Search Wikipedia Search Create accountLog in

Natural theology 25 languages

Article Talk Read Edit View history Tools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the branch of theology. For the 19th-century book by William Paley on natural theology and the teleological argument, see Natural
Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity.

Natural theology, once also termed physico-theology,[1] is a type of theology (similar to deism, but it also Part of a series on the
includes religious ideas besides God) that seeks to provide arguments for theological topics (such as the Philosophy of religion
existence of a deity) based on reason and the discoveries of science, the project of arguing for the existence
Religious concepts [show]
of God on the basis of observed so-called natural facts, and through natural phenomena viewed as divine, or
Challenges [show]
complexities of nature seen as evidence of a divine plan (see predestination) or Will of God, which includes
God [show]
nature itself. [2]
Theories of religion [show]
This distinguishes it from revealed theology, which is based on scripture and/or religious experiences,[3] also
Philosophers of religion [show]
from transcendental theology, which is based on a priori reasoning.[citation needed] It is thus a type of philosophy,
Related topics [show]
with the aim of explaining the nature of the celestial motors, or gods, or of one supreme god, that are
responsible for heavenly motion. Aristotle's tractate on metaphysics claims to demonstrate the necessary Philosophy of religion article index

existence of an unmoved prime mover. V ꞏT ꞏE

For monotheistic religions, this principally involves arguments about the attributes or non-attributes of a deity,
and especially the deity's existence, using arguments that do not involve recourse to revelation.[4][5]

The ideals of natural theology can be traced back to the Old Testament and Greek philosophy.[6] [7] Early sources evident of these ideals come from
Jeremiah and the Wisdom of Solomon (c. 50 BC)[6][8] and Plato's dialogue Timaeus (c. 360 BC).[9]

Marcus Terentius Varro (116–27 BCE) established a distinction between political theology (the social functions of religion), natural theology and mythical
theology. His terminology became part of the Stoic tradition and then Christianity through Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas.[10]

Ancient Greece [ edit ]

See also: Metaphysics (Aristotle)

Besides Hesiod's Works and Days and Zarathushtra's Gathas, Plato gives the earliest surviving account of a natural theology. In the Timaeus, written
c. 360 BCE, we read: "We must first investigate concerning [the whole Cosmos] that primary question which has to be investigated at the outset in every
case, — namely, whether it has always existed, having no beginning or generation, or whether it has come into existence, having begun from some
beginning."[9] In the Laws, in answer to the question as to what arguments justify faith in the gods, Plato affirms: "One is our dogma about the soul...the
other is our dogma concerning the ordering of the motion of the stars".[11]

Ancient Rome [ edit ]

Marcus Terentius Varro in his (lost) Antiquitates rerum humanarum et divinarum (Antiquities of Human and Divine Things, 1st century BCE)[12] established a
distinction between three kinds of theology: civil (political) (theologia civilis), natural (physical) (theologia naturalis) and mythical (theologia mythica). The
theologians of civil theology are "the people", asking how the gods relate to daily life and the state (imperial cult). The theologians of natural theology are
the philosophers, asking about the nature of the gods, and the theologians of mythical theology are the poets, crafting mythology.[13]

Middle Ages [ edit ]

From the 8th century CE, the Mutazilite school of Islam, compelled to defend their principles against the orthodox Islam of their day, used philosophy for
support, and were among the first to pursue a rational Islamic theology, termed Ilm-al-Kalam (scholastic theology). The teleological argument was later
presented by the early Islamic philosophers Alkindus and Averroes, while Avicenna presented both the cosmological argument and the ontological argument
in The Book of Healing (1027).[14]

Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225 – 1274) presented several versions of the cosmological argument in his Summa Theologica, and of the teleological argument in
his Summa contra Gentiles. He presented the ontological argument, but rejected it in favor of proofs that invoke cause and effect alone.[15][16] His quinque
viae ("five ways") in those books attempted to demonstrate the existence of God in different ways, including (as way No. 5) the goal-directed actions seen in
nature.[17]

Early modern [ edit ]

Raymond of Sabunde's (c. 1385–1436) Theologia Naturalis sive Liber Creaturarum, written 1434–1436, but published posthumously (1484), marks an
important stage in the history of natural theology. John Ray (1627–1705) also known as John Wray, was an English naturalist, sometimes referred to as the
father of English natural history. He published important works on plants, animals, and natural theology, with the objective "to illustrate the glory of God in
the knowledge of the works of nature or creation".[18] Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) established another term for natural theology as theodicy,
defined exactly as "the justification of God".[19] He viewed the science in a positive light as it supported his personal ethical belief system.[20]

William Derham (1657–1735) continued Ray's tradition of natural theology in two of his own works, Physico-Theology, published during 1713, and Astro-
Theology, 1714. These later influenced the work of William Paley.[21]
Nineteenth century [ edit ]

In An Essay on the Principle of Population, published during 1798, Thomas Malthus ended with two chapters on natural theology
and population. Malthus—a devout Christian—argued that revelation would "damp the soaring wings of intellect", and thus never let
"the difficulties and doubts of parts of the scripture" interfere with his work.

William Paley, an important influence on Charles Darwin,[22] gave a well-known rendition of the teleological argument for God.
During 1802 he published Natural Theology, or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity collected from the
Appearances of Nature.[23] In this he described the Watchmaker analogy, for which he is probably best known. His book, which was
one of the most-published books of the 19th and 20th centuries, presents a number of teleological and cosmological arguments for
the existence of God. The book served as a template for many subsequent natural theologies during the 19th century.[24]
William Paley,
The Bridgewater Treatises were eight works "the Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of God, as manifested in the Creation" published author of Natural
Theology
during the years 1833 to 1836. They were written by eight scientific authors appointed by the President of the Royal Society using
an £8000 bequest from Francis Henry Egerton, 8th Earl of Bridgewater. The series, which was widely read, offered extensive
discussion concerning the relationship between religion and science, and many of the authors offered observations on natural theology, although their
views on the subject differed widely.[25] Responding critically to one of the series, Charles Babbage published what he termed The Ninth Bridgewater
Treatise: A Fragment.[26]

Professor of chemistry and natural history Edward Hitchcock also studied and wrote on natural theology. He attempted to unify and reconcile science and
religion, emphasizing geology. His major work of this type was The Religion of Geology and its Connected Sciences (1851).[27]

The Gifford Lectures were established by the will of Adam Lord Gifford to "promote and diffuse the study of Natural Theology in the widest sense of the term
—in other words, the knowledge of God." The term "natural theology", as used by Gifford, refers to theology supported by science and not dependent on
the miraculous.[28]

Criticism [ edit ]

The ideas of natural theology did not come without criticism. Many opposed the idea of natural theology, but some philosophers had a greater influence,
including David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Søren Kierkegaard, and Charles Darwin. Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics also heavily opposed the entirety of natural
theology.[29]

David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion played a major role in Hume's standpoint on natural theology. Hume's ideas heavily stem from the idea
of natural belief.[30] It was stated that, "Hume's doctrine of natural belief allows that certain beliefs are justifiably held by all men without regard to the quality
of the evidence which may be produced in their favour".[30] However, Hume's argument also stems from the design argument.[31] The design argument
comes from people being labeled as morally good or evil.[31] Hume's argument claims that if we restrict ourselves to the idea of good and evil, that we must
also assign this to the designer as well.[31] Hume states, "I will allow that pain or misery in man is compatible with infinite power and goodness in the Deity...A
mere possible compatibility is not sufficient. You must prove these pure, unmixt, and uncontrollable attributes...".[31] Hume argues for the idea of a morally
perfect deity and requires evidence for anything besides that.[31] Hume's arguments against natural theology had a wide influence on many philosophers.[32]

Charles Darwin's criticism of the theory had a broader impact on scientists and commoners.[32] Darwin's theories showed that humans and animals
developed through an evolutionary process. This implied that a chemical reaction was occurring; but it had no influence from the idea of God.[32] However,
Darwin's ideas did not erase the question of how the original ideas of matter came to be.[32]

Faith and fideism [ edit ]

Main articles: Neo-orthodoxy, Presuppositionalism, Fideism, Christian existentialism, Postliberal theology, Reformed epistemology, Leap of faith,
Religious ground motive, Canonical approach, Non-overlapping magisteria, Double truth, and Two Truths doctrine

Immanuel Kant and Søren Kierkegaard had similar ideas about natural theology.[33] Kant's ideas focused more on the natural dialect of reason, while
Kierkegaard focused more on the dialect of understanding.[33] Both men suggest that "the natural dialect leads to the question of God".[33] Kant argues for
the idea that reason leads to the ideas of God as a regulative principle.[33] Kierkegaard argues that the idea of understanding will ultimately lead itself to
becoming faith. [clarification needed][34] Both of these men argue that the idea of God cannot be based solely on the idea of reason, that the dialect and ideals
will transcend into faith. [clarification needed][33]

Karl Barth opposed the entirety of natural theology. Barth argued that "by starting from such experience, rather that from the gracious revelation through
Jesus Christ, we produce a concept of God that is the projection of the highest we know, a construct of human thinking, divorced from salvation history".[29]
Barth argues that God is restricted by the construct of human thinking if he is divorced from salvation.[35] Barth also acknowledges that God is knowable
because of his grace. Barth's argument stems from the idea of faith rather than reason. Barth held that God can be known only through Jesus Christ, as
revealed in scripture, and that any such attempts should be considered idolatry.

Søren Kierkegaard questioned the existence of God, rejecting all rational arguments for God's existence (including the teleological argument) on the
grounds that reason is inevitably accompanied by doubt.[36] He proposed that the argument from design does not take into consideration future events
which may serve to undermine the proof of God's existence: the argument would never finish proving God's existence.[37] In the Philosophical Fragments,
Kierkegaard writes:

The works of God are such that only God can perform them. Just so, but where then are the works of the God? The works from which I would
deduce his existence are not directly and immediately given. The wisdom in nature, the goodness, the wisdom in the governance of the world –
are all these manifest, perhaps, upon the very face of things? Are we not here confronted with the most terrible temptations to doubt, and is it
not impossible finally to dispose of all these doubts? But from such an order of things I will surely not attempt to prove God's existence; and
even if I began I would never finish, and would in addition have to live constantly in suspense, lest something so terrible should suddenly
happen that my bit of proof would be demolished.
— Søren Kierkegaard, Philosophical Fragments[37]

Fideists may reject attempts to prove God's existence.[38]

See also [ edit ]

 Astrotheology
Religion portal
Book of Nature
Deism Philosophy portal

Natural religion
Epicureanism
Intelligent design
Natural magic
Natural religion
Religious naturalism
Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action
Theistic evolution
Theistic rationalism
Theophysics
Noetics

References [ edit ]

1. ^ "Physicotheology | Encyclopedia.com" . www.encyclopedia.com.
Retrieved 9 October 2020.
2. ^ Chignell, Andrew; Pereboom, Derk (2020), "Natural Theology and Natural
Religion" , in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Fall 2020 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University,
retrieved 9 October 2020
3. ^ McGrath, Alister (2022). "Natural Theology" . St Andrews Encyclopaedia
of Theology.
4. ^ Wahlberg, Mats (2020), "Divine Revelation" , in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.),
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 ed.), Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 9 October 2020
5. ^ "Natural Theology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy" . Retrieved
9 October 2020.
6. ^ a b
Swinburne, Richard (2007). "THE REVIVAL OF NATURAL THEOLOGY".
Archivio di Filosofia. 75: 303–322 – via JSTOR.
7. ^ McGrath, Alister (2022). "Natural Theology" . St Andrews Encyclopaedia
of Theology.
8. ^ Jennifer Mary Dines (8 June 2004). The Septuagint . A&C Black. p. 19.
ISBN 978-0-567-08464-4. "usually assigned to the late first century BCE"
9. ^ a b
"Plato, Timaeus" .
10. ^ McGrath, Alister (2022). "Natural Theology" . St Andrews Encyclopaedia
of Theology.
11. ^ "Plato, Laws" .
12. ^ "Marcus Terentius Varro | Roman author" . Encyclopedia Britannica.
Retrieved 4 January 2019.
13. ^ "Charles Darwin: Evolutionary Theory, Past and Present" (PDF).
earth.northwestern.edu. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 June 2010.
14. ^ Abrahamov, Binyāmîn (1990). "Introduction". In Abrahamov, Binyāmîn (ed.).
Kitāb al-Dalīl al-Kabīr . Brill. ISBN 9004089853.
15. ^ Hedley Brooke, John. Science and Religion. 1991.
16. ^ "DOES THE EMPIRICAL NATURE OF SCIENCE CONTRADICT THE
REVELATORY NATURE OF FAITH? - Edge.org" . edge.org.
17. ^ "Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways (Part 2): Contingency, Goodness, Design" .
thatreligiousstudieswebsite.com.
18. ^ Armstrong, Patrick (2000). The English Parson-Naturalist. Gracewing.
p. 46. ISBN 0-85244-516-4.
19. ^ "Principles of Natural Theology 2" . maritain.nd.edu. Retrieved 9 October
2020.
22. ^ Wyhe, John van (27 May 2014). Charles Darwin in Cambridge: The Most
Joyful Years . World Scientific. pp. 90–92. ISBN 9789814583992.
23. ^ Paley, William (2006). Natural Theology, Matthew Daniel Eddy and David
M. Knight (Eds.) . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. ^ Eddy, Matthew Daniel (2013). "Nineteenth Century Natural Theology" .
The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology.
25. ^ Topham, Jonathan R. (2022). Reading the Book of Nature: How Eight Best
Sellers Reconnected Christianity and the Sciences on the Eve of the
Victorian Age . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-
81576-3. OCLC 1298713346 .
26. ^ Babbage, Charles (24 October 2018). "The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise. A
Fragment" . John Murray – via Google Books.
27. ^ Hitchcock, Edward. "Making of America Books: The religion of geology
and its connected sciences" . University of Michigan. Retrieved 8 August
2009. [page needed]
28. ^ See Gifford Lectures online database accessed 15 October 2010.
29. ^ a b Sherry, Patrick (2003). "The Religious Roots of Natural Theology". New
Blackfriars. 84 (988): 301–307. doi:10.1111/j.1741-2005.2003.tb06302.x –
via JSTOR.
30. ^ a b
Gaskin, J.C.A. (July 1974). "God, Hume and Natural Belief" .
Philosophy. 49 (189): 281–294. doi:10.1017/S0031819100048233 .
JSTOR 3750118 . S2CID 170299604 .
31. ^ a bc de Bradley, M.C. (September 2007). "Hume's Chief Objection to
Natural Theology". Religious Studies. 43 (3): 249–270.
doi:10.1017/S0034412507008992 . S2CID 170294685 – via JSTOR.
32. ^ a bc d Swinburne, Richard (2007). "The Revival of Natural Theology".
Archivio di Filosofia. 75: 303–322 – via JSTOR.
33. ^ a bc de Fremstedal, Roe (March 2013). "The Moral Argument for the
Existence of God and Immorality: Kierkegaard and Kant". The Journal of
Religious Ethics. 41: 50–78. doi:10.1111/jore.12004 – via JSTOR.
34. ^ Pourmohammadi, Na'imeh (2013). "KIERKEGAARD AND THE
ASH'ARITES ON REASON AND THEOLOGY". Rivista di Filosofia Neo-
Scolastica. 105: 591–609 – via JSTOR.
35. ^ Matthews, Gareth (30 January 1964). "Theology and Natural Theology" .
The Journal of Philosophy. 61 (3): 99–108. doi:10.2307/2023755 .
JSTOR 2023755 – via JSTOR.
36. ^ Southwell, Gareth (6 January 2011). Words of Wisdom: Philosophy's Most
Important Quotations And Their Meanings . Quercus. ISBN 978-1-78087-

20. ^ Youpa, Andrew (2016), "Leibniz's Ethics" , in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The 092-2.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 ed.), Metaphysics 37. ^ a b

Søren Kierkegaard, Philosophical Fragments (1844).
Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 9 October 2020 38. ^ "Arguments for the existence of God" (PDF). Hodder Education.

21. ^ Weber, AS., Nineteenth-Century Science: An Anthology, Broadview Press, Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 October 2022.

2000, p. 18.

Further reading [ edit ]

A Bridgewater Treatise for the 21st Century. Science. (Vol 301, p. 1051, 22
August 2003). A review by Robert T. Pennock of philosopher of science Michael
Ruse's book Darwin & Design.
Babbage, C., The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise; Murray, 1837 (reissued by
Cambridge University Press, 2009; ISBN 978-1-108-00000-0)
Bascom, John, Natural Theology (1880)
the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature; Bridgewater Treatises,
Faulder, 1803 (reissued by Cambridge University Press, 2009; ISBN 978-1-108-
00355-1)
Polkinghorne, J. and Oord, T.J., The Polkinghorne Reader] : Science, Faith,
and the Search for Meaning (SPCK and Templeton Foundation Press, 2010)
ISBN 1-59947-315-1 and ISBN 978-0-281-06053-5
 John B. Cobb, A Christian Natural Theology, 1965 (online edition )
Connolly, Brendan, The Natural Religion , 2008; ISBN 978-0-9558313-0-0
Hauerwas, Stanley, With the Grain of the Universe: The Church's Witness and
Natural Theology ISBN 1-58743-016-9
Paley, W., Natural Theology. Or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of
Topham, J. R. Reading the Book of Nature: How Eight Bestsellers Reconnected
Christianity and the Sciences on the Eve of the Victorian Age , University of
Chicago Press, 2022; ISBN 978-0-226-81576-4
Waters, B.V. (2015). "Toward a new kalām cosmological argument" . Cogent
Arts & Humanities. 2 (1). doi:10.1080/23311983.2015.1062461 .

External links [ edit ]

Apollos.ws A Christian site surveying arguments for the existence of God and responses to common arguments against.
Toward a new kalām cosmological argument
Catholic Encyclopedia article Bridgewater Treatises
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion by David Hume
Babbage, Charles The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise 2nd edn. 1838, London: John Murray.
Natural Theology article in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Categories: Theology Religion and science Philosophy of religion Deism

This page was last edited on 15 July 2023, at 13:08 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Code of Conduct Mobile view Developers Statistics Cookie statement