Lots of things exist that are not subject to physics. Like numbers, and the laws of physics themselves.
I actually spent a little time looking into the origin of the word "supenatural" a while ago and as I suspected it dates to the Enlightenment. The concept makes no sense if you believe that God holds up the world every second. After all, "unnatural" used to mean "contrary to God," not "contrary to physics."
...........
There are two threads here. Actually, a thread within a thread.
There's the thread you're pursuing, which is almost entirely academic; based on your studies of Christian theology and philosophy.
And then there's the thread being pursued by Thornton and me (and maybe Doug too). We're describing things as they're understood and felt by people who grew up in Christian homes, went to Christian schools and for whom Christianity isn't something they studied so much as lived. John mentioned going to Catholic school. I went to the Protestant equivalent. In my case, and probably John's too, the schools were a formal extension of a wide ranging system of reinforced, ground level belief.
Christian ideas were taken like mother's milk.
So, although your philosophical objections may be technically correct (for example, your deployment of Aquinas) they're almost entirely irrelevant to praxis.
In the "Leninists find Jesus" thread, you mentioned that you "...grew up in an aggressively, obnoxiously atheistic, BF Skinner-worshiping household." Which means your approach to these questions is, as I wrote earlier, 'almost entirely academic'.
In other words, you might have all the facts right but your conclusions don't jive with the actual beliefs of a lot of Christians -- both practicing and former.
.d.