He is part of the ID movement and one of the main people in it. He gives
papers at most of the ID-convened symposia.
>(2) What is the Wedge?
As near as I can determine this term was first used in Defeating Darwin.
Johnson defines it:
"We call our strategy 'the wedge.' A log is a seeming solid object, but a
wedge can eventually split it by penetrating a crack and gradually widening
the split. IN this case the ideology of scientific materialism is the
apparently solid log. The widening crack is the important but
seldom-recognized difference between the facts revealed by scientific
investigation and the materialist philosophy that dominates the scientific
culture. What happens when the facts cast doubt on the philosophy? Will
scientists and philosophers allow materialism to be questioned, or will
they rely on Microphone Man to suppress the facts and protect the philosophy?
"My own books (including this one) represent the sharp edge of the wedge.
I had two goals in writing those books and in pursuing the program of
public speaking that followed their publication. First, I wanted to make it
possible to question naturalistic assumptions in the secular academic
community. Second, I wanted to redefine what is at issue in the
creation-evolution controversy so that Christians and other believers in
God, could find common ground in the most fundamental issue-the reality of
God as our true Creator." Phillip E. Johnson, Defeating Darwinism, (Downers
Grove, Intervarsity Press, 1997), p. 92
>(3) Does anyone know what church Johnson attends or identifies with? Does he
>claim to be a professing Christian?
If I recall correctly he is presbyterian and yes he is a christian.
>
>I am wondering if my letter delay isn't serendipity. I am wondering if when
>it gets back on its feet (ha ha) I might incorporate some of this info about
>Johnson's "intellectual movement" specifically divorcing itself from
>Christianity. As a Christian, I believe all Christians must place God first
>far above anything else in every aspect of their lives. From my knowledge of
>Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family Minsitries, Dobson feels the same
>way. If I could tie this all together, it might make a very strong statement
>to Dobson.
THe thing that disappoints me is that all this effort Christians have put
into ID reaps such a small harvest. The removal of the Bible from the
origins discussion and the fact that, with their strategy, they can't even
show that the Christian God is the Designer. It might be aliens or even
the Roman gods might be the designer. Don't believe this, here is what one
fellow from the Touchstone issue on ID said,
"Behe's argument does not entail (as in logically compel) a theological
conclusion because it is consistent with other explanations. For instance,
perhaps some advanced alien race planted fully constructed, reproducing
organisms on a hospitable earth some time in the distant past. In that
case, someone other than God would have designed these features of the
biological world. Sure, it's far-fetched; but it's possible. For this
reason, intelligent design arguments in biology do not normally entail
theistic conclusions even if many people suspect God is lurking somewhere
in the background." Jay Wesley Richards, "Proud Obstacles & a Reasonable
Hope," Touchstone, July/August 1999, p. 29-32, p. 31
It seems like a real waste of time to spend so much Christian effort to
prove that aliens MIGHT be our creators!
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution