Phil Johnson was on Nightline last night, and I found his performance
interesting in several places. Two of those stood out, though.
Questioned by Koppel on whether his "intelligent design theory" was
actually fifty years older than Darwin's "Origin of Species",
Johnson stated that the idea of divine creation was much older than
that. So now we have even Phil Johnson confusing the theological
concept of divine creation with IDT. If Johnson finds the two
concepts so similar, why should ID critics be castigated for making
the same conceptual association?
Given the last word, Johnson cast opponents of ID as being
uninterested in civil liberties, and in fact being like an Un-American
Activities Investigating Committee. This contrasts with Dembski's
analogy reported by Stephen Goode last year in which anti-ID
biologists were supposedly like the former Soviet regime. Perhaps any
analogy will do, so long as biologists become the villains.
Wesley
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 28 2000 - 11:33:56 EDT