We naturalists adhere to Aqunas' superfluity argument as Percy Bysshe Shelley implicitly uses:" To suppose that some existence beyond, or above them [ the descriptions -laws- of Nature,N.G.]is to invent a second and superfluous hypothesis to account for what already is accounted for."
Now, to claim then that no, ti's a category mistake would be to beg the question! It does no good to aver that He as Richard Swinburne and William Lane Craig is the requisite personal explanation begs the question thereof. Nothing suggests a personal explanation,but theists are reduced animists as Lamberth's reduced animism argument notes as they insist on divine intent when none appears per the Coyne-Mayr-Lamberth teleonomic argument. They see the pareidolias of divine intent and design,per Lamberth's the argument form pareidolia when only mechanism and patterns exist.
We naturalists find that natural causes and explanations are the sufficient reason!