The World Seems Too Natural

  • Thread starter Thread starter FossilResin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FossilResin

Guest
I feel that the biggest argument against belief in the supernatural (in our case especially, an all-good and all-powerful God who is intimately involved in our individual daily lives and has a precise theology of Truth about Him) is not the existence of evil, but rather that the world seems so overwhelmingly natural. Every religious experience, every strange phenomena, every transcendent glimmer of sacred light from beyond the veil can now, it seems, be explained away by how the human brain works in its marvelous ability for deep feeling, wishful thinking and self-deception.

I am indeed looking for some serious solid evidence against the notion that all things have a natural explanation.

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.” 1 John 4
 
FossilResin said:
I am indeed looking for some serious solid evidence against the notion that all things have a natural explanation.
Click to expand...
I think this is a failed line of reasoning.

Not having a valid explanation isn’t proof of anything, except we don’t have an explanation YET.

Conversely, having an explanation may be assuring but science has taught us that not all our explanations stand scrutiny and the test of time.
 
It is actually one of two arguments against existence of God refuted by st. Thomas Aquinas. However I think it may be more helpful for you to read “Miracles” by C.S.Lewis, especially chapters 2 and 3.
Long story short, he uses the argument that rational minds cannot be caused by irrational nature.
 
FossilResin said:
I am indeed looking for some serious solid evidence against the notion that all things have a natural explanation.
Click to expand...
In some peoples opinion the world is essentially just blind natural processes, there is no purpose or goals as an natural end of physical activity. And at the same time they are willing to believe that the brain works in its marvellous ability for deep feeling, wishful thinking and self-deception. All of which involve goal direction.

Being a materialist or a metaphysical naturalist is called wanting your cake and eating it at the same time.
 
Last edited:
Your thoughts are immaterial. They cannot be measured, detected or known until and unless you express them.
 
FossilResin said:
I am indeed looking for some serious solid evidence against the notion that all things have a natural explanation.
Click to expand...
There is no such evidence, because even when something truly can’t be explained by natural observances that we are aware of, it can at least be attributed to a lack of understanding thus far.
 
FossilResin said:
… the world seems so overwhelmingly natural …
Click to expand...
The world is natural. Where supernatural applies is in the grace given, and it will not be fruitful without cooperation. Conversion is through actual graces. The ability to remain free from serious sins is the result of cooperation with grace for those in the state of grace, however, who knows the totality of all the temptations faced.
 
Last edited:
There are things in the world that do not seem natural, specifically a common morality. Many claim that there is not a common morality, but upon examination one finds very common themes, across all societies and cultures. Murder and assault are always considered wrong, theft is always considered wrong, respect of parents is always present, and even with regards to sex and marraige what one finds is that these are always regulated by societal norms. Now across all areas of morality, there are differences, but those can certainly be explained by our corrupt nature, ie original sin. But the commonalities are much greater than the differences. Where did this come from?
 
The world is natural and ordinary.

That is the most extraordinary thing about it.
 
Willing_Spirit said:
There is no such evidence, because even when something truly can’t be explained by natural observances that we are aware of, it can at least be attributed to a lack of understanding thus far.
Click to expand...
There are things that are in principle the opposite of something else.
Materialism of the gaps is just as much a fallacy if the cause cannot in principle be natural. And holding to a possible natural unknown is only legitimate when dealing with scientific particulars. The larger the variables the more justified the scepticism. But there are things that follow out of necessity which are simply denied because they do not fit in with the current or popular way thinking.
 
Last edited:
From Summa:

Article 3. Whether God exists?​

(…)
Objection 2. Further, it is superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles has been produced by many. But it seems that everything we see in the world can be accounted for by other principles, supposing God did not exist. For all natural things can be reduced to one principle which is nature; and all voluntary things can be reduced to one principle which is human reason, or will. Therefore there is no need to suppose God’s existence.
(…)
Reply to Objection 2. Since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must needs be traced back to God, as to its first cause. So also whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason or will, since these can change or fail; for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown in the body of the Article.

Which (not surprisingly, if you think about it) boils down to the same point Lewis is making.
 
FossilResin said:
Every religious experience, every strange phenomena, every transcendent glimmer of sacred light from beyond the veil can now, it seems, be explained away by how the human brain works in its marvelous ability for deep feeling, wishful thinking and self-deception.
Click to expand...
No because “explained away” here means explained in the natural realm, not supernatural realm.

Its explaining the angle of the paint strokes in the painting and the color of the paint strokes in the painting, but cannot explain why there is a painting or who the painter is.

Thus this can’t serve as “argument against belief in the supernatural”
 
Well, the concept of “natural” doesn’t do away with the fact that none of these things designed and created themselves. When we see something as simple as a doghouse (incalculably less complex than a simple cell) we immediately perceive that it required a designer and builder. And yet, because something is “natural”, we seem content to deny that requirement somehow. The Designer and Creator are simply not immediately evident, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t a necessity.
 
That living matter arose from non-living matter, that it survived and improved, and so order arose from disorder, all this by natural processes, is for me a powerful argument for the existence of a wise and loving Creator.
 
Do you ever find yourself in awe at the natural?
Such as a spider building a web? The wonderful bright colors of flowers? How tiny planet earth is in space?

How could these things happen by chance?
 
Levitation, and so ascension.

Singularity (Big Bang).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top