Re: Phil Johnson on Focus on the Family

Moorad Alexanian (
Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:20:41 -0400

I have not yet read the transcript of the interview but the key word may be
SECULAR theory of evolution. That may preclude theistic evolution. Of
course, Johnson may understand that even theistic evolution may be, in its
foundation, neither science nor religion. I am a physicist and as such the
areas of my scientific research and Christianity are totally disconnected. I
do not know how a Christian biologist feels. I know what science is and I
know what Christianity is and I realize that the whole of reality
encompasses them both. However, the trouble I have is with a SCIENTIFIC
theory that brings in God. There is no such thing! Accordingly, I believe
that the question of origins is NOT a scientific question.


-----Original Message-----
From: Howard J. Van Till <>
To: ASA Listserve <>
Date: Wednesday, April 28, 1999 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: Phil Johnson on Focus on the Family

>>At one point Phil said that the reason
>>Christian higher education does not take a hard stance against
>>evolutionary theory is beause the parents of the students that attend
>>these schools want their kids to go on to ivy league schools and
>>therefor must be educated in the secular theory of evolution in order
>>for this to happen.

To which Art replied:

>Am I missing something here? Did he say something that was not true?

Art. I am one of those persons in Christian higher education who finds the
scientific concept of evolutionary development (not its extrapolation into
a comprehensive naturalistic worldview) to be highly credible. Would you
therefore say that Phil would be correct to conclude that I hold this
position merely to please the parents of my students?

Howard Van Till