In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002 3:27:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, RDehaan237@aol.com writes:
>
>In a message dated 04/12/02 9:08:18 AM, wallyshoes@mindspring.com writes:
>
><< Is it true that Johnson agrees that, if evolution is true, then
>there is no God? I know that I read something similar in a book by
>Colson. >>
>
>Walt,
>
>Do you know that he believes that? As far as I know, he never did or does.
>Please cite chapter and verse from Johnson's writings if you really know what
>you are talking about.
For one, see the excerpt from an essay by Johnson in Touchstone, which Keith Miller posted here:
http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200201/0164.html
The incompatibility with Christianity is made pretty clear. Of course what he says is incompatible is "Darwinism," so somebody looking to defend Johnson could try to say that this is not the theory of evolution itself, but the whole "Darwinism" package that also includes alleged philosophical implications of the theory (based on the idea that natural explanations exclude God). I would agree that that "package" is incompatible with Christianity. But Johnson cannot be absolved by these means, because he actively resists any effort to break up the "package" by separating the philosophy from the science. If the scientific theory of evolution is inseparable from the whole philosophical package that gets labeled "Darwinism" (and Johnson consistently treats it as inseparable), then he is saying evolution and Christianity are incompatible.
I could also point out that this is certainly how his message is taken in Evangelical churches, and he seems to encourage the image as the guy who is showing Christianity isn't false after all because evolution isn't true after all. If he really didn't believe the two to be incompatible, then he should make some effort to correct that misperception. But he never has to my knowledge, despite being asked about it on several occasions.
Having said all that, I think some of the things said here about Phil Johnson's character recently have been unfair. Regulars on this list know I disagree with Johnson and lament his effect on the church as much as anybody here. But he is a member of a sound church (one I went to while I was in grad school, though I did not get to know him). People I know who know Johnson do not describe him as the deceiver some have been painting. Is his theology of God's action in nature deficient? I believe so. Does his lawyer background lead him to focus more on winning his case than on finding truth? Probably. Is his crusade harming the witness of the church? I would say "yes."
But if everybody who ever did something that harmed the witness of the church were cast out, we'd all be in the outer darkness. By all means let's oppose his misguided anti-evolution crusade. But let's do that while treating him as the brother in Christ that he is (even if he does not reciprocate -- note his attacks on the integrity of Christians who disagree with him as evidenced in the Touchstone article). It may be more of a challenge to "do unto others ..." with somebody who behaves like Johnson, but it is still what we are called to do.
Allan Harvey, steamdoc@aol.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 12 2002 - 16:56:27 EDT