Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #259001 in Books
• Published on: 1993-01-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 220 pages

Synopsis
This book shows that the theory of evolution is based not on fact but on faith - faith in philosophical naturalism. The author argues that there simple is no vast body of empirical data supporting the theory.

Customer Reviews

Compelling case for 'more to life than Darwinism?'
A respected law professor turned theologian, Johnson presents a fascinating and logical examination of Darwinism and more current forms of evolutionary theory. Johnson's book is refreshingly free from blanket statements about his subject. He seeks to open the debate on evolution, acknowledging the contributions of the scientific community at large whilst recognising the limited 'proof' that the available evidence provides.

For anyone interested in a subversive but balanced view of Darwinist evolutionary theory as ideology, or anyone clinging to the hope that their purpose in life is more than producing reproductive offspring, this is compelling reading. It ought to be compelling and challenging reading for Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins fans too - if they are brave enough to read it. Johnson has become Gould and Dawkins' nominated nemesis - due, in no small part to the strength and profound logic of his arguments. Definitely worthy of your further investigation.

Definitely worth reading
Very interesting indeed. When reading it, I was not entirely sure of the details of Johnson's views, I think it's correct to say he writes as something of a theistic evolutionist, which is to say he does not necessarily dispute that the variety of life on earth came into existence through evolutionary lines, but would dispute that it can have been a purely naturalistic process, and would argue that God caused it and perhaps intervened in the process. Certainly Johnson does not here advocate the standard Biblical Creationist framework as such, indeed, sad to say, he effectively rejects much Biblical teaching, i.e. about the age of the earth, the creation week, and the inscrutability of creation by divine omnipotence, instead choosing to define Creationism more broadly as the belief that the world has been designed and exists for a purpose. But his objective in this book is not to present alternative views to Darwinism, but to critique the way it is defended by Naturalistic philosophical assumptions rather than by empirical data, and to question whether Naturalism per se really provides a valid definiton of science. And these objectives Johnson achieves admirably, offering a devastating critique of Evolutionists' naturaliistic philosophical presuppositions in interpreting data, and showing how Evolutionists skew debate by demanding science be defined as seeking naturalistic explanation rather than as executing empirical research per se.

Although the book does not argue from a Biblical viewpoint, and even though I already knew Darwinism to be twaddle, I still found the book very interesting and helpful. There's a lot of useful information and telling detail in here, and Johnson's points are developed proficiently, solidly and eloquently, and I found it helpful in clarifying some points about Evolutionist smokescreening.

This 1993 edition is worth getting instead of the earlier 1991 edition, because it is expanded somewhat, including a whole new chapter in which Johnson responded to critics of the first edition. Very interesting.

It's a great pity the book is not written from a Biblical viewpoint, but it is still very interesting and useful, and is definitely worth reading.

Darwinist hot air ballon brought down
This book puts into words a lot of the feelings of implausibility that I often have when Darwinism is presented. As Johnson points out, Darwinists are as "religious" as anyone else and some have blown this whole thing up out of proportion by wishful atheistic philosophical conjecture. It is high time this hot air ballon was punctured by some pinpricks of reality and brought down to size. What is left is empirical evidence for evolution which points only to slight deviations in population, not an explanation for how life began or the human kind came to be.

Furthermore this kind of conjecture that postulates survival of the fittest, rather than a good Creator God as the ultimate cause and value can be(and has been) very damaging in its implications for our world