Sorry Atheists, But Gods Are Perfectly Possible!!

[Coito ergo sum]

Not precisely. If a deity being existed that could alter the laws of nature at will, then that deity being would be "supernatural."

Why would such a being be supernatural?

It would be supernatural if it was not produced by nature or natural processes.

If such a being existed, the fact that it exists would render it, along with it's behaviours, natural.

Not necessarily. All things that are natural exist. But, not all things that exist are necessarily natural. That's where the word supernatural comes in. If something exists, and is supernatural, it is by definition supernatural. Natural means produced by nature or natural processes. Thus, if something could be found to exist, but not be produced by nature or natural processes, then it would be supernatural. I.e., if the Christian God exists, then it is supernatural since it is not produced by nature or natural processes, and the things it does are not produced by nature or natural processes. It engages in miracles - miracles are not natural processes, they are supernatural.

Just because other beings don't know about it, or can't explain it, does not make it supernatural.

If this is directed at me, then I will clarify that I never said it was. We can't explain the formation of many structures in the universe, but they aren't supernatural.

To think so is like agreeing with theists who believe that any gaps in our knowledge plausibly belong to a 'god'.

I'm just suggesting that IF something supernatural did, in fact, exist, then by definition it would not be natural. Existence just means that something is real and not imaginary. Natural is not the same as that. Natural means produced by nature or natural processes. If supernatural things exist, they aren't imaginary, but they also aren't natural.

[Coito ergo sum]

It has nothing to do with the definitions of natural and supernatural, that's all sematics.

All communication involves semantics.

The question is: If an entity was discovered that could break (our current understanding of) the laws of science, would that mean, a) our laws of science are wrong and need to be changed to account for this new phenomenon; or, b) this new phenomenon exists outside the laws of science and is in a new class of existing things.

Or, the question is: If an entity was discovered that could break the actual laws of nature would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

Or, if an entity was discovered that was not produced by nature or natural processes, would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the Christian God exists as described in the Bible, would that entity be supernatural? Yes, because as described it is not produced by nature or natural processes, and can alter the laws of nature at will (and not merely correct our misunderstanding of those laws).

[Coito ergo sum]

duplicate

[RuleBritannia]

Or, the question is: If an entity was discovered that could break the actual laws of nature would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the laws of nature can be broken how can we know those are the laws of nature?

Or, if an entity was discovered that was not produced by nature or natural processes, would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the universe has always existed then it was not produced by nature or natural processes, this would this mean the entire universe is supernatural and everything inside it a product of this supernatural entity. Therefore everything is supernatural.

[Trolldor]

Or, the question is: If an entity was discovered that could break the actual laws of nature would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the laws of nature can be broken how can we know those are the laws of nature?

Or, if an entity was discovered that was not produced by nature or natural processes, would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the universe has always existed then it was not produced by nature or natural processes, this would this mean the entire universe is supernatural and everything inside it a product of this supernatural entity. Therefore everything is supernatural.

lolwut? Where'd you get this logic from?

The Universe isn't 'supernatural' unless it defies the laws of the realm in which it inhabits.

[RuleBritannia]

Or, the question is: If an entity was discovered that could break the actual laws of nature would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the laws of nature can be broken how can we know those are the laws of nature?

Or, if an entity was discovered that was not produced by nature or natural processes, would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If the universe has always existed then it was not produced by nature or natural processes, this would this mean the entire universe is supernatural and everything inside it a product of this supernatural entity. Therefore everything is supernatural.

lolwut? Where'd you get this logic from?

The Universe isn't 'supernatural' unless it defies the laws of the realm in which it inhabits.

Coito made it up, not me. He said:

"if an entity was discovered that was not produced by nature or natural processes, would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes."

Going by that rule my logic is correct, as an eternal universe is not a product of nature or natural processes.

[Trolldor]

Prove it.

[RuleBritannia]

Prove it.

Prove what?

[Trolldor]

Prove that an eternal universe is not natural.

[RuleBritannia]

Prove that an eternal universe is not natural.

But it is natural. I was just showing that Coito's rule is rubbish because it would logically imply a supernatural universe.

[Trolldor]

Ah, right.

Sorry.

[JimC]

This thread is the Ratz equivalent of the medieval theologians arguing about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin...

I love it!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This thread is the Ratz equivalent of the medieval theologians arguing about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin...

I love it!

Or arguing about how many Hell's Angels could stomp on Sean Penn's head before it became goo.

[hiyymer]

If the Christian God exists as described in the Bible, would that entity be supernatural? Yes, because as described it is not produced by nature or natural processes, and can alter the laws of nature at will (and not merely correct our misunderstanding of those laws).

Do you have free will? If so, I guess you are supernatural too.

[Hermit]

Or, the question is: If an entity was discovered that could break the actual laws of nature would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

Or, if an entity was discovered that was not produced by nature or natural processes, would that entity be supernatural? By definition, yes.

If you discovered that rabbits did in fact exist as early as in the pre-cambrian, would you regard that as supernatural because it goes against the theory of evolution, or would you begin to wonder just how true that scientific theory actually is?