A. It explains what it ought to explain. The naturalist runs into contradictions when explaining the origins of life. They attempt to say it is due to abiogenesis, in contradiction to the Law of Biogenesis. They have also attempted to say life is due to panspermia. I will show that Christianity provides a logical hypothesis to account for the “unexplained” phenomena we observe in our world: the origen of the universe, the design of the universe, and the universality of morality.
B. Internal logical consistency. Scientific Naturalism holds to the belief that matter must either be eternal or have the capability of creating itself (spontaneous generation/evolution). However, the Second Law of Thermodynamics implies that matter cannot be eternal. Also, the First Law of Thermodynamics as well as the Law of Causality states that it is impossible for anything in nature and to create itself. If scientific naturalism is unable to account for the creation of the universe and the existence of man as free agents, then it is inadequate as a comprehensive worldview to explain the entirety of reality.
C. Factual adequacy. Scientific Naturalism claims that it is able to answer the
…show more content…
I argue that Secularism was a significant source for the emerging new creed of scientific naturalism in the mid-nineteenth century. Not only did early Secularism help clear the way by fighting battles with the state and religious interlocutors, but it also served as a source for what Huxley, almost twenty years later, termed ‘agnosticism’.” It is proper for Huxley to label scientific naturalism as agnosticism due to that world views strenuous efforts to explain life and the universe without acknowledging the existence of