Ravi On Yoga

Ravi Zacharias explains the philosophies behind yoga that can be dangerous to Christian faith but also the health benefits that are free to be enjoyed by all people.

{Dr. Zacharias at the annual Jonathan Edwards Forum in Wethersfield, Connecticut speaking on, "Is Christianity Still Relevant?" }

visit www.RZIM.org for more resources

Category:

Travel & Events

Tags:

• Ravi
• Zacharias
• Jonathan
• Edwards
• Forum
• Wethersfield
• Connecticut
• Jesus
• Christ
• Christianity
• Yoga
• Eastern
• Religion
• God
• Bible
• RZIM

[nantapatt]

not just ravi but this is the understanding of all christians. the goal for any exercise is not to rid ourselves of thought and to just "be" but rather rid ourselves of everything that isn't Christ and "meditate" on him alone which is what ravi was saying. "meditating" on the word of God is the same as meditating on Christ.

[BootyBot]

meditating on the word of god is just called thinking. the whole point of meditation is to not be thinking, to just be.

[nantapatt]

@BootyBot i guess it depends on how we define meditation. our definition of the word means to deeply focus or to deeply think about A. "to meditate on the words." "meditate on the lyrics." so yes it is thinking but not "just" thinking but rather "deep and reflective" thinking. please elaborate on "to just be" because i do not think i am meditating right now but i am certainly "being"

[BootyBot]

@nantapatt "to think deeply about" is not what meditation is in yoga. in fact it's just the opposite. the point of meditation is to not to deeply think about. meditation is not something that's accessed through conscious logic. meditation is feeling. it's being in the moment. it has nothing to do with deep thinking.

"to be" is to be in the present moment without your mind being cluttered with a constant stream of conscious thought. it's clarity.

[nantapatt]

@BootyBot ah i see. i guess that's not a desirable option for the christian because to reach clarity, we "think deeply" about Christ and it that alone are we satisfied, in that alone do we "feel" good. i think what we mean by "biblical" yoga is to relax and retreat from ourselves and the world and into the word of God. i think its hacking the true definition so perhaps we shouldn't call it yoga at all. but that's what we mean.

[krishnantube]

is he not? read the history.

[nantapatt]

@krishnantube jesus was convicted as a criminal. afterall he died on cross, reserved for the worst criminals. i think xm3talx is just assuming that you said it in a negative light. as do i. though it is truth, it can come off as offensive when told mockingly. but that's just what i assume, don't really know why you said it.

[MayonR]

@Megaritz It seems that young would be benign, but we don't have the foresight God did. The preservation of the Hebrew people was for a greater plan that God had for all humanity. Again, it's easy to pass judgement especially without the foresight of God. It's absurd to accuse the Creator of being unethical if it is carried to it's logical end. but if you assert there is no Creator then there is no basis for calling anything immoral. Without God there is no basis for objective morals.

[Megaritz]

@MayonR A large population of adult Canaanites, etc., were living in the region in the time of Judges, and this can easily account for the repeated corruption of the Israelites during that period. I consider the most ethical action to be the one that minimizes death and suffering, and so I think the very *most* one could defend would be killing the adults and teenagers. I still doubt the younger children, even males, who had not long been brought up in pagan society, would have been a threat.

[MayonR]

@Megaritz As you indicated, it is easy to make hasty judgements with just passing cursory glances at the hard choices they had to make. No doubt the Hebrews in ch 31 initially thought it moral to spare many of the Midianites. And no doubt Moses recognized their good intentions, yet aware they didn't have the foresight that the God who led them out of slavery was capable of. I don't condemn you for your disbelief but commend you for your honest approach. This approach cannot fail you.

[MayonR]

@Megaritz Much as we regret the terrible loss of life, far greater mischief would have resulted if they were allowed to live in the midst of the Hebrews. This led to moral and religious degeneration of the 12 tribes in the days of Judges.(Judg. 2:1-3,10-15,19-23) and the result, centuries before they completed in gaining their promised territory. This serves as example to today's Christian to be equally yoked with their own and not appease or engage the moral depravity around us.

[MayonR]

@Megaritz An easy observation is that a male represents the strength and future of the culture. This is expressed also in the beginning of Exodus when the Pharaoh saw the Hebrews were thriving and ordered the killing of all males upon birth. But even apart from this it was similarly regrettable as radical surgery on a cancer victim. If his life is to preserved, the diseased portion must be completely cut away. A mistake I see is attempting to apply today's political correctness.

[Megaritz]

@MayonR (Part 3) At any rate, while I will still argue that the supposedly divinely decreed killings are excessive, I thank you for correcting my earlier ideas. I want to argue against what is *really* in the Bible, not against what I incorrectly imagine to be in it. I have also sometimes corrected my fellow nonbelievers when I have seen them using poor arguments. In the words of the atheist philosopher Daniel Dennett, "There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view I hold dear."

[Megaritz]

@MayonR (Part 2) I am, of course, changing my tact from my original stance of suspecting an allegedly divinely decreed allowance to commit rape. I was mistaken and I apologize. I've found that some easy criticisms of the Bible have better counterarguments that I'd expected--but I'd also argue defending its morality is not enough. I think claiming that even one miracle is true--not to mention claiming an entire book is the Word of God--requires far stronger hard evidence than that which exists.

[Megaritz]

@MayonR (Part 1) I follow your logic and appreciate it, but I still have a hard time finding it plausible that the only way God could prevent the Israelites from adopting the pagan ways was to have the male children killed. Surely the youngest boys would not have posed a threat to corrupt the Israelites with pagan practices? If the young women could be spared, it seems that at least the youngest boys, who had not yet even been *taught* the pagan practices, ought to have been, as well.

[MayonR]

@Megaritz cont. A young boy had the potential to remain loyal to his former culture upon adulthood which would cause problems. This sentiment is shared with the mandate in Numbers 33:55 which said they would be a thorn to their side and a barb to the eye. Young woman upon marrying to an eligible Hebrew was likely to adopt the Hebrew customs and loyalty. It seems harsh but it was necessary in this light.

[MayonR]

@Megaritz The honesty in your approach to understanding is commendable. This was observing the principles governing warfare. The reason for any extermination at all was that the woman mainly had seduced the Hebrew people and this extended to the Hebrews intermingling with the pagan practices. A large aim at the time was preserving the Hebrew people and any threat to that effect was eliminated. The woman who had known men were already full of idolatry. cont.