Don’t Judge Me By The Color Of My Eyes

Photo: John w/ his two sons.

A while ago, my older brother John wrote a really powerful Facebook post about the state of racism in the world. He considered the matter and concluded that racism is nothing more than a categorical error. The idea that because of a sole variable (i.e. the color of one’s skin), those that share that variable are different than those who do not have that variable (i.e. those of a dissimilar skin color).

Even if both groups shared almost every other variable (i.e. culture, DNA, religion, etc), they were and are still identified by a variable that bears little to no significance when compared to more appropriate labels of identification like one’s birthplace or cultural upbringing. With his permission and in light of the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Day, I wanted to share his thoughts with you (1). So, let’s see what he said:

“I’ve heard so much talk lately about “black” people and “white” people. Unfortunately, every single post has missed the point entirely. We live in a world where we’ve been taught to categorize by color. A process that if not taught to you since you were born, would make absolutely no sense. In fact, you would find it ridiculous because if you step back and think about it, color does not represent anything.

You would never consider categorizing people by eye color. It would be so stupid to even try. Close your eyes for a second and try to imagine a world where people were categorized by eye color. The whole idea is just stupid, right? Well, open your eyes. This is your reality.

So why don’t you even give it a second thought when someone says “white” or “black” people? The very moment that you define someone by their skin is discriminatory. That is the birth of racism. Allow me to explain.

The deep rooted problem lies in our fundamental thinking process that we all are guilty of being indoctrinated into believing. Somewhere in our messed up ideology we discarded categorizing other people by real connections like culture and heritage. Instead, we have substituted appropriate labels with something more superficial and shallow: the color of our skin.

The way we use the word color itself is ridiculous. Everyone’s a different shade of brown. Have you ever actually seen a person with white or black skin? Me neither.

Also, the word “race” is entirely incorrect in the context that we use it in when talking about people. If there is no biological difference between people of different shades, then there is only one race. I’ll say it again. If there is no biological difference between people of different shades, then there is only one race: the human race.

If you really break it down, there is only one thing that people of the same skin shades have in common: the way society views and treats them. This is the only thing that creates the bond between people who look similar and separates those who look different. But the way society treats you has entirely nothing to do with you.

Now we’re back to agreeing that there is really no difference, except the one that we created in our minds. So I leave you with this: as long as you yourself define people by categories of skin “color,” you are reinforcing racism. If you want to change society, then you must first change the way you think.”

If you change the way you think, then you will naturally change the way you speak. Don’t judge others by the color of their eyes or skin, but instead judge them by the inner condition of their identity. Now before you go, here is some more food for thought from two very important men in history speaking on the same subject:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” – Christ Jesus (NRSV John 7:24)

With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless.


  1. John also gave me permission to make minor edits that help fit the format of a blog-post, as well as fix any grammatical errors present in his original Facebook post.
  2. For more from John Cribari, here’s his personal training business:
  3. Disclaimer

The Cosmo-Quattro Argument

Rather than writing on something currently on my mind, I just wanted to upload a response I gave a couple years ago on a Facebook group to someone who posted a meme about theism. The post revolved around how theists cannot provide adequate answers to support their belief in God. I don’t remember which group on Facebook it was, but I think off the top of my head it was either “Atheist Beings,” “Atheism Uncensored,” or “Atheism United.” Either way, because I’m notorious for posting extremely long comments when in a dialogue online, I have had to write my comments on Google Docs before copying and pasting them into discussions.

I wrote this particular response on Google Docs as well and have just kept it over the years in my Google Drive. Also, I name all of my own arguments and this one I called the Cosmo-Quattro Argument because it sounded really cool at the time. So with minor adjustments for clarity and conciseness, here is my response:

“Okay I’m back. Sorry for the delay, I had a long day at work and then after work I was busy for quite some time. Finally have a little time to sit down and write back to you all. In a previous comment, I said that I would lay out the Change Argument and William Lane Craig’s Kalam-Cosmological Argument for those who are following this particular thread. First let me start with Dr. Craig’s argument and then proceed with the Change Argument:

The Kalam-Cosmological Argument (Source: On Guard by William Lane Craig)

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

2) The universe began to exist.

3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Now this argument is airtight in its premises. The logic likewise flows as follows and is simple in its presentation. The conclusion is that this universe has a cause. Simple enough. Now let’s take this one step further with the Change Argument:

The Change Argument (Source:

1) The material world we know is a world of change.

2) When something comes to be in a certain state, such as mature size, that state cannot bring itself into being.

3) Other things must be involved.

4) Nothing can give itself what it does not have, and the changing thing cannot have now, already, what it will come to have then.

5) Nothing changes itself.

6) No matter how many things there are in the series, each one needs something outside itself to actualize its potentiality for change.

7) The universe is the sum total of all these moving things, however many there are.

8) The whole universe is in the process of change.

9) But change in any being requires an outside force to actualize it.

10) Therefore, there is some force outside (in addition to) the universe, some real being transcendent to the universe. This is one of the things meant by “God.”

11) Briefly, if there is nothing outside the material universe, then there is nothing that can cause the universe to change.

12) But it does change.

13) Therefore there must be something in addition to the material universe.

14) But the universe is the sum total of all matter, space and time. These three things depend on each other.

15) Therefore this being outside the universe is outside matter, space and time. It is not a changing thing; it is the unchanging Source of change.

With Craig’s argument and Plantinga’s argument in mind, we can conclude a series of things:

  1. The universe has a cause.
  2. This cause logically must be immaterial, spaceless, and timeless.
  3. It cannot change because it is the unchanging source of change.
  4. Therefore, the cause of the universe is changeless, immaterial, space-less, and timeless.

Adding these figures together we move onto the next argument that reasonably follows: The Teleological Argument. It is the argument that the late and great Christopher Hitchens considered the greatest argument for the existence of God. Even today, many atheists consider it to be the most formidable argument. The argument goes as follows:

The Teleological Argument (Source: On Guard by William Lane Craig)

1) The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design.

2) It is not due to physical necessity or chance.

3) Therefore, it is due to design.

Gathering our conclusions together, let’s now attribute factors to this mysterious first-cause. In order for something to be the first-cause it must fit this specific criteria that we have just observed together:

  1. The universe cannot cause itself into existence nor be the first cause (See: The Kalam-Cosmological Argument).
  2. The first-cause of the universe must be immaterial, space-less, and timeless (See: The Change Argument).
  3. The first-cause of the universe must be changeless (See: The Change Argument).
  4. The first-cause of the universe must be the designer of the universe (See: The Teleological Argument).
  5. Thus, the most reasonable and logical explanation based off of the evidence is that this first-cause must be and is God.

Lastly, in the Greater Than Argument I argue that God must be multi-personal due to Him being beyond our limits as the first-cause of the universe. My argument goes like this:

The Greater Than Argument

1) Every human is a single person.

2) God is greater than a human.

3) Since God is greater than a human, He therefore must be multi-personal.

4) The Christian Trinity is the best explanation of His multi-personal nature.

5) Therefore, God is a tri-unity of persons, yet remains one nature.

From this lengthy and exhaustive breakdown, we can also conclude that this first-cause (i.e. God) is indeed personal and is a transcendent creative mind. Just as a painter paints a painting with a specific purpose in mind, God must have personally caused and created the universe with a specific purpose in His mind. What purpose did God have in making the universe?

In the Judeo-Christian worldview, God caused and created the universe for His own glory. In other words, everything was caused and created for the glory of God. In Revelation 4:11, it says “Worthy are You, our Lord and our God, to receive glory and honor and power; for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

Branching off of this, why should we glorify God? Well succinctly put, He made us and that should be enough reason to glorify Him. We are in eternal gratitude that God would want and will for us to exist because He desired for us to glorify Him by tending to the Earth in response to His love towards us (1). It’s a relationship that God desires from us because it’s in that relationship that those who choose to love Him back are glorifying Him to the fullest extent. “We love because He first loved us” (2). and that’s why in the Judeo-Christian worldview, we desire to love everyone equally because Christ loved us first.

But before this can take place, everyone must first repent of their sin. The very thing that separated this relationship God and mankind once had together is blemished by our own sin. Yet, God (the Father) so loved the world (humanity) that He gave His only begotten Son (the Christ) that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

To conclude, you must repent and believe in God, so that you can now determine to glorify God in all that you do. The ultimate aim in Judeo-Christianity is to know God, to be known by God, and to make God known. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless.”


  1. Genesis 1:26-31
  2. 1 John 4:19
  3. Disclaimer

How Should Christians Talk?

Photo Cred: (1)

Within Christian circles, there has been a long and great debate over how we believers should talk. Whether that be with others in social settings, before a congregation at a church, or even by ourselves. There are many sides to this discussion and I think for the sake of brevity, I will outline the more popular sides before giving my two cents on the situation.

Some say that according to such passages of Scripture as Ephesians 4:29-32 and Colossians 3:8, we should not swear or say anything remotely close to “those” words. This is because Paul the Apostle, the author of both Ephesians and of Colossians, follows up both passages with a contrast between the old sinful self and the new sanctified self (2). His frequent mention of this spiritual duality puts a special emphasis of importance on outward distinction from how the rest of the world operates. This should presumably include the way we speak.

On the flip side, there are other believers who insist that because the Bible itself and some of its most famous historical figures used swear words (3), like Paul, that we should have the freedom to use them too. Many on this side refer to such passages as 1 Samuel 20:30 and Luke 13:31-32 where people like Jesus seem to use curses towards others as a way of describing them or of telling the truth of a certain situation. They argue that because these heroes of the faith use these sorts of words, that we too should have the freedom to use them as well in the proper context.

Several months ago, I was apart of a great community group at Peace Mennonite Community Church called Thrive and the discussion for one night revolved around “unwholesome” speech. At the time, we were going through the book of Ephesians and this particular night was focused on the latter half of chapter 4. We all gave great and thought-out answers, but today I’ll just share with you my input with the group that night.

There are many passages in the Bible that to me are more profound than other passages because they give insight to who Jesus was during his quieter moments in His 3-year ministry. Moments like that in Mark 10:13-16 where Jesus explains the Kingdom of Heaven to both His disciples and the children that wanted to be there with Him. But the moment that I referenced in this small group was from Matthew 14:13-14.

In this passage of Scripture, Jesus has just received news that one of His dear friends, John the Baptist, has been killed by King Herod. After hearing the awful news, Jesus goes away to a secluded place in Bethsaida (4) and travels there by boat. The disciples and apostles went with Him, in order to rest and eat. Not long after arriving there, the crowds showed up and this is the beginning of a more famous part of His ministry where He feeds the 5,000 with loaves of bread and fish.

Now what interests me most about this passage is how Jesus responds to the death of a friend during a very busy and exhausting portion of His ministry. He removes Himself, along with His disciples and John’s closest followers to seek rest. When thinking about how the followers of John the Baptist must have felt during this horrible tragedy, I then turned my focus to what Jesus must have been thinking and/or saying about His good friend. That friend being the very one who baptized Jesus and was there at the very beginning of His ministry.

To be more precise, how did Jesus talk to others, to Himself, or even to His Father in Heaven about His deceased friend while He was on that boat headed to Bethsaida? Was He angry and because of that, spoke curses concerning the situation or towards King Herod? What was His attitude and response? How did He handle the situation?

Branching out even further, how does Jesus speak about you when talking to the Father? How would He talk about you? We should talk, whether in social settings or by ourselves like Jesus would talk in social settings or just by Himself. We should talk to one another and when talking to ourselves like Jesus talked when He was on Earth.

It would appear that the thread that links the way Jesus spoke about anything was that it had to be necessarily true. Necessary in that it needed to be said in that moment of time for that specific situation about those certain persons, places, or things (i.e. the Pharisees). It also had to be true because Christ Himself claims to be the truth (5), so He cannot do otherwise then speak the truth. In more simpler terms, he said it as it is and/or said what needed to be said.

In fact, this seems to be the pattern with every single word Jesus has ever said that we know of as is written in the Christian Scriptures. He always only said what was necessary and true. Nothing more and nothing less. Sometimes, it would be blessings onto His most faithful followers and other times it would be curses onto those who knew better than the way they lived. Everything that has ever been said by Christ had to be said the way that it was said.

But can the same be said of us when we speak? Do we say what is necessary and true or do we find ourselves saying a bit too much and a bit too little? I think we can all agree that we are the latter. We seem to always say too much or too little, but we never seem to tell the truth enough. We never seem to say what needs to be said. So before you ever ask yourself if you should say this or that word and this or that phrase, ask yourself if it is necessarily true.

Just as the tongue has the power to build up and destroy the subject that stands before it, so too do you have the ability to speak the truth or a lie. To speak life or death and praises or curses. Nevertheless, whatever encounter you find yourself in next, pause and ask yourself this question: is what I am about to say necessary and true? With that said, Godspeed and Jesus bless.


  2. Colossians 3:9-11, Ephesians 4:22-24
  4. Mark 6:14-32, Luke 9:7-11
  5. John 14:6
  6. Disclaimer

The Book That Made Your World: Review and Summary Part 2

Photo Cred: (1)

*Note: this is the final installment of a 2-part series on The Book That Made Your World by Vishal Mangalwadi. If you have not read Part 1, go here.*


Chapters 10 – 11: Language & Literature | Photo Cred: (2)

The Bible also changed the way the West developed both our language and our literature as time went on. For instance, due to the efforts of several key missionaries like William Carey, Joshua Marshman, and William Ward, India finally had a national language, instead of hundreds of languages and their nuances that were dependent on their geographical or demographic state.

When it came to literature, the Bible has influenced countless writers varying from William Shakespeare to even the immigrants on the Mayflower that sailed to find home in the New World. This is largely due to it having a ring of truth that other famous works of literature simply lacked. Compared to the Iliad or the many poems of Rabindranath Tagore in his work Gitanjali, the Bible resonates because it stands the test of time as true. The Book of books forever changed the way we communicate through whatever medium we choose to do so. It defined how we tell stories because it is the collection of stories that together tell one, ultimate story. The story of God and His plan to save us from ourselves.


Chapters 12 – 13: Education & Science | Photo Cred: (3)

In light of this, there was also the profound effect that the Bible had on both the development of the university system and on the scientific method as a whole. As history shows, a good portion of cathedrals and monasteries became universities as Christians at the time believed that we ought to relearn our knowledge of nature. A knowledge that supposedly Adam and Eve had before the Fall as they daily walked with God. Even modern day universities were founded by Christians like Cambridge, Harvard, Oxford, Princeton, and even Yale.

In regards to science, a firm belief in the Bible and God was the very cornerstone of the study in general.  John Lennox, professor of mathematics at Oxford University, once said concerning the debate over science and religion that “far from belief in god hindering science, it was the motor that drove it.” At first, science was referred to as natural philosophy and natural history as it branched out from theology. This is because “the scientific perspective flowered in Europe as an outworking of medieval biblical theology nurtured by the Church. Theologians pursued science for biblical reasons” (P. 223).

Francis Oakley has taken the time to observe and validate this claim between the laws of nature (science) and its origin in a Bible-believing culture in his essay entitled Christian Theology and Newtonian Science: The Rise of the Concept of the Laws of Nature (The American Society of Church History, 1961). Later Mangalwadi asserts that “science was born in the university-an institution invented by the church” (P. 229). Some notable founders of science who were also Christians include Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernicus, Robert Boyle, Albertus Magnus, Francis Bacon, and many more as pointed out by Elaine Howard Ecklund in her book Science vs Religion: What Scientists Really Think (2010).


Chapter 14: Morality | Photo Cred: (4)

Morality is another way in which the Bible sculpted the Western way of living, in that there was a return to a more civilized society every time a movement was led by the Holy Spirit and not by the hearsay of men. One notable time that Mangalwadi points out is John Wesley and his impact on England and the surrounding area as a preacher and social activist. Reminding people that there is a moral law written on the tablet of our hearts. This effect can also be seen when comparing Holland and India in the way the Bible’s influence, or the lack thereof, helped shape these two very different countries.


Chapter 15: Family | Photo Cred: (5)

In this day and age, the idea of family is under serious investigation and scrutiny in the West. This is due to the rise in awareness of the LGBT+ movement that preaches that all sexual expressions of love are love. That no matter the combination of sexual partners, it still counts as equal to the original idea of what a family looks like.

In the Christian worldview, the monogamous family structure is central to what is directly taught in Scripture. Because of this model of the ideal family structure of one man and one woman in a mutually consensual relationship raising the next generation, the West thrived. As the culture carried on this idea generation by generation, they could rightly live in light of the original intent of God’s grand design. The Bible gave Western society a firm foundation to build a better world and that foundation was a proper understanding of the most functional family structure: the monogamous family.


Chapter 16: Compassion | Photo Cred: (6)

Shifting his focus, Mangalwadi then pinpoints another key in the difference between those places that are influenced by the Bible and those that are not with the fact that compassion is an essential outpouring of Christian living. Unlike America for example, India has the karmic belief that the needy do not need to be helped because they have received what they sowed. Justice has had its way and the best thing is to let the needy sort out their karmic threads on their own without the aid of the more fortunate.

Yet Christ taught numerously that we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, to help the poor, to serve the downtrodden, and to not neglect the needs of the weakest links in our own societies. Compassion is a key outpouring of God’s Word penetrating the hearts of humans as they live out what Christ taught. It is for this reason that Christians have made the most homeless shelters, hospitals, and orphanages than any other religious system in history by a long shot.


Chapter 17: Wealth | Photo Cred: (7)

Concerning wealth, Mangalwadi argues that capitalism is a direct result of the Bible’s influence on the West in the economic sense. He believes that because of this influence, it created brilliant inventors like Cyrus McCormick who would go one to revolutionize the way farmers tended to their crops with the invention of horse-driven reapers . Mangalwadi argues that his influences of both growing up in a home that had strong Protestant influences such as John Calvin and his Puritan upbringing made McCormick the man that history knows him as now. Later on in his life, McCormick continued to influence the world by promoting the Bible in the local newspapers and when he changed the name of the Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Chicago to the now McCormick Seminary. True wealth stems from true wisdom and true wisdom is rooted in true worship unto the triune God.

Later on in the chapter, Mangalwadi makes the statement that “ambition is good, but it becomes greed when separated from moral absolutes (P. 321).” The idea of a free market economy and saving wealth for later, instead of either hiding it or throwing it away on quick pleasures was unheard of in these older days. Greed was far more commonplace as the rich would hide their wealth, instead of redistributing it back into the free market. As Ayn Rand would say and Mangalwadi would agree, “happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values.” This specific chapter covers a lot of other ground too like foreign markets and the history of capitalism in the West, but you will have to read the book yourself to find Mangalwadi’s argument on the relation between the Bible and its influence in those areas as well.


Chapters 18 – 20: Liberty, Missions, & the Future | Photo Cred: (8)

Jumping off of the free market section of the book, Mangalwadi ends by highlighting a few other key places that the Bible has influenced: the idea of liberty, Christian missions, and what lies ahead in the future. On the biblical idea of liberty, Mangalwadi makes the case that only the Bible could drive people like the Huguenots (French Calvinists) to construct the Huguenot monument in South Africa to commemorate their newfound freedom from the Wars of Religion where the strong, woman holds firmly a Bible in her left hand. There is a reason Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics didn’t stir the hearts of the downtrodden to keep fighting for freedom. Only the Bible could invoke this sense of longing to be free like Adam and Eve once were in the garden of Eden.

On the subject of missions, Mangalwadi tells the story of how the introduction of the Gospel of John revolutionized an extremely remote tribe called the Hmars who lived in the dense forests that rest on the border between Myanmar (Burma) and India. The effect of missions work such as that done for the Hmars tribe is evidence of the effect that the Gospel can radically change even the most primal tribes of people and turn them into much more civilized people with the tools necessary to keep up with an ever changing world.  

Finally, the book ends with where the West is going now that these biblical principles are being abandoned in favor of other, more tolerant, worldviews. A direction that, if continued, could lead to a social and spiritual decay that we cannot recover from. Mangalwadi ends with an urgency to remind people of how the West was built in the first place. On the very spine of the Christian Scriptures leading and guiding us from darkness and into the light.

In summary, the Bible is the most influential book of all time and Mangalwadi does a pretty good job of showcasing that in this book. There is a lot of good information in this book and it’s worth the read for any who are curious on the Bible’s impact on history. Suffice to say, the Bible is the book that made your world. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!


  9. Disclaimer


To the Bride and Groom

Photo Cred:

Recently, my friend David got married and it got me thinking about marriage in general. If someone was to tell me something I needed to know before I ever got married, in order for a successful marriage, what would I need to hear? What is something every couple needs to know and have in mind before their wedding day? Well, I would want realistic expectations and some sort of idea of what will happen regardless of what that marriage turns out to be in the future. Something that needs to be known before “just married” becomes “married.”

As I have observed other marriages in my life, I have noticed five things that every marriage faces. Five obstacles that can repair or ruin this intimate relationship. These obstacles are communication, finances, intimacy, society, and worldview. Every couple will face one, if not, all five of these types of obstacles during the duration of their marriage. So for those of you who are either a) going to be married or b) just got married, then this blog-post is for you.

1) Communication

The obstacle of communication revolves around the issue of who matters more in this conversation: me, you, or us. The answer is us, not you or me. It’s called a team effort for a reason: teams communicate well because they have to, in order to win. Likewise, spouses communicate well, in order to maintain their marriage.

In marriage, everything you and your spouse do in life from now on will be communicated one way or the other. There are always going to be two types of marriages: those that communicate well and those that communicate poorly. Which marriage do you want?

By taking the effort to communicate well with your spouse on little things, you won’t have to worry when big situations come up. You will have all of that discipline to not only speak openly, but also to listen actively. All good marriages have a great sense of communication. Does yours? Will yours? If not, say something to your spouse or spouse-to-be and work on being better before it’s too late.

2) Intimacy

The obstacle of intimacy is a matter of understanding love and then living that out practically. Love at its core is sacrificial. Christ was sacrificed because of God’s love for us, even while we were in sin. The husband is commanded to follow this example and sacrificially love his wife.

Likewise, Christ respects His Father in Heaven. The wife is commanded to follow this example and respectfully love her husband. The answer to the obstacle of intimacy in marriage is sacrificially loving your lover with consistency. Better to have loved too much than to have never loved someone enough.

3) Finances

The obstacle of finances is a problem rooted in a combination of faithfulness, honesty, and wisdom. If you are faithful with little, then you can be faithful with much. Whether that be saving, spending, or investing, your faithfulness in finances will translate into honest use of your money as one couple. This faithfulness and honesty will in turn become wisdom in all of your financial endeavors.

I’ve seen countless couples who have a horrible marriage because of the tensions of bad financial decisions. This can lead them to either go broke or divorce. Don’t be them. Prepare ahead of time for the financial emergencies and general costs of marriage before they happen. Save, spend, and invest wisely while you have the advantage at the beginning of your marriage, not after you have already dug your financial ruin like everybody else. Be wise by making financially wise decisions in marriage.

4) Society

When two families join together and become in-laws to one another, this can be both bad and good. The obstacle of society is the social pressures of maintaining the expectations of those closest to you. This could be your in-laws, your family, your friends, or even your “public image” on social media.

First and foremost, live out the expectations for marriage as instructed by God before you ever listen to anyone else. Everyone else’s opinions on your marriage can wait as you listen to the LORD’s instruction. God’s expectations should be your standard for how your marriage should look and be perceived by others.

On the other hand, when two families unite through marriage you will inherit newfound responsibilities that you should certainly prepare for now rather than later. These are natural and should be celebrated new changes in your new life together. Nevertheless, marriage is two people married under God and it doesn’t have any wiggle room for control-freak family members, friends, or nosy neighbors to nitpick your every decision. If you follow God first and then listen to others, you’ll be just fine.

5) Worldview

The obstacle of worldview is a problem that deals with how the home will be run. How does your worldview align with your spouse? Do you share the same worldview or do they differ? Are you both Buddhist or Christian? Atheist or Muslim?

You need to be aware of the fact that if you both have differing worldviews, it will be much harder to run the home as a team because of the disagreements that can arise in different ideologies. It is crucial to keep in mind how each other’s worldview will impact the other as you both grow closer together. Your combined worldviews are the foundation for the way your new life together will turn out. If you have no foundation, how can you even begin to build a home? Start with a firm foundation and work from there. Know your spouse and allow yourself to be known by your spouse. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!


Blog Update: Q4 2017

Photo Cred: (1)

Long time no see! Boy, has it been awhile since I’ve posted on here. I’ve been crazy busy with lots of stuff like working on two books, ministry at my church, work, and so much more. With that said, I’m back and have a lot to say. A lot of things have been on my heart and my mind that I’m dying to write about.

For instance, next month I will be posting three different blog-posts and have another four or so planned for the rest of the year. In October, I will post these three blog-posts:

Then from now on, I will be trying to stick with two or more blog-posts a month. In November, you can look forward to these two blog-posts:

  • Causation, Karma, and Kung Fu: Dragon (2011) | Film Analysis
  • The War of Words: How Should Christians Talk?

After that, December will have two more blog-posts followed by many more going into the start of the new year:

  • The Cosmo-Quattro Argument
  • The Thief on the Cross Theory

Starting next year, I will also have an active Facebook page (Chris Cribari Blog) and an Instagram account (, which is where I will post all of my content in addition to my blog. They’re active now, but are not ready yet so you could technically follow them if you really wanted too. But just know that there isn’t much there yet content wise. Regardless, those will be live in January.

Speaking of next year, here is a sneak peek of what is to come in the lineup of blog-posts coming your way in the near future:

Lastly, I am in the process of updating my blog. Fixing older blog-posts that I wrote years ago and making the website look more user-friendly. I’d like to be done with all of that by the end of the year, but we will see. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!


  2. Disclaimer

The Greater Than Argument

A while back I wrote an argument for the doctrine of the Trinity called The Lovely Trinity Argument (1) and it was okay in retrospect. After further study and improvement in philosophical argumentation, I have a second argument for the doctrine of the Trinity. This new argument is called The Greater Than Argument. The argument goes as follows:

The Greater Than Argument

By Christopher Cribari

  1. Every human is a single person.
  2. God is greater than a human.
  3. Since God is greater than a human, He therefore must be multi-personal.
  4. The Christian Trinity is the best explanation of God’s multi-personal nature.
  5. Therefore, God is a tri-unity of persons, yet remains one nature.

Now this argument is meant to be presented after belief in God is philosophically proven. This can be done by showing the person that you are talking to any number of arguments for the existence of God. In the spirit of my argument, I think the Kalam-Cosmological Argument (2) makes the most sense as a foundation to then build off of and further understand who God logically must be if they exist. Although, one could just as easily use Norris Clarke’s World as an Interacting Whole Argument (3) or Peter Kreeft’s version of The Change Argument (4) first proposed by Thomas Aquinas in his famous Five Ways collection of philosophical arguments.

On the flip side, I also have in addition to the original Greater Than Argument, made an alternative version that is simply called The Alternate Greater Than Argument. This alternate version is more so meant to be used in broader contexts, but still requires a logical building block to be placed upon in order to work correctly in dialogue. The Alternate Greater Than Argument goes as follows:

The Alternate Greater Than Argument

By Christopher Cribari

  1. Every human is a single person.
  2. If God exists, then they would have to be greater than a human.
  3. If real, God would be multi-personal.
  4. The Christian Trinity is the best explanation of both God’s existence and His  multi-personal nature.
  5. Therefore, God is a tri-unity of persons, yet remains one nature.

The basic concept for my Greater Than Argument was inspired by many things, but mostly Alvin Plantinga’s philosophical work in general and a YouTube video from InspiringPhilosophy called “The Trinity Explained” (5). I’d highly recommend those resources, along with James White’s book, The Forgotten Trinity, that you can buy anywhere books are sold (6). Both arguments have the exact same conclusion and start with the same first premise. Where they differ is in their next three premises, in order to get to the same conclusion.

It’s probably not going to become the most groundbreaking development in defense of the doctrine of the Trinity, but I would say it is a vast improvement over my first argument. Not only in its more focused nature, but also for the fact that it is a third of the length of that first argument (i. e. A 15 point argument vs. a 5 point argument). So the use of The Greater Than Argument and/or The Alternate Greater Than Argument in discussion will be far easier to defend in a dialogue, rather than The Lovely Trinity Argument because of those two primary reasons mentioned above. Because the argument is shorter and more to the point, the defending apologist has more time to support their view by focusing on a combination of logic, Scripture, and everything of that sort.

Maybe you may find it useful to use or might figure out a better way of defending the doctrine of the Trinity. Regardless, I hope it helps you out in some way. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!



Christian Reconstructionism: Not So Right

Photo Cred: Austin Cline (

As of late, I have noticed a strange phenomenon growing in the political climate and it is one that concerns me because of its implications on American society and Christianity as a whole. That phenomenon is the Christian Right and its underlying belief by some within the movement in an ideology called Christian Reconstructionism. Before addressing the problem, let me properly define it and then get into why Christian Reconstructionism is a dangerous ideology that should not be upheld by Christians or those on any political platform.

Christian Reconstructionism is a theonomic movement that really began in the early twentieth century by a man named R. J. Rushdoony and flourished during the 1980s in American politics as it seeped into the Republican Party as a major driving force (1). They are similar to a political action committee (i.e. PAC or Super PAC), but instead of using primarily money to influence the political process they twist Scripture to push their ideology. Rushdoony’s philosophy of Christian Reconstructionism was largely influenced by the fact that his family were victims in the Armenian Genocide of 1915 and his strong resistance to the New Deal proposed by Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930’s, which led him to creating this new form of Christian political involvement.

The basic philosophy of Christian Reconstructionism is the idea that any given nation must be run as a theocracy by Christians, for Christians. Just to be clear, let me define a few terms before moving forward. A theocracy is a form of government where a nation is ruled by the divine order of some type of deity. A theonomy is how a theocracy is run by any given governing institution in power. The difference between the two terms would be “what it is” versus a “how it is” in theory from what I could gather online. A couple examples of theocratic government include, the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages and Islam in the Middle East. So, why is this scary? Why is this such a problem that people still have this mentality, albeit only a small minority? Well, let’s quickly look at those two examples for a refresher on the negative side effects to a theocratic government.

When it came to the Catholic Church, they essentially ruled Europe during the Medieval Ages and had complete control up until both the Reformation and later the Enlightenment that flipped the world upside down. As put it, “the church reinforced the political authority of the states, and the states reinforced the authority of the church (2).” What this meant was that they worked together to enforce law. The government enforced the law of the land, while the Catholic Church enforced the law of the LORD. If one broke either law, then they broke both forms of law and thus would not only receive punishment in this life, but also in the life to come afterwards.

Because of this political snare, the common people were apart of the faith in fear of the tyranny that loomed above them. If they did not believe in the Catholic faith, then they were subjected to torture or even death like those that were implemented during the Spanish Inquisition. This fear drove the commoner to live in utter submission to whatever the government said. Likewise, the government lived in utter submission to whatever the Catholic Church said because in those days, spiritual concerns superseded material matters.

Regarding Islam in the Middle East, it is much more extreme when compared to the Catholic Church not only by the length of time, but also by the amount of death and torture inflicted onto non-believers throughout history. Nevertheless the same goal for both forms of these theocratic governments was to sustain control over the the region and in these two cases, through whatever means necessary. For the purposes of this blog-post, I’ll leave researching into both the abuses of the theocratic forms of the Catholic Church and Islam to you to look into further.

Going back to where we started, this is what a theocratic government would look like if the Christian Reconstructionist had their way and that is why it is a danger to the American way of life. Under theocratic rule, every American would have to be Christian or suffer the severe consequences for believing otherwise. Not only that, but a very specific type of Christian that upholds certain beliefs like rejecting antinomianism (the polar opposite of legalism), presuppositionalism (polar opposite of evidentialism), and postmillennialism to name a few.

The Torah, the first 5 books of the Bible, would become the new rule of law and it would be barbaric to say the least in its application to 21st century civilization. Things such as interracial marriage, individual autonomy, and even modern women’s rights would be abolished. In other words, the philosophy of Christian Reconstructionism reapplying the Old Testament Law as the new law in American society is the equivalent of reapplying the use of horses instead of modern-day tractors for farming. They had their use and importance in history, but their need in today’s society is no longer applicable as the world has advanced beyond that phase of human civilization.

At the time, the Old Testament Law was amazing when compared to the horrific cultures that surrounded the region. Other nearby nations like the Hittites and the Canaanites were utterly wicked in the sight of the LORD, so God commanded the Israelites to live differently in almost every way than these other cultures lived. This is why the Old Testament Law existed in the first place: to fulfill the Hebrew’s part of the Old Covenant. If the Israelites obeyed God, then they would be blessed beyond belief under this covenant. If they didn’t keep the covenant, then they would receive the repercussions of their actions in full (3).

Fast-forward to the times of Christ when the Old Covenant is turned obsolete as Jesus introduces the New Covenant not just with the Hebrews, but with all of mankind (4). Hence, the Christian Reconstructionist’s major selling points on their particular philosophy are in direct conflict with crucial biblical truths in Scripture. The Old Covenant is no longer necessary and yet the Christian Reconstructionist advocates the reintroduction of the old way of relating to God.

As history can attest, when the political and the spiritual are unnaturally bent into a particular agenda we all lose. When it comes to Christian Reconstructionism, this just happens to be one of many attempts to do just that. Forcing someone to live a certain way in spite of their convictions in order to show them what you believe is a better way is not loving, but tyranny. In the name of freedom, there must be flexibility. In the specific case of Americans, what could be better than each and every one of us freely doing as we will to do, without infringing on the dignity inate in others. Sharing ideas rather than controlling them to fit within certain boundaries that favor one sect, while simultaneously oppressing another.

So what is the solution to a theonomous culture? Well, there are only two other options: a heteronomous culture (totalitarianism) and an autonomous culture (libertarianism). For the sake of brevity, America began as a theonomous culture with the mutual belief in the natural law of God giving us unalienable human rights, but has overtime become an autonomous culture where the rights of the individual matter more than the rights of the collective group. Act, believe, and think how you want, but without stepping on the toes of another person’s freedom to do the same.

As I clearly noted earlier, American politics and Christian Reconstructionism are simply not compatible. The movement would only cause more harm than help in the grand scheme of things. When choosing between compromise and extremism in the game of politics, compromise is always the better way out. Compromise is the reason that we as Americans can proudly say that we freely pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!


  3. Deuteronomy 30:15-20
  4. Luke 22:20

The Book That Made Your World: Review and Summary Part 1

Updated: 9/16/2017 | Photo Cred: (1)

After taking over a month off, I finally have another blog-post finished. Except this one here was commissioned by a friend at my local church, Peace Mennonite Community Church (2), and this friend, Marjorie, asked me to do a book review, along with a short summary of The Book That Made Your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization by Vishal Mangalwadi (3). To be honest, I had never heard of him or his oddly titled book, but I went for it and thoroughly enjoyed it for the most part. There were a few minor issues I had with the book, but they are too minut to mention every single one in detail.

Primarily, my issues with the book were either grammatical spelling errors (i.e. “bcome” vs. “become”) or jumps in logic to unproven conclusions. Yet, those issues were brief and were my only nitpicks with the book itself. There was also the fact that it reads like an encyclopedia of information as it goes from subject to subject like a textbook of sorts. Then again, I guess there was no way around that problem either considering the subject matter in the first place.

Mangalwadi’s The Book That Made Your World is a very informative take on the Bible’s influence in twenty key areas of the human experience. From the origins of science to the concept of compassion and forgiveness in the face of utter barbarism in the early first century. Its aim was to show how the Bible has shaped the West in some of the most profound ways imaginable, even in some ways unexpectedly. In that respect, the book succeeds, but it does tend to lack the artistic appeal of more expressive writers.

Related image

Chapter 1: The West Without Its Soul | Photo Cred: (4)

The book begins with how the Bible was crucial in the conceptual development of the human soul. Comparing both Johann Sebastian Bach and Nirvana’s lead singer, Kurt Cobain, we see a stark contrast in their lives and striking similarities. Bach’s biblical upbringing versus Cobain’s Buddhism, which led to his belief in Nihilism later in life.

For Bach, his worldview produced some of the most celebrated classical music of all time that gave a sense of hope to its audience as they admired the art of his compositions. For Cobain, his worldview led to producing music that bears nothing meaningful or worthwhile in substance. The soul can express itself best through music and music allows us to see into the souls of one another. The Bible shapes our souls into redeemed wretches, while its absence allows our souls to rot in utter decay. On the one hand, everlasting life and on the other hand, a life that left too soon.

Related image

Chapter 2: Service | Photo Cred: (5)

The next chapter focuses on the biblical value of service when compared to other worldviews. Drawing from his own experiences growing up in India, Mangalwadi explains how someone who lives out the statutes of the Bible in a real-world way will see their whole outlook on life change as they do less for themselves and more for others in the name of Christ. While others worry about getting to the other side where the grass is always greener, Christ compels His followers to seek out those whose grass is not so green and to help them flourish as they soak in the love of the Son. The world promotes self-love for our own good, but Christ commands selfless love as we serve others for the greater good.

Image result for journey

Chapters 3 – 4: Quest and Self | Photo Cred: (6)

Mangalwadi continues into more particular ways in which the Bible has influenced and helped make the modern West by going into the quest of life, along with our role in that quest as free creatures. The Bible helped give humans the ultimate quest in life: to be known by God, to know God, and to make God known. In the same respect, it also gives us a true sense of self as we now know that we are neither equal to God nor to a dog, but rather exist in the middle of the spiritual and the natural. We are free creatures that create like our Creator and yet are the cherry on top of Creation itself. He asserts that “I am a creative creature” and a free one at that too as we journey on our unique quests into the unknown reaches of what truly makes us human. As we draw close to God, we at the same token draw close to a proper understanding of ourselves in light of His light: the Word of God.

Image result for george lemaitre

Chapters 5 – 6: Humanity and Rationality | Photo Cred: (7)

From here, Mangalwadi touches on our humanity and rationality as self-conscious beings. When it comes to humanity in particular, the Bible was the very spark that ignited the Renaissance, along with the reintroduced idea of human dignity. Even in the most cruel cases of people living in rejection to God in history, our human dignity cannot be erased from the human consciousness. It remains an ever-present element in our lives as a mark that we were made for more.

For rationality, the greatest movements post-11th Century Europe all involved in some shape or form, a strong emphasis on learning, especially through reading and writing. This can be traced back to Augustine, Boethius, William Tyndale, and other brights that sought to bring the truths of Scripture to the commoners who lived in ignorance. It was men like these who brought about new generations of free thinkers that could now test the claims of the corrupt and powerful.

Image result for lateen sail

Chapters 7: Technology | Photo Cred: (8)

When it came to the advancements of technology throughout the ages, notable scholar Ernst Benz clearly pinpoints the four key ways that a Judeo-Christian worldview helped the development of technology on a worldwide scale. His reasoning is summarized below by Mangalwadi:

“First, the Bible emphasized intelligent craftsmanship in the world’s design. Second, the Bible suggested that human beings participate in divine workmanship by being good artisans themselves. Third, the Bible taught that we follow divine example when we use the physical universe for righteous ends. And fourth, the Bible challenged the West to use time wisely, because each moment is a valuable, one-time opportunity (P. 97).”

In short, most of the most important inventions of the last several centuries can be attributed to a Biblical worldview that fueled the passion of many inventors over time. These inventions include the lateen sail, the wheeled plow, the horse as a tool in the workforce, the water mill, the windmill, the crank, the wheelbarrow, the flywheel, the pipe organ, the mechanical clock, eyeglasses, and dozens of other inventions that are the basis of Western technological advancements.

Chapter 8: Heroism | Photo Cred: (9)

The idea of a hero has changed as the culture in Western society has transformed with the passing of time. The classical hero exemplified the traits that would be expected of the Greco-Roman mentality and that meant powerful leverage over others, whether politically, militarily, or any other barbaric means necessary to control those beneath you. The medieval hero was the next idea of heroism and they sought glory, skill, prowess, loyalty, generosity, and courtesy. This eventually led to what is known as religious chivalry and this was basically the equivalent of placing a spiritual mask onto a sinful practice.

That is, fighting for the LORD would guarantee salvation, which was a lie. This idea has evolved into what is known today and what I like to call “good-person salvation.” The idea that because someone “lives a good life” and is a “good person,” that they will inherit eternal life in Heaven. As this idea flourished over the years, it was the Reformers of the 15th and 16th centuries who brought back the idea of true heroism. A heroism based off of Christ himself and His selfless sacrifice for his enemies. This is the backbone behind what most people refer to in Western society as a real hero: someone who is sacrificial, loving, true, and giving to those in need.

Image result for reformation

Chapter 9: Revolution | Photo Cred: (10)

A true revolution is one that either goes back to the way things were or changes the culture into something better. The Protestant Reformation was one of the most influential revolutions because it did both. This revolution was different in a sense from other revolutions because it started from the top and worked its way down. Starting in universities and growing in pubs all across Europe, this revolution stood firmly on God’s Word as its source of reform. The reformers consisted of a team of ragtag “heretics” who just wanted the Word to be the final say in the World, even greater than the Pope. The result of the revolution? Two Bible translations for the commoner, the Geneva and the KJV, along with the most powerful force in any society: an informed public.

Well that’s just half of my review and summary of The Book That Made Your World! Stay tuned for Part 2 and the rest of my thoughts on this book. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!


  1. www.revelationmovement.com;

What are the Judeo-Christian Essentials?

Photo Cred: The Four Posts of Avila, Spain (1566) by Francisco de Arellano

Through the years of Christian development and especially in recent times, there has been a dwindling of understanding concerning what exactly makes someone a follower of Christ. What is a Christian really? What does someone need to believe and do in order to adopt such a distinct worldview like Judeo-Christianity? What separates a Christian from a Muslim or a Mormon? With all of these questions in mind, let us look at what others have laid out as the absolutely essential tenets of Judeo-Christianity and see if it is a biblical understanding of what makes someone a Christian and others non-Christian.

Most sources you find will list out 5 to 7 essentials that must be affirmed in order to be a Christian. For instance, says that there are 7 Essentials (1), yet the Gospel Coalition has up to 20 Essentials (2)! Specifically, 10 Essential beliefs and 10 Essential behaviors as written by Kevin DeYoung, respectfully. But are there truly this many Essentials or are we misunderstanding what an Essential actually is in Judeo-Christianity? I think we should start by identifying what an Essential is before pinpointing how many Essentials there are and what they actually entail.

An Essential is a fundamental core value, whether a deed or doctrine, that if removed from the other fundamental core values of any given belief system, would completely cause that belief system to collapse entirely. Islam, for example, has the 5 Pillars of Islam (3) that indicate the basic tenets of the faith that make someone a Muslim as they are the Islamic Essentials. These 5 Pillars of Islam include the Shahada (Profession of Faith), the Salat (Daily Five Prayers), the Zakat (Giving of Alms), the Saum (Fasting of Ramadan), and the Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca). If a Muslim does not affirm the Shahada, the other 4 Pillars are useless. If a Muslim does not affirm all 5 Pillars, then their Islamic belief should be called into question for either heresy or ignorance.

Now can or does Judeo-Christianity have a small list of criteria that distinguishes Christians from other belief systems? Yes and for Christians there are even less Essentials than Islam. In fact, I would argue that Judeo-Christianity has only 4 Essentials. Not 5 Essentials, not 7 Essentials, and certainly not 20 Essentials. These 4 Essentials are the Nature of God, the Hypostatic Union of Christ, the Gospel, and the Inspiration of Scripture. Let me explain each one individually in further detail below and show why there are only 4 Essentials at the root of Judeo-Christianity. I refer to them as the “Four Cornerstones of Christianity,” but we will stick to the Judeo-Christian Essentials for simplicity sake. First of the Judeo-Christian Essentials is the nature of God.

1) The Nature of God


The nature of God is comprised of 2 unique doctrines: Monotheism and Trinitarianism. The belief of Monotheism affirms God’s unique oneness and the idea that there is only one God (4), while Trinitarianism affirms God’s tri-unity as three persons, yet one being (5). As Dr. Michael Brown would put it, God is “complex in His unity” (6) and this truth is best known as the doctrine of the Trinity. Now the Judeo-Christian Essential regarding the nature of God also includes His divine attributes as He is omnibenevolent (all-loving), omnipotent (all-powerful), omnipresent (all-enveloping), and omniscient (all-knowing). To be more precise, God is uncaused, eternal, immaterial, non-contingent, non-physical, and personal. I believe St. Anselm of Canterbury sums up God’s divine essence best when he concludes in his Ontological Argument the following:

“Therefore, if that than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in the understanding alone, the very being than which nothing greater can be conceived is one than which a greater can be conceived. But obviously this is impossible. Hence there is no doubt that there exists a being than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality” (7).

Suffice to say, we Christians believe God to be indescribable in His grand majesty that is beyond human comprehension, yet He is near to all who seek Him with sincere hearts. He is the one, true, triune God and His presence is even still so near to our souls in this life, along with the life to come one day for all who seek His face. But how does God, of such glorious splendor and goodness, interact with His Creation? How could a deity bridge the gap between finite minds and His infinite mind? Well, that leads us to the second Judeo-Christian Essential: the Hypostatic Union of Christ.

2) The Hypostatic Union of Christ


The hypostatic union of Christ is similarly divided into 2 distinct sub-Essentials: that Jesus is both fully God (8) and fully man (9). Hypostatic originally means “personal,” so the hypostatic union of Christ really means the personal union of Christ. In this case, the personal union of two natures within the person that is Jesus.

At certain points in time (10), Jesus adopted a second nature, a human nature, with the sole purpose of bridging this gap between Creator and Creation. As the ultimate mediator, Jesus inhabits the best of these two natures. He is both the only good God and the only sinless man. He is the mediating messiah who has taken the task of healing the world from the sin in the Garden of Eden and is, at the same time, the ultimate human ambassador for the holy Godhead (11).

If His deity is denied, then you find yourself aligned with cults that deviated from Judeo-Christianity like the Latter Day Saints, Jehovah Witnesses, and large portions of the Church of God Movement. These cults most likely came from early historical heresies like adoptionism, arianism, nestorianism, and the like. If His humanity is denied, then you find yourself conforming to some heretical views such as docetism, apollinarianism, eutychianism, and so forth misunderstandings about the Hypostatic Union (12). Needless to say, Scripture is quite clear that Jesus is both fully God and fully man.

If Jesus was not fully man, then He could not be the unblemished sacrifice that atoned for the sins of the world. If Jesus was not fully God, then He could not be the Messiah that the Old Testament proclaims will enter the world and save it from itself. Jesus fully inhabits both natures and if we do not believe this Essential truth, then Judeo-Christianity collapses as a worldview. Jesus is one person with two different natures that are in complete harmony. These two natures are not contradictory, but complementary. Understanding the God-man is the second Essential of Judeo-Christianity and the next Essential is the Gospel.

3) The Gospel


The Gospel is grounded both in the historical reliability of the physical resurrection of Jesus from the dead back to life (13), along with the theological understanding that salvation is by God’s grace, not of works, and because of Christ’s atonement on the Cross (14). We will first observe the biblical and theological side of the Gospel, before going into the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus as it is the definitive Judeo-Christian foundation of our faith.

Now there are many quick ways to understand the Gospel, so we will observe the two most common explanations that reveal what the Gospel message is and why it is an Essential in Judeo-Christianity. When it comes to understanding the message of the Gospel, Scripture paints the best picture. The most common Scriptural guide in understanding the Gospel is the infamous “Romans Road.” The “Romans Road” goes as follows:

The Romans Road

  • Romans 3:23 (Everyone has sinned and are fallen)
  • Romans 6:23b (Sin leads to death and therefore everyone who has sinned will die)
  • Romans 5:8 (God gives grace and Jesus pays our sin debt)
  • Romans 10:9 (Salvation to all who confess that Jesus is LORD and believe that God raised Him from the dead)
  • Romans 10:13 (Whoever calls on the LORD will be saved)
  • Romans 5:1 (We are justified by faith and now have peace with God)
  • Romans 8:1 (We are no longer condemned to Hell for our sin)
  • Romans 8:38-39 (Nothing can remove this seal of salvation and our salvation is sealed by the love of God)

Now the “Romans Road” is a great resource to use in evangelistic settings, which many believers do, but not all of us can memorize or remember that many passages of Scripture on the spot. So, how do we Christians explain the Gospel in a shorter and more straightforward way? Well, here is the other way to explain the Gospel that summarizes the truths of Scripture in a briefer way:

The 4-Point Gospel Message

  • Creation: God created everything, including us, and it was good.
  • Condemnation: Adam sinned and we inherit his sin debt now that everything is bad.
  • Propitiation: Jesus atoned and paid our sin debt, making those that repent and believe free from the condemnation.
  • Salvation: We receive new life in Christ and enjoy living for the LORD now until forever.

Because the Gospel in it’s biblical and theological sense is so simple to comprehend, as it should be, we will move onto the historicity of the resurrection since it carries so much weight in the defense of Judeo-Christian thought. For another Scriptural explanation of the Gospel in the form of a video, I would refer you to David Wood’s great YouTube video on “What is the Gospel?” (15). Bottom line: when it comes to the Gospel, keep it Scriptural and simple. That’s what Jesus did and that’s we, His followers, will continue to do until the end of the age.

As Paul the Apostle once said, if Christ did not rise from the dead, then our faith is in vain (16) and thus if we cannot defend this claim, then our faith is in jeopardy. When it comes to defending the resurrection of Jesus, there are many approaches to take and ways to go about supporting this quintessential truth in Judeo-Christianity. Some might use extrabiblical sources or manuscript evidence, but I like to keep this just as simple as a Gospel presentation and use basic logic. I have a three point argument called “The Resurrection Argument From Reason” that concludes the resurrection of Jesus to be the most logical explanation of the historical evidence. This argument goes as follows:

The Resurrection Argument From Reason

  • The empty tomb of Jesus is due to either the apparent death theory, the conspiracy theory, the displaced theory, the hallucination theory, or the resurrection theory.
  • Based off of the historical evidence, it is not due to the apparent death theory, the conspiracy theory, the displaced theory, or the hallucination theory.
  • Therefore, it is due to the resurrection theory.

Now this is a very short argument that is inspired by analytic philosopher William Lane Craig and his “A Case for the Historicity of Jesus’ Resurrection” argument, as well as the contributions of New Testament scholar Gary Habermas. For more information regarding the resurrection of Jesus, I would point you to both William Lane Craig’s book, On Guard, where his previously mentioned argument can be found and to the book, Did the Resurrection Really Happen?, which is the written version of the third and final debate between Gary Habermas and former atheist Antony Flew concerning the resurrection. Last of the Essentials is the inspiration of Scripture.

4) The Inspiration of Scripture


The inspiration of Scripture is the final Essential and it is the root belief that guides the belief of the inerrancy of Scripture. At the same time, this final Essential gives us Christians the other 3 Essentials. In order to understand biblical inerrancy, we must properly understand biblical inspiration. If the Bible was not divinely inspired, then why should we believe the Bible to be inerrant as the infallible Word of God?

The idea of inspiration can be traced far back in history to the Israelites and their beloved fondness for the Torah, as it was the very Word of God that inspired Moses to write those first five books of the Bible. It was the Law that the Hebrews lived by and this was the start of the canon of Scripture. Since then, that understanding of the holy canon of Scripture now includes the entirety of the Old and New Testaments. Once belief in the inspiration of Scripture is established, we can then conclude the inerrancy of Scripture.

We believe the Bible to be God’s inerrant Word for a number of reasons. When it comes to presenting said reasons the Bible must be inspired, I have both an argument and an acronym from Charlie Campbell (17) that will aid in remembering key reasons to believe the Bible to be the inspired and the inerrant Word of God. First, we’ll observe my own argument for the inerrancy of Scripture below:

The Inerrancy of Scripture Argument

  • The inerrancy of Scripture is due to either chance, divine inspiration, or human manipulation.
  • It is not due to chance or human manipulation.
  • Therefore, it is due to divine inspiration.

With this in mind, the divine inspiration of the Bible logically infers the inerrancy of God’s Word. If God was behind the scenes guiding the process of developing the canon of Scripture, then why can we not conclude that it is without error? Can we empirically prove that because the Bible is inspired, that it is also inerrant? Using the Charlie Campbell’s M. A. P. S. acronym, we can do just that. The M. A. P. S. acronym goes as follows:

  • M = Manuscript Evidence
  • A = Authors’ Forthrightness About Failures
  • P = Persecution Endured By The Early Christians
  • S = Son of God’s View of Scripture

In short, we Christians believe the Bible to be God’s inspired Word because Jesus believed it was and not the other way around. Because we believe it is inspired by God, we also believe it to be God’s inerrant Word. We support this claim with the M. A. P. S. method of providing evidence. Our understanding of the other 3 Essentials hinges on our understanding of this final Essential.

Like the above picture, the 4 Essentials of Judeo-Christianity all work together and uphold the very essence of what Judeo-Christianity is as a whole. Everything is built off of these four key pillars of our faith. If you remove one pillar, the whole worldview collapses.

Therefore, just as a Muslim has the 5 Pillars of Islam, we too have the 4 Pillars of Christianity. When you understand the foundation for Christianity, then you will understand the Christian faith. When you understand why you believe what you believe, then defending what you believe is that much easier. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!


  4. Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 43:10-13, 1 Corinthians 8:4b-6, Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5
  5. Genesis 1:26, 3:22-23, 11:7, Isaiah 6:8, Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19-20; 2 Corinthians 13:14
  6. The Real Kosher Jesus (P. 134-135). See also Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus Vol. 2: Theological Objections (P. 3-14) by Michael Brown for a theological understanding of the Christian Trinity in response to Orthodox Judaism, along with The Forgotten Trinity by James White for an exegetical understanding.
  8. John 1:1-3, 10:30; 20:28-31
  9. John 1:14, Philippians 2:5-11; Hebrews 2:14-18
  10. Genesis 14:17-20, 16:7-14, 18:1-33, 22:11-18,  32:24-30, Exodus 24:9-11, Joshua 5:13-15, Judges 6:11-25, Daniel 3:23-28; John 1:14-18
  11. In his book Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth, John MacArthur & co. make the following statement regarding Jesus being an ambassador or messenger of the Godhead: “When the biblical account associates “the angel of the LORD” with a theophany, “messenger” might provide a better translation than “angel,” because this title denotes the function or office of the individual, not his nature. In addition, the Scripture speaks of him [the angel of the LORD] as actually being God. He bears the name “LORD,” he speaks as God, and he displays divine attributes and authority. Most significantly, however, he receives worship (Matt. 2:2, 11, 14:33, 28:9, 17). Given what John 1:18 says about the Son-that “no one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known” -the appearances of God in the Old Testament must have been the Son, not the Father. The phrase “made him known” in Greek (exégeomai) is the word from which we derive the verb exegete and its cognate noun, exegesis. Literally, the Son of God “exegeted” the Father to mankind (P. 241).”
  13. John 2:19-22, 1 Corinthians 15:1-22; Galatians 1:6-9
  14. John 14:6, Acts 4:12; Ephesians 2:8-9
  16. 1 Corinthians 15:13-14
  17. Scrolls & Stones: Compelling Evidence the Bible Can Be Trusted (P. 93). See also The Canon of Scripture by F. F. Bruce and From God to Us: How We Got Our Bible by Norman Geisler & William E. Nix for more information on biblical inspiration and biblical inerrancy.