What Jesus Said

  • Can We Know God Exists-Part 1 — The Question Every Worldview Must Answer

    Can We Know God Exists-Part 1 — The Question Every Worldview Must Answer

    Introduction.

    Questions everyone wants answered. Where did I come from? What is the meaning of life? How can I know right from wrong? What will happen to me after I die? Does God exist? These questions are embedded within each one of us.
    Trending generational differences may have shifted the emphasis, and the growing dominance of a secular outlook has attempted to override them. Yet these primal concerns are still shared by everyone on the planet.

    How Our Beliefs Have Shifted

    In the past few decades, it has been fashionable to categorize how Americans think by analysing the beliefs and attitudes of the generations in which they were born. As with any such categorization, there are differing opinions about how to sort the generations, and there will always be exceptions and overlap between groupings. Still, a brief overview can provide a point of reference for understanding how our values and beliefs have changed over time.

    Let us start with the Silent Generation, born during the Great Depression and World War II. Members of this group are typically conservative, religious, and financially secure. Next are the baby boomers, born after the war, many of whom rebelled against social norms and instigated the countercultural protests of the 1960s.

    Members of Generation X, born between 1965 and 1980, tend to be resistant to government and have liberal views on social issues. Millennials, born in 1981 and later, are usually better educated and more tech-savvy than earlier generations, but less likely to endorse the norms of religion, race, sexuality, and politics of their predecessors. Members of Generation Z, which began with the year 1997, are commonly considered more independent, less social, but more socially conscious, more inward-turned, and more technologically dependent.

    I do not doubt that these characterizations of the general mindsets of the generations carry considerable weight. The trend has been away from traditional values, religious belief, and social responsibility and has moved toward hedonism, materialism, secularism, and self-sufficiency. Yet those troublesome questions about origins, meaning, morality, eternity, and God’s existence remain.

    A Journey to Find Answers

    You may be reading this blog because you have reached a place in your life where these questions have risen up to confront you. You may have begun to feel that the faith you embraced in the past no longer has the answers you need. Perhaps the answers offered by secular culture seem as if they might better fit the realities you encounter.

    If this describes you, or if you are concerned about someone who is facing these questions, I urge you to accompany me on a journey to discover the answers. This is no mere excursion into trivialities dressed in platitudes written in typical religious blog jargon. I will lead you to solid answers that I will demonstrate to be firmly rooted in reality. I will show you that truth is a firm reality you can know with certainty and that meaning is possible when you align yourself with that truth.

    I will begin our journey in this first blog in the series by exploring the misconceptions inherent in secularism that have blocked off the light of truth from modern culture.

    A Roadmap for This Series

    Part One: The Bedrock of Truth
    We will consider how to find and rely on the bedrock truths that have underscored successful and satisfying lives throughout the past 20 centuries. I will show that God is no fantasy and demonstrate undeniable steps of reason that can lead you to certainty that He is real.


    Part 2: Addressing Secularism
    We will examine the weaknesses of several secular and naturalistic props to atheism, especially those explaining ultimate origins. I will demonstrate through reason, scientific evidence, and the writings of prominent scientists how secular origin theories often contradict science, reason, and observable reality.


    Note: When I use the terms naturalism or naturalistic, I mean the philosophy that asserts that nature is all that exists, that there is no supernatural realm, and that there is no transcendent God who exists outside or above nature. There may be shades of difference between naturalism, materialism, secularism, and atheism, but I will use naturalism as a convenient term to encompass these and similar beliefs that exclude God.


    Part 3: Finding Meaning
    We will turn a corner and focus on how belief in God provides the only viable foundation for meaning and embodies the truth that bathes the world in beauty and joy.

    Our Approach to Finding the Truth.

    Lest you fear that I am about to bombard you with Bible verses and Scripture proof texts to support my claims, I assure you that I will not. In fact, you may find this to be one of the strangest Christian blogs you have ever read. Nowhere in this blog do I support my arguments with biblical references. I realize that biblical proofs would be meaningless if you are sceptical of religion.
    Instead, I will make every attempt to rely solely on reason, observation, evidence, and common sense in supporting my propositions and reaching my conclusions.
    This blog began as an update of a previous idea for a blog series I wrote in August 2025. Perceiving a rising need to address the secular mindset that now dominates Western culture, I essentially ended up with an altogether different blog. As we tackle head-on the questions that people of all generations are beginning to ask, I trust that it will help you find stability in a society rapidly descending into chaos. More importantly, I believe that it will reassure you that God does indeed exist.

  • Can We Know God Exists. Part-3-Why Atheism Demands More Faith Than Christianity.

    Can We Know God Exists. Part-3-Why Atheism Demands More Faith Than Christianity.

    Finding Meaning: The Foundation That Cannot Be Shaken.

    We have journeyed from establishing the bedrock of truth in Part One to confronting the intellectual weaknesses of secularism in Part Two. Now, we turn to the most urgent question of all, the one woven into the fabric of human existence: What is the meaning of life?


    Even in periods of unprecedented affluence and technological advancement, a profound sense of void, a hunger for significance, persists across every generation. Secularism attempts to fill this space by counselling that meaning is something we create for ourselves. Its mantra is often: “live well, be kind, and find fulfilment in your temporary existence.”


    While admirable, this self-created meaning is built on sand. When the great, inevitable questions of suffering, ultimate justice, and mortality arise, this purely subjective meaning collapses. True meaning cannot be manufactured by us; it must be discovered. It must be objective, permanent, and universal.


    This ultimate meaning is only viable when anchored in a reality that transcends the temporary, the accidental, and the purely physical. It is here that belief in God moves from a philosophical necessity to a profound foundation for life, providing the only ultimate structure for meaning, and embodying the truth that bathes the world in beauty and joy.

    Meaning’s Solid Foundation: Transcendent Value.

    If the universe is, as naturalism holds, a colossal accident—a random collision of particles destined for ultimate, cold oblivion—then everything is temporary. Human life, love, justice, and achievement have no ultimate worth beyond their fleeting utility. In this scenario, your life matters for seventy years, and then, truly, it doesn’t matter at all. The logical conclusion of a godless universe is nihilism—the belief that life is meaningless—a conclusion few people can actually live with.


    The Theistic Foundation provides the only escape from this logical paradox. Belief in a transcendent God provides a source of ultimate, objective value. Our significance is not something we earn or construct; it is a purpose assigned to us by an eternal, perfectly loving being.


    When your existence is the result of intention rather than accident, your life is imbued with inherent, indestructible worth. Every act of kindness, every pursuit of justice, and every creative endeavour is not merely a temporary chemical reaction, but an engagement with an eternal, cosmic reality. This is the definition of objective meaning.

    Purpose, Morality, and the Divine Law.

    A life that is truly meaningful must be grounded in an understanding of right and wrong that is more than just social convention. We possess an undeniable awareness of objective morality—a sense that some things (like selfless sacrifice) are genuinely good, and others (like torture) are truly evil, regardless of what our culture or current laws dictate.


    If naturalism is true, morality is nothing more than an evolved survival mechanism—a useful illusion that encourages cooperation. But if that is the case, then morality is fluid, relative, and has no power to condemn truly wicked acts. Why, then, is a heinous crime wrong in an absolute sense? According to naturalism, it’s only inconvenient.


    The reality of objective morality requires a Moral Lawgiver. We know what goodness is because we are made in the image of a perfectly good God. Our deep-seated, inner moral compass points toward Him. Our sense of purpose is intrinsically linked to this reality: to live a life aligned with the nature of the Creator who first defined what is good, true, and beautiful.

    Beauty, Joy, and the World Bathed in Truth.

    Finally, belief in God provides the only viable explanation for the overwhelming beauty and joy we experience in the world. Why do we find profound fulfilment in music, art, and the intricate wonder of nature? Why does genuine joy feel like a discovery of something real and external, rather than just an internal, fleeting chemical boost?


    A transcendent God created the world with order, structure, and aesthetic intention. The ancient concept of the Logos—the rational principle structuring the cosmos—means that the universe is intelligible. This is why we can discover scientific laws, why mathematics describes reality, and why we are moved to tears by a sunset or a piece of music. The order we discover is the reflection of the ordered mind of the Creator.


    Meaning is not about creating a temporary distraction from the impending void; it is about finding our place within the true, beautiful, and eternal reality that God created. This is not a restrictive belief but an expansive one—it aligns us with the deepest, most joyful reality of the cosmos, leading to a fulfilment that no shifting secular trend can ever provide.

  • The ‘Outrage Paradox’-is not a problem. It is an invitation…

    The ‘Outrage Paradox’-is not a problem. It is an invitation…

    Why We Get Angry at Injustice If All Truth Is Just an Opinion.

    We love the phrase: “That’s your truth.” It feels open. It feels flexible. It’s the ultimate modern safety net.
    Everyone gets their own truth. It’s the new golden rule.
    But let’s be honest. It’s a lie we abandon the second we see real injustice.
    Imagine scrolling through your feed. You see that devastating story. The woman killed on the train. The senseless violence. The outrage immediately splits into two furious camps.
    One camp demands accountability: Why was this dangerous man released from prison? They are angry at the objective failure of the justice system.


    The other camp demands empathy: They argue the system failed the murderer, too. They say his history justifies his actions. They believe the only truth is that the criminal is the true victim.
    Here’s the impossible problem for the modern world: By what standard are you angry?
    If objective truth is truly dead—if the universe is just a random accident—then your outrage is meaningless noise. It’s a chemical reaction in your brain. It has no more universal authority than when you laugh.
    If all morals are subjective, then the murderer’s action is just their truth. The outrage on both sides is just two equal, competing feelings.
    You cannot logically demand an objective, universal punishment, or a universal demand for empathy for something you claim isn’t an objective, universal truth.


    It’s a paradox that leaves everyone exhausted and polarized.
    Academic experts even agree. The rise of polarization isn’t just about politics; it’s about “moral outrage.” Scholars found this intense combination of anger and disgust is what’s driving people to dehumanize their opponents online and commit to sophistry (just making bad arguments). The whole system is breaking down because we’re shouting about a moral code we can’t locate.

    The Echo of the Law.

    So, why do you get so fiercely, gut-wrenchingly angry at injustice? Why does that line feel so real?
    Because, deep down, you know the line is real. It’s not imaginary.
    Your outrage is not a random chemical spike. It’s an echo. It is the sound of a fixed, unchanging law bouncing off the walls of your subjective world.
    The Bible explains why this echo is so loud. It explains why you instinctively know right from wrong, even if you’ve never picked up a Bible.
    They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them. — Romans 2:15 (ESV)
    The feeling of injustice—the fury that says, “This should not be!”—is not your invention. It’s proof that the work of the law is written on your heart.
    You have a moral standard built in. It’s part of being human.

    The Truth Is Not in the Way. The Truth is the Way.

    The problem isn’t that truth is in the way of your life. The problem is that you are desperately trying to live according to an objective moral law without acknowledging its objective Lawgiver.
    The truth you’re looking for—the foundation for your anger, the source of your demand for justice, the only thing that can end the outrage paradox—is not a feeling. It’s not a perspective.
    It’s a Person.
    You can stop listening to the echo and start listening to the Source.

    The Subjective Jail.

    Maybe you feel like you’ve found the solution.
    Maybe you think: Fine, I’ll stop worrying about the whole world. I’ll just focus on my truth. I’ll look inward.
    This is the great promise of the subjective world: liberation. No one can tell you what to do. Your feelings are the compass. Your perspective is the only reality that matters.
    Sounds freeing, right? It’s not.
    Absolute subjectivity is not a path to freedom; it’s a tiny, airless cell. It’s a subjective jail.
    Think about it logically. If all truth is only true for you, then you have instantly disqualified every single major truth claim you rely on every day.
    You can’t trust your memory. Was that conversation toxic, or does your mood make you believe it was toxic? If your feelings are the final authority, how do you judge a past event when your feelings about it change? You become a prisoner of your current emotional state.
    You can’t trust your relationships. If your spouse says, “I love you,” that is objectively meaningless. It’s just their subjective experience at that moment. You can’t build a life on a truth that might change before breakfast. You’re left constantly questioning.
    You can’t trust your mind. The core of absolute subjectivity is an old idea called solipsism—the belief that only your mind is sure to exist. When you reject all objective reality, you are forced back into the one thing you can’t deny: you exist. The rest of the universe becomes a giant projection, a film reel playing just for you.
    And here is where the isolation hits. You are the only one who matters. You are utterly alone. The world you see has no shared reality, no shared ground, and no shared moral compass. The outrage is paralyzing, and the isolation is absolute.
    You start to realize that the fight over whether the train murderer was failed by the system is minor compared to the fear that you are trapped in a reality only you can access. The search for truth becomes a desperate scramble to escape your own head.
    But we were not designed to be isolated, judgmental monarchs of our own tiny worlds. We are designed for shared reality. We crave community, cooperation, and love. None of that works without a fixed, shared truth that exists outside of your personal opinion.

    The Foundation of Freedom.

    This is why the anger you feel—the echo of the law written on your heart—is your escape key.
    The law written on your heart (Romans 2:15) is not a prison sentence. It’s a compass. It is the objective fact that points toward a solution that is bigger than your feelings and truer than your memory.
    When you look for the source of that objective law, you are led out of the Subjective Jail. You find the universal standard that:
    • Validates your anger at injustice (it was objectively wrong).
    • Provides a consistent standard for empathy (God is the only True and Righteous Judge of motive and action, right and wrong).
    • Guarantees shared reality (Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever).
    The Gospel is not the end of truth; it is the fix for the broken subjective compass. It is the one objective truth that sets you free.
    Question: Are you still okay being the sole judge of a world you can’t trust? Or are you ready to see the fixed, objective line that explains your outrage and frees you from yourself?

    Your outrage is telling you something.
    Not about your feelings.
    But about reality.

    Justice is real.
    Which means truth is real.
    Which means the Lawgiver is real.

    The question is not whether you feel outrage — you do.
    The question is whether you will follow it back to the One who wrote the law on your heart.

    Further Reading & Resources 📚

    I. Academic & Secular Sources
    For those interested in the psychological and sociological analysis of moral disagreement in the digital age, I recommend exploring the research that validates the “Outrage Paradox”:
    • Political Polarization and Moral Outrage on Social Media
    o Authors: Jordan Carpenter, William Brady, Molly Crockett, René Weber & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
    o Source: Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 52, No. 3, Article (2021)
    o Focus: This article proposes a theoretical model explaining how “moral outrage” (anger and disgust at a perceived moral violation) on social media leads to affective polarization, dehumanization, and a decay of civil discourse—the very chaos we see in daily news feeds.

    II. ESV Scripture Anchors.

    To explore the concept of an objective moral law written on the human heart, and the historical solution found in Christ:
    Topic Scripture Reference (ESV) Purpose in Post
    The Law on the Heart Romans 2:15 Explains the Outrage Paradox—why humans instinctively know right from wrong, even if they reject God’s law.
    Objective Reality/Christ Hebrews 13:8 Guarantees shared reality and objective permanence: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”
    The Resurrection 1 Corinthians 15:17 Establishes the entire Christian faith on a single, objective, historical fact: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins.”

  • The Outrage Paradox-Part Two. Why You Can’t Condemn Tyranny Without God

    The Outrage Paradox-Part Two. Why You Can’t Condemn Tyranny Without God

    The Objective Answer.

    Why You Can’t Condemn Tyranny Without God (And The Single Fact That Smashes All Subjective Religion)
    We’ve talked about the Outrage Paradox. You get furiously angry at injustice, but your subjective worldview can’t actually explain why that injustice is wrong. Your moral compass is spinning, but it has no fixed North Pole.

    The search for a foundation.


    The natural next question is: If we need a fixed, objective truth, where do we actually find it?
    The world offers two dead-end options:

    1. Subjective Feelings: If it feels good, do it. (This led to the Subjective Jail we just discussed.)
    2. Man-Made Rules: We’ll just all agree on the rules. (This leads to the chaos we see every day.)
      This reliance on man-made rules creates a massive, global crisis. It’s the Objective Morality Crisis.

    The Problem with Human Rights-No Objective Standard.

    Think about the concept of universal human rights. Everyone believes in them. Everyone fights for them. We pass laws and sign treaties to protect them.
    But here is the logical trap: If the universe is just atoms and accident, and if humans are just highly evolved animals, then why does every person on Earth have inherent, universal, and unalienable rights?
    You can’t find human rights under a microscope. You can’t derive human worth from the Big Bang.

    Why Human Rights Require God.


    If morals are subjective, then a nation, a dictator, or a mob can simply vote to change the rules. If truth is just an opinion, then condemning tyranny is just one opinion fighting another. Slavery wasn’t abolished because science discovered it was wrong; it was abolished because people finally recognized an objective moral law that transcended culture and economy. We condemn genocide because, deep in our bones, we know that human life has fixed, objective value—value that is not dependent on government, location, or skin colour.
    If there is no God who created all humans in His image, then every dictator who says “might makes right” is philosophically justified. They are simply enforcing their truth.
    You cannot defend universal human dignity without a universal, objective source for dignity.

    Why Science Can’t Carry the Moral Weight.

    Some people try to plant their flag in science. They argue science is the only true objective authority.
    Science is incredible. It tells us how the universe works with stunning accuracy. But it hits a wall when it tries to tell us why or what is right.
    This is The Bible ESV vs. The Microscope problem.
    Take consciousness. Scientists can map the brain, measure the electrical impulses, and track the neural activity. But they still cannot tell you what consciousness objectively is, why we are driven by meaning, or where our awareness comes from. The objective study of the brain fails to capture the objective essence of the mind.
    Or take the Big Bang. It explains the physical beginning, but it requires a huge amount of subjective interpretation to connect those initial physics to a human being who feels moral outrage.


    What happens when science hits that subjective wall? It needs something more. It needs a Designer or Creator who makes the rules.
    The Bible is not anti-science. The Bible is the owner’s manual for the reality science is trying to measure. It declares that the reason human life is sacred, and the reason your consciousness demands meaning, is that you were made by a God who is Himself the fixed definition of love and justice.
    God’s moral law is not random; it’s a reflection of His objective character. This is the only philosophical ground strong enough to condemn tyranny and establish true human rights.
    But is that just another religious opinion? Is that just another subjective choice?

    The Single Fact That Changes Everything.

    This is where Christianity separates itself completely from every other philosophy and faith claim.
    Most religions offer subjective truth. They give you a path, a feeling, a set of guidelines. They rely on inner experience or ancient myth. Christianity, however, rests its entire claim on one objective, historical data point: The Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
    It’s not primarily a moral code. It’s a physical, factual event.
    The claim is simple: Jesus, a real person, died on a real cross, was placed in a real tomb, and three days later, that tomb was objectively empty.


    This moves the conversation out of the Subjective Jail and onto the cold, hard ground of history. It invites you to be a sceptic, an investigator, and a lawyer.
    You have to ask: Was the tomb empty, or wasn’t it?
    If the tomb wasn’t empty, Christianity is a beautiful, inspiring lie. The Apostle Paul himself wrote that if Christ has not been raised, our faith is “futile” (1 Corinthians 15:17, ESV). It’s a binary, objective question.
    If the tomb was empty—if that single historical fact is true—then Christ is who He claimed to be. He is the Objective Lawgiver who stepped into His creation to fix the broken moral system. He is the ultimate, non-subjective reality.

    The Eyewitness Test.

    Now, consider the men and women who first saw the resurrected Christ: the women at the tomb, the two on the road to Emmaus, the Apostles, and the hundreds of others. They were ordinary people.
    The Romans and the authorities of the day had a simple solution to this new “truth”: torture or kill the eyewitnesses.


    Think about the test this presented. These eyewitnesses were beaten, imprisoned, stoned like Stephen, and ultimately crucified and Peter was even crucified upside-down, believing he wasn’t worthy to die the same way as his Lord.
    If the Resurrection was just a subjective feeling, a comforting story they made up, then at what point—under the burning oil, facing the lions, or nailed to the wood—would they have broken?


    At what point would they have cried out, “Stop! It was a lie! We didn’t see him resurrected. The nail wounds weren’t healed. Please, let me live!”?
    They had the ultimate out. They could have saved their lives by admitting to a lie. But historical evidence shows they did not. Not one of the captured eyewitnesses—who were tortured and executed—denied the core fact.


    No one dies for what they know is a lie. People die for what they believe is the objective truth.
    The empty tomb is the proof that gives authority to the principle (objective truth), which in turn validates your anger (the Outrage Paradox). You don’t have to agree with every single Bible verse right now. You just have to deal with the objective fact of that missing body and the immovable testimony of those who paid the ultimate price.

    The Question That Remains.

    If the Resurrection is true, what does that objective fact change about the subjective world you live in? What does this mean for you?

    Further Reading & Resources 📚

    I. Academic & Secular Sources.

    For those interested in the psychological and sociological analysis of moral disagreement in the digital age, I recommend exploring the research that validates the “Outrage Paradox”:
    • Political Polarization and Moral Outrage on Social Media
    o Authors: Jordan Carpenter, William Brady, Molly Crockett, René Weber & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
    o Source: Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 52, No. 3, Article (2021)
    o Focus: This article proposes a theoretical model explaining how “moral outrage” (anger and disgust at a perceived moral violation) on social media leads to affective polarization, dehumanization, and a decay of civil discourse—the very chaos we see in daily news feeds.

    II. ESV Bible Scripture Anchors.

    To explore the concept of an objective moral law written on the human heart, and the historical solution found in Christ:


    Topic: Scripture Reference (ESV) Purpose in Post


    The Law on the Heart Romans 2:15 Explains the Outrage Paradox—why humans instinctively know right from wrong, even if they reject God’s law.


    Objective Reality/Christ Hebrews 13:8 Guarantees shared reality and objective permanence: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”


    The Resurrection 1 Corinthians 15:17 Establishes the entire Christian faith on a single, objective, historical fact: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins.”

  • My Fight for Truth-Living With the Consequences of a Medical Nightmare

    My Fight for Truth-Living With the Consequences of a Medical Nightmare

    How The UK NHS Tried to Ruin My Life.

    This is a personal story about my recent ordeal with the NHS, a journey that began with a routine blood test and ended with my life forever changed. What I learned is that sometimes, the answers we seek aren’t in a complex diagnosis, but in the most basic things around us—like in our homes.


    It all started when I went for a full blood test because of my hypothyroidism. The results came back with alarming news: I had hypercalcemia, extremely high calcium levels, along with high creatinine and signs of kidney dysfunction. My GP advised me to go straight to the local hospital’s Same Day Emergency Care (SDEC) unit.


    SDEC is a diagnostic department where doctors try to figure out what’s causing symptoms, a bit like the TV series House. Over the next seven days, I went back and forth to the hospital. Each time, my blood tests showed worsening symptoms. My calcium levels were above 3.0, a point where I should have been admitted for a hydration drip, but I was sent home and told to “drink more water.” The more I drank that week, the worse I felt. I told this to Dr. Lok, the Cancer and Sarcoidosis doctor in charge of the department for that single week. This detail would be key in everything that happened next.

    A Wrong Turn: The Focus Shifts.

    Dr. Lok decided that because my symptoms resembled those of his patients, he immediately requested urgent lung scans with iodine, which is unheard of in the local NHS hospital. I was injected with iodine, which works like a marker pen for CT scans. The results came back, and he pointed to a small, dark area on my lung, which he suggested might be cancer or sarcoidosis.


    I repeated to Dr. Lok that I was there for my kidneys and calcium levels, not a lung issue. But he insisted on a procedure: an urgent EBUS bronchoscopy was arranged. I was put under immense pressure and rushed into the procedure room. There was no time to think, no proper introduction from the medical staff. When I asked the junior registrar who was to perform the procedure if he had done it before, he said he had five years of training and that a consultant was present. He assured me I was in “good hands.”

    The Unthinkable Procedure.

    Before the procedure, I was injected with three different sedatives, but none of them worked. I was fully awake and conscious. The six nurses in the room were concerned and advised against continuing, but the junior registrar decided to proceed anyway.
    The moment the procedure began, I was in excruciating pain. I couldn’t scream because of the tube down my throat, so I waved my arms and stamped my feet on the bed, begging them to stop.

    This went on for an hour. I never saw the consultant in the room, but I heard the young registrar say, “I’m lost in the lungs. What do I do?” A voice from the corner of the room behind me—the consultant—replied, “I don’t know, I wasn’t watching. You’ll have to break procedure and hope you don’t spread infection.”
    He told the registrar to go back up to where the lungs split into the right and left airways and start again, which he did. After an hour of unimaginable pain, the procedure was finally over. When I asked why they didn’t stop, they simply told me I was fine. I was then rushed to the recovery area, and despite my inability to breathe properly, they brushed it off as normal and sent me home.

    The Aftermath: The Truth and The Fight.

    When I got home, I knew something was terribly wrong. My breathing was severely impacted. I called for an ambulance, and three paramedics attended. The senior paramedic, who had been through the same procedure, though sedated, said, “They don’t tell you how painful it will be after for around twenty-four hours,” and then they left after a few basic tests.

    It turns out the dark spot on my lung was nothing—no cancer, no sarcoidosis, and no bacterial infections. The procedure was completely unnecessary.


    It was then I began to question everything. I purchased some equipment, tested my tap water, and found it had a high level of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), at 440 TDS. The legal limit for undrinkable water in the UK is around 500 TDS, and my tap water was just below this limit. My theory was correct: drinking my tap water was making my condition worse. Within seven days of switching to a low-TDS spring water (which tested around 90 TDS) and then filtering it to bring the TDS down to 60, all my original symptoms normalized. The problem wasn’t a disease; it was my tap water.


    The fight for justice against the NHS lasted for two and a half months with the patient complaints department. They dismissed my evidence, including the water suppliers’ results confirming my findings. The hospital refused to do follow-up scans that would prove the damage to my lungs was a result of a wrong diagnosis and malpractice. I received an email from the executive of the local NHS Counties who had signed off on the complaints department’s verdict that no malpractice had taken place. Although they were sorry the procedure caused what I had outlined, they protected themselves against a mountain of proof. The complaint was swept under the carpet, and I was left with only 30% of my breathing capacity.


    I can no longer stand for long periods or do simple tasks like cooking or cleaning. As a rescue diver, I could once go down thirty to forty meters and rescue a diver without breaking a sweat. I am now left with the devastating, permanent consequences of a botched procedure that was never needed in the first place. My story isn’t about wanting sympathy; it’s about raising awareness. I’m just one of many who suffer in silence, and my experience highlights how difficult it is to find objective truth in a modern secular society, even within a trusted government service like the NHS.


    The stress over those two and a half months was so immense that I sought professional legal help, a solicitor for a “no win, no fee” arrangement. But no solicitors would take on the NHS in a legal battle for the truth and justice. I contacted the local paper, and even they didn’t want to publish against the local hospital. They use the same hospital, so I don’t blame them.
    I am grateful for every short, painful breath I can take. What would you do in my situation? Do you have any constructive thoughts or similar experiences? Please leave a message in the comments.
    A personal account by Jo blogs on “Is Truth in the Way.”

    Note: This is the original version of “My Fight for Truth – Living With the Consequences of a Medical Nightmare”, first published on 24 September 2025. A lightly updated repost, together with Part 2, is now available here:

    3 responses to “My Fight for Truth-Living With the Consequences of a Medical Nightmare”

    1. My Fight For Truth. Part One – Is Truth in the Way Avatar
      My Fight For Truth. Part One – Is Truth in the Way

      […] My Fight for Truth-Living With the Consequences of a Medical Nightmare […]

    2. Christopher Francis Avatar
      Christopher Francis

      Hello. I am truly sorry for what you have had to endure. I can’t say that I have had a very similar experience. I would offer that God is more than able to heal you, no matter what anyone else says or believes. I would encourage you not to give up on God healing you. I will pray for you as well. I also recently read a devotional series on God’s Restoration that another blogger has written. I found it very encouraging and helpful and I would recommend you checking it out if you are inclined. Here is the link: https://wordpress.com/reader/blogs/161410387/posts/1773 Cheers.

      1. Jo Blogs Avatar
        Jo Blogs

        Christopher, thank you so much for reading this difficult piece and taking the time to leave such a kind and thoughtful comment. As this is my first time blogging, getting a second comment from my first subscriber on such a sensitive topic is very kind of you.

        You’re right—it has been a truly difficult ordeal. But honestly, a big reason I even started this blog was because being unable to do much else left me with the time and the chance to join the Great Commission in this new, limited way. Your message is a great source of encouragement that I’m on the right track.

        I particularly appreciate you saying that “God is more than able to heal you.” It’s so easy to get lost in the human failures and injustice of the situation but remembering that ultimate truth is what keeps me focused on God.

        Please know that your offer to pray for me is deeply valued.

        I will definitely check out the devotional series on God’s Restoration that you linked to. That theme is exactly what’s needed right now. Thank you for thinking of me and sharing that resource.

        It means a lot to have your support. God bless you.

        Jo