Over the last century, one of the most common attacks on biblical truth has been upon Genesis 1 and 2. The conservative resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention originates in the "Genesis controversy," where a Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary professor wrote a commentary on Genesis and claimed that the book was allegorical. Almost every liberal denomination has rejected a literal interpretation of Genesis. While historically, this threat has existed outside of conservative denominations, the modern version of this threat has arisen among so-called conservatives. The denial of a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-2 is a denial of inerrancy.
The Danger Present
It has been stated that how a person treats Genesis 1 and 2 is foundational to his entire hermeneutic. Genesis 1 and 2 are very straightforward narratives of the beginning of history. The details of these two chapters are not complicated. The danger of denying a literal interpretation of these two chapters is that it will lead to denying other historical and scientific statements in Scripture. Any hermeneutic that bends the clear statements of Scripture will ultimately destroy any church that allows it in. While different beliefs present unique dangers, each has this specific danger undergirding it.
The Threats
The most common view that denies the literal interpretation of Genesis is Theistic Evolution. Theistic evolution believes everything that naturalistic evolution believes. It believes in natural selection, species-to-species changes, the need for billions of years, and universal common descent. The only difference between naturalistic and theistic evolution is that the latter believes God is the one who initiated and guided all of the evolutionary processes. The major problem with theistic evolution is that it makes God a passive agent in creation instead of the active creator of all things. Colossians 1:16 makes clear that all things were created by God, through God, and for God. However, according to evolution, all things were not created by God, through God, and for God. A second problem with theistic evolution is that it removes humanity as the peak of God's creation. In Genesis 1, when God made male and female, he said it was "very good." Evolution makes humanity the last part of a chain of animals and organisms that necessarily must precede it, de-emphasizing the importance of humanity. A third problem with theistic evolution is that it necessarily puts death before sin. In evolution, the only way things can evolve is if something dies. Romans 5 makes clear that death only came about because of sin. If millions of years of evolution existed before any human could ever sin, that would mean death occurred before sin. Theologically, death is a punishment and consequence of sin. Logically, evolution makes the punishment and consequence precede the action that makes it necessary. For these three reasons, but also many more, theistic evolution is a great danger to local churches.
For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. —Colossians 1:16
Day-Age Theory is another view that denies a literal interpretation of Genesis, albeit less common. Day-age theory is the belief that each day in Genesis 1 is actually an epoch of time. These epochs of time are undefined, ranging from 1,000 years to billions of years. Day-age theorists attempt to harmonize Scripture with the "scientific consensus" of the earth being millions of years old. Some day-age theorists are theistic evolutionists, but not all. The major issue with day-age theory is that it interprets the Hebrew word for day, "yom," to mean something that is found nowhere else in Scripture. This interpretation creates great confusion in interpreting Scripture. If the day-age theory were true, then any time the word "day" is used in Scripture, the believer must doubt it means a literal 24-hour period. Further, the day-age theory ignores the pattern of "evening and morning" in Genesis 1. The major issue with day-age theory, though, is that it believes Scripture must be harmonized with worldly science. A belief that Christians must take into consideration the beliefs of unbelievers deny the sufficiency of Scripture. The practical outcome of a belief like the day-age theory is pragmatism. If our beliefs on creation must change to accommodate unbelievers, what other views must change to do the same? While day-age theory has lost its popularity over the years, it is still a dangerous view regarding creation.
Who Brings in the Threat
Two types of people bring in these threats. The first type is those who desire to be seen as smart by the scientific community. Almost every secular scientist believes that biblical creationists are crazy, and there is a group of Christians who desire to be respected by these people. These people aren't necessarily trying to subvert biblical truth but instead have an overinflated desire to be liked by the world. These types try to make secular science make sense in the world of the Bible.
The second type of people are those who are adherents to the cult of scientism. These people claim to hold to Scripture but believe exactly what scientism promotes. These people are trying to subvert biblical truth and make Christians adhere to the tenets of scientism. These types bend the Bible to fit into the world of secular science.
How to Defend Against the Threat
To prevent the threat of denying a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-2, you should know and teach a sound hermeneutic. The literal grammatical-historical hermeneutic is the only sound hermeneutic that does not change the meaning of Scripture. Knowing and teaching this method will prevent Christians from bending Scripture.
Another way to protect against this threat is by using sound material on creation. Answers in Genesis is the most trustworthy organization on biblical creation. Promoting and teaching the material that Answers in Genesis provides will be of great value to your local church.
Conclusion
Defending against this threat is vital for a local church. The desire to be respected by the scientific community has allowed the cult of scientism to enter into local churches. While some people are seemingly harmless about their beliefs, any denial of the literal interpretation of Scripture will ultimately destroy a local church.
Written by Klayton Carson
The "Threats to the Church" series is also on the Text-Driven Podcast. You can listen to the Text-Driven Podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or at www.textdriven.org/podcasts. New episodes are released every Monday, just in time for your morning commute.
