Five Reasons why I know Christianity to be True.

I was recently asked, how I know the story of Jesus is true? The questioner added, isn’t it just like the story of Achilles or Krishna? In my reply, I outlined the 5 reasons when Christianity is true.

1 Manuscriptes

Achilles and the the Odyssey  

We have, we have somewhere near nine manuscripts of the Odyssey And the closest we have to the original is nearly 900 years after the originals were written This means there is absolutely no way to know if we have eye-witness accounts. Also, the corroborating evidence is extremely sketchy.

The Hindu Sand Script with the stories of Krishna

The Sand Script has one single line of transmission and vast discrepancies with the text. The single line of transmission prevents any checking of which discrepancies are right and which are not. Again, there is no way of knowing what was written originally. Also, the corroborating evidence is mostly nonexistent.

The Bible with the store of Jesus

5000 Manuscripts with less than 100 years from the original.  Multiple Streams of transmission, so we have something to compare. Vast amounts of corroborating evidence from Jesus’ time from all over the known world at the time. Today, no reputable historian, Christian or Secular, uncertain whether Jesus was real.

2 Certainty

Undoubtedly it is correct that we cannot know in the case of Achilles and Krishna. Therefore, we are correct to dismiss them. Without some evidence, they even existed for sure they are just stories. On the other hand, the fact that Jesus lived within time and space is verifiable beyond any reasonable doubt. Therefore, we must take what he said seriously. Since there are less than 1400 viable textual variants in the New Testament (NT), we are confident within about 90% that we have those eye-witness accounts as they were written. (even the Secular scalars agree with that). In other words, 90% of what you see is certainly the eye-witness account. Also, for the record, I am being very conservative with the 90% number. In reality, it is more like 99%. So, what do we do with these eye-witness accounts? We would need some reasons to dismiss them. Comparing them to Achilles and Krishna does not work because there are no verifiable eye-witness accounts of those events. Jesus existed, so what about these eye-witness accounts is not credible?

3 Credibility

Let’s say there is a murder trial, and we have different witnesses. How would we go about establishing the credibility of those witnesses? The first thing to establish credibility is that they were indeed eye-witness. That has been established. We know that we have eye-witness accounts. Next, we would cross-examine those accounts for contradictions. If we didn’t find contradictions, we would conclude those accounts are true and that the murder did happen.

When we apply these steps to the biblical accounts, we see that all the writers wrote at different times and to diverse audiences. So, there is no chance they collaborated with the store. Their stories cohere to each other and do not contradict, so they meet every standard we need to call them true.

Added to this, the story of Jesus fits directly into the Bible’s story as a whole. Jesus personally fulfilled 300 prophesies about himself. Where he was born, how he died, ETC. See Psalm 22 for an example of a prophecy that he fulfilled which was written nearly 1400 years before his birth.

No other account has this element of fulfilled prophesy. There was no prophesy about Achilles recorded before he was supposedly born. Moreover, prophies about Krishna don’t show up in the Sand Script until many years after the first account of Krishna is written. They were pretty clear written after the story.

4 Coherent Worldview

A worldview is something there everyone has. Your worldview is there to answer five fundamental questions. Everyone has to answer these questions in one way or another.

Why do I exist?

What is my Purpose?

What is wrong with the world?

How does what is wrong with the world get fixed?

Where do I go after I die?

The Christian worldview is the only worldview that coherently answers these questions with how we live our lives. Hinduism does not coherently answer those questions. For example, “Mother Earth took the form of a cow and went to Lord Brahma, the creator God of Hinduism, with her plight. Lord Brahma then summoned Lord Vishnu, who assured Mother Earth that he would take birth as Lord Krishna to end this tyranny.” ( This is not coherent.

We don’t have room here for a debate on the coherency of Hinduism. The bottom line is that Hinduism does not offer a coherent solution for those five questions, and Christianity does. Check it out for yourself.

5 Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit provides “an immediate and direct witness to the heart of a believer.” (Dr. Martin Lloyd Jones)2 I have God himself witnessing to the truth of his account. He will do this for you if you are humble enough to ask him for it genuinely.


1“Krishna Janmashtami 2019: The Story of Lord Krishna’s Birth.” Hindustan Times, August 23, 2019.

2Kendall, R. T. Holy Fire. Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2014.

God Heal Amputees? Real and Challenging Questions? A Response.


             WhyWon’ provides a list of ten questions that they say Christians cannot answer.[1] Here there will be a response to the first of these questions. The question is, “why won’t God heal amputees.”[2] The reason the first question was chosen is twofold. First, all the following questions have the same theme and all of them are built on the same logical fallacies. This means that the first question is a good measure of the ten. Second, this question has what can be termed as reasonable appeal. On the surface, someone might consider the question reasonable based on personal experience. First in reply, there will be an examination of crucial elements of Christianity challenged by the question. Next there will be an examination and explanation of the various background information that goes into this challenge of the Christian faith. After that, the crucial elements of Christianity challenged will be addressed and answered. Finally, the consultation will address the theses that, not only does this question not possess any real difficulty for Christianity, it demonstrates a worldview that is incoherent and cannot consistently answer the questions that are fundamental to this state of existence.

Crucial Elements to Defend the Christian Faith

             The primary claim is that God does not exist. The question is clearly addressed to Christians and therefore, it is reasonable to reword the question to say, the God of the Bible does not exist. This is not to say that the video’s author would or would not endorse any deity, rather it is a recognition that the question is targeted at the Christian God. The next claim made is that needs if that God of the Bible existed, he would necessarily be obligated to heal everyone equally. Finally, the video gives the Christian’s answer as “God must have some kind of special plan for amputees.”[3] Finally, and this will be addressed first in the response section, there are logical fallacies at play in the question itself. This issue is not a direct attack on Christianity; however, logical issues prevent correct conclusions and therefore they are the enemy of every conversation.

A Worldview That Challenges the Christian Faith

            The worldview that asks this question is usually entirely materialistic. Meaning that the idea of anything metaphysical is usually considered to not exist. It presupposes this nonexistence of anything metaphysical in the formulation of the question. Hodges explains that “[t]he extreme of materialistic atheism”[4] got its start in France between 1745 and 1749 with names like Locke, Condillac, Diderot, and D’Alembert. The point is that Hodges is correct, materialistic atheism is an extreme position. For much of history the idea that God, or some kind of god, did not exist would have been unthinkable. Berkhof explains that, “there is strong evidence for the universal presence of the idea of God in the human mind, even among tribes which are uncivilized …”[5] This leads to the impact of modernity. The justification for the extreme of materialistic atheism is that, with modern understanding, humanity is freed from ancient superstitions. However, it presupposes that modern man is better, at what McGrath calls, “abduction,”[6] than his ancient counterpart. Yet, some of these ancient superstitions bound people, such as Aristotle, are still read formatively today.


Effective Apologetics Approach

              Finally, time to get to the question itself. The three main points as listed before are, logical issues with the question itself, God’s obligation to heal everyone the same way, and the essence of God. Just for reference the question asked is, “why won’t God heal amputees.”[7] The video presents a different question as a direct statement “God completely ignores amputees.”[8] The statements that “God won’t heal amputees” and “God completely ignores amputees” are not seminomas. Not must time in the response will be spent on this error but it is worth noting because it highlights the rhetorical method of the question, emotional appeal. This question is a trick of the emotions rather than any logical proof of God’s non-existence.

Logical Issue

            The question is in invalid because both the statement and the question uses analogical language,[9] language that can neither be proven nor disproven. Arguments that can neither be proven or disproven are in the end rhetoric and do not provide basis for judgment. If God does not heal amputees, does that prove his non-existence? No, it does not. If a person travels to Alaska and does not see any gold, does that prove there is no gold in Alaska? No, again, that is analogical language, it is a statement that cannot prove or disprove anything.

God’s Obligation to Heal Everyone

            The insinuation is that if God chooses not to do something, and that means he does not exist. Obviously, this is a poor argument because every person decides not to do things every day, and they do not not exist because of that choice. Here, however, is the power of a rhetorical rather any logical argument. How many people have seen an amputee’s appendage grow back? It is safe to warrant not many. Natural experience helps cover the issues of analogical language. Rather, if God chooses to do anything, that is proof of his existence. Existence is a prerequisite to choice.

Notice there is a presupposition about the nature of this non-existent God in the question. That is, if God exist, he would then necessarily heal paraplegics as proof of his existence. This presupposition begs the question, by what standard are you saying that if God exist, he would then necessarily heal paraplegics as proof of his existence?

The Claim to God’s Existence

Upon examination, however, it is not unreasonable to assume that God would choose not to heal or to heal. The God of the Bible never hangs the proof of his existence on the healing of anyone. This means the questioner becomes the questioned yet again. If God does not hang the proof of his existence on the healing of paraplegics, by what authority does the author of this question make healing necessary contingent for proof of God’s existence? The is no rational answer to the question. The only rational answer is to admit that the questioner has no right to make that presumption.

The purpose of God’s healings

Jesus raised the dead and healed several paraplegics, this healing was for the purpose of being signs as to who he was. It is not reasonable to say God does not exist simply because he chooses. It is entirely consistent with the God of scripture to withhold from some and give to others. Jesus directly states that it is within God nature to choose and withhold when he spoke of the widow of “Zarephath.”[10] The purpose of miracles are not to show that God exists, anyone that would entertain the idea that God does not exists is rightfully called a fool[11] even if not a single healing every took place. Miracles, as started before, are signs of God’s action in a situation.


This question does not pose any real difficulty for Christianity. No question does, because this universe corresponds to the maker, and He is the God of Christianity. God has always revealed himself as the one who works all things, “according to the purpose of his will.”[12] If God chooses not to do something, this does not constitute ground for the claim he does not exist.  Everyone one of the 10 questions posted in this video relies on presuppositions within the naturalistic worldview that have no bases in reality, and cannot produces a standard of authority that would warrant them to be take seriously. Secondly, the extreme nature of the naturalistic worldview that must find evidence for God’s nonexistence in every question is revealed. This naturalistic worldview does not correlate with the world around the viewer. One only need open their eyes to see that the world has a designer, and that He is good.


[1]. Questions can be found here

[2]. Elmo Parsley. “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” Aug 1, 2014. Video, 10:44. 1:23.

[3]. Elmo Parsley. “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” Aug 1, 2014. Video, 10:44. 1:23.

[4]. Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, vol. 1 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 254.

[5]. L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938), 22.

[6]. Alister McGrath. 2012. Mere Apologetics: How to Help Seekers and Skeptics Find Faith. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. 82.

[7]. Elmo Parsley. “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” Aug 1, 2014. Video, 10:44. 1:23.

[8] Ibid, 1:50.

[9] Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed May 20, 2020,

[10]. Lk 4:26, All Scripture citations are ESV unless otherwise noted.

[11]. Psalm 14:1.

[12]. Eph 1:5.



Berkhof, L. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938.

Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.

McGrath, Alister. 2012. Mere Apologetics: How to Help Seekers and Skeptics Find Faith. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed May 20, 2020.

The Necessity of Biblical Inspiration and Authority to Resolve the Problem of Evil


           This essay will discuss three things related to the problem of evil. First, justwhat is the problem of evil? Second, what preconditions must exist to not only coherently speak of a problem of evil but also the solution to the problem? Third, it will be shown that the Bible meets all of the criteria for explaining the problem of evil and providing a coherent solution. Throughout the essay the worldviews of New Atheism and Christianity will be juxtaposed to show that only Christianity can coherently speak of the problem of evil and provide a solution. It will become clear that Atheism cannot provide an epistemological framework for speaking of a problem of evil much less a solution; this by extent means that the epistemological framework of Atheism cannot coherently speak of human history or culture as valuable. Only the Christian worldview provides a coherent explanation of the problem of evil, the solution thereto, and provides a coherent epistemological framework for understanding the value of human history and culture.

Christian Worldview and Doctrine in Response to New Atheism

What is the Problem of Evil?

            The problem of evil falls in the category of “the values and ideas that shape human culture and define human existence.”[1] There are several kinds of evil in the category, natural external evil like flood and tsunamis, moral or personal evil like oppression, theft, or rape, and natural internal evil like cancer or genetic defects. For this paper all of this will be defined as anything that impinges on human flourishing. A very commonly used example is children dying of cancer. That is the example that will be used going forward from here. A preliminary comment at this point about the difference between how the worldviews of Atheism and Christianity are equipped to handle this issue would be that the Atheist has no ground for calling random chance a problem, while the Christian can call it a problem because they have a standard by which to make the determination.

What Preconditions Must Exist to Call Evil a Problem?

            Very simply, for evil to be a problem, there must be some objective standard to call it evil. Using the example from before, specifically child cancer, why is this a problem? The Atheist will claim that the God of the Bible claims to be a good God who has all power. If God has all power and lets children die of cancer, then they will say, he cannot be good. Cancer is not a moral evil so the Christian cannot point to the evil doer. Nor, can they deny that God is all powerful and good. However, once the preconditions are examined, an unavoidable issue arises for the Atheist’s claim. The question is, by what standard is the Atheist calling child cancer bad? In a wholly materialistic worldview, where all existence is shaped by survival of the fittest, chance acting on matter over time, there is no wrong in the death of anyone at any age for any reason. If there is a death, that means their dice was rolled and they got unlucky; they were not fit enough, so they were culled from the herd. The point is that Atheism does not possess the necessary precondition of an objective standard to even speak of a problem of evil.

Bible Meets the Criteria for Explaining the Problem of Evil

            The Christian worldview is best described as revelational epistemology. There are two sources of revelation, general and special, they are the necessary preconditions for knowledge. Cornelius Van Til’s explanation of revelational epistemology is summed up here, “every belief system is grounded in an ultimate presupposition, Christianity being grounded in the self-attesting revelation of the triune God.”[2] Here is another way of saying it, God is the necessary precondition for reason. The Christian worldview can say that it is a problem that children die of cancer because it has an objective standard by which to judge the value of the child. That standard is the extrinsic value that the creator gave that child when God made them in his image.[3] God has also revealed the reason death happens, all deaths, and that reason is sin.[4]  Moreover, God has confirmed the value of humans by coming to die for them in the person of Jesus: he is the word of God made flesh. This confirmation in Christ, that is perfectly attested to in the Bible, is the necessary precondition for making any claims about the value of humans and the value of history. Calvin explains it like this, “knowledge of ourselves lies first in considering what we were given at creation.”[5]


When the Atheist says that God is not good because children die of cancer, the Atheist has assumed a value for that child that the materialistic worldview cannot substantiate. On the other hand, when the Christian speaks of the value of the child, and the problem of sin that causes the death of that child, they are well within reason because God has in his perfect revelation provided the standard that can coherently explain the situation. One of the most powerful ways the Bible demonstrates its inspiration and authority is that it presents a worldview that is perfectly coherent and can consistently provide an epistemological framework for understanding the value of human history and culture.


[1]. Alister McGrath. 2012. Mere Apologetics: How to Help Seekers and Skeptics Find Faith. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. 75.

[2]. C. Stephen Evans, Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 120.

[3]. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Ge 1:27.

[4]. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Ge 2:17.

[5]. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion & 2, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol. 1, The Library of Christian Classics (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011), 242.