Though more will probably be added, I think enough has been said to demonstrate that there is more to reality than the physical particles and complex arrangements of physical particles that science studies. But, if we accept that naturalism fails, we still need to ask ourselves what else reality may hold.
Or, more simply, we know that there is something “out there”, so what is it? Tying together several of the past discussions here, we see:
1. Much, if not all, of our mental lives would be included.
3. If one accepts the reality of moral truth (as most all who are not beholden to naturalism do), then these, too, would be included.
4. We also see the order of the universe, which cannot itself be accounted for by science (which simply assumes it).
Looking at this list, many will find it hard not to conclude that the explanation for all these curious facts of reality is a single, transcendent God. The suggestion, at least, strikes me as a far more elegant way to account for the facts than any alternative on offer.
And there are many alternatives, most of them complex and inelegant mixes of various conflicting theories. When all is said and done, it seems that the overwhelming response to this is either to agree, or to assert that we simply don’t know (and apparently should avoid reaching a conclusion or looking into the matter).
But simply to ignore the pertinent questions and reasoning will not do. Rather, the rational person will accept the most plausible choice as a guide to reality. What is not rational is to insist that, until theism can be proved absolutely, we should live out our days as if naturalism is true.