Intelligent Design, Perfect Design, and Stupid Design

So in dealing with Creationism and Intelligent Design, I couldn’t help but notice that if God is perfect shouldn’t he be called the Perfect Designer.  And that creationism should be referred to as Perfect Design, not Intelligent Design.

However in calling God the Perfect Designer, we do come across some head scratching dilemmas:

      • Can something imperfect come out of something perfect?  And if so, can we still call it perfect?
      • Why would a perfect designer require, demand, or ever need worship?
      • That this perfect designer created this imperfect universe and imperfect earth and imperfect creatures.
      • Given if he is so perfect, why couldn’t he even convince the whole world he exists?  (Is that not a simple task for an all perfect being?)

I find some of these questions to be the most troubling attributes of the God of Judeo-Christianity.  It is for one to imagine and believe that Yahweh, an all-powerful, all-knowing, infinitely wise and most importantly a Perfect deity.  That he be the creator of such a flawed world and society, but that also from top-to-bottom, everything he has done is a few degrees short of perfection.

I think for me when I think of a perfect God, who is the creator and cause of all things, I think of a perfect world, a perfect universe, peace, joy, happiness, and no illogical suffering. But here is the thing, I don’t see those things so why should I still believe that this God is perfect?

I think one of the fundamental problems with creationism is the idea of intelligent design and having an intelligent designer.  This is actually conflicting with the attribute of God.  God is perfect, so to simply call him intelligent is somewhat insulting and degrading.  It would only be right to call God the Perfect Designer.  However the problem with that is that we don’t see observable evidence for a perfect designer, in fact we barely see evidence for an intelligent designer.

Evaluating Intelligent Design and Creationism

Now some might think intelligent design is a more accurate label for God, but in keeping with realism; Does the actions match the title?  We would be hard-pressed to infer from natural observation that this world was the making of an intelligent designer.  Well let’s look at some of the things this Intelligent Designer created.  

Astronomical Problems

      • We are on a collision course with the Andromeda galaxy
      • Nature is designed to a degree to kill us humans in masses:  Earthquakes, Volcanoes, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Flash Floods,  and Hurricanes
      • Because of Dark Energy, the universe will keep expanding more rapidly until the universe grows colder & colder and we all die a horrible icy death.
      • He created this vast universe, infinitely vast, but we can only live and survive on this spec of a planet we call earth.  That does not sound like a smart idea and definitely not a perfect one.
      • Comets and asteroids, -that at any moment that one large enough could end all life on this planet. Like it did for the dinosaurs.  And there are calculations of highly unlikely but still probable impacts in 2026, 2036, and 2182.
      • A Sun that is on high side of its lifespan, so even if we do avoid Global Warming, the Andromeda galaxy collision or an asteroid collision, we won’t live that long because our sun will burn out before then.

Evolutionary Problems

      • The appendix, the most useless organ in your body, and it serves no purpose, but it causes more human harm than good, so why would God put it there.
      • The wisdom tooth, nearly everyone needs to get them removed and they are not necessary to chew, so why would a God put them there?
      • Birth Defects??????
      • The Hiccup; it is an unnecessary human reaction
      • Humans must use the same tube for eating, drinking, and breathing, which leads to hundreds of unnecessary deaths by choking.  If this intelligent designer would have endowed us with a separate hole for eating, drinking, and speaking, like he did for whales & dolphins no one would ever choke.
      • The human retina is backwards causing a blind spot. This is unnecessary; octopuses have a camera eye like us, but the retina is the right way around, so they have no blind spot.
      • The human tail bone; Why in the world does a human have a tail bone?
*Here is a link to entire listing of examples of bad design 

What was so intelligent about this design?

There are so many problems with the idea of a perfect designer; one would even begin to question if the designer was even intelligent.  One could almost infer a stupid designer or an invalid designer.  These are just some of the many examples, that makes one question; What was so intelligent about this design?

“Over and over again, bad designs make sense as byproducts of evolution. They make no sense if you posit that they’re the product of a creator’s whim — UNLESS you think that creator’s whim was to fool us into thinking that life had evolved. And who wants to believe in a god like that?” –Jerry Coyne

About M. Rodriguez

When I first received Christ salvation, I made it a priority to read the whole bible and I did. But it was the Bible that made me question my faith. For I found it flawed and lacking. Due to this I launched a personal inquiry/investigation into my faith, and ultimately realized that the Christian God of the Bible was indeed man-made. Now I Blog about those findings and life after Christ.
This entry was posted in creation, creationism, evolution vs. creation, Intelligent Design, jerry coyne, religion vs. science, scientist, youtube and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Intelligent Design, Perfect Design, and Stupid Design

  1. You said

    “That he be the creator of such a flawed world and society, but that also from top-to-bottom, everything he has done is a few degrees short of perfection.”

    More than just a few degrees if you ask me….the examples from nature (never mind moral dilemmas) are overwhelming.

  2. Fredericka says:

    Is the appendix indeed “the most useless organ in your body, and it serves no purpose”?
    That is what they used to think, now they are starting to get the picture: “Immunologist William Parker of Duke University examined samples of normal tissue from organ donors and from patients who had healthy appendixes removed during other surgeries. . . .’Think of your appendix as a part of your immune system,’ Parker says.” (Discover Magazine,
    To give an example, when I was a child, I had my tonsils removed, which used to be routine. As they explained to all the parents who used to be expected to pay for this formerly very common surgery, the tonsils were a useless appendage prone to infection. Then they discovered the function. Oops.

    • M. Rodriguez says:

      I remember reading that article before I put this post, because I wanted to make sure my words were accurate. But after reading that article, I tried to search for other articles that supported the research of Mr. William Parker, but there was not much support. He was the only researcher who came up with that level of conclusion. His research and findings have not found very much support among the consensus dr or scientist community. In fact what I found, was that it was not supported by the academic or medical society and that a large part still find his research ambiguous. oops, so I guess the jury is still out.

      Give me that peer review science

      And just because you rebuttal, one small part does not mean you have answered all the questions. I made a total of 13 points for the evidence of an unintelligent creator. If you would like to rebuttal the other 12 points, I would welcome your comments.

      • Fredericka says:

        When you say ‘stupid design,’ you’re wandering off into the atheist wilderness, because Darwinian evolution, to the extent that it predicts anything at all, predicts good design not bad design. Natural selection is supposed to weed out bad design. You have to walk a tightrope to say, ‘it’s not optimal design, but it’s not like it impacts reproductive success or anything. . .’ Or are you arguing against both evolution and design?

      • M. Rodriguez says:

        Actually evolution makes no prediction or models of future creatures or species. In fact, if you read the quote under the video, Jerry Coyne, (A scientist, who expertise is evolution) himself admits that bad design can only be explained through natural selection and evolution.

        In understanding natural selection here is a link…
        and I would highly recommend you watch the video…Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne.

  3. Fredericka says:

    “Actually evolution makes no prediction or models of future creatures or species.”
    Have you noticed that it is therefore not falsifiable?

  4. pat says:

    ■Can something imperfect come out of something perfect? And if so, can we still call it perfect?
    -Actually according to the Christian the world was once perfect. It’s just that it had the potential to be imperfect. And yes I believe that perfect can create perfect but give it the potential to be imperfect. Besides as a Christian I don’t really even look at God being perfect the same way you probably do. After all perfect is merely perspective since there is no known objective perfect perspective. You may not view God as perfect but if I view him as perfect am I wrong or right? Neither. We would merely be at a stalemate. But yes I do believe perfect can create something perfect with the potential to be imperfect.

    ■Why would a perfect designer require, demand, or ever need worship?
    -I don’t believe God needs worship. I don’t believe God needs anything. I conclude the reason God wants us to worship is more for us not really for him.

    ■That this perfect designer created this imperfect universe and imperfect earth and imperfect creatures.
    -Actually by making this statement you give me more reasons for God. After all if we can identify earth as imperfect then its logical to conclude that a perfect earth either does or once did exist. And as far as I conclude or am aware of Genesis is the only example of a perfect earth. Besides how do you possibly know this world is imperfect? You can assume its imperfect but it is impossible to say you know that it is imperfect because what objective standard indicates imperfection?

    ■Given if he is so perfect, why couldn’t he even convince the whole world he exists? (Is that not a simple task for an all perfect being?)
    -This is not really evidence against him. Its merely a complaint. First off according to the Bible at some point your going to know. If Christianity is true then we’ll know at death. So your statement is actually a mistake because according to Christianity at some point everyone will know. So your statement why couldn’t he even convince the whole world he exists? Well simple answer is if Christian God is true then we will all be convinced.

    • M. Rodriguez says:

      Hello Pat,

      thanks for your comments, but let me respond

      1. To say something is Perfect, but then to admit that God created it with the potential to be imperfect, is admitting it has flaws or the capability to flaw, If it has flaw or the capability than it is not perfect. Instead describing it as perfect, the more accurate definition for what you described, is that god created a falliable world, (meaning it had the capacity to be imperfect or flaw) Look up the definition yourself, I am using it, in the proper and correct terminology.

      2. As a former Christian, theologically I would agree with you. But I don’t know if your answer is entirely theologically or biblically correct. So I’m not going to push the issue here.

      3. You ask how do I know that this world is not perfect….Go back to my article and read the seciton about all the astronomical and evolutionary problems. And yes they are problems, Cause if they were perfect, they would not be problems nor have a need for improvement.

      And as for your Genesis as a example…I would say that is the worst possible example you could give. Just read Genesis 1 and 2, and tell me how many scientific and logical contradictions can you find. I’ll give you a hint, there are atleast FIVE.

      4. Yes you are right, it is a compliant, but a very vailid complaint. And yes according to the bible I would know, as the bible says… And I did. Then I kept on reading the bible, and came to realize that the bible contained way too many errors for it to be considered the inspired word of God. As Ben Erickson says,” A christian reads the bible, an atheist understands it.”

      I’ll leave you with a quotes to cap off this section of my comments…

      It ain’t those parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand. -Mark Twain

      • Pat says:

        1. Then we obviously disagree because I do believe something perfect can have the potential to be imperfect just as something is victorious when it has the potential to be defeated. But since there is no scientific criteria of perfect we are at a stalemate and obviously disagree. Even God’s perfection in my opinion is based on the Bible’s perspective on perfection more than objective.

        3. Well first off I can agree with you that the world today is imperfect and still be using my original point. But it doesn’t change the fact that saying the world is imperfect is subjective not objective. I don’t know of any scientific testing to identify bad world or good world or perfect or imperfect world. Its beyond us. If your certain it is an imperfect world then your doing it on faith. not proof because i have a lack of belief such a thing as proof of imperfect exists. Its all perspective. Besides Biblically God already solved all the problems of the world. Evil for example God solved the problem and evil is no longer an issue. You probably disagree but again you would be saying it on opinion just like me. Is this a perfect world? My perspective may say no but without any objective criteria of perfect world to say with any degree of certainty would be dishonest.

        3. Nothing you said countered anything in my original point. You said that why Can’t God convince the world he exists. I answered if Christianity is true then God can and will do it. He will at some point convince every single person he exists. Didn’t I succesfully answer your original question? If not show me how.

  5. M. Rodriguez says:

    Hello Pat again…

    as for the topic of perfect, I can give you a definition of perfect. I have been working on a series of post dealing with the perfection or misperfection of the biblical God. I’ve been working on this series for a while, so it is still unfinished. Here is a small excerpt from the one titled: Does goes measure up to his own standard of perfect?

    First Perfection as defined by the bible,
    A definition of Someone Not Perfect and Unstable: It also to say he is not double-minded. The bible calls a double minded man unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8) Therefore a double-minded man or unstable man lacks the capacity for perfection.

    A definition of Biblical Perfect: We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check. (James 3:2)

    so now we have a definition of perfect and not-perfect.

    To say God is not perfect by the definition of not perfect, one would have to indeed persuade that the God of the bible is unstable and can be found with fault. Then the question would also be is God double-minded and if he is, what is double-minded about?

    blatantly in Exodus 21:14-“The Lord changed his mind(repented) and did not bring on his people the disaster he threatened.” How can all perfect God change his mind? Isn’t he supposed to immutable?

    Do keep in mind this was just an excerpt..I don’t know when i will put up the full series, it is still a work in progress.

  6. Pingback: Intelligence of the Gaps | Tangled Up in Blue Guy

  7. Pingback: The Argument for and Against A Perfect Creator | The BitterSweet End

  8. Pingback: Top Atheist and Skeptic Scholars | The BitterSweet End

  9. Pingback: Religion vs. Science: How and Where they Contradict? | The BitterSweet End

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s