Replies

but as I mentioned, naturalism is a scientific philosophy, not empirically verified by science with respect to biology.

Lot of things have not been proven or verified by science yet. Sometimes the more we discover or prove, the more questions it creates.

Again, it would be illogical to use science, which assumes naturalism, to prove naturalism. In that respect, science will forever be vulnerable because in the end, the entire body of science is based on the assumption of naturalism. Where experiments can be carried out, and repeated, we can trust that in those cases naturalism holds true. For instance, this is the case with gravitational pull on Earth. However, in the realm of biology, naturalism is a philosophical assumption that cannot be verified. I find it amusing that one looks at major morphological similarities in fossilized forms in the Earth's strata and say "Ah ha! Those must be ancestors!". The entire theory of evolution, and abiogenesis as well, rests *entirely* on the philosophical presupposition of naturalism. I don't fault science for this assumption since this is the essence of science, however I am always struck by how many people do not seem to realize this major achilies heel of science, especially in the realm of biology. At any rate, you have your faith, I have mine. Good luck!