Supernaturalism
A friend posted an interesting blog that made me think. It was about science, naturalism, and whether various vocations conflict with Christianity.
I'm gonna step back and ask a more fundamental question. Does naturalism (in this case, an assumption that there is no supernatural) necessarily conflict with Christianity (specifically, the Bible)?
Belief in the supernatural is almost universal among Christians. But why? Does the Bible really teach supernaturalism? Or is it simply a matter of tradition and human philosophy inserting this concept into writings from a time when people described things with less 'scientific' language?
I'm not sure. But I don't see the big conflict between naturalism and Christianity. I always get funny looks when people who know I'm a Christian find out I also believe in Evolution. I'm sure I'd get even funnier looks if I said I don't believe in the supernatural. But it's definitely worth considering. I think it's quite possible that God is natural himself or that "natural" intrinsically refers to the way God created and interacts with his creation.
And of course, there are natural processes that we don't yet understand.
posted by Matt @ 6:23 PM
11 Comments:
Hmm.. that's interesting.. Im not really sure what to say about it... so I am going to post a short and sweet version of my belief...
I believe that God uses science in creation.
Perhaps you could clarify a bit - do you mean to posit something substantial, or are you merely playing around with definitions? (To which I've no objection, only I should like to know one way or the other.)
I know you don't intend 'naturalism' in the ordinary philosophical sense of the word, nor for that matter 'evolution', both of which as usually taken involve the denial of God's existence, or at least pragmatic agnosticism.
I was always astounded by the anti-science view of "Christians" in Oklahoma. I went to a very rigorous Catholic school and was taught evolution...there was no debate about creationism
or the misnomer of "creation science". Science was considered what humans did with God's gifts. There is only conflict if you take the entire Bible literally, and I didn't know a single priest who did. In fact, one
of the priests argued that if you take the Bible literally, you end up missing many of the deeper literary allusions and metaphors. I would agree.
Joel - I do mean 'naturalism' in the ordinary sense of the word. Same with 'evolution'. Neither of those addresses whether or not God exists.
anonymous - I agree with you, but I'm not sure about the "taking the Bible literally" part. I always take the Bible literally unless there's a compelling reason not to. I just don't think what it literally says is always the same as what most christians in Oklahoma believe it says.
hey matt, enjoy denver and whatever took you there. sorry you were delayed a bit by the airline. i think they run a tight schedule - and maybe it takes 30 mins to get your bag (and/or you) from the agent to the gate. just shoot for 35 mins next time ;)
about supernaturalism: i think the strongest biblical evidence for supernaturalism is simply the resurrection of christ. it is the fundamental tenet of our faith, and is by definition supernatural. (i define supernatural as "outside the realm of natural processes". it's not every day that you meet a resurrected creature, and while i'm not an MD or biologist, i dont think humans will ever be revived after being 3 days dead).
p.s.- i agree with you that evolution and christianity are not intrinsically distinct (think venn diagrams: it's quite possible for overlap). as a personal theory, i think it's possible that the 'early hominids' did come from apes, but that c. 6000 yrs ago, god still made the first man, adam, and his wife eve, and put them in a garden somewhere in east africa. and somewhere along the way those 'early hominids' found in the fossil record became extinct (maybe even killed by man! how's that for irony -- created beings kill off those that were evolving!) your thoughts?
p.p.s. - i passed my gen. exam on friday. WHOOP. and i'm leaving for austria tomorrow (mon @ 5). seeya in jan.
Matt,
You don't think most people consider evolution a process that happens 'naturally' in the sense of mechanistic (i.e. sans God) cause and effect? I know Dawkins and Gould certainly do, and they seem like pretty widely read authorities on the subject. Granted, this is not an assertion about his existence, merely his relevance (deism as opposed to atheism).
And yeah...I dunno about this whole 'literary allusions and allegories' business. As someone clever I was reading the other day noted, 'there is nothing that the wit of man can produce which the wit of some other man cannot allegorise.' But of course it naturally depends on what one means by 'literally' - Jesus said 'I am the door'...
sorry, 'metaphors' - didn't mean to misquote anybody.
Joel - I DO believe that evolution happens "'naturally' in the sense of mechanistic cause and effect". And I don't believe God is sitting there guiding all the steps along the way.
The only unique thing about my view (as opposed to the atheists') is that I believe God determined the initial conditions. (and of course, the initial conditions determine the final outcome and all the natural mechanistic processes in between)
Brad - Congratulations!!!! I'm sure you'll do just as well at your defense. Good luck on writing that dissertation!
I basically agree with what you said with regard to evolution. I think the first true human might've evolved around 6,000 years ago - perhaps the humans before that lacked something. I could be wrong though.
Have a great time in Austria! See ya in Jan!
I have always believed God created the universe using science. What we believe is supernatural is completly natural in my belief. Just because we dont understand a particular thing like ghosts or Aliens or whatever the case maybe, if they exist(which I believe they do) they would have to exist completly naturally, if it wasnt natural the world and universe would be out of alignment. If there are Aliens and it wasnt natural for there to be Aliens, then how could the universe have them? We have very little knowledge regarding these things, so to us it may seem supernatural. If you took a car that is produced today back in time 200 or 300 years,they would think it was supernatural.
Matt-
Perhaps I ought to stop telling you what you believe. In any case, I suppose I wasn't making a clear enough distinction between mechanistic in the atheist sense and your theistic use of the term. Really, your view sounds remarkably similar to Edwards' view of the unregenerate human soul (at least insofar as I understand it). Odds fish, that.
What do you think about the notion that death entered the world only after the Fall? That seems to be fairly clearly stated in the Bible - to you take it metaphorically, or what? Am I correct in assuming your view of evolution does require innocent creatures (i.e. pre-Adamic creation as yet untainted by his sin) to die?
Post a Comment