Last week I responded to theologian Gavin Ortland’s tweet, where he was defending himself against the charge of goin
g liberal. I pointed out, in my retweet, that the slope starts when you reject six day creation (which Gavin does). “Not believing in a literal 6-day creation is the first stage in going liberal, and yes that would mean a lot of PCA pastors would be in that camp.”
This statement sparked significant discussion, so I want to elaborate on why I believe six-day creation is so foundational to orthodox Christianity, and why rejecting that view is the “first stage in going liberal”.
My Personal Experience
I grew up in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) and spent about 18 years in PCA churches across Texas, New Mexico, and Oregon. I still have many friends in the denomination. One friend who went through ordination about 12 years ago, told me that out of eight pastoral candidates in his presbytery (in deep South Texas, no less), he was the only one who didn’t take an exception to the Westminster Confession regarding six-day creation. The other seven all held to some form of theistic evolutionary framework or gap theory.
My former pastor in Oregon embraced theistic evolution and eventually departed for a liberal church in North Carolina. I’ve personally witnessed how compromising on six-day creation can be the first step toward theological liberalism.
Addressing Common Objections
In the thread under my retweet, a number of themed responses popped up, and so below is my breakdown for each response.
1. “Genesis 1 is poetic, not literal”
Yes, Genesis 1 is poetic—but that doesn’t make it less true. As Pastor Toby pointed out in our show on this: “Ancient cultures put their most important truths into poetic form”. Poetry doesn’t signal fiction; it underlines reality and significance.
The poetic structure of Genesis 1 (with its repeated “evening and morning” pattern) doesn’t diminish its historical truth any more than the poetic Song of Moses in Exodus 15 makes the Red Sea crossing fictional. Scripture presents Genesis as history, and to chalk it up for allegory, is not being faithful to the text as presented.
2. “The Hebrew word ‘yom’ doesn’t always mean a 24-hour day”
Genesis 1 explicitly defines each “yom” as consisting of “evening and morning”—24 hours. God maintained this pattern for all six days of creation, showing these were all normal-length days.
Furthermore, Exodus 20:11 connects our six-day work week directly to God’s creation week: “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day.” The connection only works if God’s days were like our days.
3. “The earth must be millions of years old/needed time to mature”
When people claim the earth needed time to mature before Adam and Eve arrived (with trees growing to maturity, etc.), they’re overlooking that God created Adam and Eve as adults, not babies. He created mature trees bearing fruit from day one. Just as Jesus instantaneously turned water into fine wine at Cana, God created a mature world with age already baked into the recipe.
This isn’t deceptive because God clearly told us in Scripture exactly what He did. The problem arises when we impose human logic on God’s Word instead of allowing Scripture to shape our thinking.
The Theological Problems with Theistic Evolution
Theistic evolution creates massive theological problems for the Christian, like trying to fit a square peg into a circle. Here are a couple points for the square peg people to consider:
- Death before sin: Romans tells us death entered the world through sin. If evolution occurred over millions of years, then death, suffering, predation, and extinction were God’s tools for creation, not consequences of the Fall. Sin came after Adam and Eve fell, and death entered because of sin. But theistic evolution maintains that death occurred over and over again for millions of years for everything to evolve into where we are at now in 2025. The world evolved for millions of years, death occurred again and again during that time, and then Adam and Eve entered the world.
- God as author of evil: Theistic evolution makes God responsible for billions of years of death and suffering before sin even entered the world. Theistic evolution, knowingly or unknowingly, attributes evil to God and not to man rebelling against God.
- Undermining Christ’s work: If you mess with the first Adam and the origin of sin, you inevitably distort the work of the last Adam (Christ). Why did Jesus need to die if God could simply evolve us toward perfection?
The Slippery Slope
Once Genesis 1 becomes purely “allegorical” or “metaphorical,” other biblical accounts naturally follow: the global flood becomes localized, the Red Sea crossing becomes wading through shallow water, and eventually even Christ’s resurrection becomes metaphorical.
Ideas have consequences, and cultures develop ideas to their logical conclusions. While individual believers might hold inconsistent views (accepting evolution while remaining orthodox in other areas), the trajectory of reinterpreting Genesis typically leads toward greater forms liberalism.
A Warning Case: Francis Collins
Francis Collins, founder of BioLogos (which promotes theistic evolution) and former NIH director, exemplifies this connection. While directing the NIH, he approved gain-of-function research in China that led to COVID-19, funded studies using aborted babies, studies involving homosexual practices of teenage boys, and even research grafting aborted baby scalps onto lab rats.
When you embrace an evolutionary framework where God used death, mutation, and suffering to create, then what logical basis do you have to oppose these practices? If we evolved from lab rats over billions of years through violent, painful processes directed by God, why can’t we experiment on human tissue or manipulate human biology now?
Conclusion
I’m not suggesting that everyone who questions six-day creation is heading toward complete liberalism and apostasy. By God’s grace, many Christians remain orthodox despite inconsistency in this area. But I do want to sound a warning that this represents a crack in your theological foundation that could lead to bigger problems.
The choice is ultimately between starting with God’s Word as He presents it or starting with man’s theories and trying to fit Scripture into that framework. When geology or archaeology seems to contradict Scripture, we should remember that human science has been catastrophically wrong many times throughout history—from bloodletting to climate alarmism to our insane COVID policies.
Six-day creation isn’t a peripheral issue—it’s foundational to biblical authority, God’s character, the reality of sin, and Christ’s redemptive work.
*”Oculus Rift of the Sky Gods” by jurvetson is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
