It is interesting to read the sorts of things one finds on the Answers in Genesis website about sin. There are studies on the topic by the organization’s leaders and members, as well as classic sermons by Charles Spurgeon. For instance, Spurgeon says:
“Every man who believes Christ obeys him; believing and obeying always run side by side. Do you not know that Christ does not come merely to blot out the past, he comes to save us from being what we are…Now this cannot be done unless we obey, for if we are to continue to live in sin, salvation is a mere word, and to boast about it would be ridiculous. How can we be saved from sin if we are living in sin?
In another study by Troy Lacey, pride in emphasized as being the most fundamental and heinous of sins.
Now young-earth creationism is in its very essence an act of pride – a refusal by the ignorant to accept correction from scientists and scholars about matters pertaining to both Scripture and the study of the natural world. And it is fundamentally about deception – making false claims about the evidence from both the Bible and the natural world.
And thus it is clear that young-earth creationism is inherently a form of sin. Where does that leave the claim of young-earth creationists to be Christians?
Can you be a Christian and persist in living in sin? Certainly we all fall short of the lofty goals to which Jesus calls us. But when someone is a persistent liar, or thief, or whatever else, if they say they are also Christians, we question whether they understand what that means, and if they do, we question their commitment.
And so we can say this about young-earth creationism: Identifying oneself as a young-earth creationist, with deceit and pride woven into its very fabric, is to make a declaration that is fundamentally at odds with the claim to be a Christian.
This doesn’t mean that there aren’t people who self-identify as both. But being a Christian young-earth creationist is like being a Christian warmonger, or a Christian thief, or a Christian xenophobe. Not impossible, perhaps, but inherently self-contradictory.