You may or may not know that I write for another website called TruthFinder. TruthFinder is not intended for Christians specifically, but it is meant for those who have critical questions about the universe and reality. Examples of such critical questions are, “How do we know what is true?” and “Why is there something rather than nothing?”
What you’re about to read is the transcript for the seventh and final episode of TruthFinder. There, I describe my personal journey from atheism to belief in God. You can find a link to the TruthFinder website and podcast feed at the end of the post.
Introduction
When I left home for college in 1996, I considered myself a functional atheist. My life provided ample evidence of that. Even though I was both the grandson and the son of a preacher and had grown up in church my entire life, I never understood what all the fuss was about. In other words, I never understood why I should care about religion, the Bible, and God. In fact, I thought organized religion was for the weak—people who either needed a crutch or something to fuel hope so they wouldn’t have to face reality for what it really was. Quite frankly, the Bible bored me, and I thought Christ was a vague, mystical Someone somewhere out there who had no relevance to my life. Christianity made no sense to me, and, speaking honestly, I was annoyed by Christians, whom I thought needed to find something better to do. Leaving home for college thus meant I was “free” and now unshackled from the restraints and burdens that kept me from doing whatever I wanted.
That was 1996, when I was sixteen. Now it’s 2026, and I’m forty-five. What I can see so clearly now, in retrospect, is the prideful arrogance of my ways. You see, back then, I still lived in the United States, had no job, was not responsible for anyone else, was healthy, lived a relatively stress-free life, and Mommy and Daddy were paying all my bills. With that setup, it was easy for me to be an atheist. It was easy because I hadn’t yet begun to live a real life that demanded accountability, responsibility, and acceptance of the consequences of my actions. I lived in a sheltered bubble, insulated from genuine life trials that have the uncanny ability to expose what is really true and clarify who you really are. So although I began as an atheist, at some point during the next decade, God saved me.
So what led me away from atheism and back toward biblical Christianity three decades ago? Well, first, I stopped running. I stopped trying to suppress the nagging whisper of conscience that told me God certainly is real and that, no matter what I think or do, I can’t escape Him. Second, I came to see that running away is never a valid destination. You always need to be moving toward something substantive and concrete. In my flight from Christianity, I eventually had to consider where I was headed. Consequently, once I began to seriously contemplate atheism and follow the ideology to its logical conclusions, I realized that the solid ground I thought was supporting me was nothing but sinking sand. Third, I came to see that if atheism really were true, then nothing really mattered, including my atheism. Over time, I realized that when real life hit hard, atheism had nothing of substance to offer: no objective truth, no justice, no joy, no contentment, no forgiveness, no hope, no comfort, nothing to believe in, and nothing to offer a flesh-and-bones human being navigating real life.
You may now be wondering, “What does this personal story have to do with TruthFinder?” Well, the first episode of this podcast was released on January 21, 2017. If you had asked me back then why I chose to launch the podcast, I would have told you that I had the idea that if I started with the right questions, others would join me in the search for crucial answers to critical questions about belief, nonbelief, and everything in between. But on a deeper level, I was really working out my own faith. I was, in essence, creating a podcast that I wished I could send back in time to the teenage-to-twenty-something version of myself and say, “Hey, I won’t force religion on you if you reject God. Instead, let’s start with some basic questions and work through them, taking the answers all the way to the end. Because what I think you’ll eventually see is that when you search for honest answers—even without a preacher or the Bible—what you’ll find is that you end up at God. Know why? Because He made the world, you, and your mind. So when you begin using and exploring all those things, what you’ll see, piece by piece, is a divine fingerprint.”
That’s what TruthFinder really is. And now, in the final episode of the podcast, I will first briefly summarize each of the prior six episodes to give you a helicopter view of the ideas discussed. For those who want more, do listen to the full-length episodes, where I go far more in-depth. Ideally, the information contained there will not only help you know what you believe and why but also equip you to engage others who have critical questions about belief.
Next, I will explain that although I sincerely believe that God is certainly real, almost all religions are not. That is, biblical Christianity is the only trustworthy, reliable faith that is in agreement with fact and reality. I once violently fought against God, and now I am consumed by the undeniable fact that there is only one exclusive way to salvation: through Jesus Christ. He alone is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6).
Hence, in the conclusion, I will provide seven reasons for the exclusive truth of biblical Christianity. Biblical Christianity is the best religion because it is the only true religion.
Years ago, I was working out my own faith and still had doubts. What was discussed back then?
One
The first podcast was titled, “How Do We Know What Is Really True?”
There, I discussed that, at its most basic level, we can know truth through what is discerned by using our senses. And by senses, I don’t just mean touch and sight; I mean using the full breadth of our minds and hearts to arrive at rational, reasonable conclusions. Certainly, sense experience is a fundamental way all human beings come to know what is real and true, but sense experience is not the exclusive path. Furthermore, for truth to be both relevant and meaningful to all people, it has to be both objective and exclusive. Otherwise, it would cease to mean anything, and reality would descend into nonsensical meaninglessness.
So can one determine what is true? Of course, by means of weighing and continually reweighing all the facts and determining what is reasonable.
It must be taken into consideration that we live in a world full of fallible human beings. These human beings often cannot be reduced to logic, cannot be shrunk into a formula, and often do things that don’t make empirical sense. With this honest perspective in mind, it is clear that no matter how “airtight” the truth is that a person claims to present, no argument will be totally convincing to everyone. What is certainly true is that humanity will never be in total agreement. What is also certainly true about people is that we are not drones who operate based solely on hard facts in our mind. We are whole persons with minds, emotions, natures, motivations, experiences, and responsibilities. The result is that diverse people are drawn in divergent directions, and thus, a consensus on truth does not exist. Cognizant of this, total knowledge with complete answers is not possible, but workable knowledge with workable answers is.
The first episode ended with the mission statement that if we begin with truth as a question, we can reach some intelligent answers: not answers that are irrefutable and beyond a shadow of a doubt, but sensible answers that weigh the evidence just as one would in a courtroom.
Two
Next, in the second episode, I asked the question, “What Are the Consequences of Ideas?”
In short, I discussed that ideas do not exist in a vacuum. They are animated by reality and are given life by living, breathing people. Hence, if you accept an idea, then you accept the consequences of that idea not only for yourself but also for the people who share reality with you. If one does not accept the consequences of an idea, then one of two possibilities exists: either you don’t regard the idea as true, or you want the idea without the consequences. In the latter instance, you suppress your conscience and live in a state of self-delusion.
This idea proves helpful in evaluating belief systems because if you find yourself averse to the consequences of a held belief, perhaps it’s time to rethink what you believe and why. The consequences are inextricably linked to the idea, and vice versa.
Three
In the third episode, I asked the question, “Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?”
Asking why was important because the resulting answer provides clarity and imparts meaning, purpose, and significance. Why is the cardinal existential question that marks the beginning of thought and drives the impulse toward knowledge and fruitful argument. Why also demands that a person consider knowledge from all domains, not just science. Hence, in asking why, it became evident that while science is a tool that helps complete our understanding, it is neither the only tool nor exclusive in its ability to determine truth. To discern the truth, we cannot limit our tools of investigation.
The framework for answering “Why?” was built upon the law of causality. Why? Because by identifying a cause for the something that is our reality, we move one step closer to answering why there is something rather than nothing.
The law of causality was stated as follows: every effect must have a cause.
What this law means in plain English is that reality is filled with effects (e.g., other people, a rocking chair, cars, etc.), and every effect must have a cause (e.g., parents, a chairmaker, a car manufacturer, etc.). Note that something can be both a cause and an effect in different relationships with different things. For example, a car can be the cause of someone’s broken leg at an intersection, yet at the same time, it is also the effect of a car manufacturer. The key here is that the car is in two different relationships with two different things. Furthermore, it is impossible to have an uncaused effect (like a planet popping out of thin air), nor can you have an effectless cause (like gravity that doesn’t pull a skydiver toward the earth). In fact, if anyone were to identify an uncaused effect in all known existence, then reality as we know it would be redefined. Most attacks on the law of causality are directed at an erroneous definition of the law—that everything has a cause—which is not what the law states. Having an uncaused cause is perfectly compatible with the law of causality.
In contrast, if the universe is causeless, this not only violates the law of causality but is also nonsensical. Consequently, the reality that the universe is an effect validates the absolute necessity of a cause.
In TruthFinder episode three, I considered different proposed causes for the universe, such as the idea that the universe is an illusion, that the universe was always here, and that the universe was made by something that is self-existent.
It was discussed that things that exist contingently do so as a result of an external cause. Concrete things are all contingent. Things that exist necessarily exist by the necessity of their own nature. These things cannot not exist. Therefore, an explanation of a thing’s existence can be found either in necessity or contingency. The resulting conclusion is that in order to affect our reality and start a chain of causation, there had to be, by necessity, something that exists necessarily. This being would be an uncaused cause, the unmoved mover—an eternal, self-existent being that caused the universe’s existence. This self-existent being does not have a cause because that would be absurd and would not address the need for a spark to light the fuse of reality. This being has inherent, eternal existence. The logical extension of this argument is that the first cause, by necessity, should also be timeless, spaceless, and immaterial in order to effect what is temporal, spatial, and material. Hence, as was extrapolated in episode three, an uncaused cause was necessary at the beginning of existence.
Even when some presume the universe came into being from nothing, they have validated the law of causality by stating that the cause of the universe is nothing. The conclusion may be nonsensical, but the logic isn’t. The only reality in which there would be no need for a law of causality is a world where causes and effects are not needed. In this imaginary world, everything would exist by its own nature. Thus, there is no escaping causality. If ever there was a time when nothing existed, the most we would expect now is nothing. Being comes only from being. Nothing causes nothing.
Hence, at the end of episode three, we made an inference to the best explanation, that explanation being that a self-existent something made our reality. That is the reason there is something rather than nothing.
Four
In the fourth episode, I asked the question, “Why Is There Life Rather Than Things?”
Well, what permits life rather than a universe of just things is something called fine-tuning. Fine-tuning refers to the constants and laws of nature. Decades ago, scientists could identify only a few solar-system characteristics that required fine-tuning for human life to be possible. Over time, with the increase in scientific knowledge, scientists discovered more than 150 finely tuned characteristics. Because of fine-tuning, we live on a planet that is favorable to life because the conditions established by these parameters are life-permitting.
Moreover, the constants and laws of nature not only have to interact but also must be meticulously exact. That is, so many of these conditions demand such precision that our world would be incapable of permitting life if any one of a myriad of physical constants differed in value by even a small amount. Correctly fine-tuning just one of these forces, for example, is analogous to standing on Pluto with a blindfold, firing a gun at earth, and expecting the bullet to hit the eye on the face of a dime sitting atop the Empire State Building. Now try repeating that dozens and dozens of times with other variables. To suggest, then, that the organized complexity of fine-tuning “just is” or happened by chance is refuted by its own absurdity.
Thus, there is life instead of merely things because life is actually dependent on fine-tuning, and, based on what we know about advanced organisms, life would not have arisen in the absence of fine-tuning. In fact, there exists a sense of double fine-tuning in that the universe follows certain fundamental laws, and those laws cooperate with many other variables in one location—earth—to permit life. Our universe in general is life-prohibiting, and a life-sustaining planet cannot exist just anywhere.
Thus, earth is special because of the mere fact that it is cumulatively life-permitting, while the rest of the known universe is not. In many respects, earth is the anomaly that draws attention to itself because only here are conspiring variables aligned to permit life in the midst of an unsympathetic universe. Our anomalous, nonuniform island of fine-tuning raises the “irresistible conviction” of an intelligent architect who designed and fine-tuned our world.
So why is there life instead of things? Because of fine-tuning. But why is the universe fine-tuned? The sheer number of variables fine-tuned to very narrow ranges imparts an overwhelming impression of intention. Furthermore, because the wealth of evidence for fine-tuning leads us to intelligence, the burden of proof rests on the person who seeks either to deny order or to assert that nonintelligence was the cause of fine-tuning. Why? Because this proposition defies uniform experience, which tells us that organized complexity appears to be the effect only of organized complexity, such as a factory or the human mind.
Yet if an intelligent architect explains the conditions that permit life, what explains life itself? That brings us to the fifth episode.
Five
The fifth episode was by far the most controversial. There, I answered the question, “Was Darwin wrong?” This episode was actually the podcast version of a free e-book I published called Why Evolution Is Not True: Because Natural Selection Does Not Exist.
Admittedly, even when I was a professing atheist, evolution never made sense to me. It seemed to defy reason, logic, and common experience that a blind, purposeless force could guide simple, nonliving matter into complex, living, diverse organisms given enough time and the right conditions. Yet when it came to working out my own faith, it still bothered me that so many intelligent and gifted people could subscribe to the theory. Back then, I wondered, “What am I missing? What is it that I fail to understand?” So instead of listening to others talk about evolution, I decided to go straight to the source and study the theory for myself.
Consequently, I read Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. It was then that I quickly discovered that Origin was not a groundbreaking book that provided evidence for a revolutionary new theory but was instead an imaginative work of science fiction that never presented a plausible explanation for evolution by natural selection. All it provided were vague theoretical conjectures. As I dug deeper and began to explore how the theory had advanced over time, it became evident to me that because the foundation upon which evolution by natural selection was fraudulent, everything built atop it was also fraudulent. And the facts that presumably support the theory are rare, isolated, and unimpressive.
Indeed, the prior podcast episode and e-book were not merely a critique of a work published more than one hundred years ago. Rather, by synthesizing Darwin’s original postulation in On the Origin of Species with molecular biology, modern genetics, medicine, and paleontology, I explained seven reasons why evolution is not true; that is, because natural selection does not exist. I argued that, on a cellular level, where the building blocks of life work, natural selection explains virtually nothing and, therefore, is not a credible scientific theory. Thus, because the engine of evolution—natural selection—is nonfunctional, the vehicle doesn’t go anywhere. Consequently, natural selection certainly does not power a process capable of progressively selecting traits so that, over time, apes evolve into humans. Evolution by natural selection is nonscientific speculation because it explains next to nothing while making an endless number of assumptions.
In the fifth episode of the podcast, I did not offer any alternatives to evolution by natural selection; as mentioned, I simply critiqued the theory using its own postulates. What I will add here are some insights I have gained in the years since that podcast was published.
Why is it that so many hold on to the theory of evolution by natural selection? For those who truly understand the gaps in the idea, I am firmly persuaded that it is because they adore an idol that gives them an alternative to God. For many others, it’s because they have never taken the time to analyze the theory itself and observe what I believe are holes in the argument. For example, in the book and podcast, I explained how the historical piece of evidence most often cited as clear proof that evolution happened—the fossil record—is actually a large reservoir of evidence against natural selection. You see, all fossils tell you is that something died. They don’t explain why. The mental trick is that if you develop a theory whose endpoint is defined by survival, guess what? Everything that lives dies. So Darwin conceived of a cause (evolution by natural selection) and expected to see evidence of it everywhere in nature without ever explaining how the cause induces the effect. This logic amounts to an impenetrable hoax because natural selection’s so-called effects can be observed everywhere, yet a precise explanation is nowhere to be found.
Furthermore, even if one assumes that evolution by natural selection is real, it begs the question of why. That is, why does it drive complexity and diversity in nature? Admittedly, as touched on before, why is not a scientific question that we would expect to be answered by a scientific theory. But if we’re asking whether evolution is true, we are attempting to discern whether evolution by natural selection conforms to fact and reality. This conformity is essential, cognizant of the fact that a godless worldview based on evolution must be coherent and cohesive. Hence, if the explanation for how is valid, it must align with why. Why does it produce organized complexity in defiance of uniform experience, which tells us that organized complexity appears to be the effect only of organized complexity?
You see, proponents look back at a world full of variety in animal and plant life and say, “Evolution is the explanation.” But is that what one would expect moving forward from the beginning, or is it what one assumes when looking back after observing the diversity in nature? Because, looking forward, would we not expect simplicity and uniformity from a blind, undirected, and purposeless force whose ultimate goal is survival and the propagation of a genetic legacy? We would expect the pursuit of the highest yield with the least effort. Why, then, bother with male and female when asexual reproduction is an option? Why bother with complex organisms that demand so many resources when single-celled organisms would suffice? Why bother with a multiplicity of divergent species if a genetically fit population has already been selected? Again, the how of natural selection does not align with the why. Hence, the very thing evolution claims to explain—the diversity and complexity of life—is actually an argument against natural selection.
Evolution by natural selection is a foundational principle of a godless worldview. Consequently, as mentioned, it is a convenient scapegoat for avoiding God. In fact, when I apply my biblical understanding of reality to this secular theory, I have deduced that natural selection is not real because the term is a way to refer to the providence of God without mentioning God. Because God is the First Cause of all things, He is the ultimate explanation for why things survive and die. The Bible explained the diversity in nature, as well as what determines life and death, thousands of years before Darwin. And what the Bible says agrees with uniform experience: that the ultimate organized complexity—God—created organized complexity in nature. As it says in Psalm 104:24–30:
O Lord, how many are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all; The earth is full of Your possessions. There is the sea, great and broad, in which are swarms without number, animals both small and great. There the ships move along, and Leviathan, which You have formed to sport in it. They all wait for You to give them their food in due season. You give to them, they gather it up; You open Your hand, they are satisfied with good. You hide Your face, they are dismayed; You take away their spirit, they expire and return to their dust. You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; and You renew the face of the ground.
Before moving on, it must be mentioned that creation scientists do use the term natural selection to refer to a process which is the opposite of Darwinian natural selection. As an example, consider an animal group entering a cold region. Which ones survive? The ones with the long fur, which is cold-protective. They are the only survivors that could pass on their genes so all their pups who have long fur survive. This is natural selection: it selects from what is already available, removing genes. It’s a culling force. It’s not a creative force that adds new genes. Darwinian evolution is thus the opposite of real natural selection, because Darwinian evolution needs more genes not fewer. Darwinian evolution is called, “survival of the fittest” but is doesn’t explain the arrival the of the fittest.
Many years ago, I thought something was wrong with my thinking when I asked, “What am I missing? Why do so many zealously support evolution, yet I don’t? What is it that I fail to understand?” In reality, there was nothing wrong with my thinking. I was merely living in a world in which so many others were both suppressing the truth and substituting it with a lie.
Six
In the sixth episode, I asked the question, “What’s Right About Right and Wrong?”
One of the basic foundations of human behavior is the ability to discern between right and wrong, between good and evil. Without this fundamental distinction, society would degenerate into chaos.
Accordingly, I began with the premise that science would not be the final arbiter of moral truth because impersonal, indifferent forces cannot inform interpersonal morality. And so, we looked at logic, philosophy, and a healthy dose of common sense.
Consequently, in that episode, I ended up answering a few questions to discern what’s right about right and wrong. I provided answers to the following: First, what is morality? Second, what must be true for morality to be meaningful? Third, what is the origin of morality: is it transcendent or the product of human culture? And fourth, do right and wrong tell us anything about either the existence or nonexistence of God?
In short, here are the conclusions that were worked out: in order for morality to be meaningful, there must be an objective, universal standard. If not, then every side of all moral arguments is right. It is clear, then, that moral absolutes are unavoidable because, without them, “ought” statements or value judgments can never be used. Furthermore, cognizant that moral absolutes are unavoidable, they are valid insofar as they originate supernaturally in a perfectly good moral Lawgiver. This good moral Lawgiver is the only valid source of morality because He is the only One who is absolutely good. For what value would morality have if the lawgiver Himself were corrupted by evil? Right and wrong, therefore, point us in God’s direction.
Even if one were to reject God based on morality, one would soon find that, when such a worldview is taken to its natural conclusions, the system of ethics self-destructs. That is, when it comes to virtue and vice, a theistic view of morality explains both morality’s origin and its validity. The theist, therefore, has only one major problem to wrestle with: how to reconcile evil in a world governed by a good God. The atheist, however, has two significant problems: how to reconcile where objective good comes from and how to account for evil without a perfect, objective standard of goodness.
Finally, it must be said that in a world ruled by a good God, all evil will ultimately and finally be judged. In a world without a final authority, the world is a circus.
Conclusion
The Truth Rises Beyond Atheism
In retrospect, I was never a genuine atheist. That is because atheists don’t really exist. The grand irony is that atheists say they lack belief in God, but God says He doesn’t believe in atheists. Psalm 14:1 says, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”
Why a fool? Not because such a person is intellectually deficient. Why the heart? Because the person’s motives are corrupt. They assert that there is no God because it is a mere wish projection.
So genuine atheists don’t exist because God doesn’t make them. The reality is that He gives all human beings—who are made in His image—a divine spy deep within their souls called a conscience. Subsequently, the atheist calls themselves such not because there is a lack of information or they are unconvinced, but because they suppress the truth they know is legitimate that screams out, “God is real!”
According to the Bible, the actual name for an atheist is truth suppressor. As it says in Romans 1:18–23:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
I will pose a rhetorical question: How could a Roman Jew (the apostle Paul) write a letter to the Church in Rome two thousand years ago that not only spoke directly to my own sin but also pierced my heart and convicted me of the truth that I knew was right but did not want to admit was true?
And as it says in Romans 2:14–16:
For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
Again, as I explained in the introduction, back in the 1990s, when I was a teenager, it was easy to be an atheist because I had the curse of godless ease. But then real life hit: the deaths of loved ones, the death of our daughter, broken relationships, shame, guilt, depression, anxiety, sinning against others, and being sinned against. Life got real. Life got hard. Life meant suffering.
And what did atheism offer to solve those problems? Nothing.
It pawns prideful criticism of a good God as substance but offers no real content. Atheism is an accuser, not a redeemer; it destroys but doesn’t create. This goes back to what was mentioned in episode two: to accept an idea as true, you must also accept its consequences. Atheism means that, in the end, I am sovereign, but reality teaches a far different lesson.
Hence, my atheism died when I realized I was substituting the sovereignty of God with the sovereignty of self.
The Truth Rises Above Beyond Coincidence
I said in the introduction that this podcast is a message that I wish I could send back in time to the skeptical, unceasingly doubting, younger version of myself. To that version of Elijah, I would say, “Hey, what I think you’ll eventually see is that when you search for honest answers—even without a preacher or the Bible—what you’ll find is that you end up at God.”
In what has been summarized from the prior podcasts thus far, I have touched upon several big-picture ideas and how they point to God in general. The question then becomes, when we reason from the ground up, what type of God do we expect to find in particular? From creation, is what is inferred about God in agreement with what He reveals about Himself? Yes. Specifically, the God of the Bible matches the description of the Person we suspect based on all the clues He left behind. It is His fingerprints that are conspicuous everywhere.
Several examples of this congruence between creation and Creator have been provided over the years, but I’ll provide one concrete example here. Recall that in episode three, the topic was causality. There, I came to the conclusion that there had to be a specific cause that was the beginning of all effects; there had to be an original uncaused cause. Amazingly, the God of the Bible reveals Himself to be self-existent and eternal, matching whom we would expect to find from the bottom-up argument that moves from effect to cause.
First, the opening verse of the Bible reads, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” This implies a fundamental ontological distinction between the Creator and what was created. Hence, there is a two-ism model of reality in which there is the universe that we know (two) and the self-existent Being who made it (One). One is separate and distinct from two. The cause is separate and distinct from its effect.
Second, the God of the Bible is known by a particular name in Hebrew: Yahweh, or YHWH. Names in our world are usually easily explicable; typically, parents give their child a name, often for specific reasons. There is, however, only one explanation for the name of God in the Hebrew Bible, and it comes from the book of Exodus. When Moses is speaking to God through the burning bush, he asks God what His name is. God responds by saying, “I AM WHO I AM.” The Hebrew root of “I AM” is, in essence, the name God uses to identify Himself. In Hebrew, “I am” is derived from the verb “to be”; meaning that when God reveals Himself by name, He tells Moses, “I am the One who always is” or “I am the One who eternally is.”
This is quite captivating because, in God’s initial revelation to the person who would lead the first corporate group of followers—the Hebrews—God answers by giving a name that denotes eternal being and self-existence. God did not answer by saying, “My name is Bob,” or “I am the one who is always becoming,” or “He who was and now is something different.” God used a form of the verb “to be” in the present tense to name Himself.
On top of that, verses within the Old Testament refer to God as both eternal and self-existent. It is not accidental that an unsophisticated, unscientific, and simple tribe in the Middle East thousands of years ago could worship a God who provides an answer to a cosmological and existential question that we are still asking thousands of years later—equipped now with presumed enlightenment, advanced technology, and a vastly deeper ocean of knowledge. That fact is well beyond coincidence or conspiracy.
The argument from causality is one that provides evidence for theism. I am now fully persuaded that theism is true. But which version? Only biblical Christianity. It is the greatest religion in the world because it is the only true religion.
I will now provide seven reasons for that claim. Of course, in what follows, I will provide broad, general reasons that don’t get into the deep weeds or address many of the finer details. That is why I would invite the reader to follow my longstanding podcast, What Christians Should Know. Every month, we discuss something that equips you with clarity and meaningful answers about God, the Bible, and your everyday life.
For Biblical Christianity
The first reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that it is unique; it is based on grace, not works.
There is a concept in the Bible called grace, which simply means unmerited favor. That means that when grace is active, you receive something that you don’t deserve. So when it comes to getting right with God, being saved, and going to heaven, there is a message unique to biblical Christianity: you are saved by God’s work, not your own. In other words, you are saved based upon what God has done, not what you do. After all, if God isn’t in charge of your salvation, then who is?
You see, 99.9 percent of all religious truth claims are not based upon grace. They are based on your performance or what you merit. Merit-based religious systems are false because, in essence, the self is deified. I must then ask: If you could save yourself and are certain about your salvation plan based on performance, then why don’t you? But before you take up that challenge, consider this: How would you prove your redemption plan? How would you prove that you can conquer the great equalizer, death?
In contrast, biblical Christianity is based upon a perfect God, not broken creatures. It is based upon grace alone, meaning that God—through Christ—has done for you what you could never achieve for yourself.
As it says in Ephesians 2:8–9:
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
And Titus 3:5 says, “[God] saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy.”
In John 3, Nicodemus—an intelligent man, well respected and well versed in the Jewish Scriptures—questioned Jesus. Christ then replied, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3).
Tell me, did you have any say in when, how, and to whom you were born naturally? Of course you didn’t. Hence, Jesus tells us that we also are not ultimately the causal agents in whether, when, and how we are born spiritually because those who go to heaven are all born again. You don’t need to be reformed; you need to be recreated. You can’t accept God into your heart because your heart is sick and you need a new heart. This is why God must do the work of salvation. Biblical Christianity is the only religion in history whose message is, “It is finished.”
So the first reason why biblical Christianity is the best is because it is the only true religion and because its truth claims are unique. It is based on God’s work, specifically in the life, death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is why the only thing a person can do is trust in Jesus. Biblical faith, then, isn’t blind; it is evidence-based.
This leads to my second reason.
The second reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that no other religion has anyone comparable to Jesus.
There is no other faith that has a figure who compares to the God-Man: One who is fully God and fully Man in one Person. No other religion has a figure who incarnated, took on a human nature, and entered into our timeline at a specific point in history.
As it says in John 1:1–3, 14, where the Word refers to Christ:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being… And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
There is no other religion in which the Savior of the world was born of a virgin in a manger in the Middle East two thousand years ago and then, over the next three decades, grew up and matured just like you and me. And during those three decades, He lived a perfect, sinless life. There is no other religion in which God sent His only begotten Son. In no other religion does God Himself—in the form of a real, mortal human being—come into the world to die for His enemies, to bear the punishment that He Himself must inflict on them in order to be just.
Of course, that punishment was death by Crucifixion. But that wasn’t the end of the story because, three days later, Jesus rose from the dead. That news is both exceptional and hope-infusing. Now anyone, anywhere in the world, who trusts in Jesus, the God-Man, will be saved from his sins and from the wrath of God. There is no other religion in which God died so that you may live.
There is no other religion in which its central figure is talked about and referred to so much by other religions. These other religions—like Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism—either regard Christ as a prophet or as an enlightened, great Teacher. It’s not a coincidence that these other faiths point to Christ while Jesus points only to Himself. As Jesus says in John 14:6, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”
Even those faiths that label themselves Christian yet reject Christ’s deity also refer to Jesus as a respected prophet or teacher. Furthermore, the whole of the Protestant Bible is sufficient, meaning that, when it comes to dogma, it contains everything a Christian needs for life and godliness. So while other religions point to Christ and Christ points to Himself, what Jesus never instructed His followers to do is look away from Him or to another book from an outside faith. Why? Because there’s no one like Jesus.
Jesus is unique because He bridged the gap between the supernatural realm and the natural one and then proved to us that He is God by doing things that only God can do. For example, He demonstrated power over life and death by resurrecting Lazarus. He demonstrated power over the forces of nature by calming the storm. He demonstrated power over matter by turning water into wine. He demonstrated power over the human soul by forgiving others of their sins and drawing them to Himself.
Jesus is unique because there’s nothing mythological or make-believe about Him. He is a real Person who engaged with humanity in real historical events.
This brings me to my next reason.
The third reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that it is based on history, not philosophy.
Other religions present philosophies. They present ideas that could theoretically be correct anytime, anywhere. But biblical Christianity is grounded in history. It’s not a collection of ethereal ideas; rather, it has core doctrines that are forever linked to historical people and concrete events, such as Abraham and the Resurrection. No history, no religious truth.
Biblical Christianity, therefore, exposes itself to real people who can experience these events and provide eyewitness testimony. When the eyewitnesses recorded these phenomena, the result was thousands of manuscripts—from many places and from the earliest centuries—that far exceed those of any other historical work of similar antiquity.
Fairy tales begin like this: “A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.” That’s not how the historical record of the Bible reads.
For example, consider Luke 3:1–3:
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness. And he came into all the district around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
Did you catch that? Luke uses the names of real people in real places at defined times. Why? Because he is concerned to provide an accurate account after having investigated everything carefully. If you were reading this in the first century and recognized the names and places, you could travel to those locations and talk to the same people. And here, Luke mentions individuals who are also referenced outside the Bible. Recorded history enables documentation, examination, scrutiny, and investigation.
I will mention Islam since it is the second-most populous religion in the world behind Christianity. Muslims claim that our New Testament has been corrupted and that the current New Testament depiction of Christ and His teachings departs from what the original Gospels said. Muslims, then, are making a historical critique. However, the question the Muslim must answer is this: Where are the originals? If the New Testament has been corrupted, then where are the earlier, uncorrupted documents?
This is where the critique self-destructs because the Muslim cannot point to any earlier manuscripts that present a different picture. Why? Because they don’t exist. Historical assertions without concrete evidence are baseless claims.
Also, what the Muslim fails to see is that, when it comes to documenting history, earlier sources are generally more reliable. Which means what? That the current New Testament depiction of Christ and His teachings are our most accurate chronicles because they are the earliest records. With a proper historical record, all you have to do is go back and look.
The final point I will mention about the historicity of biblical Christianity echoes back to what I mentioned way back in the first podcast. There, I said that for truth to be both relevant and meaningful to all people, it must be both objective and exclusive. Otherwise, truth would cease to mean anything, and reality would descend into nonsensical meaninglessness.
This is relevant to the current discussion because linking religious truth claims to history demands that a person’s beliefs be anchored in what is objective, external, and unchanging. I say unchanging because you can’t legitimately alter the past. Consequently, no matter what I want to believe, I can’t change the fact that roughly two thousand years ago, a man named Jesus walked the earth and had a public ministry. No matter what I feel, I can’t change the fact that in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, those men occupied those offices. Pontius Pilate then played a crucial role in the Crucifixion.
You see, linking dogma to history prevents cheating; it deters a person from fabricating truth in their image. You can bend ideas; you can’t change history.
I say all that to say that over the years, I have interacted with many religious skeptics who critique the historical truth claims of the Bible and say, “I don’t believe that” or “I reject that.” Well, what are they rejecting? Something external, objective, and exclusive. Because, in my experience, when the tables are turned and they are asked what they believe and why, many don’t lean on anything objective and exclusive. For them, the Bible isn’t good enough, but it’s enough to be without the equivalent of a Bible.
Some are comfortable with truth that is subjective and inclusive. When expressed, such a worldview sounds something like this: “Well, this is just what I believe.” The problem with such an ideology is that everything is true and nothing is true at the same time.
I have found it helpful to ask such persons, “How did you come to that conclusion?” and “What do you base that belief on?”
I mentioned before that other religions point to Christ, and Christ points to Himself. What I failed to mention is that biblical Christianity also has two things to say when it comes to other religions.
This leads to the next reason.
The fourth reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that it explains other religions.
When it comes to other religions, biblical Christianity explains two things: first, why they exist; and second, that they are false. Thus, other religions do not threaten biblical Christianity because—as the Bible explains—they are inferior forgeries. The Bible anticipates a plethora of false religions and equips Christians both to defend their own faith and to navigate a world filled with idolatrous ideologies.
So what explains all other religions? The simplest picture of this can be seen in Genesis 3. There, in the beginning, Adam and Eve were in Paradise. They were told not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. After our first parents disobeyed God, they knew they were naked and attempted to cover their loins with fig leaves. God then walked in Eden and called to Adam. He asked, “Where are you?” (Genesis 3:9). Then Adam says, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself” (Genesis 3:10).
You see, all human beings experience a sense of fear, guilt, and shame when they stand before God. Why? Because our sinfulness causes us to dread a God who is holy and sinless. His perfection exposes our imperfection. People—like Adam—know they have offended the Lord, and their consciences are unsettled. They know they must somehow make things right. So what do they do? They try to cover themselves with something wholly inadequate, like fig leaves. Fig leaves were Adam’s plan, not God’s. Essentially, fig-leaf religion explains every other religious system.
This concept is parsed out more explicitly in the New Testament in Romans 1:20–23, 32 and 2:15. What those verses explain is that God’s Law is written on everyone’s heart. Thus, because all humans know the basics of behavior that are right and wrong, they also know they have not lived up to what is right and that they deserve punishment for what is wrong. The ultimate punishment is death. And because such people are out of favor with God, they create different religious systems—with their rituals, offerings, and sacrifices—in an attempt to get right with God.
Christianity reveals that there is only one way for man to get right with God: His name is Jesus Christ. But this is strange and alien to a world of false religions that neither honor God nor give thanks to Him. They want to be okay, but they do not want God. And so, they exchange the truth of God for a lie and manufacture their own idols.
As C. S. Lewis once said, Christianity is like the sun in the sky. You not only see the brightest light in the sky, but the sun also illuminates and exposes everything else. The true light of Jesus exposes everything else under the sun.
You may then be asking yourself, “What about those who aren’t religious and are either atheist or agnostic?”
This leads to the next point.
The fifth reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that it explains atheism.
I will be brief here since I previously spoke about how the Bible explains atheism.
Again, God never made a genuine atheist because, as Romans 1–2 tells us, all humans have a divine spy planted within their souls: a conscience. That conscience not only gives them a basic sense of morality; it also tells them that God is real.
And thus, the so-called atheist knows that God is real. But what do they do? They suppress the truth in an attempt to muffle the soul-whispers that testify to God’s existence. The problem, then, isn’t a lack of information; it’s a hard heart that doesn’t like God and doesn’t want God. So, as an escape, they create a worldview in which they say God isn’t real. They say in their heart that God doesn’t exist. Meaning, they project the desire or wish that God isn’t there, so they won’t have to deal with Him.
The sixth reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that it explains people.
The Bible is a relatable, refreshing book because it describes people acting like real people. It neither sanitizes history nor depicts the faithful as flawless. Rather, it gives an honest depiction of people, “warts and all.” It talks about grown adults doing really dumb, foolish things. It speaks of people acting like they don’t know better when they already know what’s right. It talks about parental favoritism, mothers smothering their children, siblings bickering, women fighting over a man, men who pursue too many women, and men who fail to lead and take responsibility. It talks about anxiety, doubt, broken relationships, envy, jealousy, betrayal, prosperity, poverty, suffering, life, death, and everything in between. And the Bible doesn’t speak about imaginary people but real historical figures who lived in specific times and places.
Biblical Christianity explains that people oftentimes can’t be explained. Why? Because sin doesn’t make any sense. The Bible explains that people will often miss the mark and do what they want to do, even when it will destroy them. This, in fact, is what makes sin so senseless: it nudges you to sacrifice forever for right now. You prioritize the present over the future. You think of yourself before others.
Yet still, the Bible comforts us with the glorious hope that God never came to choose only perfect people but instead to redeem broken ones. As Christ says Himself in Luke 5:32, “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.” The Lord uses imperfect creatures—warts and all—to do His work and advance His kingdom. The point in all of that, you see, is that it is not about you or me; it is about God always accomplishing what He wills, even when people try to mess it up. The failures of people always point to the perfection and ultimate triumph of the Son. Ultimately, people can be explained in the context of the Creator who made them in the first place.
Accordingly, the Bible explains where we came from: God. We were created by God with purpose and intent (Genesis 1:26). The Bible explains who we are: not merely flesh-and-bone material creatures but living souls who are image bearers of God (Genesis 2:7). We have a spiritual essence with a capacity for worship.
Consequently, God made us for His glory (Isaiah 43:7), and thus our lives find ultimate satisfaction, happiness, and joy when we are God-focused. By design, we were made to be God’s representatives here on earth, where we have the responsibility to cultivate, keep, and exercise dominion over the world (Genesis 1:27–28; 2:15).
The Bible also explains where we’re going. If a person rejects Jesus, then that person is headed to hell. His best life is therefore right now. If a person trusts Jesus, then that person is going to be with God forever. He is going to Paradise. That means the best is never right now; the best is yet to come.
This leads to my final reason.
The seventh and final reason that biblical Christianity is the best and only true religion is that it explains our concrete, external hope.
In other religions, my hope comes from making myself acceptable to God. So, I’m okay as long as I continue meeting the performance requirements. This system can actually work for a time, as long as I keep making sacrifices. But this man-made system is ultimately hopeless because, no matter what I do, I cannot make myself acceptable to the true God who is holy.
This echoes back to the first reason for the superiority of biblical Christianity: God, through Christ, has done what we can’t do; that is, bear our just condemnation in Jesus’s death and then bring us to everlasting joy in His presence. In biblical Christianity, because my standing with God is based on God, I now have a concrete, eternal hope.
People long for genuine, concrete hope. Their hearts yearn for something more, something otherworldly, because, as Ecclesiastes 3:11 says, God has “set eternity in [our] hearts.” We have this innate sense that we were made for another realm and that this world is not wholly satisfying.
Jesus speaks to this when He says, “Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). He also invites all who feel the weight of a life without Him when He says, “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Matthew 11:28–30).
And for those who are now in Christ, there is abounding hope because the source of our hope is divine, eternal, unchanging, and forever committed to us through Christ. Romans 15:13 says, “Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that you will abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.” And 1 Peter 1:3 says, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.”
For the Christian, hope is defined by its source: God Himself. Therefore, our hope is spiritual, perfect, everlasting, and unchanging.
Closing Thoughts
Now we are both at the end of this episode and the TruthFinder series. I hope the content in this and past episodes has helped you in some way.
In the introduction, I alluded to an insight I discovered in my journey from atheism to belief. That is, based on my personal experience, I now see that doubt and skepticism weren’t conclusions or final destinations; they were temporary stops en route to someplace else. Skepticism was useful because it led to further investigation toward something substantive and concrete. In the real world, you have to find something real to hold on to. And when it comes to the ultimate truth of God, I would encourage anyone who has their doubts to keep exploring, examining, and investigating. For the Christian who is unsure about some things, remain hopeful that there is a huge difference between weak faith and no faith. Keep reading the Bible and keep praying that God would guide you to a confident, assured faith.
Indeed, two people can look at the same God: One may see glory and majesty, while the other may be unimpressed. Yet what explains the difference isn’t information. What explains the difference is the condition of the heart. Consequently, after many years, I have come to a simple conclusion: those who don’t believe judge God; those who do believe acknowledge that they will be judged by God.
By God’s grace, I have found the truth. That truth is Christ. He is the Son of God, the God-Man, the Redeemer, the exclusive way, and the chief organizing principle of all reality. As Colossians 1:16–17 says, everything that has been made was made by Christ, through Christ, and for Christ. He is the One who holds all things together. So, of course, in studying many different things, I was led to Him.
You see, God isn’t hiding from anyone. He’s made a general revelation of Himself in the so-called big Bible of creation and a special revelation in the small Bible that you hold in your hand. But just like anything else in life, worthwhile things don’t fall out of the sky and land in your lap. You have to act and go out and grab them with both hands.
Jesus Christ isn’t a thought or a philosophy. He’s a Person. And how do you get to know Jesus? By reading about Him in the Bible, God’s special revelation to humanity. That book isn’t just a material object with words on paper; it is living and active, transforming your mind, piercing your heart, and awakening your spirit.
Furthermore, because Christ is a Person, how do you cultivate a relationship with Him? By getting close. By conversing with Him. By spending time with Him. By living life together. You see, our English word skepticism comes from a Greek root that means to look at or consider. That original Greek implies there is distance between you and the object. Skepticism is defeated, therefore, not in remaining comfortable afar; it is by taking action and moving close.
Draw near to God, and He will draw near to you. (James 4:8)
The Lord is near to all who call upon Him, to all who call upon Him in truth. (Psalm 145:18)
The Bible used to bore me. Now I am consumed by it. I used to think Christ was a vague, mystical someone. Now I know that He is my Redeemer, who has promised to be with me until the end. Christ now makes sense of everything, and it is impossible to understand anything without Him.
Jesus says in John 8:31–32, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
TruthFinder (Website)
TruthFinder (Podcast)
What Christians Should Know (Podcast)
Dr. C. H. E. Sadaphal