I am fully aware that science is not the ultimate vehicle for proving or disproving matters of faith. Science is the use of observation and experimentation to discover things about the natural universe. It really has nothing to contribute to proving the reality of any faith system, one way or another. It can contribute data that either supports or undermines beliefs associated with a faith system, but it is not able to prove anything.
That said, science does have its place in helping us understand and move forward with life in our natural existence. Using the scientific method, we are able to understand better the natural world we live in, and are able to make discoveries that advance civilization in massively tremendous ways.
But what happens when people try to ignore or manipulate science in ways that make a mockery of it? Honestly, that is what is happening a lot these days.
Recently, St. Phillip’s College in San Antonio, Texas fired one of its biology professors for teaching students in an anatomy class that a person’s sex is determined by X and Y chromosomes. I’m not kidding! This is, of course, an established scientific fact, but apparently the school has gone totally woke and fired him for teaching the facts concerning the course he was hired to teach. In other words, they apparently wanted him to teach false biological information. And this happened to him after having taught that class at the school for twenty years.
And how about this one? The California legislature is, as of this writing, working on amending a child welfare law that would make a parent subject to arrest for child abuse if they do not affirm the preferred gender identity of their children. Forget the fact that a child is objectively either male or female based on well established biological knowledge, woke political beliefs now trump everything – even objective scientific knowledge.
What we have here is a situation in society where people’s personal subjective beliefs and feelings trump objectively real facts. So how in the world can a person justify that kind of thinking? It is absolutely possible when the thinking is based on a naturalistic worldview.
What is Naturalism?
To get at this conundrum, the first thing we need to do is define Naturalism. Naturalism is the belief that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists.
Implications of Naturalism
If the definition of Naturalism is true, there are a couple of significant implications that emerge.
First, there could be no God. Since God is a transcendent being, and Naturalism only acknowledges the existence of the natural universe. There is no place for the existence of a god. Naturalists are atheists.
Another important implication is that, ultimately, everything in all of existence can be understood by science. Science is the use of observation and experimentation to discover things about the natural universe. Of course, there is a lot that is currently not known by science. But since, according to Naturalism, the natural universe is all that exists, and it operates purely by natural laws, once human beings get to the place where they are able to fully understand the natural laws that govern the things that are now unknown, we will be able to understand them. For Naturalists, there can be nothing outside the reach of science.
Thus, as a bottom line conclusion, Naturalists believe Naturalism and science are essentially the same. If you believe in Naturalism, it can legitimately be said that you believe in science. For them, Naturalism = science.
Oops, There is a Problem
As defined above, Naturalism is the belief that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists. And if that is true, then everything can ultimately be proven using the scientific method. So, what science can be brought to bear to prove that the definition of Naturalism is true? How do we know that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists? Well, science can’t prove that. In fact, science can’t even deal with that matter.
The reason science can’t deal with it is that Naturalism ≠ science. Naturalism is not a physical thing that can be observed and experimented upon. It is a belief system, and belief systems can’t be evaluated by science.
So what we have here is a belief system that proclaims that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists, and that definition is being asserted by something that is not subject to natural laws – a belief. And this is where things, for Naturalists, begin to horribly break down.
As we look more deeply at this situation, it becomes evident quite quickly that morality and values are expressions of a belief system, and are not natural elements that can be evaluated using the scientific method. So, Naturalism claims that everything, without exception, is subject to scientific evaluation, but itself cannot be evaluated that way.
So What About Values and Morality?
Let’s revisit for a moment the illustrations at the beginning of this article – the cases of St. Phillips College and the law being considered by the California legislature. The people making the decisions on these cases are using a reasoning process that assumes that God does not exist. Even if they claim to believe in God, they are dealing with values and morality based on their own subjective ideas, not on any objective factor. And once they dismiss the belief that God has revealed the objective nature of reality, they are then free to dismiss the entirety of reality that is taught in the Bible. At that point, they have bought into the idea that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists (the naturalistic worldview) without any objective basis for doing so. They do it because, well, that is just what they believe.
So when it comes to the intersection of their belief in science and their relativistic values, they are put in a position where they must assert the objective reality of science, yet must deal with values and morals outside of their stated worldview beliefs. These two things simply cannot coexist and something has to give. And in virtually all cases, they end up throwing out science in order to affirm their values. This is how you get to firing biology teachers for teaching biology and making laws that promote a version of sexuality that does not reflect reality.
So why does this problem exist for Naturalists? It exists because both the natural universe and a transcendent reality both exist. And by accepting one yet denying the other, they lose any objective basis for making value or moral judgements. They literally have to make it up on the fly based on their own personal preferences.
But when they begin doing that, there will inevitably be conflicts at some point. We see that conflict playing out big time in modern society as biology teachers are getting fired for teaching biology and state legislatures are making laws that assert a view of reality that is not real (among many other examples that could be given).
Bottom Line
So, does real exist? Well, of course it does! And if you want to get at actual reality, you have to acknowledge the existence of both the natural universe and transcendent reality – which Naturalism does not do.
God is an objectively real person that we can know in an objectively real personal relationship. Beyond that, He has created us as self-conscious beings with the ability to learn and understand not only about the natural universe, but also about the spiritual reality that we personally interact with in our lives. So not only do Christians know a personal relationship with God that allows them to understand values and morality based on an objectively real foundation, they also take science more seriously than those who claim that everything can be understood by science.
So yes, real does exist. And it exists quite differently from the confused mess that Naturalists are pushing.
© 2023 Freddy Davis