I can't be young earth, Genesis 1 seems like a "this is a gist of it but I'm not telling you specifics" overview of creation rather than a step by step instruction, allowing for what has been scientifically discovered about the nature of the universe and its age to hold true while still being God's very good creation. I see ongoing geological, cosmological, and biological processes that take very long times to do anything and it only makes absolute sense that those processes have been going on for a very long time, canyons are still being dug by rivers inch by inch, Niagra falls recedes its bank inch by inch over the years. There have been cataclysms such as global flood but there have also been slow processes that continue to go on every day, I have witnessed microevolution in laboratory settings. So there's only so much you can do believing in young earth creationism, and not just blind yourself to everything around you that says the universe is older than 6000 years. You either have to believe that Satan created the evidence (where in scripture has Satan ever been able to create anything?), or believe that God created things to appear older than they really are which seems like, deception. Why create things that would intentionally trick people? God doesn't lie or deceive!
So I can't be a young earth creationist, which puts me at odds with most pastors in most denominations of Christianity.
I believe in Old Earth. I still believe God created it, but I believe he did so using processes we still see at work today. I am not sure if I full blown believe in theistic macroevolution or progressive creationism (God creating things according to "kinds" in waves, which is more consistent with the fossil record, and microevolution being a tool within the genetic code that God created as a blueprint for all life). But microevolution I can't ignore at all. I can't just pretend that DNA just doesn't exist and we're all just scooped up dirt breathed upon by God. In Genesis 2 God even describes anesthesia and surgery to remove one of Adam's ribs (as a source of bone marrow and stem cells) to make Eve (Genesis 2:21-23). Which had always confused me as to why Genesis 2 didn't have God just speaking Eve into existence, but then I learned about stem cells present in bone marrow and the ribs are a flat bone which is one of your main sources of hematopoiesis, it suddenly made perfect sense, God GREW Eve from stem cells from Adam's bone marrow.
Is there any denominations that support old earth and either theistic evolution or progressive creationism?
@Albion is correct - most denominations accept Old Earth Theistic Evolutionism. I will list some of them to give you an example of the scope we are dealing with:
- Anglicanism (all provinces, including the Anglican Church in Australia, even the extremely conservative Archdiocese of Sydney, the Anglican Church in North America, the Episcopal Church USA, the Church of England, the Church of Ireland, the Church in Wales, the Scottish Episcopalian Church, the Anglican Church of Ghana, the Anglican Church of South Africa, the Anglican Church of Tanzania, the Mar Thoma Syrian Church (which is in India, not Syria), the Church of South India, the Church of North India, the Church of Pakistan, the Anglican Province of Egypt, the Spanish Reformed Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church of Canada, the Anglican Church of New Zealand / Aotearoa, and many others).
- The American Baptist Convention
- The Assyrian Church of the East
- The Ancient Church of the East
- The Christian Church / Disciples of Christ
- The CCCC (Conservative Congregational Christian Conference; my denomination!)
- The Eastern Orthodox Communion (all members, including the Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, Georgian Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox, Bulgarian Orthodox, the Orthodox Church in America, the Antiochian Orthodox, the Ukrainian Orthodox, the Albanian Orthodox, the Latvian Orthodox, the Estonian Orthodox, the American Carpatho-Rusyn Orthodox Diocese, and some smaller Orthodox churches that do not have their own parishes in the US such as the Polish Orthodox, the Czech and Slovakian Orthodox, the Macedonian Orthodox, the Finnish Orthodox, the Japanese Orthodox, the Cypriot Orthodox, and the Orthodox churches of Alexandria and All Africa, Jerusalem, Sinai, Moldova, Bessarabia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and generally speaking, the Old Calendarists and Russian Old Rite Orthodox / Old Believers, who
are in the US)
- The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
- The Evangelical United Brethren
- The Evangelical Lutheran Synod
- The Evangelical Covenant Order (of Presbyterians, disgruntled former PCUSA)
- The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (mostly)
- The Moravian Church
- The North American Lutheran Church (ex-ELCA)
- The Oriental Orthodox Communion (Armenian Apostolic, Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Eritrean Orthodox, Indian Orthodox/Malankara Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox)
- The Orthodox Presbyterian Church and The Presbyterian Church in America (in some parishes; your mileage will vary I think)
- The Presbyterian Church, USA
- The Reformed Church in America
- The Roman Catholic Church (including all Sui Juris Eastern Catholic churches such as the Ukrainian Greek Catholics, the Ruthenian Greek Catholics, of which Andy Warhol was a member, the Melkites, the Maronites, the Chaldeans, et cetera)
- The Southern Baptist Church (some congregations, it could be hit or miss)
- The Lutheran Church, Wisconsin Synod (same as above)
- The United Church of Christ
- The United Methodist Church
The Missouri Synod, Wisconsin Synod, and the Southern Baptist Church are congregational, but I haven’t heard of any of their congregations being especially fierce about this issue. I attended a Missouri Synod church for a while and never heard this mentioned; later I attended an ELCA parish. and this being before the recent leftward shift in that denomination, the content of the sermons was pretty much identical, as was the music (lovely in both cases). In the case of the SBC, the Presbyterian Church in America, and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, its probably a good idea to just visit their website before attending; if it does not include any anti-evolution tracts or links to Answers In Genesis, you should be fine. You can also always ask.
There are several smaller denominations which I have not listed (but to be fair, the CCCC and the Moravians are pretty small, I just happen to like them), which should also be fine. I don’t know anything about Pentecostal or Charismatic churches, so I can’t help you there. I also don’t know anything about the Calvary Chapel, the Anabaptists, the Seventh Day Adventists or the more evangelical Quakers.
Also I would assume many non-denominational evangelical churches are not into the creationism debates.
I personally am a theistic evolutionist, because I prefer to use Alexandrian-style allegorical and typological-prophetic exegesis of the Old Testament to the literal-historical method of the School of Antioch, as did Cyril of Alexandria, Origen, Athanasius (who defended the doctrine of the Trinity and saved Christianity from the counterfeit Arian cult the Roman Emperors tried to replace it with in the fourth century), and Cyril (who preserved Christianity again, this time from Nestorius and his teaching that the man Jesus and the Word of God were separate, united in a personal union or a union of will), and so using this allegorical form of exegesis, I believe the Book of Genesis is an allegorical account of creation, and my view is strengthened by the fact that if we interpret all accounts of creation in every religion allegorically, the only one which corresponds to known science is the Christian account.
But at the same time, some members of my flock are creationists, and I fully respect the creationist perspective. And if asked about how the universe came to be, my answer is probably the same as theirs, “God created it from nothing.” The only disagreement is over how He created it. Many extremely pious Christian pastors and theologians who I deeply respect are also creationists, and I cannot fault someone for using the Historical-Literal form of interpretation associated with the School of Antioch (indeed, the orthodox interpretation of the Old Testament shared by most Christian churches is based on a mix or
synthesis of historical-critical interpretation, of the kind favored by John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Alexandrian allegorical-typological-prophetic interpretation, favored by Origen, Athanasius, Cyril and others.
The important part of the Bible is the Gospel message, which we get from the entirety of the books in it; the Good News that we can, thanks to the atoning sacrifice of our Savior, and his victory over death on the Cross, receive the blessing of everlasting life if we believe in Him.
