A Look at The
Facts by
Gary Ray Branscome
"The fool has said in his heart,
There is no God" (Psalm 14:1)
Reason
itself tells us that for every design there is a designer. Therefore, it is
significant that on the first page of his book The Blind watchmaker
Atheist professor Richard Dawkins says, “Biology is the study of
complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a
purpose”.
Now, before
going further I want you to think about his words, “give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose”.
Do these complicated things appear to a dog to have been designed for a
purpose? Do they appear to a horse to have been designed for a purpose? Of
course not! It is our reason not just the appearance that tells us that
they have been designed for a purpose. Therefore, when you consider the fact
that the stated purpose of Dawkins’ book is to convince the reader that
the opposite is true, that those complicated life forms were not designed, it
should be obvious that the stated purpose of his book is to reject reason. And,
because reason itself tells us that for every design there is a designer, his
rejection of reason is a rejection of God. In other words, if reason points to
the existence of God, then Dawkins and all of his admirers reject reason. That
is why Christ calls them fools, and that is one example of how those who brag
the most about following reason actually reject reason (Luke 24:25).
The evidence that living things have
been designed is so clear that Dawkins could not deny it! In fact, only someone
devoid of reason could miss it. For example, if I find a flint arrowhead on the
ground the evidence that was shaped by a designer is obvious. Random events do
not produce the balance, regular lines, and uniform appearance seen in an
arrowhead. Likewise, if I come across part of an old stone wall, while walking
through the woods, reason tells me that it had a designer. Even if the wall was
made without cement, the fact that it was designed is obvious. The orderly
arrangement of the rocks in the wall is clear evidence of design. While the
effects of nature may break down such a wall, they could never produce one. For
the same reason, when I see a house, the evidence that it had a designer is so
obvious that it would be foolish to believe that it was formed gradually over
millions of years. Our reason tells us that intelligence was needed to plan and
arrange all of the parts so that they fit together to form a house. And that
same reason also tells us that the forces of nature may cause a house to decay
and fall apart, but they could never assemble one.
Just as it is obvious that an arrowhead,
a wall, and a house must have a designer, it is also obvious that the human eye
must have a designer. In fact, the evidence of design can be seen in the shape
of the parts, the way that the parts are arranged, and in the fact that their
arrangement enables them to function as a whole. As we look at the individual
parts of an eye, it becomes apparent that we need some cells that are clear. If
those cells were brought into existence by nothing more than time and chance,
it would be just as likely for them to be on our arm, leg, or finger as on our
face. And it would be more likely for them to be scattered around our body, or
lumped together as a shapeless blob, than it would for them to be joined
together in an optically perfect formation. Therefore, the fact that those
clear cells are arranged in neat circles in our eyes, and that we have two eyes
which are arranged in an artistic pattern on our face, is in itself evidence of
design.
Those clear cells must also be free of
blood vessels, otherwise the capillaries running to
each cell would make vision impossible. For that reason, they need a different
system, both for getting oxygen and for getting rid of waste, than the rest of
the body. Without a designer to plan their formation, how would they know that
they needed a different system? Who would tell them? Is it reasonable to
believe that they figured it out for themselves? Do you think that they just
got together and said, “Since our job is to let light enter the eye, we
need to turn clear and start getting our oxygen from a different
source”? Or is it more reasonable to believe that, the fact that
these details were taken into consideration and provided for is evidence of
design.
Let us look a little more closely at the
fact that some of those clear cells just happen to take the form of a lens. If
you found a glass lens on the ground, would it be more reasonable for you to
believe that natural forces shaped it, or that a designer shaped it and someone
later lost it? If you believe that a designer shaped it: Is it reasonable to
believe that no designer was needed to give certain cells in our eyes the exact
shape they need to focus light? Not if your brain is working! Why, the shape of
the lens is itself evidence of design.
In addition to clear cells and a lens,
the eye must also have a photosensitive surface for light to focus on. And,
bingo, a photosensitive surface (the retina) just happens to be there. Or was
it more than just chance that put it there? Come to think of it, if random
events could give our cells photosensitive qualities, why didn’t any of
our other cells acquire those qualities? Furthermore, how did they just happen
to find their way to the inside of the eye? Actually, when you think about it,
the very existence of photosensitive cells, as well as the fact that they have
been placed in the eye and given the exact shape and position needed to receive
a focused image, is evidence of design. In the light of such evidence, a person
would have to throw their brain out the window to believe that mere chance could
produce such cells, place them in the eye, or give them the exact shape needed
to receive a focused image. [It was the fact that natural forces could never
have produced the eye, that led eye-specialist, Doctor
Ming Wang of
In addition to the hardware needed to
focus light, there must also be a code for
transmitting an image to the brain, and a cable to carry that code. In fact,
the photosensitive cells would be worthless, if they could not transmit the
image they receive to the brain. However, it would be irrational for us to
assume that such a code could write itself. Likewise, it would be irrational to
assume that chance events could provide the perfect cable for transmitting that
code (the optic nerve), or place that cable in exactly the right place. You may
not realize it, but the optic nerve is more complex than our most complex
computer. It has to be complex in order to carry all parts of an image without
mixing them up. Therefore, the very existence of a mechanism for transmitting
an image to the brain, as well as the way that the parts are all joined
together to form a functional whole, is evidence of design.
For our eyes to function, our brain must
also have the ability to decode the information transmitted to it by the
retina, and organize that information into a picture that is right side up. In
fact, if our brain did not have that ability, our eyes would be useless. At the
same time, our eyes need a system that will enable them to move, a system to
focus them, and a system to keep them moist (the moisture must also have
antiseptic qualities). However, such systems not only require design, but need
design to put them in the right place and to arrange the parts into a
functional whole. Therefore, the very fact that such systems exist, and that
they work, is evidence of design.
Although we have considered only a few
parts of the eye, the evidence that it has been designed is obvious. Moreover,
the deeper one looks the more obvious the evidence becomes. In fact, it would
be just as foolish to claim that the eye came into existence without design as
it would to claim that video cameras came into existence without design.
Furthermore, it is equally obvious that our designer has far more knowledge and
ability than we do.
While it is easy to see the evidence
that our eyes have been designed, the more we know about our other organs the
more obvious it becomes that they have also been designed. Our pancreas, liver,
and kidneys not only are miniature chemical processing plants, but they produce
exactly what is needed, have a mechanism for distributing it, and discharge it
where it is needed in just the right amounts. Things like that don’t just
happen!
Consider, for example, our circulatory
system. The very fact that capillaries reach every cell in your body is in
itself evidence of design. Not only would our existence be impossible without a
network of capillaries to connect our arteries with our veins, but a chance
arrangement of capillaries would place too many capillaries in some parts of
the body and too few in others (causing cells to die and rot to set in).
Furthermore, the fact that our veins and arteries just happen to be made up of
especially dense (leak proof) cell layers (we would not live long otherwise),
is another evidence of design.
Another thing to consider is the fact
that your blood cells cannot reproduce by splitting in half as other cells do.
If they did, your veins and arteries would be clogged in no time. Therefore,
isn’t it convenient that your body just happens to be provided with
little blood cell factories in the form of bone marrow? Things like that just
do not happen without planning. Furthermore, your blood needs hemoglobin in
order for it to carry oxygen. Who told it that it needed hemoglobin? Who told
it where to get it? The very fact that all of these details have been
considered and provided for is evidence of design.
Let us also look at the digestive
system. Have you ever wondered why your digestive juices do not eat up the
inside of your stomach? You would not live long if they did. However, your
stomach lining just happens to be made up of cells that reproduce fast enough
to keep that lining from being eaten up. Furthermore, the fact that you have
digestive juices at all is amazing. Did you ever wonder how your body was able
to acquire just the right kind of chemical factory needed to make them?
Factories do not just come into existence by chance. In addition, those
digestive juices also need to be present in the right strength. Moreover, in
order to keep them from eating up the skin around your anus, there also needs
to be some way of removing them from the intestinal tract. Therefore,
isn’t it just too convenient that a system for removing them happens to
be there? Finally, isn’t it also convenient that those digestive juices
just happen to change food into a form that can be absorbed by the blood and
used by the body? Or, that nutrients just happen to be
taken into the blood stream, but waste is not? Things like that do not just
happen by chance.
MATHEMATICAL EVIDENCE OF DESIGN
Since the evidence of intelligent design is clearly
observable, it can be expressed mathematically as, P+I>P.
Briefly put, that formula says that the evidence something has been designed
can be seen in the fact that the parts (P) plus the intelligence needed to
arrange the parts (I) is greater than the parts alone (P). Furthermore, as with
all scientific formulas, this formula can be tested scientifically. For
example, suppose that we have all of the parts necessary to make a car. As long
as those parts are just piled in the middle of the floor, the parts (P) plus
the intelligence manifest in the arrangement of the parts (I) is not greater
than the parts alone. However, as soon as we assemble those
parts, the situation changes. Once we have an assembled car, the parts
(P) plus the intelligence manifest in the arrangement of the parts (I) is
greater than the parts alone. The difference lies in the fact that the
intelligence apparent in the arrangement of the parts enables the assembled
whole to function in a way that the parts alone never could. Therefore, the
functional arrangement of the parts is in itself evidence of intelligent
design. If you would like to pursue this further I recommend the video series,
“The Search for the Origin of Life” by John MacKay,
SOME FINAL THOUGHTS
During the twentieth century militant atheists murdered
millions of people. While the bloodlust of the NAZIS is well known, over sixty
million babies have been butchered in the name of “liberalism”. In
many parts of the world, Christians have been tortured and killed by Communists
who thought nothing of using cruelty to advance their religion. At the same
time, even though persecution has been more subtle in the
While many atheists are Communists, some are libertarian.
While many atheists flaunt their immorality, some claim to be moral people.
However, an atheist who chooses to live a “moral” life, is living a life that is inconsistent with their
atheist beliefs for if atheism were really true, and there was no God, then
right and wrong would just be a matter of opinion. To put it another way, since
belief in morality assumes that an authority higher than self exists, it is
incompatible with atheism.
CONCLUSION
Reason not only tells us that we have a Designer, but it
also tells us that He is good. We can see that goodness not only in the way our
bodies are designed but also in the beauty of the world and all of the good
things that He has provided for us. At the same time, reason also tells us that
something is wrong with the world. In it we see conflict, pain, suffering, decay
and death. However, while reason cannot tell us who our Designer is, why there
is so much suffering in the world, or how we can be saved from death, our
Designer has revealed the answer to those questions in the Bible.
Wherefore,
as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed
upon all men, for that all have sinned // But God commends his love toward us,
in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us // For God so loved the
world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life. (Romans 5:8, 12, John 3:16)