer would be quote
Isaiah or Daniel, but a how answer is well, I
need to know who I'm talking to adapt my approach accordingly. Now,
why didn't then Jesus quote Isaiah or Daniel. Well, because
it's not one of the first five books that they

(45:46):
would have believed in. And even more so, a lot
of people miss this. This is God incarnate Jesus Christ
purposely choosing not to debate scripture with people who didn't
believe it. And Jesus knew had he quoted Isaiah or Daniel,
the entire discussion would have devolved into a debate about
biblical reliability or errancy, and Jesus apparently didn't consider that

(46:07):
to be the main thing, so much so that he
decided to set that aside and just quote from Exodus. Wow, so,
my goodness, if Jesus can do it, why can't we.
And when people get mad at me, like, oh, you
should have definded scripture there, you should have proved and
there's no contradictions, I'm like, look, I got the idea
from Jesus.

Speaker 3 (46:23):
Take it up with him.

Speaker 4 (46:24):
But note he is keeping the main thing the main thing.
He's making the most use of his time, focusing on
theological triage. What's important here resurrection and two he's knowing
how to answer instead of what. Still, it's a nonverse.
I'm the god of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And then
he says he's not the god of the dead but
the living. His argument is brilliant. It's basically this Again,

(46:45):
the Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection or an
afterlife or the intermediate state where we exist temporarily disembodied.

Speaker 3 (46:51):
Is what Paul says.

Speaker 4 (46:52):
To be absent from the body is to be present
with the Lord. And the argument is basically this, on
your view, Abraham, I Jacob have ceased to exist and
they they're just they're not alive because there's no afterlife.
But wait a minute, when this verse was written, this
is this is at the burning Bush and Exodus. He says,
I am that's present tense. Currently, I am currently the

(47:13):
God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But how can he
be the god of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Guys, if
on your view there is no afterlife and they've ceased
to exist.

Speaker 3 (47:21):
And they're not alive.

Speaker 4 (47:22):
But wait a minute, if your own verses, I am
currently present tense the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
not I was not I used to be. I am
the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Well, then I
guess that follows that even on the verses you like
to quote, it must imply that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
are still alive and well, hence he's a god not
of the dead, but the living. So even on your

(47:44):
favorite verse, looks like I'm still right and you're still wrong,
but hey, thanks for trying. And then the next verse
is that they were astonished at his teaching and that
Jesus had silence to sadducees. And then a few verses later,
the Pharisees, you know, give a swing at it. He
embarrasses him too. At the end of that chapter, it says,
and from that day Foeward no and dared to ask
him any more questions, like they were tired of getting

(48:06):
beat up.

Speaker 3 (48:07):
But he was clearly a logician and was masterful at this.

Speaker 1 (48:10):
That's awesome. So thinking about the book, The Lazy Approach
to Evangelism, Wow, what a great book. It is not simplistic,
it is meaty, it is deep, but it's practical. I
felt like, you know, for a person who has read
a bunch of books on apologetics and evangelism, you know,
I think I'm familiar with this sort of stuff, you know,

(48:31):
but I felt like you revealed that I have a
wall with lots of cracks and gaps in it, and
it was like putting in mortar into all these gaps
and strengthening all the walls, and like, oh wow, I
needed that. Oh that was good here, this was really good.
So it's like an apologist or someone who's familiar with evangelism,
they're going to get a lot out of this and
it'll be great. But at the same time, someone who

(48:54):
is new to it, it might be intimidating. But there's
every brick they need to build their own wall. Speak.
So from the perspective of someone who's listening to you,
and they said, wow, you're brilliant, Eric. Maybe you should
just come over and talk to my friend, you know,
but obviously that's not the plan. You're equipping them. What
sort of encouragement would you give to someone who's like, Hey,

(49:16):
I'm new to this and well I don't wait, wait,
what are these world views?

Speaker 4 (49:23):
You know?

Speaker 1 (49:23):
I thought this was going to be a simple book,
but it's heavy for me. Give them some encouragement and
just how to get started and to lay the foundation
for doing the evangelism, getting into apologetics, conversations that sort
of thing.

Speaker 3 (49:38):
Yeah, good, good question.

Speaker 4 (49:40):
So I'd first say, if everything we're talking about is biblical,
which we've given the receipts, the verses, a scripture, the
examples from Jesus, then at the end of the day,
the question is do you believe it? Do you believe
that Christianity is true, that God exists, Jesus rose from
the dead, and that he wants people to be saved?
Do you do you believe that God wants heaven crowded?

(50:02):
And if the answer is yes, then the only other
question left is are you willing to do what it
takes to do your part to make that happen. In
other words, will you have especially if you're brand new
to this, will you have to learn some things? Absolutely,
this applies to any field. But my goodness, if someone
was going to get a job to support their family,
and you know, they had to get a new job
that they've ever done before, we're sure you're going to

(50:23):
go through the train and you're going to learn because
you want to provide for your family and put food
on the table. Well, is not the spiritual aspect and
eternity more important than that? You know?

Speaker 3 (50:33):
Scripture says, what is a prophet of a man to
gain the whole.

Speaker 4 (50:35):
World but lose a soul? In other words, do you
really take any of this so seriously that you're willing
to call me crazy? But actually read a book, learn,
and go out there and speak to people about the
good news that there is a God who loves you,
created you send separated yourself from him, but he gave
his son to bring about redemption so that we can

(50:56):
have restoration and fellowship with him. If that is true,
then that is the most important news anyone can hear,
and so wet that it may take a little bit
of thinking. Uh, it may take some some reading a
chapter or two, over and over again. But the question
is is, if this is true, are you willing to
do what it takes, because as it worth it in
my goodness, the answer should.

Speaker 3 (51:17):
Be yes all the way around. It Really it bogs
my mind.

Speaker 4 (51:22):
And I know you're you're not complaining here some people,
not about the book or my book, but just in
general about like, oh, this theology stuff, this philosophy stuff,
that's apologetic stuff.

Speaker 3 (51:31):
It's it's it's really hard. It's difficult, and I get it.

Speaker 4 (51:33):
It comes easier to some people it's or it's you
know that, to people like us, it's it's it's also fun, right,
it's it's stimulating. But regardless of whether not someone thinks
it's stimulating, the question is, well, again, if this is true,
I mean, gosh, why would we expect an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent,
maximal great being. Why would why would we expect this

(51:55):
to be simplistic that that's always been odd to me?
But more than that, I mean this applies across the board.
So for example, you know, sometimes I miss social cues,
I have ADHD and I'm not the best at you know,
Oh gosh, I hopefully that first, and didn't feel like
I wasn't giving them my full attention because I kept
looking around or something. So things like being I don't

(52:17):
want to say nice because it's not like I mean,
but like being just in the moment, so to speak,
is hard for me sometimes.

Speaker 3 (52:24):
But I also realize that could.

Speaker 4 (52:25):
Sometimes make someone feel like they're not being appreciated or
that I'm not giving them my full attention. So I'm
going to be honest with you here, and this is
one could say, this is a little embarrassing. I have
to force myself to not look around and to just
give them my underbetter attention. It doesn't come natural to me,
but guess what, who cares that it doesn't come natural
to me. If I want people to feel loved and
respected and treated with dignity, it doesn't matter what I

(52:48):
feel like. When my daughter was little, I would say, like,
you know, her name's Addie, Addie, you have to clean
your room, and sometimes she would say, well, I don't
feel like it. And one time I sat her down,
she was maybe six years old, and I said, Addie,
you're gonna love this. I am not asking you to
feel like cleaning your room. I'm just saying you have
to do it. You don't even have to want to
do it, You just have to do it. Isn't isn't
that amazing that you don't have to want to do

(53:08):
something to do it? And that's kind of the same
way I feel like telling. I mean, if you're a
Christian again and if you want to follow Christ, evangelism
is not optional. Neither's apologetics. And your age does not matter.
Whether you meet a non believer ever or not, does
not matter. This is what we're commanded to do, what
we're called to do, and it's just a matter of
were willing to obey Christ and do it?

Speaker 1 (53:29):
Good answer.

Speaker 2 (53:30):
I do a presentation and it's about like why apologetics essentially,
you know, and it's geared toward Christians. One of the
points I make toward the end of the presentation is
I have a slide and on the slide there's a
picture of like the NFL emblem, there's a picture of
the Democrat Republican symbol, you know, to represent politics. There's

(53:54):
a symbol of two people with their wedding rings on.
And my point that I make in the presentation, and
I want to see if you agree with this, is
like you're all apologists if we define apologetics as defending
something right just bare minimum, if we're defending it. Okay,
when you bring up there are certain people I know

(54:16):
in my life that if I said something bad about
the Pittsburgh Steelers, they would go into a defense right
of why the Pittsburgh Steelers are the best football team,
which by the way, I don't watch football, don't know
anything about it. It's just an example, okay. Or if
I say something about their political party or the person
that they like in politics or whatever, right, they're going

(54:37):
to do the same same if someone insults their wife,
I would hope right. So to me, it all boils
down to what are you passionate about? What do you
care about? And if you're passionate about something and you
care about it, then you're willing to make a defense
on that concept or that person's behalf.

Speaker 4 (54:54):
Oh yeah, no, I love that, absolutely it. I like
that because it's like what it s. If you're willing
to stand up for your football team and you can
quote the stats, you can quote the player's names, you
can quote the history, but you're not willing to do
that with the truth of Christianity, then I dare say,
you're more passionate and more inclined to defend something that's

(55:17):
not bad, but it's also not something that's the gospel,
and you're far going to defend something else before the Gospel,
And that to me should be a real gut check
to anyone if that applies to.

Speaker 2 (55:27):
Yeah, it's like it's like learning the historical evidence for
the resurrection is too much work. But you can tell
me who the quarterback was in nineteen seventy three and
how many yards you through four.

Speaker 1 (55:39):
And et cetera, et cetera.

Speaker 3 (55:41):
Right, that's right.

Speaker 1 (55:42):
Well, Eric, it's been like an hour already. The time
is flown. It's been a really interesting content reading the
book and discussing it, and yeah, super work and a
great resource for equipping people. Now this book is being
used as a green Bereat teaching manual or something like that. Right, So,

(56:02):
can you tell us a little bit about what people
would expect if they pick up the book and where
they might find other resources by yourself?

Speaker 4 (56:09):
Yeah, so great question. Yeah, they can pick it up
on Amazon. I'm currently in the process. I don't know
when this will be, but I'm working on a workbook
for the book that kind of will help people. You know,
I've already seen people use it as a small group
study things like that, but I liked I've been using it,
of course to train people. One thing I want to
start doing more of is once in North Carolina about

(56:30):
a couple months ago, did all Day. We did a
Friday night, all day trained Saturday with like four or
five youth groups in this area. And then Sunday we
went to Duke University and I had high school students
getting groups of two or three and for three hours
they went to go talk to college students at Duke
University and all of them got into gospel conversations. This

(56:50):
is not rocket science. I would love to help any
church out there do something like this. I want to
train your students and an announce that that I've just
made public, like maybe a week ago. So for the
last seven years I've been with Texas Baptist as the
apologetics leader for the state convention. But about two or
three weeks ago, I got the news that they are

(57:13):
dissolving the apologetics department. I will leave that there, but
just say, as I was praying and I said, all right, Lord,
where do you want me to go?

Speaker 3 (57:21):
What do you want me to do.

Speaker 4 (57:23):
Long story short, I just felt the Lord say keep going.
I haven't changed my mind, I haven't changed my plans.
So I want to continue doing full time industry, but
I would now need to raise support to do that.
So my goal is I want to raise support to
where whether it's something like one hundred people one hundred
dollars a month, obviously that's just people are going to

(57:43):
give more or less. But my point being is I
really feel the Lord call me to do more. There's
going to be opportunities for me to go on more
college campuses as well. I want to continue to put
out content. In fact, I want to focus more on
putting out content. All that to say, resources, you can
go to my YouTube channel, go to Amazon from my book.
There's a book that we're coming out that I'm contributing

(58:04):
a chapter two on AI and the Soul. I can
give you more information whenever that comes out, and maybe
sometime next year.

Speaker 3 (58:11):
I'm having to.

Speaker 4 (58:12):
Redo my website, but I'll be having a newsletter coming
out soon on things that's going on. But all that
to say, Gosh, I think more than ever we really
need to learn how to have these gospel conversations. Learn
how to engage in a hostile culture that, my gosh,
would celebrate if you were to die, would celebrate your

(58:32):
death because you disagree with their views that that's so
bizarre to me. But my goodness, we're still called to this.
And I love what one of the church fathers said.
Of course the church church for other church was going
through so much persecution, but I love what they said.
They said, well, hey, the worst they can do to
us is kill our bodies. That's about it. If this

(58:54):
is true, then we got to go all in. And
I don't want to slow down. So my first goal
is to raise the support and I want there's so
much I want to do, train people, so many thoughts
that I won't get into about, like how I want
to do this ideas God's given me. I want to
take even do this with adults and maybe you know,
take them out to also do training with adults, because again,

(59:17):
this is not just something for young people. This is
something across the board that every believer is called to
do and be equipped with. And you know, I am
excited to do that. And I'd love to have people
on the support team who know and understand this and
believe in this and I say, hey, let's let's be
this alt of the earth together.

Speaker 1 (59:35):
Well put Well, thanks again for joining us, Eric, and
will point people to your website and resources. Many thanks
for coming on again.

Speaker 3 (59:43):
Yeah, thank you, oh, thank you. This has been a
huge blessing. I thank you guys, thanks for listening to
the podcast.

Speaker 1 (59:50):
If you have a question you'd like us to address,
or just a message for us feedback good or bad,
you can either email us at podcast at apologetics three
fifteen dot com, or a voice message for us using
speak pipe. Just go to speakpipe dot com slash apologetics
three fifteen to leave us a message, and remember, if
you include a Ghostbuster's quote in your question, we guarantee

(01:00:12):
that we'll read it on the podcast. We also ensure
up to fifty percent better quality answers. Also, if you've
enjoyed today's podcast, please leave a review in iTunes or
the podcast platform in your choice, and please share this
episode with a friend if you've found it useful. Remember
you can find lots of Apologetics resources at apologeticspree fifteen
dot com, along with show notes for today's episode. Find

(01:00:34):
Chad's apologetic stuff over at truthbomb apologetics. That's truthbomb dot blogspot.
Dot com. This has been Brian Auten and Chad Gross
for the Apologetics three fifteen podcast, and thanks for listening.