(May 2, 2009 at 8:16 pm)Sai Wrote: I'm sorry to confuse you... Well, I don't think there is value in a distinction between natural and supernatural, but if I had to, I would say that we are all supernatural, believing that we are natural (uh, i think that may sound even more confusing ^^'). But I'm more comfortable with "natural". God is definitely natural. No point in adding "super" just to make it sound flashy.You don't even know what the words "natural" and "supernatural" mean do you?
Let me explain. Something is "natural" when it abides by the laws of nature, the laws of the universe. A hot cup of water cooling is an example of something "natural".
Something is "supernatural" when it violates the laws of nature. A cup of cold water boiling in a fridge is an example of something supernatural, as are ghosts, etc. Usually when someone claims something is supernatural, they are mistaken, but on some rare occasion they open up a new realm of research and the "supernatural" claim becomes natural.
The same cannot be said for gods. Gods are by nature and definition, supernatural beings. They are said to exist outside our universe (already a supernatural thing) and yet also everywhere (also supernatural). Most are said to have omnipotence and omniscience (both supernatural). A "miracle" is a supernatural event that supposedly occurs when one of these supposed beings interferes with the universe (again, a supernatural event).
The "super" isn't there to make it look flashy, the "super" is there to distinguish what is explainable (and believable in my eyes) from what is unexplainable (unbelievable).
