think I have always believed in the supernatural, or rather something other than what is observed by our five senses.
There is a lot of nature that is not directly observable by our senses. Gravity, electromagenetic forces, atoms and their constituent parts, etc. However, why go as far as to say that they are supernatural, or more directly why attribute everything that is not immediately observable to our sense as the workings of an anthropomorphic supernatural agent.
I recently read a really good article by JP Moreland all about the mind. Moreland is a professor and seems to know what he is talking about. (I once heard him lecture about Ecclesiastes, and it was really very insightul.) JP also has a passion to get Christians discussing these matters with the world. (by that I mean the people living on our planet, of course).
Which article?
Lately, I read a very interesting discussion about a lecture ((((VIDEO))) given by John Lennox - here < watch it!
I've watched many debates with John Lennox, and have read some of his works. I'll watch the video you posted as well. Polkinghorne is another interesting bloke along the same lines as Lennox. Polkinghorne, a prior mathematical physicist turned pastor, uses the choas theory as 'proof' of the supernatural and the occurrence of miracles. His argument goes (paraphrasing from memory):
There are trillions of particles in the air in this room (He was giving a lecture) colliding about many times/second, and you should theoretically be able calculate how each particle will interact, yet we can't do this because if you miss just one particle in your equation you've boggled the whole enterprise of predicting the outcome. He then utilizes the Uncertainty Principle in that you can't both know the position and velocity of a particle to a high degree of accuracy, to confound the problem. He then comes to the conclusion, therefore god exists and he has room to work his miracles. I've heard Lennox use similar arguments.
However, I find this an odd argument for the 'supernatural'. They've boxed the supernatural into the quantum, where previously apologists gave god the stage of any which way he would so choose, by suspending natural laws. In other words they claim, the supernatural is not a suspension of natural law, but just a really complex interaction that we are unable to solve the equation for. This is interesting indeed.
I still don't see how they get to the conclusion of 'therefore god exists' from the complexity, not to mention the impossible task of solving an equation with trillions of variables. This reminds me of two things 1) A cartoon in which two mathematicians are working at a problem on a black board, one fellow thinks he has solved the equation and has God did it emphatically underscored to denote his conclusion. The other fellow has a questioning look on his face, and expounds, I think you need to clarify a bit. 2)Stephen Hawking quips in a brief history of time about such equations essentially saying that the largest computers on earth couldn't compute them, and even if you were able to come up with an answer how would you know you didn't mess up on page 1393938349342349283432490324. In other words determination via mathematical equations is nonsensical. Hawking, Polkinghorne, and Lennox are all on the same page here. However, Polkinghorne, and Lennox come to the god did it. Hawking does not. Obviously it isn't such a cut and dry as Lennox and Polkinghorne suggest to their flocks.
