RE: [asa] Proof (was: Our discourse here)

Michael said:
Genesis speaks of creation by God - whatever that means beyond creating! It
is inappropriate to talk of miracles in regard of genesis one.

Iain said:
Genesis 1 and 2 are not written in a way that they can be described as
"miracles". It is clear in the Bible when miracles occur (e.g. Jesus'
miraculous healings, the parting of the red sea etc), but the creation is
not described as a miracle. Therefore I don't see a contradiction, or a
problem with the idea that it is there to say that God is the creator; the
exact manner of creation being described in figurative language. By
contrast, it seems to me that miracles are signs and wonders that happened
subsequently to reveal God to His people; not a trick to bring creation into
existence.

James replies:

OK, so first, we have a dividing point: Genesis 1&2 (creation accounts).

Secondly, we have a rationale for division: Creating is creating, and not
"miraculous".

Now, I sometimes use "miracle" and "supernatural" interchangeably, and they
are not necessarily the same. I am familiar enough with language to not do
that, and I am sorry. So the second question is this: Do you agree with
these statements, with "miracle" changed to "supernatural"?

"It is inappropriate to talk of the supernatural in regard to Genesis 1."

"Genesis 1 and 2 are not written in a way that they can be described as
"supernatural".

JP

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Feb 28 17:35:01 2009