Why I Believe in Intelligent Design


Insight for your “Journey across the Sky”
A View from the Nest www.eagleviews.org


For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. 1 Corinthians 13:12 (NKJV)
Done jigsaw puzzle of historical map from 1639 y.

Image via Wikipedia

Work with me here a little bit as I attempt to explain why I believe in Intelligent design. First let us imagine having jigsaw puzzles. For the sake of this argument imagine that all the end pieces have been removed, you know the ones with the flat side you use to make the frame. Also I guess we must over look the obvious fact that someone put a picture on one side of each piece and cut each piece into different shapes. But again for this argument we need to assume some things just are.

Now take all 5 puzzles and dump them out onto the ground in one big pile. Throw away the boxes with the lids and any other instructions on how to put the puzzle together. Better yet, burn all that in a fire so there is no way you can refer to it again. Now pick up all the pieces and throw them up in the air and allow them to fall in random patterns around the ground. What do you see? Anything resemble a picture forming?

Okay try it again, and again, actually do it 60 times an hour for one solid week. What do you suppose is the likelihood of any of the pieces actually falling into place together where they belong? Do you think at the end of a week you would actually see a pattern emerging? How about after 7 weeks? How about seven months, or perhaps seven years? Maybe it will take 7 decades, or longer.

Pass on this routine to your children and then onto  their children even down to the 5th generation. Do you suppose that by the time it reached your  great great great great grandchildren that perhaps one of the puzzles will actually be put together?

What do you suppose the chances are that just by constant repetition of the same process, over and over again, patterns would actually emerge? I can suppose for the sake of this argument that indeed after a while you would start to see patterns emerging. I would doubt that they would actually look like what the puzzle designer had designed them to be, but indeed you would certainly have pieces hooking together over a long enough period of time.

Now let us take this argument one step further and actually apply just the slightest bit of intelligence to the matter. Let us start with the same 5 puzzles with all the end pieces missing and no box design, all together in one big pile on the ground, but this time instead of just picking them up and dropping them and allowing chance to play a total role in the process take up a few pieces and look at them for distinguishing marks and structure. I am sure that if you examine the individual pieces closely enough you will see some similarities and some differences. Applying some intelligence then you could start to separate like sized pieces with similar colorings together into groups. You may notice that the pieces from one of the puzzles is slightly larger than the rest and those you could easily separate by themselves. The remaining pieces may be distinguishable in a similar manner.

Again working with no blueprint or design but using strictly one’s intellect, I can reasonably assume that sooner or later with constant work and effort you would start to be able to assemble individual pieces of the puzzles. After a long enough period of time pictures would start to emerge resembling what the puzzle designer had in mind when designing the puzzle. How long do you suppose it would take you to separate, organize, and fit together like pieces of the puzzles? You think that by the end of the week you could have all 5 puzzles put together correctly? How about in seven weeks or seven months? Do you suppose that seven decades would be amble amount of time? Would the amount of intelligence one possesses play a part in how long it would actually take? Do you think that an above average intelligence could assemble the mess quicker than one of lesser intelligence?

Now let us take the same 5 puzzles but this time all the end pieces are still in the boxes, there is still no picture to follow but at least you have the framework for each puzzle in each box. Take them and dump them into one big pile and now see how long it takes to assemble the same 5 puzzles. Does having the frame pieces make assembling easier? Does separating out all the flat sided pieces make sorting the rest of the puzzle pieces any easier? Do you think that the time it would take you to assemble the puzzle now would be longer or shorter than the previous examples?

Apart from applying intelligence to the mess, can you imagine that pile of puzzle pieces ever coming together in any semblance of order? Yet many believe in just that; when it comes to creation. Many believe that chance and adaptation formed this puzzle we call life. They remove any intelligence from the equation and just allowed simple randomness to happen. I can not for the life of me understand how anyone could believe this is a viable explanation. We can see from the puzzle experiment that there is a certain amount of intelligence required to take a random mess and arrange it into some sort of order.

Even if you apply only enough intelligence to separate the like pieces  and then let random chance work out the rest, it still would not  assemble those like pieces into anything that resembles a finished puzzle. However if you allow for the influx of intelligent design, from the concept through completion, then it is easy to see how it all fits together.

God is the designer and the architect of life. He assembled the like pieces together according to his pattern and plans. He established the framework in which all the pieces would fit together nicely. His laws are the framework that holds the universe together. Apart from God’s laws and framework all the elements would break apart and end up being one big mess.

Without the framework any puzzle would not be complete. You could not tell if you still had more of the puzzle to assemble because there would be no ending point, no guideline, no stopping place. All you would have is a puzzle with unfinished sides all looking for another piece to plug into the open end. It would be an unfinished work. A life without boundaries is a life always in search of something more to fulfill it. It is always aimlessly looking for another piece to fill the void. It is looking for something to give it some meaning. Without a framework we too would be an unfinished puzzle.

Now let us look once again at the 5 puzzles each in a pile on the floor. This time we have the framework and the original design all set before us. We know what the finished product is supposed to look like. How long do you think it will take you to finish the project now? Perhaps all 5 puzzles could be assembled correctly within a week. I am sure that with steady work you could certainly finish within a month.

Now if we take the puzzle pieces and divide them up amongst 7 different people and put the 7 different people on 7 different continents and have them each speaking a different language how difficult do you think it would be to assemble just one puzzle let alone all 5? Each person would only have their own frame of reference when looking at the puzzle pieces. They would assume that all the pieces they have are all supposed to fit into one puzzle and not 5 completely different puzzles. They may be able to assemble pieces of several puzzles but they would be unable to complete any of them without the input from the other 6 people.

You see, we know in part, we see only a small portion of the whole, therefore it is impossible apart from some common  ground to understand the complexities of life. We, like those 7 people, only hold a handful of the pieces that are needed to complete the task set before us. We need to come together with others who possess a portion of the same puzzle in order to complete the task.

Apart from God’s divine intervention and input how could any of us possibly exist, let alone feel complete? We would only have our own selves to rely on and our own experiences to draw from. We would be left to our own intelligence or lack thereof in order to assemble a life worth living.

This is why I believe in intelligent design. For we are beautifully and wonderfully made. We are not just some random accumulation of left over pieces. But our life has a design and purpose to it and when complete it is beautiful.

But those who are waiting for the Lord will have new strength; they will get wings like eagles: running, they will not be tired, and walking, they will have no weariness. Isaiah 40:31 (BBE)

Related articles

Zemanta Pixie

3 thoughts on “Why I Believe in Intelligent Design

  1. Hi there. Just by this article alone I can tell that you are a person searching for truth, and searching for truth should never be ridiculed. In the friendliest form of communication please consider this: You are saying that you believe in an ALL-knowing, ALL-powerful, invisible being, who created the WHOLE universe, and who lives in another dimension called heavennnnn. When put this way, doesn’t it sound like a children’s fairy tale?

    Also, if people really understood what the concept of having a God meant, they wouldn’t want a God at all. What I mean is, if you were to create a world in your mind, and imagine all kinds of living creatures, when you stop thinking about that world and those creatures, what happens to them? Nothing happens to them because they aren’t real. You made them up. So, if a god does exist, one who is thinking all of this up, then WE don’t exist. We, and the entire universe, are merely figments of His imagination. As for your puzzle scenario, it isn’t valid because the laws of nature won’t work on puzzle pieces. If you were to toss a bunch of seeds upon the soil, they would grow. That’s nature working. Planets orbiting the sun via gravity, volanoes erupting because the inside of the planet gets boiling hot… It’s all nature, natural, and logical. No magic or miracles required, but it was very nice discussing this with you. 🙂

    1. Interesting Jigger that you should reply to something that really does not exist because it was created out of someone’s imagination. But those words on an imaginary canvas invoked a need in you to respond to an imaginary someone or thing so that your viewpoints could be solidified. Your attempts to argue with an uncaring, uninvolved, imaginary entity proves the existence of that entity even more so than the original remarks themselves. But then again I do not even know why I responded to this comment because you do not exist, nor does this blog exist, because they are both just figments of my imagination.

      That all being said.. I shall address your comments further once I have time to IMAGINE I am talking to a REAL PERSON and not just an imagination.

    2. You set forth this premise which is faulty on its face but I will indulge with you long enough to explain why I said that. You said:

      “As for your puzzle scenario, it isn’t valid because the laws of nature won’t work on puzzle pieces. If you were to toss a bunch of seeds upon the soil, they would grow. That’s nature working. Planets orbiting the sun via gravity, vol(c)anoes (an imaginary correction applied by random selection) erupting because the inside of the planet gets boiling hot… It’s all nature, natural, and logical (logic shows the existence of intelligence). No magic or miracles required, but it was very nice discussing this with you. ” (you were not actually discussing anything but stating your opinions real discussion to follow if you dare)

      Actually my example is valid for the very same reasoning you said it is not valid. You state that the LAWS of nature would not apply to puzzle pieces when indeed they do. The law of gravity applies which is a law of nature. But where did these laws come from? Or for that matter where did the PUZZLE pieces originate from? I started my dissertation with those very same premises. That we have to ASSUME for the sake of this ILLUSTRATION that some things just are, which point you also reiterate in your example of spreading seeds. You imply that LAWS OF NATURE exist. OKAY where did they come from and who set them in place? This is what was implied by my removal of the FRAMEWORK of the puzzle. If you remove the laws of nature and of nature’s God you would have nothing more than randomness and not the intricate patterns that immerge from applying intelligence into the equation, which is what you also stated in your comment.

      You then stated that if you toss a bunch of seeds upon the soil, they would grow. This is not entirely true. It takes more than just soil for seeds to grow. They require the right amount of moisture and sunlight. Lacking either of these two ingredients would not result in a seed sprouting into a plant. And then even if it does sprout into a plant it does not mean that the plant will actually grow to maturity because of other extenuating circumstances, that of environment and natural predators and parasites. Weeds could also choke out the plants. Therefore once again you prove that it is almost impossible for life to JUST SPROUT up from a random tossing around of elements. Although all the elements are present it will not produce the INTENDED results unless other forces are applied to those elements. All the rules of nature and of nature’s God have to align in the right sequence in order for life to spring forth. To take your argument one step further if you took those same seeds and tossed them upon the soil of the Moon or Mars it would not produce any life either because the conditions for life to exist does not exist on the Moon or on Mars.

      To say that life just randomly happens without some intellectual input is like saying gravity could assemble a puzzle. DNA is the building block of life. DNA is a molecular puzzle of sorts. To imply that it just randomly orders itself requires more faith in imagination then it does to actually believe in an intellectual designer. In my puzzle analogy I asserted that random patterns can emerge through the application of natural laws and selection but the resulting pattern or design would not be the intended outcome. Therefore if we remove “created for a purpose” or intellectual design from the equation you would have just random life with no purpose. But even the slightest bit of observation would reveal purposes to most plant and animal life. Therefore you can not rule out intellectual design from the equation. If nature and nature’s laws produced myriads of random, seemingly useless or purposeless, life forms then there would be validity to your assertion of life being just random order out of tossed about chaos. YET you affirm the existence of LAWS that nature must abide by. AND where do you portend these laws originated from? And what or who legislates these laws? Why should these laws continue into the future if there is no “intelligent” reason for there existence in the first place? How is one to live life not knowing if there is a SURE FUTURE or not? If the laws of nature can RANDOMLY change then so can the RANDOM life those laws create. WHY would anyone want to accept that fairy tale? That sounds like a horror story to me. But if the laws of nature are a constant then what MAKES THEM SO? How can you have a constant law in a random ordered universe?

      Therefore your own argument supports my position far better than it does your own. For example if there is no REASON or purpose to life but just a random rolling of the dice then to live a life of such purposelessness would be meaningless and empty. Why would anyone want to live a life like that? Why would anyone want to live a life that is controlled by none-feeling, non-responsive, lifeless laws of nature? To think that we are nothing more than a cosmic hiccup is very depressing.

      As for your statement: “You are saying that you believe in an ALL-knowing, ALL-powerful, invisible being, who created the WHOLE universe, and who lives in another dimension called heavennnnn. When put this way, doesn’t it sound like a children’s fairy tale?” No in reality the evidence points to an INTELLECTUAL and purposeful design to life. Your description sounds more like the fairy tale to me. Your description of the formation of life sounds like Johnny Appleseed. BUT EVEN then the story of Johnny Appleseed has an ACTUAL person spreading SEED with an ACTUAL PURPOSE. Seems to me you too admit that SOMEONE somewhere has to be SPREADING SEED. Your seed spreader just happens to not have a name while mine does. I call him ABBA FATHER; you can simply call him JEHOVAH.

      And this comment is just plain silly but you said it anyway showing forth how silly your whole argument is. You said: “Also, if people really understood what the concept of having a God meant, they wouldn’t want a God at all. What I mean is, if you were to create a world in your mind, and imagine all kinds of living creatures, when you stop thinking about that world and those creatures, what happens to them? Nothing happens to them because they aren’t real. You made them up. So, if a god does exist, one who is thinking all of this up, then WE don’t exist. We, and the entire universe, are merely figments of His imagination.”

      The facts are PEOPLE DO EXIST. Natural laws exist. The universe exists. Plants, animals, the earth and sky all exist. The only point of contention then is if they are real or imaginary I guess you are trying to say that all that “is” really isn’t because to be it has to exist apart from an intellectually designed plan? Therefore if there is an INTELLECTUALLY designed plan then it is just an illusion? And yet all evidence indicates purpose and design, which was the purpose of the puzzle analogy. The very fact that a puzzle piece exists proves the existence of a jigsaw puzzle. Someone somewhere designed a puzzle and here is proof, one of the pieces. But hey this whole subject is just a figment of my imagination put down on the imaginary canvas of an electronic mail form sent to an imaginary recipient who really does not exist because there is only random evidence of their being. And that evidence is inconclusive and suspect. Care to have a real discussion? Or just an imaginary one?

What do you have to say?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s