I just read over all the posts here WT. If creationism is taken as the idea that science must support the literal word of the bible then I don't see any connection between any of what you posted and that area of discussion.
Could you clear it up?
You seem to suggest something like this reasoning:
1) If Christ was actually resurrected then everything he says is true.
2) He indirectly supports the old testament.
3) Therefore the old testament must be true too.
4) This makes support for the resurrections support for a literal interpretation of Genesis.
Is that the connection?
That is so very tenuous that I don't see it really being tied to "creationism" as we know it here.