I recently visited the Museum of the Bible in Washington, DC. It is large, and I did not get to tour all of the exhibits. There are many well-done, informative exhibits on topics such as archaeology of the Holy Land (featuring a large display by the Israel Antiquities Authority), the cultural impact of the Bible, and the history of various translations.
I have read that in setting up its displays the museum consulted with a range of knowledgeable scholars to make sure its displays are factually accurate. I am sure that the museum management is simply trying to be truthful, but they are probably also aware that critics would seize on anything that was factually incorrect. Thus, there is great motivation for accuracy.
The bottom floor is set apart for so-called special exhibits, which I assume change from time to time. It so happens that there is currently a large walk-through area there called Scripture and Science. Since that is a topic of special interest of mine, I headed there and walked all through it. Most of the displays consisted of text placards, occasionally illustrated with diagrams or photos. One notable three-dimensional artifact here is an actual notebook of Galileo’s, documenting his observations of Jupiter’s moons; these observations provided powerful support for the then-controversial heliocentric model proposed by Copernicus.
Believers’ Contributions to Science
An overall theme is this exhibit is that there is no fundamental conflict between the Bible (properly understood) and genuine science. Towards the beginning of the exhibit are posted a couple of quotations indicating that in classical and medieval times there was widespread respect in the church for the study of the natural world, and an appreciation that such study could help bring spiritual insights:
Let us glorify the supreme Artificer for all that was wisely and skillfully made; by the beauty of visible things let us raise ourselves to him who is above all beauty.
– Basil of Caesarea, Hexaemeron, Homily 1, AD 378
The whole of the sensible world is like a kind of book written by the finger of God… Instituted by the divine will to manifest the invisible things of God‘s wisdom.
– Hugh of St Victor, De Tribus Deibus, 12th century
From more recent times comes this quote along the same vein from famed French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur, circa 1863:
Man’s first look at the universe discovers only variety, diversity, multiplicity of phenomena. Let that gaze be enlightened by science – by science which draws man closer to God – and simplicity and unity shine forth everywhere.
Early science (1500-1800) in Europe was driven mainly by men who were devout Christians, and believers have continued to contribute into modern times. A graphic (poor quality photo posted below, try clicking on it to expand) titled “How did people of faith contribute to these technical advances?” lists a number of Christian or Jewish (as far as I can tell) believers such as George Westinghouse, Guglielmo Marconi, Charles Townes and Raymond Damadian who advanced modern technology in areas such as power generation, radio, maser/laser, and medical MRI. (The graphic erroneously connects radio pioneer Marconi to the telegraph; Samuel Morse, also a believer, was largely responsible for a successful telegraph).
Photo of display in Museum of the Bible
Diverse Views on Origins
In this blog post I will focus primarily on how the subject of origins was treated in the Scripture and Science display, since that tends to be quite controversial among evangelicals. “Origins” encompasses how the universe was formed, the age of the Earth, the historicity of a global Noahic flood, the origin of life, and the evolutionary development of humans and other species. It is no secret that there is a clash between the teachings of mainstream science and the views of many conservative Christians (and Jews and Muslims) regarding the origins of the earth and of humans.
The Roman Catholic church has largely accepted biological evolution, while maintaining that humans are far more than merely smart animals. Pope John Paul II in 1996 gave a robust endorsement of the physical evidence for evolution, while critiquing the reductionistic view of humans which flows from purely materialistic world-views. Similarly, Pope Francis in 2014 stated:
[God] created beings and allowed them to develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one, so that they were able to develop and to arrive at their fullness of being. He gave autonomy to the beings of the universe at the same time at which he assured them of his continuous presence, giving being to every reality. And so creation continued for centuries and centuries, millennia and millennia, until it became which we know today.
In American Protestantism, there are a number of viewpoints. On the theologically liberal end of the spectrum, pastors and laity do not take very seriously the divine inspiration of the Bible and its creation accounts, and so they simply endorse the latest scientific consensus and move on.
Among Protestants who hold to the inspiration and authority of Scripture, we might distinguish three main positions. First, evolutionary creationists (also termed theistic evolutionists) accept an old earth and biological evolution, while taking a more figurative interpretation of biblical creation accounts. Most practicing scientists who are evangelical Christians fall into this category.
A middle position is old earth creationism, which accepts an old earth but is typically skeptical towards macro-evolution, holding to a special creation of Homo sapiens. Hugh Ross (Reasons to Believe ministry) is an example here. Intelligent Design spokesmen like Stephen Meyer largely fall in this category.
Finally, young earth creationism rejects both an old earth and evolution, holding to a very recent (c. 4000 B.C.) creation of the earth and its life-forms in six 24-hour days. It also holds to a global Flood about 2400 B.C., which deposited most of today’s sedimentary rock layers. Young earth creationism was invented in its modern form in 1961 by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris with their book The Genesis Flood, which quickly became wildly popular among conservative Protestants. (Before 1961 most conservative American Christians were old earth creationists; the cultic roots of The Genesis Flood viewpoint are discussed in Exposing the Roots of Young Earth Creationism).
I have personally passed through all three of these positions on origins. I started off some decades ago as a young earth creationist, since that is what I was taught by leaders I respected. While in college, I heard John Whitcomb (co-author of The Genesis Flood) speak in person, and was very impressed. He was learned and godly, and presented physical evidences that seemed to support a young earth.
However, after bachelor and PhD degrees in hard science I learned enough physics and geology to know that the earth was very old. I have summarized some simple evidences for an old earth here. When I went back to examine the evidences presented in favor of a young earth, I found that they all were based on not telling the full story: they picked out a few facts that seemed to favor their case, but ignored or distorted the other, obvious facts which rebutted their case. See Evidences for a Young Earth for details here.
This put me in the old earth creationist camp. I was still skeptical about macroevolution, since it was not clear to me how mere point mutations in the genomes of simple organisms could result in the larger genomes characteristic of more complex plants and animals. That objection dissolved after I learned that in reproduction sometimes whole gene sections or even entire genomes can get duplicated, giving increases in genome size and complexity. Also, the advances in genome mapping in the past twenty years have shown beyond reasonable doubt that humans and other primates evolved from common ancestors. See, for instance, Endogenous Retroviruses in Your Genome Show Common Ancestry with Primates. And so, I am now an evolutionary creationist.
Naturally, I have had to ponder how all this fits together with the teachings in the Bible. Some thoughts on how science and the Bible cohere are here. A key for me was to revisit the passage in II Timothy 3:15-17, and realize the purpose of the Scriptures is to not to teach us about geological history, but to reveal matters of spiritual import that could not be gleaned from observation of the natural world.
How Does the Museum of the Bible Handle Creation and Evolution?
These various camps can take their views on creation very, very seriously. It would be impossible for the museum to endorse any one position without alienating many of its visitors. The Science and Scripture exhibit finesses this issue by simply not taking a position. It mainly notes that there is controversy in certain areas, and leaves it at that.
I do not recall much being stated about geology or the age of the earth. I suppose that they could not say much here without outraging either the old earth or the young earth camps. There is not much ongoing controversy among practicing scientists over how old the earth is, so the museum largely leaves this whole issue alone.
Many of the displays here deal with the origin of life, where it can be truly stated that much remains unexplained. Some basic facts are mentioned, which all parties can agree on. It was noted that prior to the 1600’s, most theologians and natural philosophers assumed that at least some forms of life could spontaneously generate from non-living material. Experiments by Francesco Redi and later by Louis Pasteur (both scientists who were Catholic believers) showed that in our current experience “life only comes from life.” There is a looping video playing, with comments from several believing scientists on faith/science issues, including discussion of the conceptual difficulties for living cells emerging from a chemical soup.
One placard states, “Today, there is no scientific consensus about life’s origin. Yet, most scientists recognize the remarkably complex conditions needed for life to arise. Some claim this complexity requires a creator.” Similarly, another placard reads:
Much of the religious debate over Darwin’s theory focused on his insistence that life developed without specific guidance from God, which raised questions about the biblical idea of God’s providential care over creation… These early debates within science and among believers laid the groundwork for debates that continue today.
And finally:
The mysteries of life and its beginning have motivated scientists, theologians, and philosophers for centuries. Some have looked to the Bible, which claims God created all life with wisdom and purpose. Charles Darwin’s famous work, On the Origins of Species, sparked hot debate and prompted more questions. Later, groundbreaking discoveries such as DNA have added to our understanding of how living things are composed. Today, there’s still no definitive answer to life’s complex origin.
A Missed Opportunity?
From looking at the impressive roster of the Academic Advisory Board for this exhibit, I presume that the museum management was apprised that the weight of scientific evidence is fully in support of an old earth and of an evolutionary origin for today’s animal species, including humans. Part of me wishes that they could have publicly acknowledged that evidence, and then taken the opportunity to explain to believers how evolutionary processes in the physical and biological realms are actually quite consistent with the evolutionary development of salvation history as presented in the Bible.
There is a long progressive revelation of God’s nature and purposes within the family line of Abraham, starting with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and moving into the tribes of Israel, Moses and the Exodus, the chaotic time of the Judges, and then the various stages of the monarchy. After the Babylonian exile essentially weeded out idol worship, there was finally produced a people who were fully monotheistic and who thus had a chance of properly appreciating the Triune nature of the One God when God the Son appeared. And so on.
Also, Jesus presented the progress of the kingdom of God in terms that are strikingly similar to the workings of biological evolution:
[The modern picture of origins] looks remarkably like Jesus’ parables of the Kingdom: some seeds go to waste, others bear remarkable fruit; some projects start tiny and take forever, but ultimately produce a great crop; some false starts are wonderfully rescued, others are forgotten. Chaos is astonishingly overcome.
In my opinion, Gen Z needs to hear these wholistic, faith-enhancing themes, rather than the science-denying claims of the young earth/anti-evolution camp which drive educated young people away from serious consideration of the faith. Rather than fighting a losing battle against science, conservative Protestants need to expand their understanding of God’s workings to incorporate scientists’ findings. Catholics have gotten this right for many decades. This approach would be consistent with the words of Hugh of St. Victor which were cited earlier:
The whole of the sensible world is like a kind of book written by the finger of God… Instituted by the divine will to manifest the invisible things of God‘s wisdom.
All that said, I recognize that with a modestly-sized exhibit and the public’s limited attention span, the Museum could not effectively take on the errors of young earth creationism and of the Intelligent Design movement. To refute the popular talking-points of these camps can take pages and pages of detailed data and explanations and counter-counter-arguments (e.g., see here on fossils and here on whale evolution and here on the “Cambrian explosion”). Also, my experience with years of dialoging in person and on the internet indicates that it is extremely difficult to change anyone’s convictions on these matters, no matter how many facts are shared. Under these circumstances, I think that the Museum’s minimalistic, factually accurate, do-no-harm approach is a reasonable treatment of these hot-button topics.
Letters to Creationists 