It may have been some nontheists that agreed on that definition, just maybe, and not theologians? No, your interpretation of it is not accurate. Maybe you could glance at what is after my user name and get a clue.
Methodological naturalism looks at what can be demonstrated from nature. It doesn’t willy-nilly invoke ridiculous miracles to make nature correspond to bad exegesis.
(In my younger years I was a YEC and then I was an OEC for over three decades. Actually kidney cancer was a factor in my acceptance of the legitimacy of biological evolution, that God is sovereign in his providence, even, duh, over the mutations in DNA.)