“Worship is a posture of life that takes as its primary purpose the understanding of what it really means to love and revere God.”
As someone interested in comparative religion and apologetics, I was anxious to read Ravi Zacharias’s Jesus Among Other Gods, which I expected (based on the cover and write-up on the back) to compare Christianity with Buddhism, Hinduism, and Islam. From the beginning, it is clear that the text is an apologetic work rather than a critical treatment of the material. To be clear, this is not a comparison of Christianity with the other major religions of the world. Zacharias is primarily a speaker, and his writing comes across as very “speech” like. It is loose and semi-structured, and many times seems to lack cohesion and circle back on itself. There are many faults with the book, but I was able to learn a few things about these other religions from the “safety” of viewing them through a Christian lens. By and large though, the book was a letdown.1
It is obvious from the writing style that Zacharias likes the sound of his own voice, so to speak. There is a lot of fluff and buildup to get very simple points across. He uses bombastic and hyperbolic language to describe the practices and beliefs of other religions. And he includes endless anecdotes of his life on the road as an apologist. The exact point of the book is difficult to surmise as the topics range wildly and are presented in a scattershot fashion. Because of its unsystematic treatment of the material, it is easy to get caught up in the current flow of a particular tangent or to miss some unaddressed gaps due to the forceful style.
The main thrust of the book (or so it seems to me) is an attempt to explain why the author believes there is a (capital G) God, and why he believes that God came to earth in the form of Jesus Christ. This is fine (although it seems different than the stated aim of the book), but that topic is handled much better in books like Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig, The Reason for God by Timothy Keller, and take your pick from C.S. Lewis’s apologetic work.
For the most part, the book is a plea against atheism and naturalism, with an argument that Jesus is the only religious figure whose claims could be true. The author heavily relies on the work of others. Throughout the book (my copy is 188 pages) there were 70 endnotes, most of which were citing another work (meaning a few were just the author clarifying or expounding on a point). Many of these were from academics swimming in these same waters, as well as source material (the Bible, the Koran, etc.), but he also often quotes fictional works and poetry at length. To me, that seems like poor form. I am probably more prone to be swayed by transcendent art than average, but to me it usually didn’t sit well in a work that is trying to put forth logical arguments. It too often felt like he was just name-dropping notable people in hopes that the name recognition would lend weight to his argument. To be fair, one instance in which an outside source was particularly effective was his quotation of Napoleon Bonaparte, regarding why he believed that Jesus was divine. Although many of the cited works seemed frivolous and unnecessary, several of them did end up on my to-read list.
Some portions of the book that actually engaged the purported topic (comparing Christianity with other religions) were interesting to read, but only in spurts, and ended without giving a comprehensive treatment of anything. He often resorts to strawmanning the other religions, but never tries to anticipate and address counter-arguments to the points he makes. For instance, he describes the Hindu festival of Thaipusam—which includes ceremonial acts of self-mortification—as a strange ritual. The author provides no details of the historical development of the practice, or a critical analysis of why he believes it is wrong; I suppose these things are lacking because he thought this practice would seem weird and unholy to his audience and require no argument against it. But this would have been a perfect opportunity to address the weird practices of Christianity—things like the Eucharist (eating the body and blood of Christ), the veneration of icons, celibacy, self-flagellation—and, you know, compare them. In another example, he quotes a recounting of Christmas during World War I, when opposing soldiers put down their weapons and spent the night singing carols. He puts forth the idea that the thought of God’s presence on the battlefield stopped the killing on that night. Fine, fine, but why didn’t God prevent the war in the first place? That question is left unanswered.
Don’t get me wrong, there is good content to be found here. The opening chapter is powerful. It is an account of Zacharias’s adolescence and struggles with despair which made his heart ripe for transformation. There are plenty of little nuggets hidden away in these pages, but the structure is so haphazard that it never builds up to anything substantial. Within an individual chapter, it was often difficult to discern any sort of logical progression to the material. He makes solid points in a vacuum, but I was often left thinking, “I’ll need to look that up later,” instead of further explanation being provided in the text. It seems like Zacharias’s argumentation style is geared toward emotional appeal. The opening chapter certainly suggests that Christianity has filled an emotional void in the author’s life left by an inattentive father. But for someone who is looking for a logical, coherent argument and is unswayed by emotional appeal, these arguments come across as lackluster and insubstantial.
It is certainly more of an apologetic work than an academic one. It might serve as an introduction to other religions if one wishes to take a look at them through the eyes of a Christian writer; but I fear that the caricatured and cherry-picked versions of these other religions is not thorough enough for a reader of this book to know what really separates them. For a more serious reader, the book will be unsatisfying.
1. I should note that this is the first material from Zacharias that I have encountered, and I have seen others tout his speaking engagements more than his books. Perhaps I will try something else from him in the future.