What’s in a name?
Sometimes controversy. A boy named Sue, fundamentalist, fascist, liberal (or liberals renaming themselves (again) “progressive”), etc. … Names can evoke powerful responses. Some say controversial names generate interest. The label or mislabel of something or someone often introduces presumptions or starting points for how people, ideas, and things are initially perceived.
Answers in Genesis recently published an interesting article on whether the name “young earth creationist” is the most accurate name for those that read the first chapter of Genesis literally regarding origins.
“I’m a young-earth creationist.”
To evolutionists, a person claiming this title is akin to saying, “I’m an anti-science mystic.” To Christians who have compromised with naturalistic presuppositions, young-earth creation implies just one more opinion on the earth’s beginning.
Many Christians have conceded to uniformitarian dogma by imposing theories on Genesis like the day-age view, gap theory, and the framework hypothesis. Christians taking on names—progressive creationist, theistic evolutionist, or even young-earth creationist—implies Genesis 1–11 does not have one clear interpretation.
By making our primary title “young-earth creationists,” we seem to agree that the debate is merely over the scientific evidence of the age of the earth. We get caught up in arguments over whether the fossil record, radiometric dating, and celestial bodies are evidence for a young or old earth. While examining the evidence is valuable, the issue is not the evidence itself. The main issue is our starting point for interpreting the evidence—either fallible human opinions or infallible Scripture (Psalm 119:160; 2 Timothy 3:16). Therefore, the title of those who hold to biblical authority should identify their starting point.
“I’m a biblical creationist.”
This title accurately conveys the biblical Christian’s starting point. Two starting points exist: man’s opinion or God’s Word. Creation compromise positions come about when Christians start with man’s opinion of long ages and then reinterpret Scripture to fit the uniformitarian beliefs of God-rejecting naturalists.
See the rest of this excellent article at: Don’t Call Us Young-Earth Creationists