As I build through this thread, bear in mind I am leading up to a man who is all the more interested in Christian faith.
1. It's interesting to note which observations in this 2017 thread have been borne out.
Ravi Zacharias scandal??
2. In this interview, a lawyer investigating Christianity explains both how this situation has not put him off examining the basis of faith further, and how he had doubted the logical basis of what RZ was saying.
Atheist Explains His Investigation of Ravi Zacharias | Julie Roys
About Me
This logic issue comes alongside my own impression along the same lines, which for me was compounded by RZ's completely unconvincing manner as any sort of Anglo-Indian. I am also of a mixed minority within a minority so I have profound intuitions about analogous personal background.
One doesn't get told a useful and coherent amount about the faith, in context, in a lifetime. I now find myself independently reaching insights others haven't.
I have also been through a single man's variant on the Thompsons' experience in churches; you can find for yourselves information on their and Rev Visser's denomination. You can also find out what they revealed and why and when. The complicity of the former magazine editor Mark Galli who is being snapped up on "aesthetic" grounds by Joliet Diocese, with its movements, is not impressive.
3. Apparently RZ's talks and books have "helped" some people a bit, against the totally abysmal state of knowledge (things which secular agnostics knew a great deal about 50 or 60 years ago): but are they really steeled by their sentimentality against the needs of life?
4. I think CM&A have a lot to answer for. Is their variant on teaching too emaciating? Are they - and the many similar denominations - overstretching people and burning them out? Was he picked to be a Billy Graham lookalike? I think he had some good instincts and basic talents and he wasn't supplied with the wherewithal. A teenager's suicide bed is no place to pressure him, and his milieu had a distorted view of dutifulness. Is this a cheap way of gaining leverage for what is said to be "Christ's message"? Had the incident damaged his functioning? People of brahmanistic background wouldn't want him to not make the "right" noises for them.
5. This bears out the need for us all to use mind like Baugham does: sincerely and with effort. God won't give us the much sought-after "Brownie Points" for avoiding doing so.
6. Not only CM&A, but all RZ's subsequent gravy train coat tail hangers-on set him up to fail. And through him the wouldbe Christian public: his productions were heavily promoted through the "Christian bookshop movement" alongside such similar thin gruel as Bill Johnson's. Does Christianity have community? Are our gifts going to get potentised and is there anyone we can do the same for?
1. It's interesting to note which observations in this 2017 thread have been borne out.
Ravi Zacharias scandal??
2. In this interview, a lawyer investigating Christianity explains both how this situation has not put him off examining the basis of faith further, and how he had doubted the logical basis of what RZ was saying.
Atheist Explains His Investigation of Ravi Zacharias | Julie Roys
About Me
This logic issue comes alongside my own impression along the same lines, which for me was compounded by RZ's completely unconvincing manner as any sort of Anglo-Indian. I am also of a mixed minority within a minority so I have profound intuitions about analogous personal background.
One doesn't get told a useful and coherent amount about the faith, in context, in a lifetime. I now find myself independently reaching insights others haven't.
I have also been through a single man's variant on the Thompsons' experience in churches; you can find for yourselves information on their and Rev Visser's denomination. You can also find out what they revealed and why and when. The complicity of the former magazine editor Mark Galli who is being snapped up on "aesthetic" grounds by Joliet Diocese, with its movements, is not impressive.
3. Apparently RZ's talks and books have "helped" some people a bit, against the totally abysmal state of knowledge (things which secular agnostics knew a great deal about 50 or 60 years ago): but are they really steeled by their sentimentality against the needs of life?
4. I think CM&A have a lot to answer for. Is their variant on teaching too emaciating? Are they - and the many similar denominations - overstretching people and burning them out? Was he picked to be a Billy Graham lookalike? I think he had some good instincts and basic talents and he wasn't supplied with the wherewithal. A teenager's suicide bed is no place to pressure him, and his milieu had a distorted view of dutifulness. Is this a cheap way of gaining leverage for what is said to be "Christ's message"? Had the incident damaged his functioning? People of brahmanistic background wouldn't want him to not make the "right" noises for them.
5. This bears out the need for us all to use mind like Baugham does: sincerely and with effort. God won't give us the much sought-after "Brownie Points" for avoiding doing so.
6. Not only CM&A, but all RZ's subsequent gravy train coat tail hangers-on set him up to fail. And through him the wouldbe Christian public: his productions were heavily promoted through the "Christian bookshop movement" alongside such similar thin gruel as Bill Johnson's. Does Christianity have community? Are our gifts going to get potentised and is there anyone we can do the same for?
