Phillip E. Johnson: Quotes about people

“I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational world.”

Phillip E. Johnson

Berkley Science Review (Spring 2006), 2008-11-23 http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles.php?issue=10&article=evolution,
2000s

People , World , Education , Error

“The objective is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.”

Phillip E. Johnson Wedge strategy

This is from a summary of Johnsons ideas on the "Wedge strategy" which appeared in "Missionary Man" by Rob Boston in Church and State Magazine (April 1999) http://web.archive.org/web/20010508032051/http://www.au.org/churchstate/cs4995.htm, and not a direct quote. See also "Bad Philip Johnson Quote" at Panda's Thumb http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/post-4.html
Misattributed

God , People , Truth , Question

“We're not trying to prove the character of God through science. That's a bad idea. What I'm trying to do is clear away the misunderstandings, the debris that prevent people from accepting that God who wants to accept them.”

Phillip E. Johnson

Hank Hanegraaf's "Bible Answer Man" radio program (19 December 2001)
2000s

God , People , Idea , Science

“So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing" — the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do.”

Phillip E. Johnson

Touchstone Magazine interview (June 2002)
2000s

People , Books , Way , Question