Editing Natural theology

{{Short description|Theology reliant on rational and empirical arguments}}
{{hatnote group|
{{for|the 19th-century book by William Paley|Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity}}
{{Distinguish|Deism}}}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2019}}
{{Philosophy of religion sidebar| Related topics}}
'''Natural theology''' is a type of [[theology]] that seeks to provide arguments for theological topics, such as the [[existence of God|existence of a deity]], based on human [[reason]].<ref name=sep2020fall>{{Citation|last1=Chignell|first1=Andrew|title=Natural Theology and Natural Religion|date=2020|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/natural-theology/|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Fall 2020|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=2020-10-09|last2=Pereboom|first2=Derk}}</ref> It is distinguished from [[revealed theology]], which is based on [[supernatural]] sources such as [[scripture]] or [[religious experiences]].<ref name=sep2020fall/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=McGrath |first1=Alister |title=Natural Theology |url=  https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/NaturalTheology#section2 |journal=St Andrews Encyclopaedia of Theology |date=2022}}</ref> <!---also from [[transcendental theology]], which is based on ''[[A priori and a posteriori|a priori]]'' reasoning.{{citation needed|date=December 2022}}--->  It is thus a form of theology open to critical examination, aimed at understanding the divine.<ref name=sep2025spr/>

Natural theology does not preclude the concept of [[divine intervention]] nor presuppose a [[clockwork universe]]; however, it demands that any position be supported through reasoned arguments based on natural reason.

In contemporary philosophy, natural theology is not limited to approaches based on empirical facts, such as natural phenomena, nor are its conclusions limited to [[pantheism]].<ref name=sep2025spr/> It was once also termed "'''physico-theology'''".<ref>{{Cite web|title=Physicotheology {{!}} Encyclopedia.com|url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/physicotheology|access-date=2020-10-09|website=www.encyclopedia.com}}</ref>{{efn|Etymology: {{lang|grc|φὐσις, physis}} (nature)}}

Natural theology includes theology based on [[science|scientific]] discoveries, arguments for God’s existence grounded in observed natural facts, and interpretations of natural phenomena or complexities as evidence of a divine plan (see [[predestination]]) or [[Will of God|God's Will]]. It also includes efforts to explain the nature of celestial motors, [[gods]], or a supreme god responsible for heavenly motion. Natural theologians have offered their own explanations for some [[Lists of unsolved problems#Natural sciences, engineering and medicine|unsolved problems in science]].

== Overview ==
=== Natural theology and physico-theology ===
In the modern understanding, natural theology does not solely refer to the study of God based on natural facts but rather to the study of God based on natural reason.<ref name=sep2025spr>
{{Citation|last1=Chignell|first1=Andrew|title=Natural Theology and Natural Religion|date=2025|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2025/entries/natural-theology/|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Fall 2020|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=2025-03-22|last2=Pereboom|first2=Derk}}</ref> Although the term "physico-theology" is still occasionally used to describe an earlier understanding, natural theology does not necessarily involve [[teleological arguments]], such as the defense of [[creationism]] or the [[intelligent design]] hypothesis,<ref name=sep2025spr/> as seen in [[natural theology#Nineteenth century|19th–century England]].  Also, [[a posteriori]] [[cosmological argument|cosmological arguments]] such as [[Aristotle]]'s [[unmoved mover|first mover]] theory and [[a priori]] [[ontological argument|ontological arguments]] such as those of [[Anselm of Canterbury|Anselm]] and [[Descartes]] fall within the scope of natural theology.<ref name=sep2025spr/> 

Furthermore, natural theology is not limited to Christian theology. As will be described later, natural theology—i.e., the study of God through reason rather than revelation—has been explored by ancient Greeks such as [[Plato]] and by Islamic philosophers such as [[Ibn Sina]].

=== History ===
For [[monotheism|monotheistic religions]], this principally involves arguments about the [[Cataphatic theology|attributes]] or [[negative theology|non-attributes]] of a deity, and especially the [[existence of God|deity's existence]], using arguments that do not involve recourse to [[revelation]].<ref>{{Citation|last=Wahlberg|first=Mats|title=Divine Revelation|date=2020|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/divine-revelation/|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Fall 2020|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=2020-10-09}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Natural Theology {{!}} Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|url=https://iep.utm.edu/theo-nat/|access-date=2020-10-09|language=en-US}}</ref>

The ideals of natural theology can be traced back to the [[Old Testament]] and [[Greek philosophy]].<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Swinburne|first=Richard|date=2007|title=The Revival of Natural Theology|journal=Archivio di Filosofia|volume=75|pages=303–322}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=McGrath |first1=Alister |title=Natural Theology |url=https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/NaturalTheology#section3 |journal=St Andrews Encyclopaedia of Theology |date=2022}}</ref> Early sources evident of these ideals come from [[Jeremiah]] and the [[Wisdom of Solomon]] (c. 50 BCE)<ref name=":0" /><ref name="Dines2004">{{cite book|author=Jennifer Mary Dines|title=The Septuagint|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_g_UAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA19|date=8 June 2004|publisher=A&C Black|isbn=978-0-567-08464-4|pages=19|quote=usually assigned to the late first century BCE}}</ref> and [[Plato]]'s dialogue [[Timaeus (dialogue)|Timaeus]] (c. 360 BCE).<ref name="NA229">{{cite web| url = https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180;query=section%3D%23400;layout=;loc=Tim.%2028a| title = Plato, ''Timaeus''}}</ref> Aristotle's [[Metaphysics (Aristotle)|tractate on metaphysics]] claims to demonstrate the necessary existence of an unmoved [[Unmoved mover|prime mover]].

[[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 [[Stoicism|Stoic]] tradition and then [[Christianity]] through [[Augustine of Hippo]] and [[Thomas Aquinas]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=McGrath |first1=Alister |title=Natural Theology |url=https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/NaturalTheology#section4 |journal=St Andrews Encyclopaedia of Theology |date=2022}}</ref>

==Ancient Greece==
Besides [[Hesiod]]'s ''[[Works and Days]]'' and [[Zarathushtra]]'s [[Gathas]], [[Plato]] gives the earliest surviving account of a natural theology.

=== Plato ===
In the ''[[Timaeus (dialogue)|Timaeus]]'', written {{circa|360 BCE}}, in the preamble to the account of the origin of the cosmos, 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."<ref name="NA229"/> The subsequent parts of the text argues for the necessity of a divine craftsman, who rationally constructed the cosmos out of pre-existing chaos (''Timaeus'' 27d-30c) In the ''[[Laws (dialogue)|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".<ref name="NA230">{{cite web| url = https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0166;query=section%3D%231576;layout=;loc=12.966e| title = Plato, ''Laws''}}</ref>

In Book II of the ''[[Republic (dialogue)|Republic]]'' and Book X of the ''[[Laws (dialogue)|Laws]]'', Plato argues against the following ideas: <ref>Plato, ''Republic'', [https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg030.perseus-eng2:2.365/ 365d–e].</ref><ref>Plato, ''Laws'', [https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg034.perseus-eng2:10.885/ 885b].</ref>
# Gods do not exist.
# They exist but do not care about humans.
# They are easily persuaded by offerings and prayers.

=== Aristotle ===
{{See also|Metaphysics (Aristotle)}}
Aristotle's [[Metaphysics (Aristotle)|tractate on metaphysics]] claims to demonstrate the necessary existence of an unmoved [[Unmoved mover|prime mover]].

==Ancient Rome==

[[Marcus Terentius Varro]] in his (lost) ''[[Antiquitates rerum humanarum et divinarum]]'' (''Antiquities of Human and Divine Things'', 1st century BCE)<ref>{{Cite news
    | url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Marcus-Terentius-Varro
    | title=Marcus Terentius Varro {{!}} Roman author
    | newspaper=Encyclopedia Britannica
    | access-date=4 January 2019
}}</ref> established a distinction between three kinds of theology: [[political theology|civil (political)]] (''theologia civilis''), natural (physical) (''theologia naturalis'') and [[mythical theology|mythical]] (''theologia mythica''). The theologians of civil theology are "the people", asking how the gods relate to daily life and the state ([[imperial cult (Ancient Rome)|imperial cult]]). The theologians of natural theology are the [[philosophy|philosophers]], asking about the nature of the gods, and the theologians of mythical theology are the [[poet]]s, crafting [[mythology]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.earth.northwestern.edu/individ/brad/Alumnae.Lect01.pdf|title=Charles Darwin: Evolutionary Theory, Past and Present|website=earth.northwestern.edu|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100613120730/http://www.earth.northwestern.edu/individ/brad/Alumnae.Lect01.pdf|archive-date=13 June 2010|url-status=dead}}</ref>

==Middle Ages==

From the 8th century CE, the [[Mu'tazili|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]]'' ([[Scholasticism|scholastic theology]]). The [[teleological argument]] was later presented by the [[Early Islamic philosophy|early Islamic philosophers]] [[Al-Kindi|Alkindus]] and [[Averroes]], while [[Avicenna]] presented both the [[cosmological argument]] and the [[ontological argument]] in ''[[The Book of Healing]]'' (1027).<ref>{{cite book | title=Kitāb al-Dalīl al-Kabīr | editor-first= Binyāmîn | editor-last=Abrahamov | chapter=Introduction | first=Binyāmîn | last=Abrahamov | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SYqKHJFAhr8C | year=1990 | publisher=Brill| isbn= 9004089853 }}</ref>

[[Thomas Aquinas]] ({{circa|1225}}&nbsp;– 1274) presented several versions of the [[cosmological argument]] in his ''[[Summa Theologica]]'', and of the [[teleological argument]] in his ''[[Summa Contra Gentiles|Summa contra Gentiles]]''. He presented the [[ontological argument]], but rejected it in favor of proofs that invoke cause and effect alone.<ref>Hedley Brooke, John. ''Science and Religion''. 1991.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://edge.org/conversation/does-the-empirical-nature-of-science-contradict-the-revelatory-nature-of-faith|title=Does the Empirical Nature of Science Contradict the Revelatory Naure of Faith|website=edge.org}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thatreligiousstudieswebsite.com/Religious_Studies/Phil_of_Rel/God/five_ways2.php|title=Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways (Part 2): Contingency, Goodness, Design|website=thatreligiousstudieswebsite.com}}</ref>

==Early modern==
[[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 people|English]] naturalist, sometimes referred to as the father of English [[natural history]]. He published important works on [[plants]], [[animal]]s, and natural theology, with the objective "to illustrate the glory of God in the knowledge of the works of nature or creation".<ref>{{cite book | title=The English Parson-Naturalist | publisher=Gracewing | author=Armstrong, Patrick | year=2000 | pages=46 | isbn=0-85244-516-4}}</ref> [[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz]] (1646–1716) established another term for natural theology as theodicy, defined exactly as "the justification of God".<ref>{{Cite web|title=Principles of Natural Theology 2|url=https://maritain.nd.edu/jmc/etext/pnt01.htm#n_1|access-date=2020-10-09|website=maritain.nd.edu}}</ref> He viewed the science in a positive light as it supported his personal ethical belief system.<ref>{{Citation|last=Youpa|first=Andrew|title=Leibniz's Ethics|date=2016|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/leibniz-ethics/|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Winter 2016|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=2020-10-09}}</ref>

[[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.<ref>Weber, AS., ''Nineteenth-Century Science: An Anthology'', Broadview Press, 2000, p. 18.</ref>

== Nineteenth century ==
[[File:William Paley by George Romney.jpg|thumb|159x159px|William Paley, author of ''Natural Theology'']]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 [[Religious views of Charles Darwin|Charles Darwin]],<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cQO3CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA90|title=Charles Darwin in Cambridge: The Most Joyful Years|last=Wyhe|first=John van|date=27 May 2014|publisher=World Scientific|isbn=9789814583992|pages=90–92|language=en}}</ref> 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''.<ref>{{cite book|last=Paley|first=William|title=Natural Theology, Matthew Daniel Eddy and David M. Knight (Eds.)|date=2006|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|url=https://www.academia.edu/1112017}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite journal | author=Eddy, Matthew Daniel |title=Nineteenth Century Natural Theology | journal=The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology | date=2013 | url=https://www.academia.edu/1112017}}</ref>

The [[Bridgewater Treatises]] were eight works "the Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of God, as manifested in the Creation" published 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.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Topham |first=Jonathan R. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CObtzgEACAAJ |title=Reading the Book of Nature: How Eight Best Sellers Reconnected Christianity and the Sciences on the Eve of the Victorian Age |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2022 |isbn=978-0-226-81576-3 |location=Chicago |oclc=1298713346}}</ref>  Responding critically to one of the series, [[Charles Babbage]] published what he termed ''[[Ninth Bridgewater Treatise|The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise: A Fragment]]''.<ref>{{cite web |last=Babbage |first=Charles |date=24 October 2018 |title=The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise. A Fragment |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gB4HAAAAQAAJ&q=Charles+Babbage+Bridgewater |publisher=John Murray |via=Google Books}}</ref>

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).<ref>{{cite web | url=http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=moa;cc=moa;sid=6730fe66e24262cb615a418fad16efb8;rgn=full%20text;idno=AFY7120.0001.001;view=image;seq=0017 | title=Making of America Books: The religion of geology and its connected sciences | publisher=University of Michigan | access-date=8 August 2009 | author=Hitchcock, Edward}}{{Page needed|date=September 2010}}</ref>

The [[Gifford Lectures]] were established by the will of [[Adam Gifford|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]].<ref>See [http://www.giffordlectures.org Gifford Lectures online database] accessed 15 October 2010.</ref>

==Criticism==
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.<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last=Sherry|first=Patrick|title=The Religious Roots of Natural Theology|journal=New Blackfriars|year=2003|volume=84|issue=988|pages=301–307|doi=10.1111/j.1741-2005.2003.tb06302.x}}</ref>

[[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.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last=Gaskin|first=J.C.A.|date=July 1974|title=God, Hume and Natural Belief|journal=Philosophy|volume=49|issue=189|pages=281–294|doi=10.1017/S0031819100048233|jstor=3750118|s2cid=170299604 |doi-access=free}}</ref> 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".<ref name=":4" /> However, Hume's argument also stems from the design argument.<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal|last=Bradley|first=M.C.|date=September 2007|title=Hume's Chief Objection to Natural Theology|journal=Religious Studies|volume=43|issue=3|pages=249–270|doi=10.1017/S0034412507008992|s2cid=170294685}}</ref> The design argument comes from people being labeled as morally good or evil.<ref name=":5" /> 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.<ref name=":5" /> 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...".<ref name=":5" /> Hume argues for the idea of a morally perfect deity and requires evidence for anything besides that.<ref name=":5" /> Hume's arguments against natural theology had a wide influence on many philosophers.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Swinburne|first=Richard|date=2007|title=The Revival of Natural Theology|journal=Archivio di Filosofia|volume=75|pages=303–322}}</ref>

[[Charles Darwin]]'s criticism of the theory had a broader impact on scientists and commoners.<ref name=":1" /> 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.<ref name=":1" /> However, Darwin's ideas did not erase the question of how the original ideas of matter came to be.<ref name=":1" />

===Faith and fideism===
{{Main|Neo-orthodoxy |Presuppositionalism |Fideism | Christian existentialism | Postliberal theology | Reformed epistemology | Leap of faith|Religious ground motive|Canonical approach|Non-overlapping magisteria|Double truth|Two Truths doctrine}}
[[Immanuel Kant]] and [[Søren Kierkegaard]] had similar ideas about natural theology.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Fremstedal|first=Roe|date=March 2013|title=The Moral Argument for the Existence of God and Immorality: Kierkegaard and Kant|journal=The Journal of Religious Ethics|volume=41|pages=50–78|doi=10.1111/jore.12004|url=https://philpapers.org/rec/FRETMA-5 }}</ref> Kant's ideas focused more on the natural dialect of reason, while Kierkegaard focused more on the dialect of understanding.<ref name=":2" /> Both men suggest that "the natural dialect leads to the question of God".<ref name=":2" /> Kant argues for the idea that reason leads to the ideas of God as a regulative principle.<ref name=":2" /> Kierkegaard argues that the idea of understanding will ultimately lead itself to becoming faith.{{clarify|date=September 2022}}<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Pourmohammadi|first=Na'imeh|date=2013|title=Kierkegaard and the Ash'Arites on Reason and Theology |journal=Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica|volume=105|pages=591–609}}</ref> 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.{{clarify|date=September 2022}}<ref name=":2" />

[[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".<ref name=":02" /> Barth argues that God is restricted by the construct of human thinking if he is divorced from salvation.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last=Matthews|first=Gareth|date=January 30, 1964|title=Theology and Natural Theology|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2023755|journal=The Journal of Philosophy|volume=61|issue=3|pages=99–108|doi=10.2307/2023755|jstor=2023755}}</ref> 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. <!--THOMAS TORRANCE SEGMENT COPIED-PASTED FROM PAGE [[NEO-ORTHODOXY]] IN 2025 APRIL-->As [[Thomas F. Torrance]] wrote:
{{blockquote|So far as theological content is concerned, Barth's argument runs like this. If the God whom we have actually come to know through Jesus Christ really ''is'' Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in his own eternal and undivided Being, then what are we to make of an independent natural theology that terminates, not upon the Being of the Triune God—i.e., upon God as he really is in himself—but upon some Being of God in general?  Natural theology by its very operation abstracts the existence of God from his act, so that if it does not begin with deism, it imposes deism upon theology.<ref name = "Ground and Grammar">{{cite book| last = Torrance | first = Thomas| title= The Ground and Grammar of Theology | year= 2001 | publisher = T&T Clark | location = Great Britain | isbn = 0-567-04331-2 | page = 89}}</ref>|author=Thomas Torrance|title=The Ground and Grammar of Theology|source=p. 89}}

<!--THE BELOW WAS PASTED FROM TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT PAGE 1 DECEMBER 2022-->
[[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.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Southwell, Gareth |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=u9JWTes9fH0C&q=S%C3%B8ren+Kierkegaard+%22teleological+argument%22&pg=PT325 |title=Words of Wisdom: Philosophy's Most Important Quotations And Their Meanings |date=2011 |publisher=Quercus |isbn=978-1-78087-092-2}}</ref> 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.<ref name="Kierkegaard">Søren Kierkegaard, ''Philosophical Fragments'' (1844).</ref> In the ''[[Philosophical Fragments]]'', Kierkegaard writes:

{{Blockquote|text=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.|author=Søren Kierkegaard|source=''Philosophical Fragments''<ref name="Kierkegaard" />}}

[[Fideism|Fideists]] may reject attempts to prove God's existence.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Arguments for the existence of God |url=https://www.hoddereducation.co.uk/media/Documents/RS/1-3_Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God_The_cosmological_argument.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221019030040/https://www.hoddereducation.co.uk/media/Documents/RS/1-3_Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God_The_cosmological_argument.pdf |archive-date=19 October 2022 |website=Hodder Education}}</ref>

==See also==
{{Portal|Religion|Philosophy}}
{{Column list|
* [[Astral religion]]
* [[Book of Nature]]
* [[Analogy of Religion]]
* [[Deism]]
* [[Epicureanism]]
* [[Intelligent design]]
* [[Natural magic]]
* [[Natural religion]]
* [[Religious naturalism]]
* ''[[Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action]]''
* [[Theistic evolution]]
* [[Theistic rationalism]]
* [[Theophysics]]
}}

==Note==
{{notelist|33em}}
==References==
{{reflist|33em}}

==Further reading==
{{Refbegin|2}}
* A Bridgewater Treatise for the 21st Century. Science. (Vol 301, p.&nbsp;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)
* [[John B. Cobb]], ''A Christian Natural Theology'', 1965 ([https://web.archive.org/web/20150924112436/http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=1085 online edition])
* Connolly, Brendan, [https://web.archive.org/web/20090408143154/http://thenaturalreligion.org/ ''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}}
* Hernández Valencia, J.S. ''La teología natural de la tradición metafísica milesia, ABT 7 (2022), 139–162'' [https://www.academia.edu/107452403/La_teolog%C3%ADa_natural_de_la_tradici%C3%B3n_metaf%C3%ADsica_milesia]
* Paley, W., ''Natural Theology. Or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of 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., ''[http://templetonpress.org/content/polkinghorne-reader-0 The Polkinghorne Reader<nowiki>]</nowiki>] : Science, Faith, and the Search for Meaning'' (SPCK and Templeton Foundation Press, 2010) {{ISBN|978-0-281-06053-5}}
* Topham, J. R. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=CObtzgEACAAJ 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?}}
* {{cite journal|title=Toward a new ''kalām'' cosmological argument|author=Waters, B.V.|journal=Cogent Arts & Humanities|volume=2|issue=1|year=2015|doi=10.1080/23311983.2015.1062461|doi-access=free}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
* [http://www.apollos.ws/philosophy-of-religion-article Apollos.ws] A Christian site surveying arguments for the existence of God and responses to common arguments against.
* [https://philpapers.org/archive/WATTAN-4.pdf Toward a new ''kalām'' cosmological argument]
* [[Catholic Encyclopedia]] article [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02783b.htm Bridgewater Treatises]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20051122134556/http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/dnr.htm ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion''] by [[David Hume]]
* [http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=A25&viewtype=text&pageseq=1 Babbage, Charles ''The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise''] 2nd edn. 1838, London: John Murray.
* [http://www.iep.utm.edu/theo-nat/ ''Natural Theology''] article in the ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Natural Theology}}
[[Category:Theology]]
[[Category:Religion and science]]
[[Category:Philosophy of religion]]
[[Category:Deism]]