top of page
Writer's pictureBible Brian

Reproduction merely adds to the watchmaker argument


The watchmaker argument has been the bane of an atheist's life since 1804, and it has spawned many variants. Most designed objects are very clearly designed due to their specifically and irreducibly complex nature. Living organisms are no different. They display all the hall marks of having been designed. Even Richard Dawkins was forced to admit "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose..." (1)


Modern atheists think they have the answer: Man-made objects do not reproduce, whereas living organisms can, which allows them to have evolved their appearance of design through gradual modifications over time. There are a number of glaring problems with this feeble attempt at a counter argument, but I only want to focus on one for this article.

Reproduction is yet another blight on Darwin's fairy tale. While we have largely managed to automate the production of various things, mankind has never managed to produce a machine capable of replicating itself. But God did. Not only did God repeatedly manage to create living organisms capable of self-replication, but He did so in ways that are just as ingenious as the rest of the organism's functions.


If the first living cell could not reproduce, Evolution would have ended immediately. Thus, the first living cell would have had to not only be capable of surviving, but also of reproducing. Both of these functions had to be complete immediately. This is crazier than claiming you can throw a bunch of scrap metal in the sea and expect the waves to create a watch.

But living cells are not the only things capable of reproduction. All organisms reproduce. Not only that, but they have completely different reproductive systems. Systems between which there is no midpoint. This means gradual Evolution is impossible. Our alleged ancestors would have had to instantly and perfectly jump from one system to the next, which would actually have to have happened twice in the same generation in the case of sexual reproduction: Once to create a fully functioning male, and once to create a fully functioning (not to mention compatible) female. It simply could not have worked.


Therefore, the attempt to answer the watchmaker argument by pointing out that organisms can reproduce is a complete failure. It doesn't only fail to counter the watchmaker argument, it actually adds another layer to it. Evolution is impossible, as the very mechanism by which it supposedly occurs is, itself, irreducibly complex. It is time for atheists to give credit where it is due; to our amazing Creator who not only designed and created us, but also made the ultimate sacrifice so that our relationship with Him can be restored. Rather than making up silly fairy tales about magical explosions and soupy slime creating life by nothing but chance, let us glorify the Lord by marvelling at the work of His hands.


References


1. Dawkins, Richard - The Blind Watchmaker, 1986

6 views
bottom of page