Miracles

[shunyadragon]

Is God natural Shuny or supernatural?

Natural

[seer]

Natural

God is natural, really? In what sense? He is physical?

[shunyadragon]

God is natural, really? In what sense? He is physical?

No God is spiritual. The spiritual nature of existence is in harmony with the physical and all is natural.

[seer]

No God is spiritual. The spiritual nature of existence is in harmony with the physical and all is natural.

Again in what sense is God natural? Is He physical made or particles?

[pancreasman]

I suspect Shuny is simply denying the natural/supernatural dichotomy, which is a reasonable position.

[Carrikature]

No God is spiritual. The spiritual nature of existence is in harmony with the physical and all is natural.

Again in what sense is God natural? Is He physical made or particles?

The two of you are using different definitions of 'natural'.

[shunyadragon]

Again in what sense is God natural? Is He physical made or particles?

God is spiritual and natural.

[shunyadragon]

The two of you are using different definitions of 'natural'.

So be it. My view of the miraculous and supernatural events from the human perspective does not change regardless. All possible events described as miraculous and supernatural can very will be natural and not understood or verifiable as to the natural cause. This is especially true of the Healing claims that are the subject of this thread.

Seer has chosen to push this beyond the subject matter of this thread to the nature of God, the spiritual realms, and Creation by citing Baha'i scripture selectively and not reading his own references. So be it. I gave my response to these questions.

I have defined my definitions of natural, and how I use them. In terms of God's Creation and our physical existence; God Creates in God's attributes naturally in uniform consistent Natural Laws, and there are no contradictions outside this that would be 'supernatural.' The perception of the miraculous and supernatural is dependent on human knowledge, and evolves over time. Primitive humans may have considered diseases, plagues, natural disasters, and even lightening and thunder to be have supernatural causes, and even images in clouds to have supernatural explanations. Today these are normal natural events, at least for most sane people.

Bottom line is I may not define my terms in the context of those clinging to ancient world views and hiding in Plato's cave.


God is not a chess player with the white pieces,

God is the sea and we are the fishes.

[NormATive]

There is no empirical or deductive argument that can disprove miracles.

I think you have that backwards. Miracles need to be proofed. Non-miracle is the normative state.

NORM

[seer]

I think you have that backwards. Miracles need to be proofed. Non-miracle is the normative state.

NORM

What is normative is not evidence against miracles, since by definition miracles are not normative.

[seer]

God is spiritual and natural.

Shuny you are just making stuff up again. Please quote me where the Bahai faith teaches that God is "natural." I will be waiting...

[shunyadragon]

Shuny you are just making stuff up again. Please quote me where the Bahai faith teaches that God is "natural." I will be waiting...

I explained my position. Actually in the Baha'i view ultimately God cannot be defined specifically as supernatural nor natural. The ultimate nature of God is unknown. I am using 'natural' as all of existence is in harmony with the nature of God. God's Creation reflects the attribute's of God, and Creation is a natural process.

Back on topic concerning the nature of these healing miracles.

[pancreasman]

I think we're arguing about the distinction between a pantheistic or panentheistic view of God against a more transcendent notion. There ARE some Biblical precedents for at least a panentheistic view of God. This blurs the distinction between natural and supernatural so as to make them practically meaningless. You may not agree with such a position but it is a legitimate one with a long history.

[seer]

I explained my position. Actually in the Baha'i view ultimately God cannot be defined specifically as supernatural nor natural. The ultimate nature of God is unknown. I am using 'natural' as all of existence is in harmony with the nature of God. God's Creation reflects the attribute's of God, and Creation is a natural process.

Back on topic concerning the nature of these healing miracles.

No Shuny, you are just making up a definition of natural. You faith does not teach that God is natural in any sense of the word.

[shunyadragon]

I think we're arguing about the distinction between a pantheistic or panentheistic view of God against a more transcendent notion. There ARE some Biblical precedents for at least a panentheistic view of God. This blurs the distinction between natural and supernatural so as to make them practically meaningless. You may not agree with such a position but it is a legitimate one with a long history.

The view would be close to panentheistic. Pantheistic is actually close to an atheist view.