Part 6: The Existence of a Creator-God vs. Naturalism—Evidence from the uniqueness seen in biological life (The Teleological Argument continued)
This blog is part of a series. You can start the series by going back to the September 1, 2014 Introduction called A Case for Christianity: Why do we need one?
Richard Dawkins, noted Biologist and atheist, in his book “The Blind Watchmaker” said, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”
Notice that atheists like Dawkins use words in their descriptions such as design and purpose. Is that a contradiction in their worldview or is that the way things match up with reality? Does the evidence from biology point more toward design by chance or does it give resounding evidence for a creator?
As a High School Biology Teacher I have always been fascinated with the immensity of the microscopic world. How far can we peer into inner space? How small can we go? I remember looking forward to riding Disneyland’s ‘Adventure Thru Inner Space’ which was the first attraction to utilize Disney’s Omnimover system. It opened on August 5, 1967 as part of the New Tomorrowland, and closed in 1985 moving on to more imaginative rides. But that ride fascinated me because inner space included such unimaginably small things like the atom, and what really blew my mind was the fact that there were even smaller things inside the atom like protons, electrons and neutrons, but could we go even smaller than that? Today scientists have gone even smaller with claims of the Higgs Boson ‘God Particle.’ But what do these discoveries show us? Is inner space something that is just an accident, the processes of chemicals working by blind chance, or are these discoveries allowing us to peer into the creative mind of God? If God created us are there any clues from biology in the way our bodies are built?
The evidence of irreducibly complex molecular machines in our bodies:
Machines require designers and builders. Machines are man-made creations yet when we look closely at the microscopic cells in our bodies we see evidence of small machines and manufacturing plants. Biologist Michael Behe was the first to come up with the theory of irreducible complexity. This theory looks at the fact that there are many parts and systems in our bodies that work like machines and must have certain components intact in order for the design specificity to work. Behe points out that these machines in our bodies would effectually be non-functional if we did not have all of the essential parts working at the same time, “A single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning… Any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is, by definition, nonfunctional.” What Behe is saying is that there could not have been a prior system that evolved, by blind chance to the current system, it simply would not have ever gotten started.
We have many such irreducibly complex parts and systems, for example:
- The tail of a bacteria (flagellum): This is Behe’s prime example because at the microscopic level this tail looks identical to an outboard motor with almost the exact same parts in place! If any of these parts were missing the tail would effectively cease to work.
- The structure of the eye: One of the most complex “machines” in living things. If even the smallest piece of the structure of the eye were missing we would never have the ability to see, and if an individual part such as the retina were evolving on its own it would never have become functional for sight because it needs all of the other parts to work with it.
- The blood clotting factor: If any one of the complex chemical reactions required to stop bleeding was missing at any point in the “evolutionary chance process” the organism would bleed to death. If any of the chemicals were yet to evolve then the organism would have never begun to exist.
Based on this evidence, along with the evidence from cosmology, physics, mathematics and engineering, the Teleological Argument that we have presented the last few weeks becomes even more concrete, but we haven’t even talked about the information code in DNA!
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. Psalm 139:13
Let me know what you think: Does the design of the human body lead you to believe that it could have evolved slowly over time or did it need to have all the parts and systems working at the same time from the beginning? Why or why not?
Over the next several blogs I am going to continue to present logical reasoning and sound scientific evidence not found in the public school textbooks.
Join us next time for: Is There Really Something Beyond Us?
Part 7: The Existence of a Creator-God vs. Naturalism—Evidence from the information code found in DNA (The Teleological Argument continued)
Always be ready to give an answer for the hope that you have in Christ Jesus as Lord.
1 Peter 3:15