Creation is a Secondary Issue?

[Michael V. Frazier]

There is a viewpoint among many people that any discussion of Origins is unnecessary for the Christian Faith. Some feel the contention over Creationism is a secondary issue, not worthy of serious discussion. But is this a valid perspective to hold?

A wise minister in a discussion recently commented that the battle for the soul of man takes place within the mind: garbage in, garbage out. What we allow into our thoughts, what we entertain with our minds ultimately will become the way that we think; it becomes the way we view the world—our paradigm. Because of the vast plethora of evolutionary and long age paradigms so prevalent within our society [garbage in], the laity and leaders of the Church have begun to "see" within Scripture ideologies that just aren't there [garbage out]. Instead of letting the Bible stand on its own, believing it for what it says alone, we try to make it fit with modern, secular reasoning. Instead of solely relying upon the unchanging, infallible Word of God, we interpret it via the constantly changing theories of fallible man. What we believe, therefore, about Creation is of great importance as it bears upon the whole of Scripture, and thus, the sum total of Christian Faith.

As Christians we believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith. But therein we find a problem. Why are we so ready to believe in this miracle, when we cannot accept the Bible as it speaks of Creation? Since we are so ready to believe everything secular science says, we see "billions of years" in Genesis. Likewise, today we can find Christian(?) churches that deny the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ simply because science says dead things cannot live again. Instead, they "reinterpret" the Resurrection as a "figurative" illustration of a "spiritual" revelation. If we compromise any part of the Word, then that same process can be applied throughout Scripture.

"Oh!" we say, "we would never have that in our Apostolic Churches!" But why not, given enough time? We already have Apostolic minister who believe in millions of years. We already have Apostolic ministers who believe in 3.5 billion years of human evolution from some primordial beginning. We have already had Apostolic preachers professing homosexuality. Where does it end? If we cannot stand firm on the Word of God from the very first verse, then we run the risk of the Church believing just about everything but the truth.

We cannot continue to say the Doctrine of Creation is a "side issue" in the desire to simply preach the Gospel, for the message of Genesis determines whether or not that Gospel is genuine. It matters what we believe about this issue, for our belief will ultimately come out in our preaching. The foundation of the Gospel message rests upon the validity of Genesis. If Genesis can be undermined, if it can be shown to be untrue (or can be watered down), then the message of the Gospel suffers.

Without Genesis we cannot proclaim the message of Salvation, because in Genesis we find the reason we need a Savior. Without Genesis we are unable to explain or answer the reasons for so much suffering and depravity in the world. Without Genesis we cannot properly understand God's authority, sin, the atonement, marriage between one man and one woman, the need for clothing (modesty), the different people groups (races), diverse languages, the New Heaven and New Earth, and many other things. It's not called Genesis for nothing; it is the Book of Beginnings.

Now before anyone assumes or infers that I'm trying to replace Jesus Christ with Genesis as the foundation for our faith, let it first be understood that God and His authority are the foundation for Genesis. Genesis is the foundation for our Bible, and thereby, the message of the Gospel (which tells us of man's need of a Savior because of Sin). Jesus Christ (the Savior) is the foundation of the Church (the vehicle by which the Gospel is spread). We understand that Jesus is God manifested in the flesh, so it clear that He is that original foundation of Truth. Therefore, everything ultimately does indeed rest upon Jesus Christ.

So are we going to believe what He said? "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is" (Exodus 20:11a)—not six undefined expanses of time, not six long ages, not six "thousands" of years, not six accounts of creations, but six days. That's pretty simple—it doesn't require a theologian to understand it. Just ask a child what it means. If we cannot accept His Word here, how can we accept His Word elsewhere? Jesus asked Nicodemus "If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (John 3:12). If we cannot understand or simply accept what He wrote to us about this earth, can we truly expect to understand what He wrote to us about Heaven?

I am not writing to attack anyone or to promote disharmony. Each of us is certainly capable of believing whatever we will. Yet I fear what will happen to the beauty of God's Word and the Gospel "tomorrow" if the Church cannot make up her mind "today" to believe the Bible for what it alone declares, apart from external influences. The Bible is our only source of Absolute Truth. When we begin to apply secular knowledge and humanistic reasoning to God's Holy Word, we run a dangerous risk of beginning to question it within ourselves, or worse, causing someone else to question it.

And to lighten the mood . . . :-)