Geoff Robinson Interviews Fazale Rana about The Cell's Design (page 4) Q: How does the evidence you mention point to the God of the Bible, not just evidence for design? A: The significance of the argument I make for biochemical intelligent design extends beyond the notion that life's chemistry stems from the work of a Creator. The close analogy between the characteristics of human and biochemical designs points to a resonance between the human mind and the Mind responsible for creating biochemical systems. This connection finds explanation in the biblical text which declares that humans are made in God's image. The Genesis 1 creation account (and Genesis 5) teaches that God created human beings (male and female) in His image. This declaration implies that humans bear a similarity to God, at least in some ways. Just as God is a Creator, so too, human beings, which bear God's image, are mini-creators. This implies that the hallmark characteristics of humanly designed systems will mirror those of divinely designed systems, if, again, the Divine Artist is the God described in the Bible.
Q: If Darwinism is defined as all life is descended from a common ancestor by means of blind natural forces (natural selection) acting on random mutations for variation in a step-by-step process, I see major significant negative critiques in the greater ID and Creationist movements. The first is that life can't get off the ground in the first place, best exemplified in your Origins of Life book. The second is that you can't explain a lot of structures with a blind step-by-step mechanism (irreducible complexity). The last major critique I see is William Dembski's concept of Complex Specified Information. If life has it that means life can't be brought about by blind forces. Do you see your book complementing these negative critiques? A: As I mentioned in response to an earlier question, the primary focus of The Cell's Design is to present a positive, comprehensive weight-of-evidence case for ID. Still, I do raise questions about the validity of evolutionary explanations for the origin of biochemical systems. For example, I argue (with some mathematical rigor) that the universal genetic code-the set of rules that the cell's machinery uses to make proteins from the information harbored in DNA-can't arise on Earth at any time in its history through undirected processes. I also argue that the origin of cell membranes is inexplicable through chemical evolutionary processes. I also point out that the widespread occurrence of molecular convergence fits awkwardly within an evolutionary framework. Theses critiques discussed in The Cell's Design complements the major criticisms raised by Behe and Dembski against the evolutionary paradigm. Of course, the positive case I make for ID gains strength from the work of Behe and Dembski (and others who have raised significant questions about the validity of naturalistic explanations for the origin of life and life's fundamental features at a molecular level). |
