Atheism vs. Theism ≠ Science vs. Religion

On April 23rd of 2005 - five years and some months before I would accept my Creator - I posted an entry titled "Eureka!" [on LiveJournal] I was excited because I finally found "a belief with no God AT ALL."

A few days prior, on the 20th, I stated I was "of Agnosticism", but renounced it just two days later after reading "even Agnostics could believe in a God". At this time, my interest in my own religion was renewed. Basically, I believed in Jesus as being nothing more than a moral teacher, rejecting all supernatural aspects in the gospels and attributing his miracle-working to illusionism. In effect, you could say I was a Christian atheist adhering to Jesuism. Though, in my mind, I first named this "religion" of mine Jeschriism before coining it Scientialism. In fact, just a few days after posting the "Eureka!" entry, I recorded a song in which I rapped, "I believe in Jesus, just not the Jesus you believe in / I believe in God, just not the God you believe in / Jesus was a human and God's real name is Science" I had fallen into the all-too-common perception of having to choose either religion or science. Interestingly, something about Jesus still attracted me. However, I did not take into account the claims to divinity made by Jesus. Without realizing it at the time, my belief in Jesus as a great human teacher who said the sort of things He did would actually make Him either a deceived madman or a deceiving fiend.

So, just a day after coining the word Scientialism for myself, I had read of Scientism and adopted it as my belief. Scientism claims that true knowledge can only be obtained scientifically. It claims the scientific method is the only way to understand truth and reality, not just one mode of reaching knowledge. The science (i.e. evolution) vs. religion paradigm is presupposed in the definition of Scientism. The "single-minded adherence to only the empirical" is stated as a strictly scientific worldview, whereas the "Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science" is stated as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism seeks to do away with all metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims of truth, simply because they cannot be understood by the scientific method. Science becomes the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. I am writing this to give you a sense of my confusion and search for something that would satisfy my existence. I now see Scientism's flawed logic and failure to meet its own standards of verifiability. I also now understand the cooperative relationship between faith and reason and see that the conflict instead lies between competing worldviews.

Understanding Our Triune God

The doctrine of the Trinity did not have any relevance to my life (that is, I did not believe it had any relevance) until the night the Trinity saved me. The truth is that the Trinity was always relevant, even in my stubborn rebellion. Our Triune God will always be relevant to humans, whether they're saved or not. The Godhead is a diverse community working together in perfect harmony and is thus the perfect example for us to unite in our differences. When we work together in fellowship, our unity should reflect the unity of the Trinity. God commands us to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:15-17) because it leads to the best for our lives. God did not create mankind because He was lonely; the Trinity undermines this assertion. Rather, He created mankind to allow us to experience the ineffable bliss with Him.

Those who say the Trinity is a man-made doctrine simply because the word "trinity" is not in the Bible are making a poor excuse. The word "rapture" is not in the Bible either, but the concepts of both are clearly taught in Scripture. The word "rapture" comes from the Latin "raptus", which means "caught up" or "taken away". In the Bible, the Greek "harpazó" is used, which means "seize by force". Similarly, we gave the name "Passion" to the suffering of Christ from the Greek "paschó" (meaning "suffer") used in the Bible. In the Vulgate, the Latin "passio" is used, meaning "suffering". The word "bible" is not in the Bible either, so should we not believe that the books we have are the Bible? [On an interesting side note, the Koine Greek "ta biblia" ("the books") was also used by Hellenistic Jews to describe their Septuagint and the singular "biblion" had the meaning of "scroll" before it was used to mean "book".]

Anyway, a recent session in my apologetics group has made me understand the Trinity and its relevance better than I did before. One thing I learned in particular stood out and I felt a need to share it.