Has anyone heard of Ravi Zacharias?

[MarcR]

I checked and in this one fact your are correct (I have confused this part with Speak2me).


Actually that is NOT true.
He posted one of RZ's books as a PDF as proof of his heretical views.




So, no Marc, he did not just make a single, somewhat academic, query about something that RZ said in one video. He has made multiple unsubstantiated accusations to try and prove a point.


Remember he is the one who has made the claim that he is the faithful Berean!
Instead his behaviour is just one who is desperately throwing mud-pies in the hope that just one will stick.
I know this is not your approach - yet you are still vindicating him...

He posted one of RZ's books as a PDF as proof of his heretical views.

I do not see anywhere where he referred to RZ as heretical.

His concern was that RZ was soft on RCC heresy and expressed the belief that RZ should take a firmer stand.

He cited the book as an example of a soft stance on RCC. Even if we don't see that in the book, there is definitely nothing remotely slanderous in blade's post. He has made multiple unsubstantiated accusations to try and prove a point.

Where has Blade raised any issue other than softness on RCC heresy? I don't see it!

Instead his behaviour is just one who is desperately throwing mud-pies in the hope that just one will stick.

Please point out one mud pie or inappropriate remark; or even one issue other than RCC heresy.


I know this is not your approach - yet you are still vindicating him.

I am vindicating him because I honestly don't see grounds for your attack.


If anyone else on the forum sees a basis for these charges please point them out to me either on the forum or by PM.

 

[graceNpeace]

He posted one of RZ's books as a PDF as proof of his heretical views.

I do not see anywhere where he referred to RZ as heretical.

His concern was that RZ was soft on RCC heresy and expressed the belief that RZ should take a firmer stand.

He cited the book as an example of a soft stance on RCC. Even if we don't see that in the book, there is definitely nothing remotely slanderous in blade's post. He has made multiple unsubstantiated accusations to try and prove a point.

Where has Blade raised any issue other than softness on RCC heresy? I don't see it!

Instead his behaviour is just one who is desperately throwing mud-pies in the hope that just one will stick.

Please point out one mud pie or inappropriate remark; or even one issue other than RCC heresy.


I know this is not your approach - yet you are still vindicating him.

I am vindicating him because I honestly don't see grounds for your attack.


If anyone else on the forum sees a basis for these charges please point them out to me either on the forum or by PM.

Maybe you need to go back and read all his posts again (and not just the ones where he appears to speak just to you).

 

[MarcR]

Maybe you need to go back and read all his posts again (and not just the ones where he appears to speak just to you).

Do you really think I tend to speak off the cuff? Of course I read them. I don't see what you are saying in them.

If you are able to show an example of what you are talking about, you will have my apology.

 

[MarcR]

graceNpeace, I'm moving this thread forward in hope of catching your attention

 

[joefizz]

graceNpeace, I'm moving this thread forward in hope of catching your attention

Instead Joefizz notices,surprise lol!

 

[MarcR]

graceNpeace, I'm moving this thread forward in hope of catching your attention

 

[onlinebuddy]

I've listened to a fair amount (20+ hours?) of his speeches and QA sessions. He is solidly Christian, though perhaps could be accused of using too many stories and not enough Bible. I certainly haven't heard anything I would consider heretical from him. That all said, best to do as Nehemiah6 suggested and check him out for yourself.

You may not find anything heretical in his speeches, because he gets along well with people of various ideologies.
He never challenges or speaks against any church or denomination. He gets along well with catholics as well as TV evangelists such Joyce Meyer and the like. This makes me wonder if he's really a Man of God, or just a great orator.

 

[onlinebuddy]

Seems rather flimsy 'evidence'. One line not worded to your personal preference and he's no good? That line doesn't specify one way or another. It's a harsh judgment for something you have no actual proof of.

What do you think about the statement that he believes in the Catholic Church?

 

[Nehemiah6]

What do you think about the statement that he believes in the Catholic Church?

Here is a quote which indicates that (a) either Zacharias does not know what he is talking about or (b) he is deliberately deceiving people by dodging the question:

For example: When asked if he thought Roman Catholicism is a cult, here's what Ravi said...​

“My answer to you is very simple. You follow Christ as best you know how as revealed in the Word of God—and serve Him, and love Him, and honor Him with your life and your heart and in your walk—and that's what you preach to others as well, God will be the ultimate judge of what groups went wrong, and what direction.”SOURCE: Is Roman Catholicism a cult? - Ravi Zacharias at Texas A&M's Veritas Forum

http://www.jesusisprecious.org/wolves/ravi_zacharias.htm​

 

[maxwel]

You may not find anything heretical in his speeches, because he gets along well with people of various ideologies.
He never challenges or speaks against any church or denomination. He gets along well with catholics as well as TV evangelists such Joyce Meyer and the like. This makes me wonder if he's really a Man of God, or just a great orator.

I'm just going to point out a few thing about apologetics, and logic in general... this may give a different perspective.



1. "he gets along well with people of various ideologies"

An apologist is SUPPOSED to have discourse with those OUTSIDE the faith.
This generally includes being polite to them.


2. "he never challenges or speaks against any church or denomination"

An apologist deals with people OUTSIDE of the faith.
Many of them refuse any kind of denominational debate, because it's a waste of their time... it is NOT what they do.

Some think doctrinal debate is unimportant.
However, many apologists feel it IS important, but they refrain from it anyway because it is a HUGE distraction from their actual calling.

Also, it just isn't practical.
It unnecessarily closes a lot of doors in reaching the lost.

There are many reasons to be polite and refrain from doctrinal debate...
I'm doing it RIGHT NOW.




3. "he gets along well with catholics as well as TV evangelists"

Where precisely in the Bible does it say we shouldn't get along with people?

Where precisely does being polite, or even associating with someone, make YOU guilty of their misdeeds?

Being "polite" isn't a sin, and "Guilt by association" isn't a sin.
"Guilt by association" isn't even a tenable argument, and even if it was, we've yet to establish any significant association.


4. "makes me wonder if he's really a Man of God, or just a great orator"

This is a false dilemma.
It isn't necessary that he be one or the other.
He might be both; he might be neither; he might be something else entirely.

But we certainly don't have to pick one over the other, as if they are antithetical and mutually exclusive.



5. Finally, Ravi Zacharias doesn't work for me, and it's not my job to account for his motives, or defend him... but at this point in time, most of the arguments against him in this thread have been kind of weak.

If he robs a bank tomorrow... I'll be happy to change my views.

 

[vic1980]

If anyone else on the forum sees a basis for these charges please point them out to me either on the forum or by PM.

Shalom MarcR , Ravi signed the ecumenical document called the Manhattan Declaration : A Call of Christian Conscience

You can read this on there offical fourm, just google it. All of us as belivers in Jesus Christ must stand for truth , we cannot compromise the truth , for friendship with others that preach a diffrent Christ. Scripture warn us all of even moving towards such a collabroration with such views.

Ravi also was trained , under the guidance of Billy Graham a apostate , that joint himself with the Roman Catholic Church.

This move is not inspired from the Holy Spirit , The Apostles of Christ did not do such thing , as signing a joint documents with other religions leaders that teach a false Gospel.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Let us examine all things with The Word Of God

Let us all test the spirit for not all are from God...

Many individuals may not like what was posted but the truth is the truth ...

 

[maxwel]

Shalom MarcR , Ravi signed the ecumenical document called the Manhattan Declaration : A Call of Christian Conscience

You can read this on there offical fourm, just google it. All of us as belivers in Jesus Christ must stand for truth , we cannot compromise the truth , for friendship with others that preach a diffrent Christ. Scripture warn us all of even moving towards such a collabroration with such views.

Ravi also was trained , under the guidance of Billy Graham a apostate , that joint himself with the Roman Catholic Church.

This move is not inspired from the Holy Spirit , The Apostles of Christ did not do such thing , as signing a joint documents with other religions leaders that teach a false Gospel.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Let us examine all things with The Word Of God

Let us all test the spirit for not all are from God...

Many individuals may not like what was posted but the truth is the truth ...

Vic,

I thought the Manhattan Declaration was primarily about sanctity of life and traditional marriage.
And I thought the primary problem with it was that it contained a call to civil disobedience in certain situations.

I'm no expert on it.
Maybe it would be good to post any parts of it you think are a problem, and we can discuss it.


If this is some kind of serious issue, then lets post it, and take a look at it.

 

[vic1980]

If this is some kind of serious issue, then lets post it, and take a look at it.

Maxwel i belive it was very clear which was stated above. The Apostles of Christ did not do such thing , as signing a joint documents with other religions leaders that teach a false Gospel.

Test the spirit

 

[maxwel]

Maxwel i belive it was very clear which was stated above. The Apostles of Christ did not do such thing , as signing a joint documents with other religions leaders that teach a false Gospel.

Test the spirit

So you don't have any problem with anything on the document?
The document itself is fine?

You just have a problem with signing something that is also signed by people of another denomination?

 

[preacher4truth]

Maxwel i belive it was very clear which was stated above. The Apostles of Christ did not do such thing , as signing a joint documents with other religions leaders that teach a false Gospel.

Test the spirit

I appreciate your stance. Don't allow anyone to sway you.

Here is more on this document:

The Manhattan Declaration: Why didn’t you sign it, R.C.?

 

[maxwel]

I appreciate your stance. Don't allow anyone to sway you.

Here is more on this document:

The Manhattan Declaration: Why didn’t you sign it, R.C.?

I appreciate you posting something substantive.

 

[maxwel]

Although I'm no Calvinist, I regard R.C. Sproul very highly,
and I think this was a very insightful, and intelligent explanation of his stand against the Manhattan Declaration.


Although some of his close friends (fine theologians like Albert Mohler) did sign the document,
meaning even men in the same camp could easily split hairs over this...
I think I'd be persuaded by R.C. on this one.



Good link.

 

[vic1980]

One last note This ecumenical decloration is void from it's foundation , it's first stroke put forth on paper. No follower of Jesus Christ needs to sign any such documents , joining themselfs with other religious leaders. That preach a diffrent Gospel to teach or do good works.

The Law God Himself wrote in our heart is a testimony , that you will fullfilled , without joining yourself by pen & paper by men declaration to literally bind yourself with heretics.

Man's wisdom is of no used , in discussing such things , for if we are born of God , we will live it out by The Spirit.

I hope we can all agree with this truth Shalom

 

[maxwel]

One last note This ecumenical decloration is void from it's foundation , it's first stroke put forth on paper. No follower of Jesus Christ needs to sign any such documents , joining themselfs with other religious leaders. That preach a diffrent Gospel to teach or do good works.

The Law God Himself wrote in our heart is a testimony , that you will fullfilled , without joining yourself by pen & paper by men declaration to literally bind yourself with heretics.

Man's wisdom is of no used , in discussing such things , for if we are born of God , we will live it out by The Spirit.

I hope we can all agree with this truth Shalom

I think Sproul's contention was not that you shouldn't join with other religious leaders on ANYTHING,
but rather his problem was about joining them in this very SPECIFIC THING.

Rather than being merely a political document, it got into talking about the gospel -
making it appear that all the signatories had identical views and definitions of the gospel,
which they did not.
Sproul did NOT want to give the appearance he agreed with the other signatories regarding the gospel, because this political document actually got into talking about the gospel.


I got the impression that if it had been ONLY a political or social document,
then R.C. might have been perfectly fine with signing it.

 

[Speak2Me]

Shalom MarcR , Ravi signed the ecumenical document called the Manhattan Declaration : A Call of Christian Conscience

You can read this on there offical fourm, just google it. All of us as belivers in Jesus Christ must stand for truth , we cannot compromise the truth , for friendship with others that preach a diffrent Christ. Scripture warn us all of even moving towards such a collabroration with such views.

Ravi also was trained , under the guidance of Billy Graham a apostate , that joint himself with the Roman Catholic Church.

This move is not inspired from the Holy Spirit , The Apostles of Christ did not do such thing , as signing a joint documents with other religions leaders that teach a false Gospel.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Let us examine all things with The Word Of God

Let us all test the spirit for not all are from God...

Many individuals may not like what was posted but the truth is the truth ...

Amen. It is the truth.