Should we stop using the word 'supernatural'?

[Jay313 (Jay Johnson)]

@Reggie_O_Donoghue

Christians (though interestingly not Jews) often refer to God, miracles, spirits, etc as being ‘supernatural’, meaning ‘beyond the natural’, but is anything really beyond the natural?

Both “miracle” and “supernatural” are umbrella terms coined from Latin to describe various events that the Bible calls “signs” and “wonders.” As I said in another thread:

@Jay313

I’ll even take it a step farther: If a miracle occurred in the forest and no one was there to observe it, was it a sign?

The Bible doesn’t speak in terms of miracles; its primary vocabulary, in both Hebrew and Greek, consists of “signs” (oth/semeion) and “wonders” (mopheth/teras). Usage determines meaning, and in the language-game of the Bible, “wonders” inspired awe and captivated people’s attention, while “signs” identified the Lord’s messenger and granted authority to the message. Thus, in biblical terms, signs and wonders function as non-verbal modes of communication similar to a gesture, which requires an observer to receive the message.

Unlike a sign, then, a miracle/intervention is not a communication from God to human beings; it is an event in the physical universe directly caused by God. Here, we see the crucial difference between the biblical usage of “sign” and the theological meaning of “miracle.” The former requires an observer, while the latter doesn’t.

The same distinction applies to “supernatural.” It’s a useful category in the English language, but it’s not the language of the Bible, so the connotations are different. As for myself, I try to avoid both “miracle” and “supernatural,” but it’s almost impossible.