Yesterday, there was a “Debate” between Ken Ham (CEO of Answers in Genesis) and Bill Nye (the Science Guy).  I really don’t want to hash out the debate itself, but rather make some statements on what Christians should/should not think in regards to Creation/evolution.

First, how God created the universe is NOT a first tier issue.  That is, a particular belief is not required for salvation, as compared to say correct doctrine on the Trinity.  It is not even a second tier issue in my opinion.  That is, a belief that is required for like fellowship, as compared to say baptism or church polity.  It is a third tier issue, one that is fun to debate, but not serious enough to divide over.

Now that said, the second thing we need to remember is that God created the universe.  Period, end of statement.  There is no room for any Christian to believe in a non-theistic cause of the development of the universe.  Whether God started everything then stepped back and let billions of years of development take place free from His hand, OR God was intricately involved over billions of years guiding everything Himself, OR God created everything in 6 solar days; whatever way you believe, God did it.  If you say that God was NEVER involved in making the universe, then you don’t believe in God, not in any way, shape, or form.  This is why I am dumbfounded by “Christians” who oppose the concept of Intelligent Design.  People, who profess to be people of faith, argue against the idea that everything we see, all of creation, has a designer behind it.  Unfortunately, part of that may be due to flat out LIES told about Intelligent Design, arguing that ID is “just” Young Earth Creationism in different clothes.  That is a flat out lie.

Third, regardless of how you believe they got there, I do believe that belief in a literal Adam and Eve is a primary tier issue.  Maybe not as it relates to actually salvation, but definitely as it relates to “right” theology and avoidance of heresy.  Look at Romans 5.  Paul clearly believes that Adam was a literal person.  Further, Paul demonstrates the functional effectual nature of Christ’s work on the Cross.  This illustration becomes meaningless if Adam was not a literal person.  Even further, Luke shows Jesus’ lineage back to Adam.  That is hard to do if there as not a real Adam.  If there was not a real Adam, than Luke is wrong.  If Luke is wrong, then the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility are out the window.  And then, there is no solid foundation to base any religion off of.  Some things in scripture leave room for interpretation between two groups that both believe in inerrancy.  Some things do not leave such room.  A literal Adam is one of the latter.