Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Cold Case Christianity

God / Theism

Three M’s That Naturalism Can’t Provide

146Everyone has a worldview; all of us experience and interpret the world through a collection of beliefs that guide our understanding. As an atheist, I accounted for my experiences through the lens of naturalism. I believed everything I experienced and observed could be explained in terms of natural causes and laws. I never thought deeply about the inconsistencies in my view of the world, or the fact that my naturalism failed to explain three characteristics of my daily experience:

Mind
If naturalism is true, some form of physicalism or materialism must rule the day. The “problem of mind” (as philosophers and researchers commonly describe it) is only a “problem” because the material limitations of naturalism strain to account for immaterial consciousness. Naturalism can explain the existence of the brain, but little more. Our “minds” are an illusion created by the physical processes that are occurring in our material brains. But if this is the case, our thoughts are merely the result of a series of physical causes (and resulting effects). You might believe you are thinking freely about what you just read, but in reality your “thoughts” are simply the consequences of neural “dominoes” falling, one against the next. In a world of strict causal physicalism, free will (and freely reasoned thoughts) are simply an illusion.

Morality
If naturalism is true, morality is nothing more than a matter of opinion. All of us, as humans, have simply come to embrace those cultural or personal mores that best promote the survival of the species. There is no transcendent, objective moral truth. Instead, cultures merely embrace the values and moral principles that “work” for them and have resulted in the flourishing of their particular people group. If this is the case, one group of evolved humans has no business trying to tell another evolved group what is truly right or wrong from a moral perspective. After all, each group has successfully arrived at their particular level of development by embracing their own accepted moral standards. Arguments over which moral truths provide for greater human flourishing are simply subjective disagreements; there is no transcendent, objective standard that can adjudicate such disagreements from a naturalistic perspective.

Meaning
If naturalism is true, life’s meaning and purpose are simply in the eye of the beholder. If your son tells you that he thinks meaning is found in playing video games ten hours a day, there is little you can offer as an objective rebuttal. After all, if there is no transcendent author of life, each of us gets to write our own script. While you may believe your son has missed the point of his existence and has forfeited the opportunity to experience life fully, you really don’t have any objective authority upon which to ground an alternative. As a naturalist, you are inventing your own meaning as well; purpose and significance (from a purely naturalistic perspective) are nothing more than opinion and personal preference.

As an atheist, I chose to cling to naturalism, in spite of the fact that I lived each day as though I was capable of using my mind to make moral choices based on more than my own opinion. In addition, I sought meaning and purpose beyond my own hedonistic preferences, as though meaning was to be discovered, rather than created. I called myself a naturalist while embracing three characteristics of reality that simply cannot be explained by naturalism. As a Christian, I’m now able to acknowledge the “grounding” for these features of reality. My philosophical worldview is consistent with my practical experience of the world. As a Christian, I’m now able to acknowledge the 'grounding' for many features of reality. My philosophical worldview is consistent with my practical experience of the world. Click To Tweet

For more information about the scientific and philosophical evidence pointing to a Divine Creator, please read God’s Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe. This book employs a simple crime scene strategy to investigate eight pieces of evidence in the universe to determine the most reasonable explanation. The book is accompanied by an eight-session God’s Crime Scene DVD Set (and Participant’s Guide) to help individuals or small groups examine the evidence and make the case.

J. Warner Wallace is a Dateline featured Cold-Case Detective, Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, Adj. Professor of Christian Apologetics at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, author of Cold-Case ChristianityGod’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, and creator of the Case Makers Academy for kids.

Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email

Save

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Save

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Written By

J. Warner Wallace is a Dateline featured cold-case homicide detective, popular national speaker and best-selling author. He continues to consult on cold-case investigations while serving as a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. He is also an Adj. Professor of Christian Apologetics at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, and a faculty member at Summit Ministries. He holds a BA in Design (from CSULB), an MA in Architecture (from UCLA), and an MA in Theological Studies (from Gateway Seminary).

13 Comments

13 Comments

  1. Pingback: The Shape of Reality: Identifying Evil | TC Apologetics

  2. Pingback: Can the worldview of naturalism rationally ground mind, meaning and morality? | Wintery Knight

  3. Pingback: The Best Question to Ask When Starting a Conversation About God | Cold Case Christianity

  4. Pingback: Can the worldview of naturalism rationally ground mind, meaning and morality? | Wintery Knight

  5. Pingback: The Three Things You Need to Read this Week (10/06/13) | DaveCruver.com

  6. Pingback: The Three Things You Need to Read this Week (10/06/13) | Apologetics ForumApologetics Forum

  7. Pingback: Three M’s That Naturalism Can’ t Provide | A disciple's study

  8. Pingback: If Moral Decisions Are Dependent on Circumstances, Are There No Objective Moral Truths? | Cold Case Christianity

  9. Pingback: Does the "Unreasonable" Nature of the Virgin Conception Invalidate the Story of Jesus? | Cold Case Christianity

  10. Pingback: The Power of “Nice” and the Importance of “Good” | TLG Christian News

  11. Pingback: mid-week apologetics booster (6-8-2017) – 1 Peter 4:12-16

  12. Pingback: Lessons from Doctor Strange: "Looking Through a Keyhole" -

  13. Pingback: Three M’s That Naturalism Can’t Provide | Cold Case Christianity – Elders Scrolls

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement

You May Also Like

Evangelism and Case Making

J. Warner often gets asked for advice on how to start making the case for Jesus or the truth of the Christian worldview. How...

Biblical Reliability

Skeptics sometimes argue that the Christianity in its early years looked different than modern-day Christianity. Specifically, they question whether Jesus claimed to be God...

Evangelism and Case Making

How can we interact with people who have already decided Christianity is false? What approaches would be most effective with people who are biased...

Other Worldviews

Every worldview has to answer three important questions. First, “How did we get here”? This question is foundational to how we see the world...