Into to Genisis 1 & 2 series

A study of Genisis 1 & 2

[Opening Sermon Transcript: Intro to Genesis and Early Church Views]

Welcome to this searies I am doing on genisis 1 & 2

Before I dive deep into Genesis and what it truly says, I need to clear the air on something that too often goes unchallenged: the idea that modern Young Earth Creationism represents the historic, unified belief of the early Church. Because it doesn’t.

In fact, if you go back and read the early Church Fathers—men like Augustine and Basil, and and many more, you’ll quickly realize they did not all agree on how to interpret Genesis. And more importantly? That wasn’t a problem for them.

Some, like Origen, a theologian from Alexandria, saw Genesis as deeply symbolic and layered, not something to be taken as a literal, step-by-step account of physical events. Augustine, writing in the 4th and 5th centuries, believed the "days" of creation weren’t 24-hour periods at all. He thought creation was instantaneous in some sense—God willed it, and it was done—but the days were a way of expressing divine order and purpose. Others held that there were gaps—times between the creation events, long periods where history unfolded before humanity entered the story.

Now, did they debate these things? Of course. But did they divide over them? Not at all. Because they understood that how exactly God created the heavens and the earth was not a requirement for salvation. It wasn’t a hill to die on. It wasn’t even a test of faith.

And yet today, some Christians—particularly those in the Young Earth Creationist camp—have elevated this issue to the level of orthodoxy. For them, if you don’t believe that the world is six thousand years old, created in six 24-hour days, you're not just wrong, you're suspect—maybe even heretical.

That’s not just poor theology—it’s historical amnesia. The early church, the ones closest to the apostles, didn’t see this as foundational. They didn’t treat differing views as dangerous. They didn’t turn Genesis into a battleground. That came much later.

…But here’s where the real problem begins:

Because Young Earth Creationism isn’t just a belief some Christians hold anymore. It’s been elevated—wrongly elevated—from a small side issue into a central tenet. Something that was once a minor question—“How and how long?”—has become, for some, a litmus test for faith itself. And in doing so, they’ve done something deeply dangerous: they’ve turned their interpretation of creation into a kind of idol. A doctrine to be defended at all costs. A belief to be worshiped, not questioned.

And let me be clear—if someone wants to believe in a young earth, that’s their right. I’m not here to mock that. I held that view myself once. But the moment that belief is treated as though it defines true Christianity… when disagreement is met with suspicion or accusations of heresy… that’s when it becomes a problem. That’s when it becomes unbiblical.

What I want to do in this series is simple—but not easy. I want to walk through the text. Slowly. Carefully. Honestly. I want to show how, when we take Genesis in its proper ancient context, when we understand the language and the culture of the people who first received it… the so-called “conflict” between Scripture and science vanishes.

You don’t have to lie anymore. You don’t have to twist the evidence or pretend the earth is young. You don’t have to deny what God has revealed in His creation. Because, when rightly understood, the Bible isn’t at war with science. It never was.

Now, I want to be honest about something else, too. I’m not here to make the Bible say things it never said. I’m not bending it to fit science. What I am doing is putting it back into the world that birthed it—the language, the mindset, the assumptions of the people who first heard these words. That’s how we honor Scripture. Not by clinging to new traditions that came later, but by returning to the text itself.

Yes, those who came latter, but who still came before us—scholars, translators, theologians—they were faithful and wise in their time. But they didn’t have access to the wealth of knowledge we now do: discoveries in linguistics, archaeology, ancient Near Eastern culture, and yes—even science. These tools allow us to check, to verify, to understand the text with even greater clarity. That’s not a betrayal of Scripture. That’s the fruit of taking it seriously.

History has shown us how this works.

There was a time—not long ago—when Christians believed the earth was the center of the universe, and that the sun revolved around us. They believed that because it seemed obvious, and because of how they interpreted certain Bible verses. Then along came Galileo. And suddenly, God’s creation told us a different story.

Did Galileo change the Bible? No. He changed our understanding of the universe. And in doing so, he forced us to realize something important: when creation and our interpretation of Scripture collide, it may not be the Bible that’s wrong. It may be us. Our traditions. Our assumptions. Our reading of the text.

And that’s a good thing. Because every time we’re forced to go back and wrestle with the Word of God, every time we dig deeper into what it really says—not just what we thought it said—we grow. We learn. We refine. We draw closer to truth. And ultimately, closer to the One who gave us that truth in the first place.

So my goal in this short series is simple: to take the Bible seriously enough to let it speak for itself, and to stop letting manmade traditions shout over it. To follow the evidence—not just in creation, but in Scripture—wherever it leads. Because I believe, with all my heart, that when we do that, we’ll find not a God of contradiction… but a God of beauty, order, purpose, and truth.