i was asked once by my girl friend: "I question the definition of "Natural Phenomenon" because if Science has failed to explain the laws of nature then throwing the term 'natural phenomenon' and all its elements around for its own purposes is quite presumptuous "
to which i replied:
what science considers a natural phenomenon is something that is observable or measured repeatedly yielding similar results.
(i can't find a citation for this. i made this up based on my understand of science. you are obviously free to challenge it :p)
let me explain it with an example: magnetism
magnetism wasn't human-observable for a while but some birds use it for navigation. does this mean that magnetism didn't exist in nature? no. it also doesn't mean that it's not a natural phenomenon.
let's say there is a bird brained man who could sense or feel magnetism and claimed that it existed. this person says that he can't explain what it is and that you have to experience it to believe.
so does this constitute as a natural phenomenon? science would not until a way of observing this phenomenon is possible repeatedly yielding similar results. unless the bird brained person comes up with a way of showing that this phenomenon is 'natural' in the sense it is independently observable and yields the same results / experience as his, science would not consider such a phenomenon with in the scope of its study.
there are many supernatural events and most of then are out of the scope of science
now let's say there are over 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 bird-brained people who can sense magnetism and there are only 10 non-bird-brained people who can't. does this mean that magnetism is a natural phenomenon? no.
it doesn't matter if x number of people can feel or sense the phenomenon. what matters is the repeatability of the observation / measurement and the yield of similar results.
take any phenomenon science considers natural, you would find that they are independently observable, that they are repeatable and that they yield the same results.
one needs to look at this from a slightly abstract perspective. for example i am to measure the magnetic field of earth in nugegoda and ashan was to measure it where ever he is in australia - our results would be different. this is because there is another natural phenomenon.
but if we were to compare the properties of magnetism such us if we were to hold a couple of wires and ran it across and tested if it generates a tiny electrical potential - we would find that it's true.
so if you are to make god a natural phenomenon then that is very simple - transform your experience of god to something that is repeatable and yielding the same results. if results are different then there could be other phenomena interacting with it - similar to my earth-magnetism experience in nugegoda and that of ashan's in australia.
and thank you for the question :)