Divine Design: Unveiling the Rich History of Christian Art

A Brief History of Design

Introduction

Throughout history, the idea that the design in nature points to a Creator has been a topic of debate. This concept was even used by the Roman writer Cicero in his book "De Natura Deorum" to challenge the evolutionary ideas of his time. In this article, we will explore the history of design arguments and how they have been used to support the existence of an intelligent Designer.

Greek Evolutionism, the Gods, and Fear of Death

During Cicero's time, the two main schools of philosophy were Epicureanism and Stoicism. The Epicureans believed in a world without purpose, teaching an evolutionary atomic theory to nullify fear of the gods and death. Cicero, however, used arguments from design to refute these ideas. He reasoned that if even the barbarians could recognize a model showing the movements of celestial bodies as a product of conscious intelligence, then surely the universe itself must have an intelligent designer.

William Paley and Evidence of Design

In the 18th century, William Paley became a notable proponent of the design argument. In his book "Natural Theology," he used the analogy of finding a watch in a barren countryside to argue for the existence of a watchmaker. Paley also discussed evidence of design in the eye and other human and animal organs, pointing to the conclusion that complex life implies an intelligent Creator.

Charles Darwin and Paley

Charles Darwin, who studied theology at Cambridge, admired Paley's work but later developed his theory of evolution to explain how design in nature could occur without God. Darwin proposed that small, useful changes occurring by chance and natural selection could accumulate over time to produce the diversity and complexity we see in living organisms.

Modern Science vs Darwin

Today, many evolutionists still use Darwin's theory to argue against the design argument. However, there are scientific critiques against Dawkins' neo-Darwinism. Natural selection requires self-reproducing entities, and producing even the simplest self-reproducing organism by chance is incredibly unlikely. There is also the issue of complex biological machinery that Darwin was unaware of, which biochemist Dr. Michael Behe argues could not have been built in small steps by natural selection. Furthermore, mutations have never been observed to add information, but only reduce it, which challenges the idea of genetic improvements accumulating through natural selection.

The Bible and the Design Argument

The Apostle Paul used the design argument in Romans 1:20, stating that the evidence of design in nature points to God's eternal power and divine nature. However, Paul also emphasized that this evidence alone is not enough to save people. The preaching of the Gospel is necessary to show how individuals can come into a right relationship with the Creator.

Creation Evangelism

When Christians use design arguments, they engage in pre-evangelism by exposing the fallacies of evolutionary presuppositions. This approach mirrors Paul's experience in Athens, where he challenged faulty ideas by pointing people to the one true God who created everything. However, it is crucial to present a full Gospel message that includes creation, Christ's death for sin, and His resurrection.

Conclusion

Design arguments have been used throughout history to support the existence of an intelligent Creator. While modern science and evolutionists may challenge these arguments, there are scientific critiques against neo-Darwinism. The design argument can serve as a strong foundation for evangelism but must be combined with the message of Christ's sacrifice and resurrection for salvation.

Why This Matters: Understanding the history and arguments surrounding design in nature can equip Christians to engage with secular viewpoints and defend their faith.

Think About It: How does recognizing design in nature impact your understanding of God as the Creator? How can you incorporate design arguments into conversations about faith and science?