I just received an e-mail this morning from someone from Ravi's ministry.
"Dear Tom,
We do not intend for our statement of faith to be "generic," rather we intend for it to be narrow enough so that we clearly articulate the essentials of the Christian faith, yet broad enough that those from many different denominations could subscribe to it. This has less to do with wanting a diversity of denominations to give to our ministry, and more to do with the staff that we hire, since they are the ones who must subscribe to the statement of faith. As an apologetics ministry, we deal with the questions faced by skeptics, hoping to remove obstacles that prevent them from seeing and understanding the Cross of Christ. We do not take public theological positions on issues unrelated to our ministry.
Does this clear things up at all? If you have a specific question of how we would approach a particular issue, I will do my best to give you an answer.
Grace and peace to you.
Sincerely,
Betsy Childs Staff Writer Ravi Zacharias International Ministries" Betsy.Childs@rzim.org
PS Personally, I think it is safe to say that Ravi and his staff believe in the Trinity.
Personally, I think it is safe to say that Ravi and his staff believe in the Trinity.
Tom,
No doubt. My point to Speratus is that he is no more justified in questioning this than he is in questioning the authors of the ecumenical creeds, which he does not do.
No creed can guard against every heresy. But no creed should be written in such a way as to confirm a popular heresy.
Speratus,
Do you believe that Ravi's creed is "written... as to confirm popular heresy"?
Thanks,
Ron
I don't believe that was his intent; however, a popular heresy finds comfort in his generic creed. This heresy accepts the trinity but denies the hypostatic union. These modern Docetists teach that Christ had a human body but discarded it after it had served its purpose.
No creed can guard against every heresy. But no creed should be written in such a way as to confirm a popular heresy.
Speratus,
Do you believe that Ravi's creed is "written... as to confirm popular heresy"?
Thanks,
Ron
I don't believe that was his intent; however, a popular heresy finds comfort in his generic creed. This heresy accepts the trinity but denies the hypostatic union. These modern Docetists teach that Christ had a human body but discarded it after it had served its purpose.
Yes, and a popular heresy can find comfort in the portion of the creed you quoted. As you noted, no creed can safeguard all of orthodoxy; my charge is that you seem a bit quick to hold Ravi to a higher standard than the fathers. I've debated two Arminians who claimed that the WCF affirms libertarian free will. May we find fault with the Divines (Ravi, or the fathers) for not being more explicit?
If Speratus is not willing to ask Ravi's ministry personally, about the matter of the Trinity. I don't believe he has the right to make dogmatic judgments before he knows the facts. I doubt he would like it if others did it to him.
I have given a few ways he can contact Ravi's ministry in this thread.
The sheep have been given the right to judge doctrine. The facts(Ravi's doctrinal creed) are publicly known. The sheep also have the right to judge everything I state publicly (on this website).
The sheep have been given the right to judge doctrine. The facts(Ravi's doctrinal creed) are publicly known. The sheep also have the right to judge everything I state publicly (on this website).
OK. The difference between the Ecumenical Creeds and Ravi's Creed is that the Ecumenical Creeds did not give the appearance of unity with popular heresies of the day but, instead, refuted them. As far as the WCF be concerned, I will defer judgment until I have studied the document further. However, my first impression is that the WCF attempts to refute error not create a false sense of unity.
My problem with the way you are judging is not that you don't have a right to judge what someone says. But you haven't asked them to clarify what they mean. On the topic of the Trinity, I would agree that they are too generic, but I see nothing to indicate that they hold to the Trinity in a false sense.
The e-mail from them states that if I have something in regards to their statement of faith that needs clarifying, they would try to do so. Please avail yourself to this.
I know enough about them, to know that I would not support them.
speratus said: OK. The difference between the Ecumenical Creeds and Ravi's Creed is that the Ecumenical Creeds did not give the appearance of unity with popular heresies of the day but, instead, refuted them. As far as the WCF be concerned, I will defer judgment until I have studied the document further. However, my first impression is that the WCF attempts to refute error not create a false sense of unity.
How does Ravi give this appearance of unity in a way that the creed you sited does not? It would appear that you have lenses on when viewing Ravi.
Based on your Statement of Faith, I can not consider RZIM to be a trinitarian ministry. You state, "We believe Jesus Christ to be true God and in His incarnation to have been true man." Jesus Christ, in the hypostatic union of God and man, is forever our brother. Please correct your Statement of Faith and properly confess the Holy Trinity as stated in the Athanasian Creed:
Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe faithfully the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right faith is, that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance of His mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood; Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but one Christ: One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking the manhood into God; One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.
I can find no difference between what that ministries' Statement of Faith says concerning the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, He being true God and man and is forever so and the Athanasian Creed.
And just a little hint. You aren't going to get much of a hearing from anyone when you communicate by means of a demand, as if you are some kind of authority to whom they should bow! I can tell you frankly, that if I received such an e-mail from a stranger, I would be hitting the "delete" button quicker than you can say, "Yeh, right!"
I can find no difference between what that ministries' Statement of Faith says concerning the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, He being true God and man and is forever so and the Athanasian Creed.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/kneelsuckers.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/teddy1.gif)