Shroud of Turin

[Audie]

How is Christ's resurrection not supernatural?

By being a story?

[Kurieuo]

Is Christ's resurrection natural or supernatural, a better starting point is to unpack what one means by such.

The only definition of "Natural" that is justifiable as I see it, is something like that which is left to itself. In other words the natural state of something, what would be the case, without intelligent intervention or manipulation.

Really, nothing in Christianity is in actuality natural except perhaps the state of God alone as God. Given God is identified as both creator and sustainer of all creation, then according to the definition of something left to its own nothing else can logically be called "Natural".

So then, for practical reasons, we move to construct a definition of what is "natural" for the sake of communication.

For Christians, what is "natural" can be described as simply all that God sustains in existence which behaves in a stable and predictable manner as though by itself. If God were to stop sustaining in existence anything, existence which can only being imparted by the source of existence (like rays of sunlight emanating out from their source of the Sun), then everything collapses and vanishes.

Now there is a certain order we observe that we call natural. Some Physicalists will impose their philosophy upon the term, describing all that is "physical" as natural. Yet, such is a metaphysically suspicious move at best, and sadly one many don't really think about or challenge. Indeed, there is a "new breed" of Naturalists today who assert the natural world isn't purely physical but that there also exists an immaterial conscious of sorts in the natural fabric of the world.

In any case, as Christians we could accept the construct of "natural" being all that which is held into existence in a stable and predictable manner that appear to behave on their own, then certainly Jesus' resurrection isn't of this stable and predictable nature. The nature of the rules are of something higher and above our construction of what we call "nature", from the more foundational and true nature of reality.

Again, if Christianity is true then nothing that exists is natural. Rather we simply subjectively construct and call this or that order we see and experience in the world as "natural" for practical uses in discussion.

Hugh, I'd be particularly interested in your thoughts on such?

[RickD]

I meant in the context of supernatural with this definition:

(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

So Hugh,

How is Christ's resurrection not supernatural?

[bippy123]

Hugh how do you feel about this miracle that the Vatican confirms was a supernatural miracle ?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1318597

[hughfarey]

As before, I think Kurieou catches the spirit of my ideas (or maybe I'm catching the spirit of his?). The nuances at the borders of the meanings of "natural", "unnatural" and "supernatural" are debatable, as is the predictability of unusual events. Kurieou gives "stable and predictable" as his criteria for 'naturalness'. I'm not sure what is meant by 'stable' here, except that perhaps he means that the 'laws' of nature are stable, rather than nature itself. Given the stability of the laws, then the predictability of what follows from them makes sense. However, there is a sense in which the Resurrection was predictable, and had indeed been predicted, since the beginning of the Universe and before, and although it is not currently accessible to us, perhaps it will be. If it was predictable, then it could be a consequence of the 'stable' 'laws' of nature. In the absence of sufficient evidence, we cannot say exactly what happened to cause a handful of frightened, leaderless people to become the successful fount of Christianity, we just know that something happened which did. It was part of the timeless working out of the divine plan, which is, of course, as 'stable' as can be.

Bippy asks about the sudden and surprising recovery of a 4-year old boy from a severe undiagnosed illness, which was accompanied by the prayers of some nuns. Recoveries such as this are unusual, but although they may not be able to be explained today, that does not mean that they are inherently inexplicable. They are, after all, unusual but far from unique. In context, we would have to consider all those cases in which someone with such an illness was prayed for, but did not result in recovery, and all those cases in which there was a sudden inexplicable recovery, but in the absence of any prayer at all. The point about this occurrence, and the beatification of Maria Theresa Bonzel whose intercession was sought, is the increase of faith that it produced, not its apparent departure from the laws of physics. Sadly I cannot find any "confirmation" by "the Vatican" on the subject, only excited newspaper reports. It is always interesting to find out what people really say, rather than what people think they say. In view of Pope Francis's expressed disapproval of ideas about God waving a magic wand about, it would be interesting to read the text of the beatification, on 27 March 2013, if anyone can find it online.

[PaulSacramento]

You guys really need to stop redefining words to justify your theology.

[Philip]

As God exists and is all powerful and all knowing, then we know He is able to do the miraculous! End of story! God created from His imagination and per His purposes, an incredible physical universe that did not previously exist. And He, in an instant and with unfathomable power, began that in a stunning event filled with mind-blowing creations that, from the moment of their collective beginning, exhibited stunning designs, individual and cross-functionality, and tremendous precision in how things operate. And these things are ALREADY miraculous in just how they were created, and per their great precision and predictable functions (Which is what makes scientific analysis even possible).

A Being so capable, can interrupt and override His designed everyday functionality, in any moment He so desires to. And as Scripture so often references, these miraculous interruptions, in His created and otherwise typical/everyday functionality, have often been done to build our own faith. So,why should we be shocked that the builder of the universe, Who built it from nothing previously physically existing, can interrupt it, whenever or however He so desires? Strange how people believe God created a universe, began it in a moment of brilliance and immense power, but they endlessly doubt and debate the whether He can or ever does miracles? "Yes, I believe God created the universe, but Jesus miraculously turning all that water into wine - NO WAY!" How silly!

[Audie]

An account from WW2 detailed how an American aircraft crashed into a remote region of New Guinea inhabited by people who had never before had contact with outsiders.

Many years later, the locals told of how a pig given to the sky people had been eaten by them, but then came back to life. The told of seeing the marks from where the creature had been cut into pieces.

[Philip]

An account from WW2 detailed how an American aircraft crashed into a remote region of New Guinea inhabited by people who had never before had contact with outsiders.

Many years later, the locals told of how a pig given to the sky people had been eaten by them, but then came back to life. The told of seeing the marks from where the creature had been cut into pieces.

Um, well, they shouldn't have been consuming so much of their witch doctor's potions!

Really, Min, what is the point of that comment?

[hughfarey]

As God exists and is all powerful and all knowing, then we know He is able to do the miraculous!

Of course he can, Philip. He can do anything he wants. But who are you to dictate to me what he wants? Sure, he could act unreasonably, sure, he can poke his finger into creation now and again, or "interrupt and override His designed everyday functionality" as you put it. He could do all these things - I just don't think that's the way he works, that's all.

Why should we be shocked that the builder of the universe, Who built it from nothing previously physically existing, can interrupt it, whenever or however He so desires?

Why indeed? I'm not at all shocked - I just don't think that's the way he works, that's all.

"Yes, I believe God created the universe, but Jesus miraculously turning all that water into wine - NO WAY!" How silly!

Not silly at all. It's not a question of whether God could interfere with the universe in these little miraculous ways, but whether he does or not, and that is a profound, not a silly, question.

[Audie]

An account from WW2 detailed how an American aircraft crashed into a remote region of New Guinea inhabited by people who had never before had contact with outsiders.

Many years later, the locals told of how a pig given to the sky people had been eaten by them, but then came back to life. The told of seeing the marks from where the creature had been cut into pieces.

Um, well, they shouldn't have been consuming so much of their witch doctor's potions!

Really, Min, what is the point of that comment?

no possible relevance to any other miraculous things others have said they saw.

[bippy123]

And other then the fact that no one believes these myths bu the truth of the resurrection has stayed for 2000 years

[Kurieuo]

You guys really need to stop redefining words to justify your theology.

Is this aimed at me? I guess so, but don't see what I re-defined.
Dictionary definitions are practical human constructions.

I'm not speaking for Hugh, as I don't really think he'd accept all of what I wrote.

You all like Divine Simplicity, right? If a more deeply thought out and refined ontology of what is/isn't "natural" based upon such, even merely based upon Christian beliefs, logically leads to much of what I wrote then it's better to discuss what is/isn't an acceptable ontology with regards to "natural" rather than artificial dictionary definitions that have been constructed.

[Storyteller]

God creates andsustains everything. He is Nature. God is supernatural as well. It is "natural" for Him to be supernatural.
The resurrection was a natural event for the supernatural. God has the potentiality of/for resurrection as He is Existence. It became actuality through Christ. A natural eventfor God if you like, as it is in His nature. It would be a supernatural event for us as it isn't in our nature, we don't have the potentiality for ressurection.

Just my thoughts. Still figuring them out really.

[RickD]

Storyteller wrote:

The resurrection was a natural event for the supernatural.