Johnson’s book makes the case that there is far less evidence for evolution than its proponents suggest.

Darwin on Trial
Johnson, Phillip E
InterVarsity Press; 2 edition (November 1993)

Although dated (the expanded edition was published in 1992), Johnson’s Darwin on Trial still makes the case that there is far less evidence for evolution than its proponents suggest. Johnson argues that neo-Darwinian ideas are not embraced by the contemporary scientific community because they have withstood scientific testing, but because they are convenient for the ‘blind watchmaker thesis’ (Johnson’s term for the idea that life in all it’s diversity is a product of purely naturalistic forces, without purpose or design). Provocative? To be sure, especially since Johnson is not a scientist (he is a prominent law professor who specializes in logic).

Johnson’s time studying arguments seems to have served him well, however, and he is at his best when showing the equivocation and poor reasoning behind many arguments for common ancestry and the creative power of neo-Darwinist mechanisms. He is less capable when it comes to theology, and his short critiques of evolutionary creationists are less than chartable.

Still, Johnson makes a good case that many of the public advocates of Darwinism smuggle their atheism into their science, apparently not realizing that atheism is a philosophical and religious idea, not a scientific one. This error makes them beg the question against the idea of biological design in favor of the blind watchmaker thesis and blinds them to evidence against Darwinian theory. If there are good reasons for Christians to believe in common ancestry, then as of 1992, the secular public advocates of Darwinism still hadn’t let us in on them.

Buy Philip Johnson Darwin on Trial through Amazon,com.  By using this link, you help support the Center for Faith and Science International.