Sam Saved by Grace
All of salvation is God's doing
- Aug 10, 2021
- 174
- 56
- 42
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
This is just embarrassing. How can you be so dense? And look, you even used bold caps.Speak for yourself. I think He's never foolish.
No. As you learned earlier, there's an important difference between the ontological naturalism of an atheist and the methodological naturalism of scientists and plumbers (among others). Methodological naturalism does not deny miracles.
You're still confused. Methodological naturalism doesn't rule out miracles. And as I pointed out to you, we wouldn't even exist without God's attention:
Do you not see that God is intimately involved with every particle of this universe, and we would not even exist apart from Him? Nature is just something He made for His purposes
Odd that you would describe it as foolishness, then.
Obviously, I do not believe the truth of God to be foolish. When I refer to the world, I am referring to the world in the same sense as Christ, and the New Testament in multiple places. When I say that the world hates Christ, I am not saying everyone hates Him, or that I hate Him, but the world - the unsaved, fallen realm in which we currently abide.
Those who belong to the Lord are not of the world, but have been called out of the world. This is a concept utterly foreign to you, hence your confusion and mischaracterization of my words. It's not hard to understand what I mean. The world laughs at our unscientific claims, considering them to be foolish. It is just as it was in the days of Noah. But the time will come when the foolishness of God will triumph over the certainty of man and all his methods. And God will be glorified in this.
You can foolishly try and somehow distinguish between a methodological naturalism and a philosophical naturalism, but it is essentially the same. You say it does not rule out the supernatural. Yet I say that it does. "Ontological naturalism" is assumed, and regardless of what the scientist believes personally. Under no circumstances would a supernatural explanation be accepted as valid. Whether it be the origin of the universe, the formation of the planets, or the origin of life, the atheistic position of a godless, metaphysically natural reality is insisted upon in every aspect of scientific practice. Claiming that methodological naturalism doesn't deny the supernatural is patently absurd, a perfect example of empty words. The scientist himself may very well not deny miracles, but methodological naturalism is an approach that assumes that are no miracles by virtue of it's methodology. That's why it's called methodological naturalism - it's methodology rules out the supernatural.
So therefore your defense of philosophical naturalism as a practice that somehow doesn't deny or rule out miracles is just a bunch of empty doubletalk.
Upvote
0