RE: Apparent Age: Rethinking Creatio ex Nihilo

Thanks for the comment -- I agree in that it's certainly not worth
speculating as to specifics of miraculous intervention. I would first say
that my argument there (p.10) doesn't rely at all on whether these miracles
were, in fact, actual cases of creation. I'm arguing that if one considers
the possibility of creation for a given thing, its apparent age does not
suggest the reality of its implied past. So it could also be expressed: "IF
Jesus created the extra fish, THEN it would have been absurd for the
disciples to believe that the new fish had actually grown as it appeared".

This is a little off-topic from the apparent age issue, but I would also
argue that there is a very strong case for regarding both these cases (water
to wine, feeding the five thousand) as instances of miraculous creation.
First, I think it's clear that both cases must be seen as instances of
supernatural intervention in the physical order. The accounts themselves
strongly suggest direct supernatural action. It was the five loaves and two
fish which Jesus divided into enough for the five thousand, not other
supplies. The wine tasted by the master of the banquet was drawn from the
jar that the servants had just filled with water, not from somewhere else;
the water had somehow been changed or replaced with wine. Additionally, both
acts are described by the Gospel authors as "miraculous signs", a terms used
repeatedly throughout the OT and NT to refer to supernatural intervention.

Second, I would argue that there are only two general alternatives for these
miracles: (a) miraculous creation or (b) miraculous re-ordering of existing
creation (e.g. the extra fish grew as do usual fish and were miraculously
teleported into the baskets as needed). However, I think (b) is highly
unlikely as it would require other miracles not mentioned in the narrative
-- i.e. not only did fish appear in the baskets, but they miraculously
disappeared from elsewhere. Did the wine Jesus caused to appear in the jars
disappear from elsewhere? Was manna actually baked somewhere and then
miraculously transported as needed? I don't think you can rule this sort of
re-ordering out, but it seems much more straightforward not to assume
unmentioned (and superfluous) supernatural intervention.

-Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Bill Hamilton
Sent: Sunday, 21 May 2006 11:39 PM
To: Josh Klose; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: Apparent Age: Rethinking Creatio ex Nihilo

--- Josh Klose <mrbond@hlfallout.net> wrote:

When
Jesus multiplied the fish, it would have been absurd for the disciples to
believe that
the new fish had actually grown as it appeared. They knew well that
miraculous
creation had just occurred - there was no past, whatever the appearance.

The text doesn't say that Jesus created the fish. It simply says he divided
the
bread and the fish and there was enough for everyone. He could have
transported
the fish from elsewhere. The same is true of the wine at Cana. It doesn't
say
that he changed the water into wine. It simply says he asked that jars be
filled with water and then sent someone with a dipper full to the Master of
Ceremonies, who pronounced it excellent wine. Again, the water could have
been
transported elsewhere and replaced by the wine, which was transported in
from
somewhere. Do I think that's what really happened? I don't know, because the
text doesn't tell me. Neither would I advocate concluding that the fish or
the
wine was _created_. The text doesn't tell us.

Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
248.652.4148 (home) 248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Mon May 22 14:00:21 2006