Here's the writeup from the March 29 Wheaton Record:
Christianity, cultures
at odds, says lecturer.
By Rachel Maxson
Staff Writer
Phillip Johnson, professor of law at the University of California at
Berkeley, attacked the philosophy of naturalism, which he says dominates
American culture, in a lecture titled "Is God Unconstitutional?
Unscientific?" on Monday evening in Barrows Auditorium. Much of the
lecture was based on Johnson's recent book, "Reason in the Balance".
Professor Lynn Buzzard of the Campbell University Law, School offered a
response after Johnson's lecture. Johnson and Buzzard then took questions
from the audience.
Johnson said that naturalist Darwinism is by definition at odds with the
Christian belief in a Creator. Darwinists like Richard Dawkins believe
that "theistic evolution, God-guided evolution, is a contradiction in
terms; ... evolution must be mindless and unplanned."
In contrast, Johnson said that American Darwinists attempt to portray
evolution as completely unrelated to issues of religion. They claim that
only "right-wing religious fanatics" who believe in six-day Genesis
literalism oppose the teaching of evolution as a scientific fact. This is
a misrepresentation, however, of the true implications of Darwinism, which
contradicts any idea of a Creator.
Johnson rejected the position often presented by both secular scientists
and Christians that naturalism and theism can be reconciled. He argued
that such compromise separates faith from scientific knowledge and
justifies the exclusion of theism from University thought. Belief in a
Creator becomes an optional add-on to a naturalistic world view.
He went on to say that Darwinism is not supported by solid scientific
evidence but by a philosophical presumption that considers naturalism the
only possible explanation for reality.
"The philosophy fills in the gaps in the story," he said.
The power of natural selection has only been demonstrated by small changes
within a species, such as a population of pepper moths that produced more
lighter or darker moths depending on the color of the trees where they
lived. But the observation of such microevolution "doesn't explain how you
get moths, or trees, or the birds that eat the moths, or scientific
observers, in the first place," Johnson said.
He claimed that if naturalistic Darwinism were subject to unbiased scrutiny
without the support of a naturalist, philosophical framework, it would
-collapse. He pointed to recent work regarding the irreducibly complex
information content in even the simplest life forms as an example of
current scientific thought that contradicts Darwinism.
Johnson concluded his lecture with a call for new scholarship to take-on
the prejudices of contemporary academia. "What is needed in this time is a
new generation of intellectuals," he said. "This is a great crisis point
and thus a great opportunity point in our culture."
In his response, Buzzard commended Johnson as a model of one engaging his
culture with his Christian faith and pursuing this end with "a combination
of passion and expertise." He also praised Johnson for insisting on the
significance of the core issue of underlying philosophy and for pointing
out the marginalization Christian thought in academic circles.
Buzzard then questioned the limits the relevance of Johnson's attack on
naturalism, pointing out that it is not logical evidence, but more often
personal need, that causes e to come to Christ. He asked how Johnson
intended to move from a defense of intelligent design to the greater issue
of the Lordship of Christ. He also wondered if Johnson had an explanation
for the persistence of such a flawed philosophy as naturalism.
He agreed with Johnson that "Christian thought is not given serious
credence in the culture" but said that, biblically, we have no reason to
believe that we will succeed in regaining acceptance in the dominant
culture.
Buzzard argued that it is not the role of the Church to change the dominant
culture but to "rescue those who are victims of the philosophic systems of
our age.'
Johnson briefly responded to some of the issues raised by Buzzard,
affirming that "the intellectual issue is only one factor in conversion."
He said that addressing issues like naturalism removes stumbling blocks and
"opens people up to the truth," though it will not by itself bring people
to faith.
However, Johnson's goal in making case against naturalism is not simply
evangelisfic. He sees his work as gaining a hearing for the truth in
America's universities. 'That's good in its own sake," he said, "it's
Godly work, whether it results in conversions or not."
The lecture was sponsored by the Center for Applied Christian Ethics with
the departments of Education, Pre-Law, Science and Philosophy.
Bill Hamilton | Chassis & Vehicle Systems
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)