When I saw the title and blurb for Michael Glawe’s opinion piece “Religion and science can coexist,” I was somewhat excited to read a riveting philosophical discussion. However, what I found was a condescending rebuttal to a viral Internet blurb.

As a devout Christian who also loves science, I found the whole thing a bit disappointing. First off, the “Cory Jones” photo is not a good representation of theistic philosophy — I myself found that particular argument for the existence of God pretty unimpressive, lacking a proper understanding of a naturalistic worldview. As such, coming to the conclusion “leave faith to religion, and leave the evidence to science” — as if tearing down this argument was tearing down all logical arguments for the existence of God — was disappointingly simplistic. On top of that, referring to the logic of the “Cory Jones” argument as “adorable” was unnecessarily condescending, and that type of rhetoric really has no place in a scholarly newspaper.

My reasoning for belief in the divinity of Christ and the literal, historical truth of his resurrection would likely require a five-page rant, but I could (very poorly) summarize it this way: I can’t read the words “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water,” and see that as a result of historical misunderstanding or social delusion.

I’m not here to argue about science. I understand that a theory, by definition, can never be proven, and that the theory of evolution has quite a lot going for it. I believe almost everything in the observable universe is going to have a natural scientific explanation — that’s what amazes me so much about God. I don’t see belief in God as either scientific or unscientific. I don’t see belief in Jesus as either logical or illogical. It’s deeper than logic, but it’s also much more complicated than “blind faith.” It’s not emotional dogma I’m holding onto out of fear of the unknown. It’s also not the conclusion of objective logic — and let’s be honest, there’s no such thing as pure objectivity. It’s humanly impossible.

Everybody puts their trust in something. I’m putting my trust in the man who said, “I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to rebuild it in three days.” I’m putting my trust in the God who said, “Before Moses was, I AM.”