One challenge that arises when talking to people is trying to get a radar fix on what the person really believes? “Are you a Christian, a Buddhist, an atheist, a Taoist, a New Ager, or what?” And given the muddled and confused answers that we often get back from our questions, we’re all the more perplexed on what the person really believes about important issues in life.Â
Well, let me suggest three basic questions, that if clearly understood, you will be able to employ in order to get an accurate radar fix on anyone. The questions are:
(1)Â What is the nature of the religious ultimate? (a personal, transcendent God; an impersonal cosmic force; the eternally evolving material universe, etc.)
(2)Â What is the nature of the human problem? (fallen out of relationship with God; forgot we are gods; a meaningless, chaotic universe, etc.)
(3)Â What is the nature of the human solution? (given new life by God; develop god-consciousness; evolve into higher beings, etc.)
MORE EXPLANATION:
1. THE RELIGIOUS ULTIMATE:
By this question you are asking what the person believes to be the highest reality. What is eternal? The answer to this will be the thing which the person worships, venerates, or reveres. It is the thing toward which we are moving.Â
NOTE: With this question you’ll probably have to ask and re-ask the question, “What do you mean by that?” A person may say that “God” is the religious ultimate. But if you ask him to define what he means my “God,” you might discover that he’s talking about an impersonal cosmic force, or even himself. So, “What do you mean by ______________ (Oneness/Perfection/the Tao/God/Truth, etc.)?” is essential to clarify and pinpoint the answer you’re really looking for.
2. THE HUMAN PROBLEM:
By this question you’re seeking to identify the root cause of what’s wrong with the world. Why are people hateful, vengeful, envious, and selfish?  Â
NOTE: Often people will respond, “Well, the cause of what’s wrong with the world is when people are unloving or self-centered.” Don’t be fooled into thinking that the person has answered your question. All she has done is given you another descriptive—a symptom of what’s wrong with the world. You’re wanting to know the why—the root cause—of the human problem.
3. THE HUMAN SOLUTION:
By this question you are probing to discover the resolution to the human problem of question #2. What and how will the human problem be resolved?
NOTE: The same warning applies here as in the note from question #2. The tendency of most people is to give you various descriptive words like peace, oneness, tranquility, harmony, etc. But as noted above, this doesn’t get to how these descriptives are achieved. You want to know, “How is the solution obtained?” Keep asking, “How?”
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EVANGELISM:
Much more could be said about these three questions. And they aren’t the end all. But they will do two things (the 2nd being the most unexpected, but possibly most important):
(1) As stated at the beginning of this post, these three questions will afford you that quick radar fix on the person’s worldview, which will, in turn, allow you to ask more pointed questions—more dialogue. For instance, if you know the person is a New Ager, verses an agnostic, you’ll probably ask different questions of him.
(2) It is possible—maybe even likely—that rather than give you a clearer picture of what a person believes, you and he both will be more confused about his worldview. What do I mean? A typical outcome that I’ve experienced with this question experiment is not more clarity, but less. This is not all bad! You see, the questions are as much for the one being questioned as they are for you. Through your asking, the person is forced to “define,” “classify,” and “evaluate” their answers to the fundamental questions of life. And from my experience, most people discover that they have not done this well or at all. Most people leave the conversation asking questions which have never so piercingly confronted their hearts and minds.Â
Why is this so spectacular? Socrates said that wisdom begins by wrestling with real life questions, but that the fool believes himself to have all of life’s questions answered. So, maybe in this process of asking these three questions—with the help and direction of the Holy Spirit—you assist an unbelieving person to move from a hardened heart toward God to a place where repentance is possible.
3 Comments on “How to figure out what someone really believes?”
Okay Pastor Brent, a difficult philosophical issue. In examining the three questions and reflecting upon my own responses, I found my own responses to be contradicting, confussing, muddled. Maybe perhaps that is what you refer to in Result #2?
As I ponder this topic & think back to the October 26th Blog “An argument for a closed-minded skeptic”, I am reminded of a famous defense attorney from long ago (i forget the name).
In his closing arguements at each trial he would present an image to the jury of a window – the jury on one side, the absolute trueth on the other.
When the window is clean & clear, you are able to see thru it & able to see & know the absolute trueth without question. Yet, it is very rare that the window is ever clear enough to easily see thru it. At the start of the trial the window is coated in mud, thru the trial different witnesses helped to clean some of the muck off the window, other testimonies may have muddied the window further. The ultimate goal is to clean the window enough that the jury can see thru it enough so as to determine the trueth.
Ussually the window remains muddied, with only streaks through which we must peer to catch little glimpses of the trueth. We can never be sure. Though we must take each of the little glimpses & form an opinion based solely upon those glimpses (& of course the personal experiences which each person brings with them).
Is it really any different in seeking to know or understand what one really believes? Is it really any different in trying to decide if there is a God? We can try to seek the answers to those 3 questions, but in doing so we muddy the window further ….. or do we?
We might smear the mud further, never really cleaning that window, but in so doing we change the muddy streaks thru which we can peer. We change the view of what can be seen thru the window & in so doing can actually gain a greater understanding of what is on the other side of that window – additional glimpses of the absolute trueth. Yet those glimpses are still just that, glimpses, broken pieces of the puzzle.
Confusing? Probly. Can man ever really comprehend or get his mind wrapped around all that God is or all that God can do?
RFH,
You wrote:
“ In examining the three questions and reflecting upon my own responses, I found my own responses to be contradicting, confussing, muddled. Maybe perhaps that is what you refer to in Result #2?�
This is a good reminder that we must return again and again to God’s Word in order to recalibrate our answers to a God’s eye view of ourselves and His world. We can also go a step further in reflecting upon our answers to the 3 questions by asking—as you alluded to—if they are (a) internally consistent, (b) externally correspondent, and (c) existentially livable. Sorry I keep suggesting questions in groups of 3s!
You wrote, using the image of a muddy window:
“Is it really any different in seeking to know or understand what one really believes? Is it really any different in trying to decide if there is a God? We can try to seek the answers to those 3 questions, but in doing so we muddy the window further ….. or do we?:”
I certainly recognize the reality of our own preconceived ideas which color and taint our perspectives. But I think that we must not leap from that to absolute skepticism—believing that there is no good reason to believe anything to be true. I think some things we can know with certainty (e.g., laws of logic), and other things we know with probability. But I still wouldn’t shirk at probability when it comes to knowledge. Most of what I believe to be true is on the basis of probability. And it works in reverse—I must also have probability in order to doubt my own assumptions or beliefs.
You wrote:
“Can man ever really comprehend or get his mind wrapped around all that God is or all that God can do? “
No, we can never “comprehend� God (have full, comprehensive knowledge of God). However, I do believe that we can “apprehend� truths about God (limited, but accurate knowledge). And we must be reminded that the truths known about God are not due to your, my, or anyone’s intelligence or clairvoyance, but because God has climbed down the ladder and revealed Himself to us. The Person on the other side of the “muddy window� came over to our side—Jesus.
Thanks Brent. I guess I’m not that far off base. I thought maybe I was when I found contradictions in trying to answer the questions. Some of which were caused by my beliefes & feelings versus what I felt the answers should be, &/or what I thought you thought the answers should be. Coming back to God again & again would resolve those conflicts.
As for the muddy window: as a religious concept I view that as somewhat of a purpose of life – To clean as much of that muddy window as possible, on the other side is a total grasp, totally understanding, total knowledge of God. In the course of life we work on cleaning that window, having faith that there is in fact something on the other side – in this case, belief in a total knowledge of God. Faith is a belief in that knowledge, a belief in the “knowledge” of things not seen (a belief so strong that we know even though we have not seen). I do believe the reaffirmation of that faith, even the actual knowledge, comes in bits & pieces, the tiny glimpses, as we prepare ourselves to receive & attaint that level of knowledge.