In my view there is nothing supernatural about the Bible. Here is my reasoning. I call it the "weak God versus strong God" argument. I intend to show that "a non-supernatural God" is the best way to interpret the Bible.
Premise 1: God could be either supernatural or not.
On another web site I explain how a non-supernatural God exists, and provides life after death. I also show how his teachings create heaven on Earth.
Premise 2: God is, by definition the strongest
God is (by definition, in any monotheist system) the strongest of all
Conclusion
The naturalistic God does everything the supernatural God does, but sooner (in this life) and for more people (not just the believers). So he is the stronger God. It follows that the non-supernatural God must be the correct interpretation of the Bible.
Objections?
But what of the evidence that most people think God is supernatural? That is not relevant. I am interested in the most logical interpretation of the Bible. It is like asking for the most logical interpretation of any history. The most logical answer is still the most logical even if nobody believes it.
As it happens I think I can show that a lot of people did believe this. They are far more interesting to study than the majority who had supernatural beliefs. But that is a topic for another post.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.