RAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES JUSTTHINKING

26 Pages·2012·1.44 MB·English

VOLUME 21.1 I WWW.RZIM.ORG
JTHUE MAGSAZINET OF RATVI ZAHCHARIIASN INTERNKATIONIALN MINISGTRIES
Learning
+
To Think
THE JOURNEY
Critically
OF SHEEP
PAGE 14
COMPLETE TO
COMPLETE
PAGE 2
PAGE 16
IF ONLY
PAGE 20
Just Thinkingis a teaching
resource of Ravi Zacharias
International Ministries and
exists to engender thoughtful
engagement with apologetics,
Scripture, and the whole of life.
Danielle DuRant
Editor
Ravi Zacharias International Ministries
4725 Peachtree Corners Circle
Suite 250
Norcross, Georgia 30092
770.449.6766
WWW.RZIM.ORG
TABLE of CONTENTS
21.1
VOLUME
2
Learning To Think Critically future conclusion looms large over
all our efforts leading up to a given
How does the Christian learn to end. As Michelangelo remarked,
think critically? One must begin “I saw an angel in the marble
by evaluating any worldview or and carved until I set him free.”
assertion on the basis of truth, the
coherence of what is being claimed,
20
and then the implications of
If Only
what this means personally.
Ravi Zacharias sat down with Jill Carattini suggests that if we
Danielle DuRant to discuss the knew beforehand what we know
significance of critical thinking. after the fact, things could very well
turn out differently. But to assume
that because of that perspective we
14
The Journey of Sheep now see perfectly is likely a perilous
oversight. The Israelite’s mistreatment
Anyone who has been to a sheep pen at the hands of the Egyptians was
would tell you that sheep are not overlooked in their perception of
exactly the smartest in the animal the other side of the Red Sea. But
kingdom, writes I’Ching Thomas. we can thank God that He knows
They do, however, have a strong the longings we express and the ones
instinct to follow the leader. When we do not know to express.
one sheep decides to go somewhere,
the rest of the flock usually follows,
even if the first sheep has no idea 22
Think Again
what it is doing.
How do you reach a generation that
listens with its eyes and thinks with
16
its feelings? Ravi Zacharias says we
Complete To Complete
must know how to defend our own
beliefs, but likewise, not underestimate
A leadership trainer uses the phrase
the role we play in clearing the
“complete to complete” to encapsulate
obstacles in someone’s spiritual journey.
the ideal mentality behind successful
Above all, a genuine love for others
teamwork. Cameron McAllister
is essential.
contends that compressed into this
phrase is the assumption that a
JUST THINKING•TheQuarterly Magazine ofRAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES
[ R e a d i ly v i s i b l e
t o r e a s o n ]
[2] JUST THINKING•RAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES
Learning To Think Critically
Ravi Zacharias with Danielle DuRant
How does the Christian learn to think critically?
One must begin by evaluating any worldview or
assertion on the basis of truth, the coherence of
what is being claimed, and then the implications
of what this means personally. Ravi Zacharias
sat down with Danielle DuRant to discuss the
significance of critical thinking. To hear the full
interview, go to www.rzim.org.
JUST THINKING•VOLUME 21.1 [3]
Danielle DuRant:It’s great to be with you, DD:Many vocations involve critical
Ravi, to talk about critical thinking and thinking, whether you are a surgeon, a lawyer,
engaging an audience. Would you begin by a teacher. Why is it so important for the
defining critical thinking for us? Christian particularly to engage in critical
thinking and to develop critical thinking skills?
Ravi Zacharias:LETME PUTITin the
simplest words I can. The word “critical” RZ:The Christian still for some reason
often comes through as negative; that is, is charged illegitimately with being the
you’re criticizing somebody. Strangely only one who is exclusive. I have said it
enough, if you use the word “critique,” it many times before: all worldviews claim
comes through more positively because exclusivity, but somehow it is popular to
you are critiquing a book or critiquing an hit the Christian as the only one that lays
essay. I think critical thinking has two claim to this. Yes, we do lay claim to the
components to it. The main component fact that Jesus is the way, the truth, and
is when you’re analyzing any propositional the life. There is an exclusive claim made
statement or system of thought, you are by Jesus in the pages of the Scriptures.
engaged with critical thinking whether But exclusivity is also claimed in the
you like it or not. So the only question is, pantheistic worldviews and in all of the
are you doing it well? Are you doing it in monotheistic worldviews. So for the
a way that is befitting the subject or are Christian, it should be done gently, it
you doing it unjustly? The second aspect should be done efficiently, effectively,
of it is the ethical implications of whatever and with respect when you are talking
it is you have processed. to anybody.
So I like to think of critical thinking I’ve just come back from parts of
as an analytical process of evaluating the the world where I had to be so careful
truth component of the statement or in what I said and how I said it because
thought you are processing. That has to ninety percent of the audience sitting in
be done. If you are looking at a worldview, front of me was not sympathetic towards
any assertion, or any challenge to your my belief. I was engaged in a critical
own worldview, you have to evaluate it analysis of my own worldview and then
on the basis of truth, the coherence showed why it was tenable and coherent.
of what is being claimed, and then the So for the Christian today, and especially
implications of what this means for your for our young, it is important to instruct
personal life. So first there is an analytical them not only on how to defend what
component to it—the truth component, we believe but also how to do it with
the synthesizing component. And second, gentleness and respect. As Peter tells
at the end of it there must be an applica- us in 1 Peter 3:15-16, to do that with
tion or an imperative component to it. gentleness and respect to always be able
We must think critically especially in to give a reason for the hope that is
defending our worldview or in challenging within you. It is imperative upon us to
a counter perspective. So critical analysis do it justifiably and to do it respectfully.
of worldviews is what critical thinking is s
—— ——
all about.
s
—— ——
[4] JUST THINKING•RAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES
DD:What about the Christian who says, Scripture, he’s harking back also to an
“I really don’t need to learn this skill; I just empirical way of justifying it: this is a
need to study the Bible.” fulfillment of prophecy which was spoken
of hundreds of years ago. There is a
RZ:I WISHTHATPERSONwere right rational process, existential relevance,
because I would love to be that way too! and a methodology we must adhere to.
Interestingly, many Muslims actually live In a world full of challenges, you have to
like that. I have talked to one of the lead- come to something outside of the text
ing muftis, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, that you are defending rather than saying
and he said, “I just have to tell you what this is the text I believe. John 16:7-11
the Quran says and that’s what I believe.” s But very truly I tell
—— —— you, it is for your
Well, what happens in a world of pluralistic
good that I am going
options? What happens to the world of DD:So critical thinking is clearly an
away. Unless I go
reason? What happens to legitimizing essential and a necessary bridge, particularly away, the Advocate
the process, not just the end conclusion to an unbelieving or skeptical audience. How will not come to you;
you’ve come to? Is that what it is all about? did Francis Schaeffer use this discipline to but if I go, I will
send him to you.
“I’m not going to listen to any other compel non-believers to see the irrationality
When he comes, he
argument; I’m just going to believe what of their beliefs?
will prove the world
I claim to believe.” Can you do that in to be in the wrong
a court of law? “I’m not going to defend RZ:THAT’SAGOOD QUESTION because about sin and
what I’m saying; I’m just telling you I I think Francis Schaeffer broke new righteousness and
judgment: about sin,
didn’t do it.” It doesn’t work. ground. When I was a young student in
because people do not
the 70s just entering into my theological
believe in me; about
We do believe that the Bible is the training, Schaeffer was a big name. He righteousness, because
Word of God, but we come authored such works as He Is Thereand I am going to the
through a process of legitimizing that He Is Not Silent, The God Who Is There, and Father, where you
can see me no longer;
claim. We just didn’t make that claim; we Death in the City.Schaeffer was a pastor but
and about judgment,
tell you why we believe the Bible to be became branded more as a philosopher,
because the prince of
the Word of God, and the Bible itself lays and with the opening of L’Abri, young this world now
claim to this methodology. For example, existentialists would stop by and interact. stands condemned.
in the Gospel of John, when the Holy Regarding Schaeffer’s method, he took
Spirit comes, Jesus said that the Spirit the skepticism of an Immanuel Kant and
would bring conviction of truth, right- pointed out how Immanuel Kant came
eousness, and things to come. Peter says to a point in his thinking that you really
this is that which was spoken of by the can’t make any meaningful statements
prophet Joel. So while he’s harking to about God. He moved God-talk into a
I
think Francis Schaeffer broke new ground. He took
the existentialist and the nihilist to their point of
despair, to where it was that their philosophy bred a
despairing worldview, such as nihilism meaning
“nothingness.” He showed them through art or philosophy
that these points of despair had to be addressed and why
Christ brings meaning and hope.
JUST THINKING•VOLUME 21.1 [5]
nimbus, into a realm where you can’t DD:And if I recall correctly, I believe it was
critically talk about God, so it bred a Schaeffer who popularized the statement “all
kind of skepticism, which Schaeffer took truth is God’s truth.”
to task. Schaeffer was very adept in what RZ:YES, HE DID.And I think it was
he did: he took the existentialist and the often misused by people who didn’t
nihilist to their point of despair, to where understand what he was saying. What
it was that their philosophy bred a Schaeffer was actually saying is that if
despairing worldview, such as nihilism something is true, it would also be true in
meaning “nothingness.” He showed them what God has said of reality and the
through art or philosophy that these nature of life, destiny, origin, meaning,
points of despair had to be addressed and and so on. So if it is true, it is not just
why Christ brings meaning and hope. “secularly true;” it is also true in the
Schaeffer did it very effectively and he theological realm. It was interesting
ministered to a lot of people in the 70s what Mahatma Gandhi said: “Truth is
and 80s. God and God is truth.” Now Gandhi was
depersonalizing it in a way and making an
Iremember meeting him just once when abstraction out of it, but the fact of the
we hosted him in Nyack, New York. matter is there is no contradiction in
He was pretty feeble at that point. If God. There is nothing that causes God
Schaeffer can be credited with anything, to disintegrate within Himself; so I would
it was breaking wide open this terrain for say that Gandhi abstracted what Schaeffer
the Christian, charging us, “You better then personalized.
start defending what you believe and s
—— ——
know where we are heading.” So when
Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop wrote in DD:What about peoplesuch asthe new atheists
Whatever Happened to the Human Racethat who accuse Christians of being irrational and
humanity was moving in the direction of lacking critical thinking skills? After all, we
destruction, whether in sexuality or in believe in a Jesus who walked on water and
the sanctity of life, Schaeffer pointed was born of the Virgin Mary. That seems
out that we were moving towards the fairly irrational to the average skeptic.
extinction of meaning. Philosophy was
leading us there in terms of its assump- RZ:YOU KNOW, Ifind the atheist very
tions. But the fact of the matter is, life is clever in what they do. For example, why
intended to be meaningful, and Schaeffer do they discount miracles? According to
showed how Christ addresses that. That David Hume, because the natural law
is the bridge Schaeffer provided between functions routinely—so why do you look
the despair of the 60s and the postmod- for miracles, an oddity in the midst of
ernism of the 90s. It is a very valuable natural law? So they did away with the
reminder to us of how to approach this. miraculous because they were going with
s what was normative and what was routine.
—— ——
But then when it came to ethics, they
very cleverly switched the terms. If you
started talking about an absolute, which
was normative, they would interject an
exception like, “What happens if you
walk into your home and your family
member is being assaulted? Are you telling
[6] JUST THINKING•RAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES
me you will not fight or take a baseball and the birth of a child is just something
bat or something?” Very fascinating. that is explainable so naturalistically?
When it came to natural law in the realm Rather than seeing the miracle of birth
of the sun and the planets,they did not and the wonder of it, we think just by
allow for the exceptions. But when it describing it that we have debunked the
came to ethics, it was the exception that notion of the miracle.
debunked the absolute.
So what do those two reactions So when we talk about walking on water
have in common? They both want to get and the miraculous, we are talking
rid of God—because if you bring in the about a theistic framework. When you
miraculous in natural law, you have to are able to defend the existence of God,
accommodate the presence of God. you also talk about the intervention of
If you take the normative and the God in history and the intervention of
absolute in ethics, you have to invoke God in the process of a natural law.
upon the very person of God. So it is To me, the very fact of natural law is a
more the atheist that is anti-reason and miraculous expression of God to sustain
anti-rational, but the accusation that is life. You remember when we had the two
made against the Christian is leveraged astronauts visiting us here at the office.
to their advantage now. They talked about looking through the
But what about the origin of the windows of space as they were orbiting
universe? Is it repeatable? No.They the earth and seeing something so unique
themselves say this could never happen about this planet and its particularity.
again. What about the contingencies that I think we live with the miraculous
it took? Thirty some contingencies the every day.
exactitude demanded. The very fact that Now the atheist is unfortunately
you and I are here is the process of what partially correct when he or she attacks
even atheists would sometimes say is so the Christian faith and we make no proper
awesome that it is tantamount to being defense of it. So I think the defense of
something like a miracle. Some of the the existence of God, the defense of the
scientists have used that very word. So very person of Jesus Christ, and the
what I say to them is, you have already defense of the miraculous can be done
accepted that which is not repeatable. and ought to be done. I would ask the
You have already accepted that which is atheist how is it that they defend moral
so rare. You have already accepted the reasoning in an amoral universe that by
fact that when you come to a singularity, non-moral origins has arrived at this kind
you are actually seeing the laws of physics of thinking and this kind of argument.
do not apply to all of those origins. Do I think they have a lot more to explain
we really think that the consummation than the Christian does.
of love between and a man and a woman s
—— ——
I
would ask the atheist how is it that they defend
moral reasoning in an amoral universe that by
non-moral origins has arrived at this kind of thinking
and this kind of argument. I think they have a lot
more to explain than the Christian does.
JUST THINKING•VOLUME 21.1 [7]
DD:So it sounds like there are a few essential We need to recognize that without
questions that every Christian ought to be able the theistic framework, this world
to answer. You mentioned the existence of God will implode under the weight of our own
and the uniqueness of Christ addictions, principally to ourselves. So
you move beyond the theistic framework
RZ:VERYMUCH SO, Danielle, for two to the Christian framework in the pres-
reasons. The first one talks about the entation of Jesus Christ. I’m not talking
existence of God in general terms, a about the presentation of Christendom
theistic framework. We assume as nor in a sense of even Christianity.
John 6:35-37, 44 Christians that God exists. But I was just Rather, who is Jesus? What did He claim?
Then Jesus in Paris talking to two leading French Why it is that He is the one who is able
declared, “I am
businessmen and neither of them thinks to redeem the heart, transform our lives,
the bread of life.
within a theistic framework. They were and give us that new hunger that we so
Whoever comes
to me will never talking about the French elections, and need to make life meaningful in this
go hungry, and somewhere in the conversation around world?
whoever believes the table somebody asked if they taught s
in me will never —— ——
ethics or on anything spiritual. “Oh no, no
be thirsty. But as
we don’t deal with that at all,” they said. DD:We’re talking about critical thinking
I told you, you
have seen me and Then they talked about three candidates skills, but of course we’re not dismissing the
still you do not that were in the running for election and fact that it’s the Word of God that converts
believe. All those one of the businessmen—who was one and changes people’s lives, transforming them.
the Father gives
of their students—said that the first
me will come to
me, and whoever candidate was addicted to alcohol, the RZ:ABSOLUTELY. I THINKthat’s an
comes to me I second was addicted to women, and the important point to make: that really,
will never drive third wasaddicted to corruption. These critical thinking is to lay bare what is
away. ...No one are their words! And so my wife, Margie, readily visible to reason, but it is the
can come to me
said, “Maybe they do need to start teach- transforming power of the Holy Spirit,
unless the Father
ing something about spiritual values and says John 6, that draws us. We will never
who sent me draws
them, and I will ethics.” come to Him; transformation of the
raise them up at Then something very strange human heart is ultimately a spiritual
the last day.” happened. As we were having dinner, we thing. I saw that happen even on this trip
looked out of the window into the Paris with a man for whom family and friends
night sky and there was a beautiful streak have been praying for eleven years. He
of white across the dark clouds. The man was hard-nosed tough. We were sitting on
sitting next to me, a leading businessman a sofa chatting on a yacht that they had
who is very well known in France, said, chartered because they wanted to ask me
“Maybe there is a God.” their questions. He was talking about a
C
ritical thinking is to lay bare what is readily
visible to reason, but it is the transforming
power of the Holy Spirit that draws us. We will
never come to Him; transformation of the human
heart is ultimately a spiritual thing.
[8] JUST THINKING•RAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES