Response to "Stand to Reason"

As I see it, an ambassador is known to have three main skills. These skills do represent a leader, a person who can be of great influence to the many people he or she may be surrounded by. The first skill that Gregory Koukl writes about indicates that the ambassador must have knowledge. Not just any knowledge, but knowledge about HIS ruler HIS king. This knowledge cannot be merely what any man or woman would usually pertain, but instead it must exceed in a way that allows the ambassador some kind of superiority. Secondly, the knowledge must not be explained in a plain or simple way, but must be described in detail, with wisdom that gives listeners a sense of direction, purpose, and persuasive enough to the point listeners will leave thinking carefully about what was presented to them. Lastly, there is the ambassadors character and personality. In order for people to take he or she seriously, he or she must be kind, thoughtful, true, honest, wise, caring, and willing to listen not solely speak.

Now the Columbus tactic, well that is probably the most interesting idea out of Gregory's entire article. For many people who are trying to, not convert because that is not the main idea, figure out what others point of view may be on a particular topic such as religion. If I were to have a conversation with a guy my age, perhaps another student from one of the local high schools, instead of opening up a conversation with my thoughts, I would ask him what he thinks about it. That way a relationship (in the friendliest way possible) would develop and trust may be put into action. By asking questions instead of talking the whole darn time, I can get a lot further and deeper into a great conversation rather than "Sure, yea, see ya!" The point of engaging with other people and trying to make them think, open up, and ask questions, one must be willing to do the same. This is, if you may, an example of the Columbus tactic: a series of questions which lead to a conversation that allows the other to be comfortable speaking to you; makes them feel that you are willing to listen and want to know their opinion; makes them think long and hard about what exactly it is they are trying to explain and believe; allows you to communicate better in the conversation.

I recall learning about the Suicide view in my junior year Bible class, Philosophy and Apologetics. It was my favorite class last year, particularly because it solved many mysteries and introduced so many new truths that I had quit trying to figure out the years before. It can be summed up quickly and easily as "a clear picture that points out a statement that is self-refuting" such as the example that was brought up in our Bible class today, "Never say never." How true is it that we hear those sayings everyday? I didn't quite realize it until today, I hear those all the time. It is so common that people use those phrases without being serious, but when in a serious situation, it can backfire in a way that leaves you looking nothing less than stupid. What becomes more and more obvious as you study the suicide tactic, is that relativism doesn't truly exist. Really. If you take time to think about it, the suicide tactic explains it crystal clear. A relativist's main point is, "What's true for you is true for you and what's true for me is true for me." Cool, but does that mean that you think I am wrong? Obviously they contradict themselves when they blame the pastor of a local church for being wrong and a fool for believing in what God says. Or possibly when they blame Sally, their neighbor, for believing that fairies exist and magic is in the air of the human world. You get what I am saying? Their ain't no such thing as a non-self-refuting, non-critical, relativist.

Altogether, the tactics can be a useful tool if one applies them correctly. I have always been curious is finding out what people believe and why they believe it, so now that Gregory has done such an eloquent job at explaining in detail just how the Columbo tactic can be used, I am all for using it when the opportunity arrives. In order to use it, I must first now what I believe and importantly how I can explain it myself. As far as the suicide tactic, it is genius. How true it is that so many people refute what they say! Now, we know that we can easily point that out and ask questions to have others explain just exactly how they can believe in something, yet have obviously proved that what they have just said is self-refuting. They can be used anytime any day, and I can't wait to try them out! I am ready and willing.