Recent cumulative arguments in the philosophy of religion have utilized Bayes’ theorem to argue that multiple independent pieces of evidence can collectively render Theism probable. This paper adopts the same Bayesian framework but applies it to Naturalism, introducing a methodology we term ”Hyper-Conservative Cumulative Naturalism.” By assigning equal prior probabilities to both Theism and Naturalism (P(N) = P(T) = 0.5) and granting generous epistemic multipliers to Theism in core ontological domains, we demonstrate a mathematical paradox: Even if Naturalism holds only a microscopic explanatory advantage (as low as 1.014, or 1.4%) across various independent empirical domains, the exponential growth of these minimal multipliers leads to the epistemic collapse of Theism.