BELIEVING IS SEEING: Were Your Eyes Created by God or by Chance?
(9:19 VIEWING) — Regardless how you think they originated, those two eyes in your head are miraculous organs from many perspectives, from converting light received into images perceived by your brain to conveying the presence of someone near and dear to your heart.
Without our eyes, we don’t merely not see, we don’t know so much. Christianity points to Genesis and the Creation account to account for the miracle of sight. God created us and saw that it was good.
You see but do you understand what and why you see? (Screenshot from YouTube.
“And God saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.” — Genesis 1:31.
How long each of those six days were and the methods and tools God employed to create can be debated, but the bottom line is that only God, beyond time, space and matter, can create something out of nothing.
What on earth, you ask, does that have to do with eyes? They point to two fundamental problems with the non-God explanation.
First, without a God beyond time, space and matter, how do we account for the existence of the first molecule? Either it was always there, which is an intrinsically non-scientific assumption.
Second, with that assumption in mind, the non-God explanation must posit some process by which that eternally existent first molecule somehow became something else. The conventional wisdom of the day is that something else is the process of natural selection at the root of evolutionary theory.
Ignore those two basic problems and the natural evidence supporting evolutionary theory appears to be substantial. But so is there substantial natural evidence that points to the God explanation if we are open to it.
So the question we must ask if we are to approach these matters in an intellectually honest manner is this: Which assumptions make the most logical explanation for the evidence we see because we are creatures who see, reason, understand, and act?
Here at HillFaith, the “why is there something rather than nothing” question points us to the God explanation. And to that end, we offer the following 9:19 second video from the Discovery Institute that examines all of these questions and assumptions in the context of the human eye.
And as you watch and think about it, keep these observations by David Klinghoffer of Evolution News and Science Today from his 2017 Thanksgiving thoughts in mind:
“Darwin expected that eyes must have developed from simple forerunners through the usual (hypothesized) series of gradual steps. But at the Cambrian explosion some 530 million years ago, we find clear evidence of both compound and camera eyes already in use by creatures among the first animals in the fossil record. BOOM: There they are.
“To deal with and demote the exquisite sensitivity of our vision — the ability to detect a single photon — Darwinists claim that vertebrate eyes are built backwards in testimony to the haphazard ways of evolution.
“But as biologist and Zombie Science author Jonathan Wells explains, evolutionists are working with outdated science. It’s not ID proponents, but entirely mainstream research, that increasingly reveals the optimal design of our eyes.”
Enjoy!