It was the selling of indulgences that prompted Martin Luther to nail his 95 theses to the door of the Castle church in Wittenberg, Germany. Apparently, he found the practice so exploitive and unbiblical that he chose to voice his displeasure publicly—(kind of a 16th century version of a blog rant).

In my mind, I have a sort of “running list” of things about the 21st century American church that I find appalling. (That’s the theme of this category.) But, I haven’t yet written anything down. Partly because I’m not a good blogger, and a bit lazy about writing sometimes. But also because I’ve not been sufficiently “prompted.” I’m prompted now!

Memorial Day weekend saw the opening of the Creation Museum in Northern Kentucky. Reportedly, $27 million was spent on this state of the art, entertainment-oriented facility, designed to inspire belief in creationism and discredit Darwinian evolution. Give me a break!

Isn’t it time we moved beyond this fight? I, for one, am tired of the “battle of the fishes”.

Who decided that it had to be an either/or proposition, anyway? Why must we pit scientific knowledge against matters of faith? Nothing in the Bible itself suggests that the creation poem in Genesis has to be interpreted as historically, scientifically, and literally accurate. Surely, it’s about more than how creation happened. Isn’t the BIG idea in the book of Genesis: the concept of a Creator-God? Neither science, nor Darwinism does much to refute that faith claim.

The Bible is really a book about faith. It is filled with metaphors, because spiritual reality (God) and faith experiences defy literal description. When talking about such things, we are in the realm of mystery, not very often hard, observable fact. Of course, that doesn’t make it less true . . . just less objective.

Which brings me back to why I’m so offended by the Creation Museum:

1. There are 27 million reasons to be offended! Surely, these Christians could have found a better use for that kind of money. (How about AIDS, poverty, or hunger for starters?)

2. The stated goal is “Prepare to Believe.” So, the museum’s purpose is to prove something which is essentially a matter of faith . . . And uses some pretty weak “science” along the way to make it’s proof.

3. It exploits people who are confused and want to believe in the biblical view of creation. In the Bible belt, that may be a pretty significant number of people.

4. Which is good for business! Why charge 20 bucks a pop if it’s really some form of evangelism in disguise? I’m more and more turned off by “Christian” capitalism. It seems the American church has discovered a whole new way to be “successful.” (Call it “Christian”—whatever it is—and tap into a vast demographic of consumers waiting to buy it.)

5. It’s bad theology! In the process of insisting that creation happened exactly as it’s described (which, because of the limitations of language, we can never be too sure what that even is—but that’s another blog topic), the bigger TRUTHS are lost! This preoccupation with creationism not only misses the point, it damages faith. Real faith requires struggle with real issues, not closed-minded (”don’t confuse me with the facts”) acceptance.

6. It’s bad science! The creators of the Creation Museum even admit that they begin with the assumption that the earth is only 6,000 years old. Their assumptions lead them to read the evidence of science in a way that supports their assumption. Good science at least attempts (some assumptions probably still creep in) to let the evidence speak for itself.

7, It’s bad history! Of course, we’re dealing with pre-history, but there is no historical evidence to support some of their claims, such as: dinosaurs coexisting with humans, dinosaurs on the ark.

8. It’s poor (if not dishonest) intellectual pursuit! As a Christian, I am embarrassed and insulted. The smug certainty with which they present their claims leaves only two options: either close your mind to all other evidence to the contrary and “Believe,” or refuse to believe and be labeled a heretic. Intellectual pursuit (like spiritual pursuit) is strengthened by real struggle. Honest intellectual pursuit acknowledges the gaps in understanding, thus the struggle. Dishonest intellectual pursuit fills in those gaps with pure conjecture and declares them truth.

Call me a heretic if you want, but . . .

I choose to hold science and faith in a creative tension.

I choose struggle over certainty, ambiguity over blind faith, mystery over nailed-down propositions.

I choose to believe in a God that is bigger than language can capture.

I choose to believe that God is Creator.

More, I believe that God is personal, that he cares for me, and involves himself in my life (as well as the whole creation) in a way that I cannot fully explain. I simply experience and embrace the mystery. To me, that’s FAITH.