I’m struck by these words of Phillip Johnson that have to do with the naturalistic presuppositions of Darwinists. Notice how these presuppositions seriously weaken good and truthful science and scientific inquiry.
“The leaders of [evolutionary] science see themselves as locked in a desperate battle against religious fundamentalists, a label which they tend to apply broadly to anyone who believes in a Creator who plays an active role in worldly affairs. These fundamentalists are seen as a threat to liberal freedom, and especially as a threat to public support for scientific research. As the creation myth of scientific naturalism, Darwinism plays an indispensible ideological role in the war against fundamentalism. For that reason, the scientific organizations are devoted to protecting Darwinism rather than testing it, and the rules of scientific investigation have been shaped to help them succeed.”
“If the purpose of Darwinism is to persuade the public to believe that there is no purposeful intelligence that transcends the natural world, then this purpose implies two important limitations upon scientific inquiry. First, scientists may not consider all the possibilities, but must restrict themselves to those which are consistent with a strict philosophical naturalism. For example, they may not study genetic information on the assumption that it may be the product of intelligent communication. Second, scientists may not falsify an element of Darwinism, such as the creative power of natural selection, until and unless they can provide an acceptable substitute. This rule is necessary because advocates of naturalism must at all times have a complete theory at their disposal to prevent any rival philosophy from establishing a foothold.”
“… Accepting [Karl] Popper’s challenge is simply to take the first step towards understanding: the recognition of ignorance. Falsification is not a defeat for science, but a liberation. It removes the dead weight of prejudice, and thereby frees us to look for the truth” (p. 155-156).
Phillip Johnson, Darwin on Trial (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993).
shane lems
Best book on debunking evolution I have ever read, hands-down. Love this book.
His example of the impossibility of the evolution of the eye is outstanding.
Thanks for the note, Andy. I remember you saying as much earlier. Question: have you read the new/updated version, and if so, is it actually updated/expanded?
Outstanding.
I’m just beginning a new Sunday School year teaching the Belgic Confession, which of course begins with the doctrine of God. Each time I teach this, I spend more and more time on article 1 because it’s impossible to properly understand anything subsequent without a strong understand of who and what God is.
I’m convinced that this is why the world is so committed to looking past the scientific and logical flaws inherent in an evolutionary worldview, because if the public is persuaded “to believe that there is no purposeful intelligence that transcends the natural world,” then every pillar of Christianity will collapse.
Christians everywhere need to read books like this one and then confidently challenge the Darwinian presuppositions wherever we encounter them.