> > "Inasmuch that GOD is the God of nature, what does "supernatural" mean?"
> > Many Christian writers have expressed their doubts about the
> > excessive usage of the word 'supernatural' for reasons such as this.
> > CS Lewis and James Houston come to mind.
> The argument against Christians using the notion of "supernatural"
> that I have heard, is that supernatural is not a biblical concept.
> The argument says that because the bible doesn't distinguish between
> natural and supernatural, neither should we. Now I don't feel
> comfortable with this. I feel that logically there really is a
> difference between the natual and supernatural. Yet I'm not sure what
> to make of this argument about supernatural not being biblical. Any
Yes, I like your definition. My way of phrasing it would be to say that
what we call
'natural' is the way that God usually does things. This I see as God's role
sustainer (The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact
his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word, Heb.1:3; He is before
and in him all things hold together, (Col. somewhere, I think) ).
In contrast, when He departs from his usual ways and does something unusual,
that is what we would identify as 'supernatural' or 'miraculous'. I do
that God is not the only source of supernatural events; e.g. Jesus warned us
false prophets would come performing miraculous signs. (But that's another