The Theories Of Scientific Naturalism

In Christianity, the external reality, the universe, is created by the God from out of nothing, which works orderly according to the natural laws in a harmony (Sire, 2006, p. 32). Christian perspective of God’s character is closely reflected in God’s creations, gives an establishment for science, morality and reason (Sire, 2006, p. 32).

In the beginning God created the heavens with the Earth along with man in his own image. For over 1500 years, Christian followers were heavy believers of the bible, seeing it as the primary source for knowledge. Then came the scientific revolution in the 1500s, a movement which challenged the Christian view of the universe. It was a time when people were looking for a new way of thinking about the world. Since then and to this day, there has been several instances in which scientific inquiry and religious belief have collided in their ideologies.

The problem in scientific creationism, and what I see as a reason for its exclusion from the science classroom in public schools, is the fact that it looks as if, from the outside, the whole theory that it rest on is simply a contortion of the traditional version of creation described in Genesis, custom-made to fit in with Darwin’s theory of evolution. R. M. Hare would probably say that scientific creationism is simply a modification of the story of creation in Genesis, to fit into the ÒblikÓ of the religious fundamentalist. A blik, as Hare describes it, is a pre-set worldview held by all people, in which they draw from when forming certain opinions on any particular subject. In the case of religious fundamentalist, whose faith in the validity of the Book of Genesis is an essential part of their blik, it becomes necessary for them to contort their literal view of the Book of Genesis into a form that is scientifically acceptable. For this reason, creation science still does not have a place in the science classroom of public schools.

There are a variety of differing worldviews in practice today. Every person has a worldview that is shaped by their experiences, pasts, families, traditions, values, and beliefs that form the core of who they are. The Christian worldview is no exception. This worldview is formed by the beliefs and teachings of the Bible. The worldview is shaped and centered around the view of who God is, the purpose of humanity, the true identity of Jesus, the restoration of humans to God, acknowledging the strengths and weakness of the worldview, and the practicality of living out the worldview.

There a lot of differing worldviews in practice today. Every person has a worldview that is shaped by their experiences, pasts, families, traditions, values, and beliefs that form the core of who they are. The Christian worldview is no exception. This worldview is formed by the beliefs and teachings of the Bible. The worldview is shaped and centered around the view of who God is, the purpose of humanity, the true identity of Jesus, the restoration of humans to God, acknowledging the strengths and weakness of the worldview, and the practicality of living out the worldview.

Everyone has a Worldview. “A collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group.” (1) Some have a Biblical Worldview. A Biblical Worldview is founded on the word of God. It is how a Christian views the world. Both belief systems are equally important to each individual, but there are differences in the way they view the natural world, human identity, human relationships, and culture.

The Old Testament of the Holy Bible gives many examples which provide modern man with guidelines for the use of scientific method. Millam (2008) explains that there is an underlying order in nature demonstrated by the patterns and regularities of God’s creations. These regularities can be seen in the forces of nature and are stable throughout space and time (Millam, 2008). The original classification of species, use of precise measurement, and even the first account of scientific research, are all included in the Old Testament of the Holy Scriptures. God gives scientists some clear frames of reference for seeking knowledge and truth in science.

Scientific Naturalism and Christianity are possibly the two most contradictory worldviews that are in our culture today. They are also the two most difficult to understand by one another. There is very little about these two worldviews that they have in common. They are a vast amount of ideas and beliefs held by adherents of each that are different. In order for these two worldviews to successfully co-exist in society, it is important to understand, accept, and learn from each one.

Worldviews has been an important theme in this book so far. Some worldviews are in conflict with having a Christian worldview and as a Christian scientist it can be difficult to work with those who have different viewpoints. On another note, Wright gives many reasons for why a Christian can and should be a scientist. Many people do not think you can be both, but he gives valid reasons for why that is false. He says that science is very enjoyable, and you can learn about creation, how it works and what is in it (p.48). Lastly, God gives everyone different talents and interests. If your interests are studying God's creation you should do it. By studying science, more specifically biology you get to learn about God and what he has created. You get to learn about him and worship him while doing what you

Naturalism is a prominent worldview that is held and praised widely in today’s modern world. However, when examined closely and held up to certain criteria that would establish it as a legitimate worldview, one can see that it comes up short in several areas such as the source of morality, internal logical consistency, and human nature. In these areas that Naturalism fails, Christianity succeeds by offering a valid alternative. Christianity then can further establish itself as a superior worldview by offering convincing arguments such as ontological, cosmological, argument for design, argument that

Christian Science don’t have to many beliefs but they do have words that were left behind for other Christian Scientists. “Christian Science religion teaches the existence of an all-powerful God and the authority and inspiration of the Bible. Christian Scientists believe in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus to be essential to human redemption. Mary Baker Eddy taught the belief in one God and unlike traditional orthodox Christianity, described God with the synonyms: Principle, Soul, Mind, Spirit, Life, Truth, and Love.” (“What is Christian Science?”).

Biology professor Kenneth Miller’s central argument is that science should not undermine one’s faith in God. “Science itself does not contradict the hypothesis of God.” He makes this argument by stating that science explains the things that God has made and in doing so, trying to prove the existence of God through natural or scientific means does not make sense. Once the supernatural is introduced, there is no way to use nature, thus science, to prove or disprove its existence. Miller argues that science gives us the window to the dynamic and creative universe that increases our appreciation of God’s work. The central point of his argument is evolution. Creationists, of the intelligent design movement, argue that nature has irreducible complex systems that could have only arisen from a creature or designer. This theory is widely supported among devout believers in the Bible and God. Miller argues that if they truly believe this, completely ignoring hard facts and theories, then they are seeking their God in the darkness. Miller, a Christian himself, believes that this “flow of logic is depressing”; to fear the acquisition of knowledge and suggest that the creator dwells in the shadows of science and understanding is taking us back to the Middle Ages, where people used God as an explanation for something they have yet to or want

Science “aims to save the spirit, not by surrender but by the liberation of the human mind” (Wilson, 7). Both religion and science seek to explain the unknown. Instead of surrendering reasoning with the traditional religion, a scientific approach one takes full authority over it. Being an empiricist, Wilson takes favors the scientific approach to the question: “why are things the way they are?” This question can pose two meanings: How did this happen, and what is the purpose. Traditional religion answers this question with stories, many of which are impossible to prove or disprove, making them arguments of ignorance. These explanations entail the adherent surrender reasoning and put faith in the resolution. According to Wilson these are always wrong (Wilson, 49). Science is the most effective way to learn about the natural world. Religion is merely speculation.

Since the dawn of mankind religion has been one of the most significant elements of a society’s social and cultural beliefs and actions. However, this trend has declined due to the general increase in knowledge regarding our the natural sciences. Where we had previously attributed something that we didn’t understand to the working of a higher power, is now replaced by a simple explanation offered by natural sciences. While advocates of Religion may question Natural Sciences by stating that they are based on assumptions, it is important to note the Natural Sciences are based on theories and principles which can be proven using mathematical equations and formulas. Faith however contrasts from the easily visible feasibility of data

The scope of Natural Sciences is to create principles, theories and laws about the natural world. Natural Sciences theories and laws are based on a scientific methodology (hypothetico-deductive method ). The scientific method always tries to connect theory and observation, this is one manner to consistently organize our observation of the natural world . Experiments are often used in order to replicate aspects of the world in which we are interested. In fact, following this method before stating something to be true scientists needs first to arrange an hypothesis then make some tests in order to prove the theory and finally make up the law. Doing that we can say to acquire a proof and, therefore, good knowledge.