A little humility might be in order

A few thoughts on the subject of how God can exist even though we can't directly perceive him.

Proposition 1:   The species of Homo Sapiens is not the ultimate intelligence possible in the continuum of possible intelligences.

If that is not so, then Homo Sapiens are the ultimate intelligence possible, and no further enhancements can be possible.  Which of those two statements seems most correct to you?  Either we are at the end of the line in evolution, or further evolution is possible.  And those species that follow are also subject to becoming obsolete.  And so on and so forth.  Ultimately, you may reach the end of the line, but is that possible?  If there is an end to evolution, could there be an intelligence that is greater still, but cannot be reached?  If so, what do you call that intelligence?

This proposition distills down to this:  Humans are limited in an unlimited universe.

Proposition 2:  Supernatural does not equate with superstition.

 Supernatural events, if those events actually occur and are witnessed by sane people, cannot be explained.  This only means that science doesn't know what to make of what just happened ( if something happened).  Note that the event has to be witnessed by sane people.  Somebody who is prone to hallucinations and delusions cannot be considered reliable.  Also, the people would have to be serious minded people who have enough character, integrity, and respect for truth in order to tell the truth--- in other words, no pathological liars.  Examples?  Are there any such recent events that simply cannot be explained?  If so, did that event get classified as supernatural?  I ask because I don't know.  I could do a simple research project to find out, but that is not the purpose of this.  The purpose is to distinguish supernatural from superstition.  [ note the emphasis on the word distinguish, which is the opposite of postmodern dogma which reduces everything to the same level, since there is no truth in postmodernism according to their own teaching.]

Superstition is a belief in magic or luck.  Some shade of meaning may conflate the two words, but a belief in a god doesn't not equate to a belief in magic or luck.  To distinguish then:  Superstition, as an example, is the belief that if you step on a crack, you break your mother's back.  Obviously, there is no connection between the state of mom's back and the crack in the sidewalk, unless she trips on the crack and then her back gets broken in the process.  In contrast, an example of a supernatural belief is the belief in the risen Christ.  There are those who witnessed him being alive after he was definitely thought to be dead.  You can choose to believe that or not.   Obviously, the two don't compare, because one has a definite way of proof, while the other does not.  The proof relies upon the credibility of the witnesses, and the willingness of those who did not witness the event to believe the witnesses.  There is, therefore, a definite connection to an event to the belief.


Proposition 3:   Science cannot answer every question.

This is related to Proposition 1.  The species of Homo sapiens is limited in what is possible for us to discover.  An example is what happens after death?  Is there an afterlife?  Science cannot answer this question.  If science cannot answer every question, then why is it impossible to believe that there is such as thing as the supernatural?

It is quite scientific to allow for the possibility of the supernatural as an explanation for what cannot be explained by science.

In summary, then, it can be said that the postmodernists have reduced everything to the same level and thus have made it impossible to distinguish between completely different concepts.  It has raised science to the level of a religion while undermining science itself, thus reducing everyone to a bunch of imbeciles.  It has puffed up the egos of these imbeciles who do not recognize their own incompetence to make such judgments.

As Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry character said:  " A man has to know his own limitations."

Update:

How stupid of me.  I forgot all about the Shroud of Turin.  Now, what if science can never explain the existence of that cloth?  Would that make it supernatural?