A most penetrating insight, schaef21!
RE: naturalist/materialist theory, there seems to be something "unnatural" about Natural Law: It does not fit within either evolutionary theory or scientific methods. So are we just to disregard it?
But if we disregard Natural Law, then how can we make sense of the world? The fundamental insight of Natural Law theory is that there is a direct correspondence between the natural world and the structure of the human mind which is what makes the world intelligible, knowable by us.
Because a picture is worth a thousand words, I drew one, based on insights from the mathematician/theoretical biologist Robert Rosen:
Another point: Natural Law, or any law, is by definition what philosophy calls a universal. Universals are "supernatural" in that they are not direct observables they are non-phenomenal objects, intangible, and thus cannot be tested by the techniques of science.
Rather, science proceeds according to the fundamental insight of Natural Law theory: that the universe is fundamentally knowable by the human mind.
If science didn't believe that, it wouldn't have a single thing to do.
Thanks so very much, schaef21, for your outstanding essay/post!
The universe IS fundamentally knowable to the human mind - but all such knowledge about the universe has been through attributing natural knowable and predictable causes to natural phenomena.
Attributing supernatural causes to explain natural phenomena has not resulted in better knowledge and application of that knowledge about the physical universe.
That is why Science is of use.
Creationism is useless.
If science didn't believe that, it wouldn't have a single thing to do.
Thank you for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!