https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/719360951752851519/762525657426690079/The_Contingency_of_Knowledge_and_Revelatory_Theism.pdf I was looking for this exact paper to post as reference to the materialist vs theist debate and found this old post. That link is gone but here is the paper. It's a great outline of these clashing worldviews. Easy to read. Adding to this another essay from Jay Dyer who adds that that it must be the Orthodox understanding of God since our Essence-Energy distinction doesn't collapse God into Monism and the uncreated energies of God allow for a relationship that gives humans that necessary connection to the uncreated which also gives us good reason to believe in causality. Hume is correct in viewing the origin of effects as arbitrary IF one assumes man is autonomous which was of course a major shift in worldview probably gaining a lot of steam around Galileo.
"It is here that I see something unique in the traditional conception of a revelation-based epistemology that hints at answering the dilemma that even Hegel leaves us with. In God there is an ultimate unity and an ultimate plurality, but rather than an impersonal thought of Aristotle or Hegel, the omniscient absolute is also personal. I believe this is key, because it seems that meaning presupposes personality, as opposed to impersonal, brute factuality that somehow gives rise to meaning, and I suspect this relates to the idea of the logos. The problems presented by Hume and Kant (and Hegel) point us to the following needs: It seems we assume many philosophical issues relating to linguistics and meaning in order to predicate anything at all, and this prior meaning seems to need to emanate from beyond ourselves. We need to relate it beyond ourselves because the finite needs to relate the concept to the infinite to make its predication stick to the object, if you will."
https://jaysanalysis.com/2019/03/03/hume-and-kant-the-synthetic-a-priori-problem/