I know you don't believe in the supernatural.
You say you believe in the supernatural yet you also seem keen to try and explain things in a logical or rational manner when it suits you? So I'm just a little curious why?
For example you find the fact that birds and ants can talk, think and behave like humans, acceptable. Yet they don't possess the vocal chords or brain size etc...? Which means that this is an example of a supernatural event that defies the laws of nature - something that God just made happen.
Yet you felt the need to try and explain Sulayman's death in a rational and logical way that did not defy the laws of nature?
btw you asked where did I get the horse from - that is from tafseer as the Jinn saw him watching them as they were working and so it can be inferred that he would be outside - and as a king, he would not be standing watching them, but would be on a horse as befits a king - all logical - and all related in tafseer. I'm curious where you got
chair from? I thought you liked to stick to the text? Or do you infer things when it suits you and reject others inference when it suits you? Aren't you being inconsistent? Also, sitting on a chair would suggest he was inside and that seems illogical if he was watching the Jinn? Unless perhaps he was watching the "House" Jinn doing stuff like sweeping and odd jobs like fixing the plumbing. If you are not going to include horse then you cannot include chair. It seems the only reason you do is that you want to explain it in a logical or rational way. If we are to stick to the text then we can only say for certain that he was leaning - dead - on this stick for days - at the very least - some tafseers say a year! Doesn't that sound very weird? And I mean weird as in defies the laws of gravity etc...
So why is it you are not happy to accept that as a supernatural event yet accept others as supernatural?