Christian and Missionary Alliance Church Declines to Pursue Discipline Against Ravi Zacharias

Yesterday, the Christian & Missionary Alliance made public a brief statement of the results of their investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct and dishonesty against apologist Ravi Zacharias. The statement in full is below and at the church website:

Evidence does not provide basis for formal discipline under the C&MA policy.

Ravi Zacharias has maintained his licensing credentials through The Christian and Missionary Alliance (C&MA) for 45 years. Along with all C&MA licensed workers, he is subject to the Uniform Policy on Discipline, Restoration, and Appeal.
Recently Mr. Zacharias has been accused of exaggerating his academic credentials. Mr. Zacharias and his employer, Ravi Zacharias International Ministries, have revised and clarified their communications to address these concerns. The C&MA has determined that there is no basis for formal discipline regarding this matter.
Mr. Zacharias has also been accused of engaging in an immoral relationship with a woman through the use of electronic communications. The C&MA recently completed a thorough inquiry of these accusations, including interviews with those involved and a review of all available documentation and records. While it is not appropriate to publicly discuss the nuances of these allegations, the available evidence does not provide a basis for formal discipline under the C&MA policy.
Questions may be directed to Peter Burgo, at

The C&MA Statement Comes Across as Evasive

Immediately, I asked Mr. Burgo where Ravi Zacharias or his ministry addressed the false claims about Cambridge and/Oxford. There has been no reply as of time of publication.
Although I don’t believe RZIM’s statement regarding Zacharias’ use of the title “Dr” was satisfactory, there was some kind of response. However, there has been no response from Ravi Zacharias about his claim that he was a “visiting scholar at Cambridge University.” Zacharias also incorrectly said he was an “official lecturer at Oxford University.” These claims were never admitted or addressed despite being made for many years.
The RZIM response on credentials is primarily about the use of the title “Dr.” You can read it here. The only paragraph which might relate to credentials in general is below:

Neither Ravi Zacharias nor Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM) has ever knowingly misstated or misrepresented Ravi’s credentials. When it has been brought to our attention that something was stated incorrectly with regard to Ravi’s background, we have made every effort to correct it. Sometimes other entities—such as publishers or institutions where Ravi was speaking—have incorrectly presented aspects of his credentials. We were not aware of these errors when they were made; however, in some instances RZIM should have caught them and sought to have them corrected. We regret any and all errors, as well as any doubt or distraction they may have caused.

This vague paragraph does not take responsibility for the deceptive use of positions at Cambridge and Oxford not actually held by Ravi Zacharias. He did this for many years and these claims continue to be a part of his books without explicit correction.
Likewise, the C&MA statement comes across as a cover up of the credentials misrepresentations of Ravi Zacharias. In fact, Ravi Zacharias and his ministry have not revised and clarified their communications to address the concerns. They spun some of the concerns but ignored others. Alas, that is what the C&MA has done as well. Because Ravi Zacharias doesn’t refer to himself today as a visiting scholar at Cambridge, the church apparently isn’t going to comment on the many years that he did it before it was revealed to be a false claim.
According to the C&MA’s Uniform Policy on Discipline, Restoration, and Appeal, those who are investigated can face several disciplinary outcomes ranging from reprimand to expulsion. It is hard to understand how Ravi Zacharias escaped at least a reprimand for repeated misrepresentations of his credentials over the decades of his public work.

Regarding the Online Relationship

Initially, it may appear that the C&MA exonerated Zacharias for his online relationship with a Canadian woman. However, I don’t know that it should be interpreted that way. Because the statement only refers to “available evidence,” the conclusion reached by the church is limited by what they could discover. In fact, both Zacharias and the woman are bound by a non-disclosure agreement. There is little now that anyone can discern based on the legal arrangement between the two parties.

Christian Historian Says He Was Evicted from First Baptist Church of Jacksonville Conference Over Ravi Zacharias

Historian and former Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary archivist Jim Lutzweiler attended the How Should We Then Pastor Conference for pastors held January 25-28 at First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, FLfbc jax logo hoping to find out more about Ravi Zacharias. Zacharias received the Lindsay Award, an annual award given by the church. Lutzweiler attended a Q&A session the afternoon before Zacharias was slated to get his award (Jan. 28). Lutzweiler told me he wanted to ask lead pastor Mac Brunson, “In this conference about how to pastor, how did you as a pastor deal with the question of Ravi’s phony credentials, sexting, and suicide email, and still retain him on the program?”
I too would like to know the answer to that question. Zacharias has numerous loose ends remaining but has gone quiet since his ministry issued incomplete statements about credentialing issues several weeks ago.

I Will Call Security

According to Lutzweiler, he attended a Q&A session where he intended to ask lead pastor Mac Brunson his question. However, he said Brunson’s son, Trey, got to him before the microphone did. Lutzweiler quoted Brunson as saying, “No, do not ask the question. If you do, I will call security.” Lutzweiler said he complied with that request.
After the Q&A, Lutzweiler said he went to the auditorium for the meeting during which Ravi Zacharias was to get an award. He told me he looked for a good seat:

I got one four rows back.  Suddenly a security guard came to my seat and asked me to follow him.  I did.  When we got to the foyer, he said, ‘We want to ask you to leave.  We understand you want to create a scene.’  I said, ‘What? I am not here to create a scene, I just came to hear Ravi.  In fact, I pointedly did NOT create a scene across the street during a Q&A when Trey asked me not to ask a question about Ravi. I politely consented to his request.’ I could quickly tell this made no difference, that they had a mandate to get me out of there without compromise (like sitting in the balcony 200 feet-or-so away from the platform).  There were two other pistol-bearing guards right there, ready to haul me away.

I sent emails and a tweet to First Baptist Church of Jacksonville and Trey Brunson and asked for their side of this story. I received no response.
Jim Lutzweiler is a Baptist and wanted to raise issues which would no doubt have been inconvenient and uncomfortable but given the information available and recent media coverage were fair to raise. In particular, Lutzweiler wanted to know how Brunson evaluated the evidence which is very compelling. Apparently, if you follow this example, how pastors are supposed to pastor is to ignore such things; and have good security guards packing heat.

In Church of England Report, Oxford University Expressed Concern about Wycliffe Hall's Connection to Ravi Zacharias

See correction below – Ravi Zacharias’ Ligonier bio has been changed to make it accurate.
In a 2015 Church of England report evaluating ministry training at Wycliffe Hall, reviewers disclosed that the relationship between the Oxford University affiliateRZIM logo and Ravi Zacharias International Ministries had become a “cause of concern.” In 2006, Wycliffe Hall, a theological training center for the Church of England established the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics in cooperation with RZIM. However, Oxford University became concerned that the admissions to the centre were being confused with admissions to Oxford.
On pages 11-12, the report stated:

WH began a relationship with Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in 2006, establishing OCCA, the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. The relationship became a cause of concern to the university when admissions to the centre were not clearly differentiated from admissions to the university. Admissions procedures have now been clarified although some concerns remain for the university. For WH, the attraction of OCCA is important for recruitment to the Certificate in Theological Studies, particularly in relation to overseas students, whilst remaining clearly a separate entity. The independent students who had accessed the teaching of OCCA were very positive about it. A member of teaching staff is shared between WH and OCCA.

The concern disclosed in this report may be what led Wycliffe Hall to end Ravi Zacharias’ honorific position of Senior Research Lecturer in 2015 and suspended the use of such titles. According to an email from Michael Lloyd at Wycliffe Hall to Steve Baughman, Wycliffe Hall took several actions pertinent to the Church of England report near the end of 2015.
oxford WH Fellow 3
The organizations are separate. The current websites make this clear. According to this email from Wycliffe Hall, even at the time, it was deceptive to say that an honorific title at Wycliffe Hall meant one was a lecturer at Oxford University. 

Senior Research Fellow at Oxford University?

Currently, one could be forgiven for thinking there is still some connection between Ravi Zacharias and Oxford University. As I pointed out recently, a current Ravi Zacharias bio up on a website for the Ligonier Ministries West Coast conference to be held in June 2018 proclaims that Zacharias is currently a senior research lecturer at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University. (UPDATE: As January 10, this bio has been changed to remove the reference to Oxford University).
Ravi Zacharias bio ligonier
His current bios at Veritas Forum, BioLogos, The Stream, and elsewhere have this information.
Over the years, Zacharias has created the impression that his work was accredited by Oxford. In 2012, he told Ligonier Ministries:

Our Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics (OCCA) is now accredited with degree programs at Oxford University.

He wrote in his autobiography that he is “an official lecturer at Oxford University,” “lecturing there once a year” and has said that in at least one media appearance.  It is no wonder that officials at Oxford and the Church of England expressed concern that there might be confusion about the relationship between OCCA and Oxford.

Ravi Zacharias Did Not Fully Addressed the Credentials Controversy

In RZIM’s December statement, there was no mention of the false claims about connections to Cambridge and Oxford. These were the most deceptive claims but these did not get any explanation. RZIM supporters share the burden of addressing these issues. Ravi Zacharias cannot claim to have addressed the controversy with integrity until he can address head on these issues and take steps to correct the numerous deceptive representations of his work for which his organization is responsible.

This and That: Ravi Zacharias, Husbands as Holy Spirit, Another Fake Jefferson Quote, Dissociative Identity Disorder

Here are a few things I have been thinking and reading about.

Ravi Zacharias, Ligonier Ministries, and His Oxford Thing

UPDATE: As of January 10, the bio has been changed to remove the claim that Zacharias is a senior research fellow at Wycliffe Hall.
I thought Ravi Zacharias would be more careful after his brush with controversy over his credentials. However, he is speaking for Ligonier RZIM logoMinistries this summer and they are billing him as a current “senior research fellow at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University.” Problem is, he’s not. Even though Wycliffe Hall is a Permanent Private Hall at Oxford and he once held an honorific title there, he was never considered on faculty at Oxford. I have seen the correspondence from Oxford on the subject and it is clear that he does not have any position now with Wycliffe or Oxford (source, source, sourcesource).
Since December 19, I have been corresponding with Ligonier about this without any change in the description or response from them. Apparently, false claims aren’t a big deal.

Are Husbands Responsible to Sanctify Wives?

photo-1453748866136-b1dd97284f49_optThis piece by Sarah Lindsay directed me to this piece by Bryan Stoudt. Stoudt argues that husbands are responsible “to be instruments of his sanctifying work in the lives of our wives.” This means husbands are supposed to correct their wives without being too angry or too passive. Apparently the process doesn’t go both ways. Wives get to be corrected but not to correct.

Trump Supporter Sheriff Clarke Posts Fake Jefferson Quote

You can’t make this up. On December 31, Trump supporter and former Milwaukee County sheriff David A. Clarke posted to twitter a quote falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson.

A person who claims the liberal media posts fake news posted a fake quote and has so far refused to admit it. His defenders question Monticello.

Dissociative Identity Disorder Documentary

I have always been skeptical about Dissociative Identity Disorder (aka Multiple Personality Disorder). A friend recently pointed me to this 1993 documentary on the subject featuring the work of discredited therapist Colin Ross. One may generalize some aspects of the therapists’ mistakes to what reparative therapists do to falsely consider their techniques to be useful.

Feel free to comment on any and all topics. Add some of your own. What are you reading about? I’ve also been reading articles on free will and determinism, arguments against Calvinism, why there is something rather than nothing, whether or not hydrolized wheat is gluten free, autogynephilia, lost cities of Finland, arguments against an immaterial soul, the Collective Unconscious, the Milgram experiment, the history of Fleetwood Mac, and a few other things.
I might get on some theme soon or then again, I might not.

Should Recipients of an Honorary Doctorate Use the Prefix Dr?

As follow up to the story about the use of the title “Dr.” by Ravi Zacharias and his ministry, I examined the policies of over a dozen colleges andcap gown 2 universities both here and abroad.
The most recent statement from Ravi Zacharias claims the following:

In earlier years, “Dr.” did appear before Ravi’s name in some of our materials, including on our website, which is an appropriate and acceptable practice with honorary doctorates. However, because this practice can be contentious in certain circles, we no longer use it.

Zacharias’ ministry claims it is an “appropriate and acceptable practice” to use the title “Dr.” with honorary degrees. I would like to know where that is the case. My research tells a different story.
I found that an honorary doctorate does not grant the privilege of using Dr. as a prefix at most schools. I only found one school which expressly allows (well two if you count an unaccredited school where you can buy a degree). Some schools don’t have policies online, whereas most I consulted advise against it. Below are the policies I found.* I start with the UK schools since this is the world where Ravi Zacharias claims to have gotten some honors.
Oxford Brooks UK

15. Honorary graduates may use the approved post-nominal letters as contained in section A1.1.8 of the University Regulations: ‘Honorary Degrees’. It is not customary, however, for recipients of an honorary doctorate to adopt the prefix ‘Dr’.

If you click through to Section A1.1.8, you see the titles which are supposed to be used by degree recipients after their names (e.g., HonDLitt, for a Doctor of Letters). This alerts the public to the fact that the degree is honorary.
University of Brighton

Honorary graduates shall be advised that recipients of an honorary degree may use the approved designatory letters after their names; Hon DArts, Hon DEng, Hon LLD Hon DLitt, Hon DSc, Hon DTech. It is not customary, however, for recipients of an honorary doctorate to use the title ‘Dr’ in front of their name.

Robert Gordon University Aberdeen

Recipients of an honorary degree may use the approved post-nominal letters [e.g., HonDArts]. It is not customary, however for recipients of an honorary doctorate to adopt the prefix ‘Dr’.

In the U.S., university policies vary in wording but consistently indicate honorary degree recipients should not represent themselves as holding an earned degree.
University of Wisconsin

While a significant and important award, an honorary doctorate does not have the same standing as an earned doctorate and should not be represented as such.

From here on, the policies leave no room for doubt about the matter.
Florida Atlantic University

In no instance will the recipient of an honorary doctorate from Florida Atlantic University represent the award as being an earned doctorate or an earned academic credential of any kind. This award does not entitle the recipient to use the title of “Dr.” or append “Ph.D.” or any other earned degree designation after his/her name. Inappropriate use of the award could result in its withdrawal by action of the President and Provost, with the input of the University Faculty Senate Honors and Awards Committee.

Arcadia University

…always indicate degree was honorary, ie “an honorary doctorate of humanities”; do not refer to person as Dr. if he/she has only an honorary degree.

Delaware Valley University

A recipient of an honorary degree should never be referred to as doctor (if this is the only degree held). In running text: • Drew Becher holds an honorary doctorate of humane letters. Abbreviations of Honorary Degrees • Honorary Doctor of Arts – D.A. (h.c.) • Honorary Doctor of Arts and Human Letters – D.A.H. (h.c.) • Honorary Doctor of Business – D.B. (h.c.) • Honorary Doctor of Fine Arts – D.F.A. (h.c.) • Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters – D.H.L (h.c.) • Honorary Doctor of Liberal Arts – D.L.A. (h.c.) [h.c. abbreviates the Latin honoris causa – “for the cause of honor”]

Drexel University

Do not refer to an honorary degree holder with the courtesy title Dr. or Hon. When referring to someone who holds an honorary degree, make clear that the degree is honorary.

Brandeis University

Recipients of an honorary doctorate do not normally adopt the title of “doctor.” In many countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and the United States, it is not usual for an honorary doctor to use the formal title of “doctor,” regardless of the background circumstances for the award.

George Fox University

A person with an honorary doctorate is not called Dr.

Lycoming College

honorary degrees All references to an honorary degree should specify that the degree was honorary. Robert Shangraw ’58, H’04. Do not use Dr. before the name of an individual whose only doctorate is honorary. an honorary doctor of laws degree (emphasis in the original)

University of Richmond

For those who receive honorary degrees, the letter “H” is used after the individual’s name with the date the degree was conferred. Do not refer to someone as “Dr.” if he or she has only an honorary doctorate.

Saint Mary’s University of MN

“Dr.” before a name is acceptable in internal communications to indicate either an academic doctoral degree or a physician’s credential. For external use, use Ph.D., M.D., or similar abbreviation after the name. • do not use the redundant Dr. John Smith, M.D., or Dr. Steve Smith, Ph.D. • do not use “Dr.” for honorary degrees.

Hood College

To designate using the honorary degree • Wil Haygood, LHD (h.c.) The (h.c.) is Latin for “honoris causa.” A recipient of an honorary degree should never be referred to as doctor (if this is the only degree held)

West Virginia University

Honorary degree recipients are properly addressed as “doctor” in correspondence from the university that awarded the honorary degree and in conversation on that campus. But honorary degree recipients should not refer to themselves as “doctor”, nor should they use the title on business cards or in correspondence. However, the recipient is entitled to use the appropriate honorary abbreviation behind his or her name, for example, [full name], Litt.D. On a resume or in a biographical sketch, they may indicate an honorary degree by writing out the degree followed by the words “honoris causa” to signify that the degree is honorary, not earned.
When addressing a person who has received an honorary degree from another university, it is not correct to use the term “doctor” nor should the title be used in correspondence, biographical sketches, introductions, or on place cards.

One school — Lynchburg College in Virginia — allows honorary degree recipients to use the title Dr., but that is the only one I could find among accredited schools during my search.* One other, the Los Angeles Development Church and Institute proudly proclaims that you can make a donation and get an honorary doctorate. Then it is just fine to call yourself doctor.
Although I suspect Ravi Zacharias fans will continue to believe he has been entitled to his title and perhaps still is, this survey of policies should make it clear to an objective observer that the trend is against using the title Dr. with the honorary doctorate alone.
*I stopped after a searching through about two dozen schools when it became apparent that the trend was that an honorary doctorate recipient should not use the title “Dr.” If someone can show me schools I missed with different policies, I will gladly add them to this post.

Christianity Today Podcast: John Stackhouse on Ravi Zacharias and Credential Inflation

This Christianity Today interview with Crandall University professor John Stackhouse is well worth the time. Mark Galli and Morgan Lee get to theRZIM logo heart of the matter of Ravi Zacharias’ inflation of credentials.  Stackhouse revealed that he raised the issue many years ago with two of Zacharias’ staffers only to have the concerns ignored.  Near the end of the interview, Lee asked Stackhouse a key question:

John, what do you think with regards to character? So when someone does this and it is revealed that the information in their bio may be exaggerated or may be outright fabrication, is it okay to question their integrity overall?
Well, when your whole job is to tell the truth as accurately, carefully, rigorously as possible, when what you’re really asking people to do by setting forth your credentials – which literally comes from the same word as creed or credo – why I should be believed, then you really take on a tremendous burden to speak very circumspectly. And if right out of the gate your credentials are suspect, then what are people supposed to do in the audience when he makes certain claims? Are they all supposed to hit their phones, or tablets and start checking everything you say because the stuff they can check isn’t quite true. Isn’t quite true. And I think as soon as we get into the it’s not quite true phase, I think you’re done. I just don’t think you can continue as an apologist if you’re not going to be scrupulous about telling the truth in a way that you can predict your audience will understand. Otherwise, you’re in the wrong game.

This phrase is a keeper: “I think as soon as we get into the it’s not quite true phase, I think you’re done.”
The issue of credibility and trust is central to the entire problem. As a part of his talks, Ravi Zacharias makes fact claims. Some sound a little suspicious to me. Now that I know that some of his credentials claims are off, I am reluctant to fully trust much else.
Stackhouse’s critique is devastating because he is a Christian apologist in his own right. Although the fans of Zacharias are loyal, I hope Christians continue to bring this to RZIM’s attention and ask for accountability and correction.

Ravi Zacharias International Ministries: We Don't Call Ravi Doctor Except When We Do (UPDATED)

UPDATE: In the afternoon of December 6, RZIM removed the “Dr.” title from Ravi Zacharias name. To see it as it was earlier that day and before, click this link.
(Original post)
Public Relations 101
If you make a public statement, make sure you are complying with it when you make it.
On Sunday, Ravi Zacharias International Ministries said this about Ravi Zacharias use of the title Dr. The pertinent aspects are below:

The veracity of some of the educational credentials—specifically the use of the “doctorate” designation—of our Founder and President, Ravi Zacharias, have been called into question. While Ravi personally does not brandish his credentials and routinely asks not to be referred to as “Dr. Zacharias”—even by employees—our organization bears his name and, as such, we would like to take this opportunity to clear up any misunderstanding.
In earlier years, “Dr.” did appear before Ravi’s name in some of our materials, including on our website, which is an appropriate and acceptable practice with honorary doctorates. However, because this practice can be contentious in certain circles, we no longer use it.

Right now today, when you go to the International Board of Directors page of Ravi Zacharias’ webpage, here is what you will see.
Dr RZ IBM 12 5 17
Then go to this page and this page to see more examples of how this year the ministry has contradicted the statement they released on Sunday.

Why This Matters

This is about what reality you believe.
Reality: Ravi Zacharias and his ministry have improperly brandished the “Dr.” title for many years up to today on their own websites, have asked others to call him that, failed to correct others when it was used improperly. He also claimed honors and appointments he didn’t hold (e.g., “visiting scholar at Cambridge University”).
Reality RZIM is pushing: Ravi is humble and would never brandish the “Dr.” title (as if he has no control over what his ministry does). We (RZIM) used to do it but don’t anymore and we can’t control when other people do it.
Obviously, the ministry and Mr. Zacharias on Sunday weren’t doing what they claimed they had been doing all along. Ministry personnel from the top of the organization to those who create promotional material have referred to Zacharias as Dr. throughout the year up to the present. Those who have heard Zacharias speak at various churches have indicated that he is introduced as Dr. Zacharias repeatedly year after year. It would so refreshing for the ministry to simply admit that Ravi Zacharias’ credentials have been inflated for many years and that they are now committed to simply reporting the facts.

Prior posts on Ravi Zacharias’ credentials.

Is Dr. Zacharias in the House?
Was Ravi Zacharias a Visiting Scholar at Cambridge University?
Speaker at Zacharias Institute Fined $44-Million and Barred from Securities Industry
Fact and Fiction in Ravi Zacharias’ Response to Multiple Allegations of Misconduct

Fact and Fiction in Ravi Zacharias' Responses to Allegations of Misconduct

Earlier today, Ravi Zacharias issued statements regarding the allegations of sexting with a Canadian woman and misrepresenting his academic credentials. Apparently, he gave Christianity Today notice of the statements since they published an article about the issue around the time the statements appeared.
I suspect his followers will be placated by these statements. However, there are problems with both of the statements. Let me begin with his statement regarding his biography. My comments are interspersed within his statement:

The veracity of some of the educational credentials—specifically the use of the “doctorate” designation—of our Founder and President, Ravi Zacharias, have been called into question. While Ravi personally does not brandish his credentials and routinely asks not to be referred to as “Dr. Zacharias”—even by employees—our organization bears his name and, as such, we would like to take this opportunity to clear up any misunderstanding.

Just last week I found numerous instance of his own websites referring to him as “Dr. Zacharias.” I have the screen caps of the websites to prove it. Here is just one from April 12, 2017 which I captured last week from the RZIM You Tube account.  I intend to pull together more.

RZIM Youtube rzDR

On the last line, RZIM refers to Zacharias as “Dr. Ravi Zacharias.”

Listen to the first few seconds of this video in April, 2017 at Temple University. Zacharias is introduced at this RZIM event as Dr. Zacharias.

Here is one of his senior staff Vince Vitale calling him Dr. Ravi Zacharias in his own institute in March.

Here is an ad put out by RZIM for his appearance at University of Michigan earlier this year. Watch to the end and you will see that this RZIM produced ad promoted Zacharias as Dr. Ravi Zacharias.

How many more of these will it take to demonstrate that this statement from RZIM isn’t correct?

For another one, click this link to see Zacharias’ complete bio from RZIM’s Academy referring to him as Dr. Zacharias taken 11/27/17.
RZIM academy 11 27 17

As of tonight, the RZIM Academy website has been scrubbed and revamped to cleanse it of all references to Dr. There is no misunderstanding. The organization has been busy covering up the evidence. Why can’t they just acknowledge that?

You can see it on the web still at the Canadian website.

Neither Ravi Zacharias nor Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM) has ever knowingly misstated or misrepresented Ravi’s credentials. When it has been brought to our attention that something was stated incorrectly with regard to Ravi’s background, we have made every effort to correct it. Sometimes other entities—such as publishers or institutions where Ravi was speaking—have incorrectly presented aspects of his credentials. We were not aware of these errors when they were made; however, in some instances RZIM should have caught them and sought to have them corrected. We regret any and all errors, as well as any doubt or distraction they may have caused.

If that is true, then why go to such lengths to cover up the changes? It is very hard to take any of this seriously when it is obvious that Zacharias and his organization have brandished the title Dr. and are now denying it.

Currently, eleven RZIM team members have earned doctorates. Ravi is not one of them, nor has he ever claimed to have an earned doctorate. In fact, Ravi often states that he wishes he had done more formal studies, as he values and understands the importance of higher learning. Ravi has a Masters of Divinity from Trinity International University, and has also been conferred with ten honorary doctorates. Ravi is grateful for and humbled by where the Lord has taken him during his 45 years of ministry thus far.

In earlier years, “Dr.” did appear before Ravi’s name in some of our materials, including on our website, which is an appropriate and acceptable practice with honorary doctorates. However, because this practice can be contentious in certain circles, we no longer use it.

Actually, it appeared in numerous materials, not some, and no, it is not appropriate and acceptable. If it was, he wouldn’t be taking it down.

In addition, some confusion may have arisen from a difference in cultural norms, as we are a global organization with staff members based in sixteen countries. In Ravi’s homeland of India, for example, honorific titles are customary and are used frequently out of respect for elders, including by the RZIM India team when addressing Ravi. Still, it is Ravi’s custom to request for the inviting parties not to use “Dr.” with his name in conjunction with any speaking events. Despite this, on occasion it has been our experience that we arrive to find promotional banners and materials welcoming “Dr. Ravi Zacharias.” We will continue to do our best to ensure consistency; however, we recognize that certain aspects are sometimes beyond our control.

This is simply not credible, given the number of times his own organization has used and continues to use the title Dr. with Zacharias. If it is Ravi’s custom to request that inviting parties not use “Dr.”, why can’t his own social media team get the memo? Here is a tweet from RZIM India’s Twitter account on November 19. There are many like it.

The nature of our work at RZIM can evoke criticism, sometimes fair—in which case we address it—but sometimes completely unfounded and without merit. For example, recently a couple of inquirers claimed to have information that Ravi was facing discipline from his denomination. This is simply false and has never been the case, and it serves as an example of why we choose not to address certain accusations that come our way.

Given the spin being used in the statement above, I don’t accept this statement at face value. My sources have explained that he was investigated but is not now under discipline.

We will be more vigilant about editing and fact-checking at every stage. Our hope is that this will enable us to focus on our primary calling of helping people to encounter the claims and person of Jesus Christ, and will enable others to focus on the strength and merit of our message.

Ravi’s desire and our desire as an evangelistic ministry is to engage the honest skeptic, to take questions seriously, and to be as clear as possible in our communication. We therefore have restructured Ravi’s biography to better reflect his 45 years as an itinerant evangelist and apologist with a passion and a calling to reach those who shape the ideas of culture with the beauty and credibility of the gospel.

There is nothing in this statement about Zacharias’ claim to be a “visiting scholar at Cambridge University.” He clearly was not but didn’t address this false claim along with others in his bio. He simply removed all claims in the current bio.

While I am not a target of the kind of material Zacharias puts out, I have become a skeptic of his ministry. I had hoped he would truly face the distortions and exaggerations of his credentials. He did not do so in a way that would lead me to trust his work.

Ravi Zacharias Business Conference Speaker Fined $44-Million and Barred from Securities Trading by SEC

On December 1-2, Ravi Zacharias Institute will host a Business Leaders Conference in Alpharetta, GA. Participants can pay $1299 for a day and a half of talks by Zacharias, his Institute staff and invited business leaders. One of the speakers, Sungkook “Bill” Hwang runs a firm called Archegos Capital Management. However, before he founded that firm, Hwang was one of billionaire Julian Robertson’s proteges, or “tiger cubs” and founded Tiger Asia, a capital management firm specializing in Asian securities. It was there that Hwang ran afoul of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and agreed to pay $44-million in order to settle charges of insider trading. He was also barred from any involvement in trading or giving investment advice for at least five years, starting 1/22/13. Hwang’s FINRA profile can be viewed at the organization’s BrokerCheck website.
Hwang Finra
According to the SEC press release about the complaint, Hwang

committed insider trading by short selling three Chinese bank stocks based on confidential information they received in private placement offerings. Hwang and his advisory firms then covered the short positions with private placement shares purchased at a significant discount to the stocks’ market price. They separately attempted to manipulate the prices of publicly traded Chinese bank stocks in which Hwang’s hedge funds had substantial short positions by placing losing trades in an attempt to lower the price of the stocks and increase the value of the short positions. This enabled Hwang and Tiger Asia Management to illicitly collect higher management fees from investors.

In addition, criminal charges were settled against the company.

In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey today announced criminal charges against Tiger Asia Management.
“Hwang today learned the painful lesson that illegal offshore trading is not off-limits from U.S. law enforcement, and tomorrow’s would-be securities law violators would be well-advised to heed this warning,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.
Sanjay Wadhwa, Associate Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office and Deputy Chief of the Enforcement Division’s Market Abuse Unit, added, “Hwang betrayed his duty of confidentiality by trading ahead of the private placements, and betrayed his fiduciary obligations when he defrauded his investors by collecting fees earned from his attempted manipulation scheme.”

As the result of these actions, Tiger Asia faced opposition to continued operations in Hong Kong and Japan. The transition to Archegos appears to be in response to the demise of Tiger Asia. However, one would not know that by reading Hwang’s bio at Zacharias Institute’s Business Leaders Conference website.

Bill is the founder and Chief Executive Officer at Archegos Capital Management. Bill founded and ran Tiger Asia from 2001 to 2012, before turning the firm into a family office and renaming it Archegos Capital Management in 2013. Bill previously worked as an equity analyst at Tiger Management, as well as an institutional equity salesperson at both Peregrine Securities and Hyundai Securities.

No doubt Mr. Hwang has turned over a new leaf and it isn’t my intention to cast stones. As a significant donor to Ravi Zacharias’ ministry, I can understand why Zacharias would want to feature him at the conference. However, shouldn’t participants who are asked to pay $1299 be informed of this? At a conference on business virtue and integrity, I feel that learning from mistakes could be a valuable session. However, if these things are glossed over, what is the lesson then? By not making this a part of the conference bio, it seems like yet another effort at embellishment which Mr. Zacharias is currently in the middle of trying to explain about his own credentials.

Was Ravi Zacharias a Visiting Scholar at Cambridge University?

The short answer is no.
I am fact checking claims about the academic credentials of Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias made by atheist Steve Baughman. Baughman first raised his concerns in 2015 and then again earlier this month. My first post checking into Zacharias’ credentials was yesterday when I examined his improper use of the title “Dr.” Today, I take up Zacharias’ claim about being a visiting scholar at Cambridge University. As far as I can tell, this claim first showed up in Intervarsity promotional material in 1993.
There are some facts mixed in with a misleading statement, so let’s examine the details.
Zacharias said he studied at the University of Cambridge in 1990. In his book, Walking from East to West: God in the Shadows, Zacharias wrote:
Ravi Z Cambridge U East West
He made the claim more succinctly in at least four other books. For instance in his 2004 book, Can Man Live Without God?, he wrote:
RZ Cambridge Can Man

Was Ravi Zacharias a Visiting Scholar at the University of Cambridge?

He very specifically claims in his books that he was invited to be a visiting scholar at Cambridge University. No other school or institution is mentioned. There is more to this story that he doesn’t say. Read on for the rest of the story.
This description of Zacharias has spread widely. The Colson Center‘s author page says Zacharias was “a visiting scholar at Cambridge University.” Lee Strobel, James Dobson, the people who put on the Worldview Apologetics Conference, the folks at Moody Bible Institute, the Oklahoma Christian University community, the 2015 commencement audience at Oral Roberts University, and many others believe Zacharias was a visiting scholar at Cambridge University based on his word.
In response to my question to Ravi Zacharias International Ministry about the Cambridge claims, Mark DeMoss offered the following statement:

Regarding his studies at Cambridge, Professor Jeremy Begbie (Senior Member, Wolfson College, University of Cambridge; former Associated Principal, Ridley Hall, Cambridge) has provided the following written statement: “I can confirm that Ravi Zacharias was a visiting scholar at Ridley Hall Cambridge in 1990, under my supervision. His courses included guided research with Dr. Begbie, lectures from resident and visiting instructors in the Romantic writers, lectures at the University’s Divinity School from Don Cupitt, additional course in quantum physics with Dr. John Polkinghorne, and studies in world religions with Dr. Julious Lipner and others.

I wrote Dr. Begbie, who is now at Duke University and asked if this statement was accurate. He replied:

Yes – my statement is accurate (although Lipner’s name is misspelt – it should be Julius). RZ [Ravi Zacharias] was invited by Ridley Hall, not the University. Ridley Hall is not, and was not then, run by the University. The lower case “visiting scholar” was chosen to make it clear that to my memory he was not given a formal title – but he was exactly what the words say: a visiting scholar. Polkinghorne taught courses in theology and science for many years after relinquishing his University position in physics.

Let’s unpack this.

Zacharias Was Invited to Ridley Hall Not the University of Cambridge

Several colleges and universities exist in Cambridge. As in many large cities, the schools are very close together and have agreements to work together on projects while they maintain their distinctive missions. Ridley Hall is an school in the town of Cambridge which exists to prepare people for ministry, primary in the Church of England. The University of Cambridge is a world class university. Both are located in Cambridge, England. As Dr. Begbie said, Ridley Hall wasn’t then, nor is it now, run by the University of Cambridge. Ridley Hall has a visiting scholar program which Zacharias participated in, but this had nothing to do with the University. When Zacharias said he was a visiting scholar at Cambridge University, he wasn’t being truthful. He was a visiting scholar at Ridley Hall, which is an educational institution in Cambridge, England.
As a consequence of being in Cambridge, Ridley Hall has cultivated relationships with the University of Cambridge. This allows Ridley Hall students to take classes and attend lectures at Cambridge University. As Dr. Begbie told me, Zacharias did that as a part of his sabbatical at Ridley Hall by taking these classes and lectures with people at Cambridge. However, he was never an invited visiting scholar at Cambridge and did his work under the supervision of Dr. Begbie who was at Ridley Hall.
After this was pointed out to Zacharias by Steve Baughman, Zacharias changed his bio to the following verbiage (from his academy bio):

Dr. Zacharias has been a visiting scholar at Ridley Hall, Cambridge (then affiliated with Cambridge University, now more recently allied with Cambridge and affiliated with Durham University) where he studied moralist philosophers and literature of the Romantic era.

This is still a bit of an embellishment. It appears he really wants people to know he spent a few months attending lectures in Cambridge, England. However, there is no meaningful connection between Ridley Hall and the University of Cambridge which is relevant to a bio.
Prior post in this series: Is Dr. Zacharias in the House? Did Ravi Zacharias Claim to Have Doctorates He Doesn’t Have?