The implications of your form of YEC are quite far-reaching. Even if we leave the origin of life and evolution out of it, you are in effect requiring that God:
- put the fossils in the rocks to fool the scientists, giving the illusion of progressive development over millions of years,
- tinkered with the radioisotope ratios in the rocks to delude science into thinking they are older than they are,
- put magnetic stripes on the ocean floor to give the illusion that oceans have opened over millions of years,
- made the continental shelves match as if they had once fitted together, when really they never did.
- made the oceans spread at a measurable rate, to further the illusion.
- embedded seashells in the Himalayas, to give the illusion that the rocks were once under the ocean
etc, etc.
I suspect you would have the same difficulty as me in believing in a God that could be so deceitful. I imagine it is just that you have never realised that creationism necessarily implies a God that behaves in this way. But that is why, to the scientifically educated Christian, creationism is so unacceptable. It would mean we could not trust our senses at all when exploring nature, for fear of some further arbitrary trickery by God.
As to what church I belong to, I am astonished that you do not seem to realise that most major denominations of Western Christianity see Genesis as allegorical, as Origen already did in 200AD.
More here on the credentials of the allegorical interpretation:
Allegorical interpretations of Genesis - Wikipedia
As far as my YEC being far-reaching, that’s a bit odd coming from a so-called intellectual Christian. You obviously have not researched the well-known and documented history and genealogy from Jesus to Adam. If you knew anything about this, you would know that from creation until now is about 6,000 years from the scripture in Genesis. You either believe the plain text of scripture that God created heaven and earth in six literal 24 days like he said he did, or you don’t. I’m somewhat surprised and disappointed that you would start your response with a strawman regarding the fossils, radioisotope ratios, magnetic strip, continental shelf, ocean spread and the sea shells in the Himalayas! All I was saying is that when God created the earth and all life, he created it mature and fully functioning with the appearance of age due to the fact that plants and trees and all the creatures both on land and sea were in a mature state. This makes good logical and rational sense to be able to be fruitful and multiply. To dismiss this and insert something that is never spoken of or alluded to in any way shape or form, with another process like evolution is absolutely ludicrous, why? First, even evolutionary scientists, honest ones, admit that evolutionary processes to explain origins of life on this planet is impossible! Many evolution scientists will not debate anymore since they know and understand this hypothesis is baseless and are not finding what they expect to find. Not only that but the more science understands about life, the more it bends its knee to the scriptures. Look, if evolution theory is true, the fossil record must be what this theory requires, on the other hand, if creation is true, the fossil record must be in accord with that theory. So, what are the geologists and paleontologist’s finding in these areas all over the globe? A vast array of complex invertebrates abruptly appearing fully formed in the Cambrian rocks and they are found on every continent of the world! Now, this should be a clue to all people! But if that’s not enough common sense for an intellectual and non-intellectual mind, how about this. Pre-Cambrian rocks should contain billions upon billions of fossils of evolutionary ancestors of the complex invertebrates. Additionally, we must see evidence in the billions of transitional forms of these complex invertebrates. Results? No one has found fossilized ancestors for a single one of the Cambrian invertebrates, or transitional forms linking, say, brachiopods with clams, sponges with jelly fish, or any other possible linkages. What does this tell you? It should tell that if either one of these theories is true, you would find overwhelming evidence in the fossils for that specific theory, right? It’s not complicated. Are they finding what is needing to support evolution? Absolutely NOT! Douglas Futuyma an evolutionist and ardent anti-creationist is a Distinguished Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at Stony Brook University in Stony Brook, New York and a Research Associate on staff at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. He states, “It is considered likely that all the animal phyla became distinct before or during the Cambrian, for they all appear fully formed, without intermediates connecting one form to another.” Nothing more needs to be said, evolution is quite dead! This is one count in the creationists’ charge that can only evoke in unison from the paleontologists a plea of nolo contendere! As you know, or don’t, Nolo contendere is, of course, a guilty plea by a defendant who must admit that he has no defense. And it is now widely known that evolutionists, honest ones that is, are forced to admit this, and they do. Now, you and others can keep kicking the goad on this subject but, eventually your intellectual mind is going to bow down and admit evolution is IMPOSSIBLE! Why? Because it is! A truer statement from you would have been, but that is why, to the “scientifically educated Christian, evolution is so unacceptable!” Because this is exactly what the reality of current science (Christian or not) is finding and forcefully having to swallow, like it or not. The true and plain text of the Genesis account of history is exactly what the Hebrew language has stated. Nothing in the Hebrew language asserts this is any type of allegory. You would be hard pressed to prove otherwise! Good luck!
Now, as far as Origen is concerned, some of his teachings were condemned on an ecumenical council, but he as a person was not. The teachings that fathers found heretical from his discourse were:
The teaching of preexistence of the souls in God
The teaching about the “apokatastasis”, or final reconciliation of all created beings with God. Origen was a Platonist.
Now, as I’m sure you already know, but then again, perhaps you don’t, Apokatastasis (restoration) is a major patristic doctrine stemming from Greek philosophy and Jewish-Christian Scriptures. Ramelli argues for its presence and Christological and Biblical foundation in many Fathers, analyzing its meaning and development from the birth of Christianity to Eriugena. The problem here, is that when you stray away from the plain text of scripture, you are in danger of false heretical teachings. This is where Origen fell. So, you can reference him all you like, but when it comes to his teaching of preexistence of the souls in God, and the teaching about the “apokatastasis”, or final reconciliation of all created beings with God, you are forced to admit, it is in direct opposition of the true scriptures. Satan for example will not be saved, period! So, he is in direct violation of the scriptures! If you want to follow someone like this, be my guest, but you have been cuckolded. So basically, your allegiance to these teachings of Origen doesn’t mean a whole lot if your desire is to place your confidence in truth.