1. Critical Listening Does what the other person says make sense?

2. Conversational Apologetics Open Questions  To understand and know them Pointed Questions  To remove the “roof” of their irrational assumptions Explain the Gospel  Only when asked Nurture The Relationship  Help unbelievers grow towards Christ  Help believers to grow IN Christ

3. Critical Listening Logical Fallacies  Listen for something that doesn’t make sense  Familiarize yourself with the most common Logical Fallacies and begin to listen for them – they’re everywhere!  Two Common Fallacies: Appeals to Motives in place of Support Changing the Subject

4. Motives in Place of Support Appeal to Force: the reader is persuaded to agree by force  Example: You had better agree that Gay Marriage is OK, or we’ll tell everyone you’re gay!  Pointed Question: How does lying about me prove that Gay Marriage is OK?

5. Motives in Place of Support Appeal to Pity: the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy  Example: Gays should be able to marry whomever they want; they are the most discriminated-against minority in the world!  Pointed Question: How does the fact that Gays may be discriminated against prove that same-sex marriage is OK?

6. Motives in Place of Support Consequences: the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences  Example: You can’t agree that Intelligent Design is true, because if it is, all of science will be undermined.  Pointed Question: Even if all of science would be undermined, how does that disprove Intelligent Design?

7. Motives in Place of Support Prejudicial Language: value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author  Example: I can’t understand how any reasonable person can believe God would condemn people to everlasting torment, just because they don’t believe in Him.  Pointed Question: Do you think justice is “reasonable?”

8. Motives in Place of Support Popularity: a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true  Example: Except for a handful of Christian wackos with PhDs, all scientists agree that evolution is true.  Pointed Question: “Is Michael Denton a ‘Christian wacko?’”

9. Changing the Subject Attacking the Person:  The person's character is attacked “William Dembski, a leader in the ID movement, couldn’t get a job for three years after getting his PhD.”  The person's circumstances are noted “The ID movement is funded by conservatives and big corporations”  The person does not practice what is preached (the “You Too” argument) “You say the Koran teaches the killing of infidels, but the Old Testament says to kill non-believers, too.”

10. Changing the Subject Appeal to Authority:  The authority is not an expert in the field “According to Thomas Jefferson, the real Jesus didn’t perform any miracles!” (Jefferson wasn’t a theologian or historian).  Experts in the field disagree “The Jesus Seminar says the real Jesus only said about 12% of the sayings attributed to Him in the Gospels.” (Many scholars disagree with the Seminar).  The authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious “Even John MacArthur says that ‘all roads lead to heaven.’” (John was speaking in a sermon as if he were someone else).

11. Changing the Subject Anonymous Authority: the authority in question is not named  Example: “Scientists have found all sorts of contradictions in the Bible.”  Pointed Question: “What contradictions have they found?”

12. Changing the Subject Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion  Example: “Bush can’t string two words together without stumbling; how can anyone think he knows what he’s doing?”  Pointed Question: “Have you ever known someone who is smart, but can’t express himself very well?”