GOD’S FUNERAL (Part 2: The Teleological Argument).
Last week, this series discussed how mankind thinks they have outgrown the need for God, and Christians now must defend not only the doctrine of God but also the existence of God (1 Peter 3:15). Contrary to what many skeptics believe, Christians do not create the proof of God’s existence; They simply show the proof that God has left for humanity to understand through different concepts. The last concept of God’s existence discussed was the cosmological argument, everything must have a creator. Nothing in the material world exists eternally. Likewise, this material cannot have come out of nothing, so the only other logical alternative is that matter was created. This week, the discussion focuses on the teleological argument.
The teleological [tee-lee-uh-loj-i-kuhl] argument is the design argument. If design is found in nature, then by definition there must have been a designer. Nobel Laureate Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the molecular structure of DNA, cautions, “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved” (Francis Crick, What Mad Pursuit: A Personal View of Scientific Discovery. London: Penguin, 1990. p. 138). He states this because the design people seemingly observe provides one more argument that God exists. Richard Dawkins observes in his book The God Delusion, “Thanks to Darwin, it is no longer true to say that nothing that we know looks designed unless it is designed. Evolution by natural selection produces an excellent simulacrum of design, mounting prodigious heights of complexity and elegance” (2006, pg. 79). Evolutionists adhere to a system based on a mountain of random chances, using the term “evolution” as its source of design while mocking Christians who believe that such catastrophic random chance seems improbable.
The teleological argument holds that such complexity and coordination that currently exists in nature could not have happened by random chance. How can chance explain the earth’s position in the following: 1) the right type of galaxy, 2) the right location within that galaxy, 3) the odds of being near the right sun, 4) being the right distance from the sun, 5) having the right rotation rate and proper tilt, 6) possessing enough water, and 7) having the right atmospheric conditions to sustain life? Professor Harold Morowitz estimated the probability for the chance formation of the smallest, simplest form of living organism: 1 to 10340,000,000 [1 followed by 340 million zeros] (Harold Morowitz, Energy Flow In Biology (1968), pg. 99). To better understand the magnitude of this number, the entire universe is said to contain only 1018 electrons! In other words, there are not enough electrons in the universe for this chance formation to reach the estimated probability. Dr. Carl Sagan has estimated that the chance of life as life exists today evolving on earth is 1 to 102,000,000,000 [1 followed by 2 billion zeros] (from a book Sagan edited, Communication with Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (MIT Press, 1973), pg. 45-46). There would need to be 6,000 books of 300 pages each just to write that number in a 12-point font! By these calculations, more blind faith is needed to believe in evolution than to believe what the Bible says. Nevertheless, evolutionists expect people to just believe that humans randomly evolved from inorganic material on earth. Through all these numbers and expertise, evolutionists still hold that humans evolved by random chance mutations.
Essentially, the teleological argument proposes that where extreme complex function, intricacy, and harmony exist, there must be intelligent design. One would not look at a computer and think the pieces put themselves together by random chance. One would not look at a wristwatch and think the fine-tuned functions must have been put together from an explosion. One should not look at the complexity of the human body with such intricate function and perfect form and think that such a body must have happened by accident.
If evolution created design, what then created evolution and gave it the ability to design? One cannot say that evolution designs without explaining where evolution developed the ability to design. This is the equivalent to someone throwing a pile of lumber in space, coming back to that pile of lumber a thousand years later and finding a house with people and electricity inside, and then claiming that some force called evolution did it! Design requires thought and thought always begins with a prime mover. The teleological argument stands to show the gargantuan improbability that evolution acts as a force of creation and design.