The responses by Zacharias and his ministry are highly inadequate. There's a lot they leave unanswered, and a lot of their behavior is suspicious. Some of the claims of Stephen Baughman, the atheist critic who's mentioned in the Christianity Today article, are ridiculous (e.g., his comments on the book of Daniel and what Zacharias has said about its dating), but I think Baughman's criticisms are accurate for the most part. The behavior of Lori Anne Thompson and her husband is problematic on multiple levels, but it looks to me like Zacharias probably was involved in an immoral relationship with her.
Jason, I'd have to agree. usually when there's *complete* innocence, a denial is clear and obvious. This wasn't. It underscores the stressful nature of sin - we all, at any time, can do the most stupid things. The obvious question now is, should RZIM close? When you have a blot like that on your record, it's hard to look past it. What do you think?
One other thing - I think about this a lot - I know of several parachurch global or national ministries where the leader is not held to stricter accountability. I'm not saying accountability has a guaranteed effect against sin, but I always think about it!
Unless he can provide a convincing justification for all of the factors involved, which seems very unlikely, Zacharias needs to go. The attachment of his name to the ministry should go, too. So should anybody involved in any significant wrongdoing in covering things up or in some other context. Maybe another ministry could merge with what's left of Zacharias' ministry after all of those steps are taken, and the people in Zacharias' ministry who haven't done anything significantly wrong could work for that new ministry. Or maybe there would be too many legal, financial, or other problems with that kind of approach. I don't know. But it looks very likely that Zacharias and some other people affiliated with him should leave their positions or be removed.
Considering the fact that he's 71, the question of succession should already be in the works. Some ministries are centered on charismatic individuals, and ought to be dissolved after the central figure dies or retires.
There are two separate issues. On the one hand, the couple appear to be gold diggers. On the other hand, there's the question of how Ravi handled it, as well as his accountability structure.
FYI, Ravi has admitted that he never enrolled in Cambridge (despote years of calling himself "Cambridge educated" and that he was never a professor at Oxford, (despite years of calling himself a "professor at Oxford." Google Warren Throckmorton Exclusive. Ugly but important.
The responses by Zacharias and his ministry are highly inadequate. There's a lot they leave unanswered, and a lot of their behavior is suspicious. Some of the claims of Stephen Baughman, the atheist critic who's mentioned in the Christianity Today article, are ridiculous (e.g., his comments on the book of Daniel and what Zacharias has said about its dating), but I think Baughman's criticisms are accurate for the most part. The behavior of Lori Anne Thompson and her husband is problematic on multiple levels, but it looks to me like Zacharias probably was involved in an immoral relationship with her.
ReplyDeleteDang! That's about all I can say - dang!
ReplyDeleteJason, I'd have to agree. usually when there's *complete* innocence, a denial is clear and obvious. This wasn't. It underscores the stressful nature of sin - we all, at any time, can do the most stupid things. The obvious question now is, should RZIM close? When you have a blot like that on your record, it's hard to look past it. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteOne other thing - I think about this a lot - I know of several parachurch global or national ministries where the leader is not held to stricter accountability. I'm not saying accountability has a guaranteed effect against sin, but I always think about it!
ReplyDeleteCorey,
DeleteUnless he can provide a convincing justification for all of the factors involved, which seems very unlikely, Zacharias needs to go. The attachment of his name to the ministry should go, too. So should anybody involved in any significant wrongdoing in covering things up or in some other context. Maybe another ministry could merge with what's left of Zacharias' ministry after all of those steps are taken, and the people in Zacharias' ministry who haven't done anything significantly wrong could work for that new ministry. Or maybe there would be too many legal, financial, or other problems with that kind of approach. I don't know. But it looks very likely that Zacharias and some other people affiliated with him should leave their positions or be removed.
Considering the fact that he's 71, the question of succession should already be in the works. Some ministries are centered on charismatic individuals, and ought to be dissolved after the central figure dies or retires.
DeleteThere are two separate issues. On the one hand, the couple appear to be gold diggers. On the other hand, there's the question of how Ravi handled it, as well as his accountability structure.
DeleteFYI, Ravi has admitted that he never enrolled in Cambridge (despote years of calling himself "Cambridge educated" and that he was never a professor at Oxford, (despite years of calling himself a "professor at Oxford." Google Warren Throckmorton Exclusive. Ugly but important.
ReplyDelete