Ravi Zacharias Explains Existentialism

[MargaretAnne]

If you’re familiar with Ravi Zacharias, a poster named Hugh writes about Ravi’s series on existentialism.

Along the way, Ravi will often address existentialism. Now, I’ve never really been able to get a firm grasp of what that means; I only knew it had something to do with Søren Kierkegaard (as came up in the comments of my July 10 post, Becoming What You Understand — remember that thread, John Lee?). But in his September 3, 2006, podcast, taken from his Leadership and Worship lectures, Ravi finally gave me some traction — and explained a bit about Kierkegaard too.

The clearest way to explain it is by contrast:

The Christian says, “What we are determines what we do.”

The existentialist says, “What we do determines what we are.”

But Ravi insists that Kierkegaard was not an existentialist in this sense (read the quote below); he was merely focused on the existential, or experience-driven, aspects of life. Christians have plenty to offer when it comes to existential questions; it’s existentialism as an -ism that is incompatible with the Christian worldview.

From a Reformed point of view, this difference is important — we are regenerated first, and then we believe. We are new creations, and because of that, we confess Christ as Lord. As I see it, this means that to reject unconditional election is to take an existential view of man’s fallenness; that is, to say that one can choose to trust God and thereby become a Christian is to say that what one does determines what one is.

At the bottom of the post, there are links to a six-part audio series, if you’re interested in listening to it.

http://hughbiquitous.com/2007/09/26/ravi-zacharias-explains-existentialism/

[Joker]

I don’t know who Ravi is but I do think your avatar is sexy in a 1950’s sort of way in the time of black and white classic cinema.

[Nietgaard]

Thanks for the link!