Skip to content
November 21, 2011 / itsnobody

No such thing as the “Supernatural”

Contrary to what modern day delusional atheists and even now many Theists believe there is no such thing as the supernatural and religion has nothing to do with the supernatural.

Historically Theists have always been naturalists and natural philosophers up until relatively recently. Newton, Faraday, Euler, Georges Lemaitre, and basically every Theist in the past were all naturalists. The Bible and no religious scripture of any monotheistic religion actually mentions the word “supernatural” or encourages such a thing.

It’s only been in relatively recent times that there exists a Supernatural vs. Natural war. It  seems to have been conjured up by atheists in order to trick and deceive people into thinking that religion and science are enemies, and in order to turn Theists away from science.

Let us first turn to a common circular argument atheists use like “There’s no scientific evidence for anything supernatural”.

This argument is equivalent to saying:

  • “There’s no naturalistic evidence for the supernatural”
  • “No evidence of the supernatural can be found in natural explanations”
  • “After all this time, all of the natural explanations have not indicated that anything supernatural exists”
  • “There’s nothing supernatural in the natural”

It’s just circular reasoning.

In other words, if someone scientifically proves something or if scientific evidence exists for something by definition it is not supernatural, but instead natural.

Now let us realize that there is no hypothetical condition where anything can be considered as supernatural. In all possible conditions you can come up with a natural explanation, so there really isn’t anything supernatural that exists or can exist or anything that can even be considered as supernatural.

We can see this from the history of science:
- Do scientists claim that gravity or light are supernatural if they cannot explain certain aspects of it? NO.
- Do scientists claim that “quarks are supernatural particles” or just that “quarks behave in strange ways”?
- When many supposed “laws” of physics have been broken or bent or have exceptions, do scientists conclude “the laws of physics have been broken, therefore the supernatural exists” or instead that “the laws of physics are different from what we thought they were”?

We can see that in no hypothetical condition would it be possible to conclude that anything “supernatural” exists. I challenge anyone to give me an example of something “supernatural”.

I can come up with natural explanations for basically anything including many supposed “supernatural” claims:
- “One day pigs fly”: Not supernatural, if the many-worlds interpretation is true then there would really exist many time-lines where pig-like creatures evolved to have wings and can fly.

- “Some one walks on water”: Not supernatural, if someone can make their body lighter with their mind and walk on water, that’s not supernatural.

- “Someone defies gravity”: Not supernatural, it would just indicate that gravity behaves differently from how humans believe it does.

In conclusion this whole “Supernatural” vs. “Natural” war is just a lie conjured up by atheists and now in modern times propounded by both atheists and Theists alike.

Atheists enjoy telling lies and will intentionally lie to trick and deceive people into believing their false propaganda. I don’t even know how it’s possible for a group of people to tell so many lies. In modern times many Theists have fallen into the “Supernatural” trap as well.

Since nothing can even be considered as “Supernatural” I have absolutely no beliefs in the “Supernatural”, but I am definitely not a Deist, I’m a strong Theist who is 100% certain that God exists.

About these ads

9 Comments

Leave a Comment
  1. natural being / Feb 2 2013 10:47 am

    I don’t know god i have not seen so all religion is same to me what ever they teach or practice. coming to the point what I believe is I leave in Natural world. this is natural world with all science and scientists. then explain these :1) what causes the plantary rotation and revolution?
    2) How all galaxies come into existance and earth has only life??
    3) einstein’s relativity solutions
    4) michaelson morley experiments
    5)Hisenberg,s uncertainty principle
    6) Reimann functions and cosmological constants??

  2. Anonymous / Feb 6 2012 5:21 pm

    Of course there is such a thing as the Supernatural. It airs every Friday on the CW.

  3. Sugarcane / Jan 25 2012 11:46 am

    of course there is a difference between the “natural” and the “supernatural” and even tho the Bible does not use the word, by the very fact that it makes claims about the laws of nature being significantly flouted, it does by it’s descriptions build religious belief as a belief in the supernatural.

    The fact that there’s not one shred of evidence for the existence of God, and the fact he manages to influence the natural world whilst not being in the natural makes him purely a construct of the supernatural.

    As we all know, there is no evidence that the supernatural does exist.

    And, as always, your logic is incredibly flawed:

    “Some one walks on water”: Not supernatural, if someone can make their body lighter with their mind and walk on water, that’s not supernatural.

    Someone making their body lighter with their mind would be very supernatural. The laws of nature don’t allow for us to think away weight to the point of being as light as air. If we could, imagine how easy it would for slimmers to lose those extra pounds.

    We know how water works and we know that it does not allow for people to walk on it. This is testable. Someone walking on water would break so many natural laws that it would be the most astonishing thing ever observed.

    “We can see that in no hypothetical condition would it be possible to conclude that anything “supernatural” exists. I challenge anyone to give me an example of something “supernatural”.”

    supernatural things would be anything like feeding 5000 people on a couple of loaves of bread and a few bits of fish. It would be giving birth without conceiving. It would be coming back to life after being dead for a few days. It would be anything that relates to God, basically.

    Furthermore:
    - Do scientists claim that gravity or light are supernatural if they cannot explain certain aspects of it? NO.

    No they don’t because supernatural does not mean unexplainable. Gravity and light can be observed and tested, which verifies their existence in the natural.

    - Do scientists claim that “quarks are supernatural particles” or just that “quarks behave in strange ways”?

    Of course they don’t claim them to be supernatural – because they can be observed and verified – they exist in the natural world.

    - When many supposed “laws” of physics have been broken or bent or have exceptions, do scientists conclude “the laws of physics have been broken, therefore the supernatural exists” or instead that “the laws of physics are different from what we thought they were”?

    I think you need to learn what supernatural actually means.

    Supernatural
    [adj] not existing in nature or subject to explanation according to natural laws; not physical or material; “supernatural forces and occurrences and beings”

    Not existing in nature is a good broad definition. And god, and all those wacky religious claims, sit firmly within that definition because, to put it simply, if they weren’t supernatural, and therefore natural, we could observe them.

  4. Gilbert Smith / Jan 23 2012 8:24 pm

    SCIENCE IS THE STUDY OF NATURAL LAW YOU DUMB FUCK. THE SUPERNATURAL IS THE REALM OF FICTION WRITERS AND NUTJOBS.

    God DAMN people are getting stupider every day. Science doesn’t cover the supernatural for the same reason you don’t put vegetables in the poultry section at the superstore: They’re two different fucking things.

    Seriously, were your parents related?

    The saddest thing is that there are a lot of intelligent religious people out there and you are GIVING RELIGIOUS THINKERS A BAD NAME.

    • Davo / Aug 29 2012 3:21 pm

      you’re the one being off. nobody said ‘supernatural’ existed.

      • Davo / Aug 29 2012 3:22 pm

        this was a response to Gilbert Smith, for clarity

  5. seo by leon / Dec 8 2011 8:40 pm

    Excellent publish, very informative. I ponder why the other specialists of this sector do not understand this. You should continue your writing. I’m sure, you have a great readers’ base already!|What’s Going down i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I’ve discovered It absolutely useful and it has helped me out loads. I’m hoping to give a contribution & assist different customers like its aided me. Good job.

  6. Jonathan Turner / Nov 22 2011 1:03 am

    Why would I need to believe in the otherworldly when belief in the ‘worldly’ has been totally given up? I find absolutely no trustworthy evidence to support any belief in the existence of the ‘natural’.

    • itsnobody / Nov 22 2011 2:58 am

      Well the labels “natural” and “supernatural” are quite useless over all. So I’m not sure what you mean when you say you don’t believe in the ‘natural’.

      I’m also not sure what you mean when you say you’ve given up your belief in the “worldly”.

      I also don’t believe that the “otherworldly” is supernatural.

Post a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers

%d bloggers like this: