Christians are normally accused of damaging or being a threat to scientific development, but recently there are Theistic Christians, who believe that God used natural processes to create the universe, but is there a biblical basis for naturalism? (ie the philosophical belief that everything arises from natural properties and causes
2Does the bible, a book written with the express purpose of conveying the Word of a supernatural God, containing many instances of supernatural acts, provide a basis to believe there is no such thing as the supernatural? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the question but as written the answer would seem self-apparent– Isaac MiddlemissMar 27 at 0:09
1Claiming that God used natural processes in the creation of the universe is very different to the claim that naturalism is true– Isaac MiddlemissMar 27 at 0:10
christianity.stackexchange.com/q/1533/23657 Related?– User 14Mar 27 at 0:15
1We don't allow "Is there a Biblical Basis for X?" question here; instead they should be phrased as "What is the Biblical Basis for X?", but such questions need to demonstrate that there is a Christian group which actually believes it.– curiousdannii ♦Mar 27 at 3:10
naturalism means belief that theres no supernatural. Evolution is true, but its not naturalism. the bible is a religious book not scientific. Read biologos website for the best explanations for evolution defense.– Michael16Mar 27 at 16:37
No. The bible describes supernatural works of God (creation, various miracles, the resurrection) as exactly that: supernatural. You might try to argue that God accomplished these things through natural means, but you would not be able to use the Bible itself to do so; you would rather be attempting to show the opposite of the plain reading.
Up-voted +1. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were *not made of things which do appear*. Hebrews 11:3. Things which 'do not appear' are not natural.– Nigel JMar 31 at 7:51
Naturalism is the idea that the presently observed laws of nature are all that exist and are inviolate.
Everything we know about these presently observed laws tells us that humans, once they are dead, must stay dead.
Scripture records a number of instances of dead people being resurrected. Besides, Christ Himself, of course, most people at least know about Lazarus (John 11:1–44), but other instances include:
- A widow's son in Zarephath (1 Kings 17:17–22)
- A Shunammite's son (2 Kings 4:18–37)
- A man thrown into Elisha's grave (2 Kings 13:20-21)
- Jairus' daughter (Mark 5:35-42)
- A young man at Nain (Luke 7:11-15)
- Tabitha (Acts 9:36–42)
- Eutychus (Acts 20:7–12)
This is just the start of miracles recorded in the Bible. Besides Genesis 1, which is almost wholly miraculous, we have:
- Jesus turning water into wine.
- Jesus walking on water.
- Many, many healing miracles.
- Several people being "taken up" in the body by God.
- Sticks transmuting into snakes.
- Fire from Heaven consuming rock.
- A bush burning but not being harmed.
- Alterations and temporary cessations of celestial motion.
This is hardly a complete list, and I've focused on miracles that more clearly cannot be explained by providence (that is, having a purely naturalistic explanation aside from incredible improbability).
Therefore, one is left with two choices:
- Naturalism is true, and Scriptural history is false. In which case, one ought not to believe a single word of it, as its credibility is non-existent.
- Scripture is true, in which case Naturalism is assuredly false. In which case, one ought to be suspicious of claims which are based in Naturalism but contradict the reliable history of Scripture, such as "the big bang", life beginning from a mess of chemicals rather than from an act of Creation, evolution (both cosmological and biological), Earth existing for millions of years, and the Noahic Flood not occurring.
On the other hand, Scripture teaches that God is constant, and upholds all things in an orderly manner. It is this very order, as contrasted to the presumed capriciousness of pagan deities, that allows for scientific study in the first place. The very notion that Nature behaves in a consistent, predictable manner according to unchanging Laws is of Christian origin. When an atheist assumes that the laws of physics will be the same tomorrow as they are today, they are borrowing a Christian idea, and this idea certainly does have a scriptural basis.
This idea, that Nature (usually) behaves in a consistent, predictable manner is a most excellent and thoroughly scriptural idea that is the very basis of what we call "science". Without this idea, our ability to study the world and advance technologically would be severely limited.
It is the idea of strict Naturalism, that exceptions to these ordinary Laws cannot occur, that is not sustainable. Accordingly, when we rule out supernatural explanations a priori, we risk ruling out our ability to discover Truth. This is especially problematic when we allow "science" (that is, strict Naturalism) to dictate a conclusion that is clearly at odds with the trustworthy history of Scripture. God's Word is paramount; by placing that first, we are much more likely to arrive at correct understandings.