Enzymes are All Miracles of Creation

Do we, therefore, ever see mutations going about the business of producing new structures for selection to work on? No nascent organ has ever been observed emerging… Some should be visible today, occurring in organisms at various stages up to integration of a functional new system, but we don't see them: there is no sign at all of this kind of radical novelty. Neither observation nor controlled experiment has shown natural selection manipulating mutations so as to produce a new gene, hormone, enzyme system or organ.92

These words, by the evolutionist Michael Pitman, summarize the facts that other evolutionists see clearly, but are unwilling to admit openly. The theory of evolution is based upon two fundamental mechanisms: mutations and natural selection. But as Pitman admits, neither of these mechanisms has ever bestowed a useful, functional organ or structure on any organism, and has never produced one where it did not already exist.

Leaving aside human organs or anatomical structure, Darwinists have to explain how the human body as a whole came into existence. The human body is such a complete structure that its entirety is essential for the functioning of even a single molecule. Enzymes, for example, work in tandem with the reactions they carry out, the genes that encode them, the DNA that constitutes those codes, the cells wherein they work, the substrates they will bind to, the bloodstream through which they move, the heart that keeps the blood flowing, and the brain that supplies coordination. A specific body temperature and specific pH level and countless other factors bind all these together. You cannot remove any of these factors from the equation, nor simplify the system, nor make any changes in the sequences involved. Every component makes up a structure that, as a whole, is extraordinarily complex. Evolutionists have no way of accounting for this.

That being so, let's return to a single molecule: Do evolutionists have any explanation for enzymes? Is an enzyme—with the particular amino acids it contains; the special sequence in which these are arranged; its special three-dimensional shape and its three-dimensional fit with the substrate to which it binds; the way it is able to carry out such a miraculous process as catalysis; its ability to regulate timing; and the way it never ages, makes a mistake or takes a rest—is this a structure that can be explained in terms of any Darwinian mechanism? All these observations are certainly inexplicable for evolutionists.

Jon Covey of the Creation Research Society reports an admission on this subject by Richard Dawkins, one of the present day's most passionate advocates of the theory of evolution:

The automobile designer anticipated the need for a carburetor, just as ... God saw the need for the enzyme hexokinase in glycolysis (sugar splitting). How is it, incidentally, that we acknowledge an intelligent designer and skilled work-man when we find a simple arrowhead amid similarly shaped pebbles, but some of us find it impossible to admit a master architect when we examine complex living creatures? There was a time evolutionists denied that the analogy between designed machinery and biological structures with machine-like functions was invalid. However, this has changed. In The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins admits that such biological structures do seem to have apparent design. He adamantly denies that they were designed, but at least he admits that they look like they were designed.

... There is no way for blind chance to know that sugar could be a source of energy if properly tapped. It also would not know what had to be done to take advantage of that energy. How could evolution turn down a pathway and evolve a complicated series of enzymes ... that would give no survival advantage for most of that evolutionary process? Further, until the entire set of glycolytic enzymes was developed, the organism evolving the enzyme system would make useless enzymes, which would drain energy and material resources. None of it works until all of it works, not only the glycolytic pathway but in all other enzyme systems found in living cells. 93

In fact, the emergence of an enzyme as a result of supposed coincidences conflicts with the theory of evolution's own claims since its existence by itself would be meaningless. According to the imaginary process of evolution, in order for an enzyme to be able to come into existence out of nothing, there had to be a pre-existing living body in which it can circulate and function. Yet it is also impossible for a living organism to survive in the absence of enzymes. Therefore, enzymes, the living body in which they will live (and which they themselves keep alive), the enzyme inhibitors that control them, the substrates and all the other attendant molecules must all have evolved at exactly the same time. And that is impossible, according to evolutionists, who propose scenarios regarding a single original molecule evolving over the course of millions of years. If enzymes emerged first—and it is absolutely out of the question for an enzyme to form itself by chance—it would disappear in the absence of a complete organism in which to function.

On the other hand, if the living organism emerged first—in which case, all its systems and molecules would have to have evolved separately, which is completely impossible—then it could not have survived in the absence of enzymes. If the enzyme inhibitors emerged first—and again, it is totally impossible for these complex molecules to have formed by chance—then they would impede all the enzymatic functions we assume to have emerged.

This is just a brief summary to demonstrate the irreducible complexity inherent in the system. The theory of evolution has no explanation, nor any evidence to offer as to how even a single one of these complex molecules came into being.

As we have seen, evolutionists have no explanation to offer concerning the origin of enzymes. Furthermore, they are also far from being able to explain how the amino acids that constitute an enzyme could have assumed their correct sequence by chance. Probability calculations show the impossibility of any such correct sequence emerging by chance, even if all the desired conditions are met. As Jon Covey asks:

What are the chances of getting just one simple enzyme only 100 amino acid residues long? There are 20 different amino acids which could be arranged in any combination of ways... The amino acids in this simple enzyme could be arranged 10130 different ways—that is 10 with 130 zeros. Most of these arrangements would not make good enzymes. Most of them would work very poorly or not at all. Sir Arthur Eddington, a British astronomer, calculated there are no more than 1080 particles in the universe. Astronomers believe 90 to 99% of the universe is made of invisible particles called Dark Matter. This might increase the total number to 1082. This includes all the electrons, protons, and neutrons, and many other less familiar subatomic particles. That should give you some idea of how large 10130 is.

It would take a very long time to find by chance the right combination of amino acids to make some-thing as efficient as the enzymes in our bodies. If we let everything in the universe combine and recombine to make these protein chains of 100 amino acid residues at the rate of one trillion times per second, it would take more than 30 trillion years before all the combinations would have been tried. After these trials we would have just one protein one hundred amino acids long with limited function and no ability to reproduce, for protein does not code for itself, nor is it able to effect its own replication.94

Everything in the heavens and everything in the Earth belongs to Him. Allah is the Rich Beyond Need, the Praiseworthy. (Surat al-Hajj: 64)

The probability of obtaining a simple enzyme consisting of 100 amino acids at random are 1 in 10130. However, we also need to remember that this protein must consist of left-handed amino acids only. (In nature, there are two kinds of amino acids: left and right-handed, but only left-handed ones play any role in the living cell.) This means that the probability declines still further:

What are the chances of a million-dollar laboratory correctly synthesizing left-hand amino acids for one small protein molecule? It is 1 in 10210. That is 1 with 210 zeros after it.

To properly understand the immense size of these impossible chances, consider this:

Ten billion years is 1018 seconds. The earth weighs 1026 ounces. The entire universe has a diameter of only 1028 inches. There are 1080 elementary (subatomic) particles in the universe.95

When compared with the largest numbers in the universe, the impossibility of a single enzyme emerging by chance can clearly be seen.

No matter how impossible it may be, let us assume that amino acids were able to assume the correct sequence and form an enzyme. The possibility of that enzyme accelerating a reaction by becoming involved in it—in other words, the probability of it being functional—represents an even greater difficulty for evolutionists. Dr. Jonathan D. Sarfati of the Creation Science Foundation has calculated that probability as follows:

Even the simplest self-reproducing organism has 482 genes coding for enzymes about 400 amino acids long on average. Each enzyme must have a precise sequence to function properly. There are 20 different types of amino acid used in enzymes. Even if only 10 units had to be exactly right in each enzyme, the chance of getting the full set by ordinary random polymerisation reactions is one in 106271 (one followed by 6271 zeroes). This is indeed effectively nil when one realizes that the number of atoms in the universe is only about 1080.96

The probability of a single reaction coming about by chance is zero. Even if, despite all the impossibilities, we assume, that a single enzyme did come into existence by chance and happened to carry out a reaction—no matter how impossible that is—the same impossibility still applies to the genes needed to transmit the information coding for that enzyme to subsequent generations. The impossibility of that happening by chance has been calculated too:

Evolutionists say that man evolved from a one-celled organism, purely by chance. Yet it has been calculated that the probability of forming a single protein molecule by chance is one in 10243 (10 with 242 zeroes behind it.) Furthermore, even if the world were covered by an ocean a mile deep containing 1033 bacteria, scientists say it would take more than 100 billion years for them to produce a single new enzyme. And even if they produced a gene to manufacture this new enzyme, six million generations would have to elapse for the gene to spread throughout the species by the process of survival of the fittest. The above is the time needed to develop a typical non-useful enzyme. For a single useful enzyme to appear, it would take three hundred million years! This points out the improbability that even one-celled fully functional organisms developed by pure chance. If so many chance occurrences and so much time were needed to form just a single useful enzyme, imagine how many coincidences and how many eons would be required for the one cell to evolve into billion-celled man! No one could possibly calculate the odds against this happening by chance. Yet, the evolutionists ask us to swallow this whole.97

The probabilities show the impossibility of claims regarding chance formation. Moreover, countless reactions take place in microseconds in the very bodies of those who carry out such research and maintain that all these things happened coincidentally! Thousands of reactions one second, thousands the next . . . this continues on in every living body, without pause or error.

Every second, reactions takes place and at specific speed and in a specific order inside every living body. No enzyme is ever confused with another, or acts on any other structure, or seeks to match the reaction rate of another enzyme. Enzymes never head in the wrong direction, but act at the right time and stop acting at the right time. The amino acids contained in every enzyme have been determined, are all in the proper order and in the right place. All the enzymes in the living body have the correct three-dimensional shape, never bind to the wrong substrates, and never become involved in the wrong reaction.

The enzymes in any living body behave as if they were conscious and intelligent, just like cautious human beings. They do all they can to keep their body metabolizing and healthy.

For these and many other similar reasons it is impossible for enzymes to have come into being by chance. Amino acids cannot combine to form the correct sequence by chance, nor coincidentally give rise to an active site on the enzyme with a tertiary structure. Chance cannot give rise to substrates that match the active sites, nor direct these towards specific reactions. Chance cannot endow an enzyme with any ability, nor bestow on it the capacity to perform in a tenth of a second a reaction that normally would take tens of millions of years. Chance cannot make an enzyme ideally suited to the organism, nor endow it with the ability to keep that organism alive. Chance is no explanation for the literally conscious behavior that enzymes exhibit in the living body.

The fact that molecules do behave in a conscious manner in the body shows that it is the work of a sublime Creator. Every structure and every molecule in the living body is the work of Allah, Creator of all things. That is why all structures are so compatible and mutually dependent. It is Allah, Lord of the worlds, Who creates organisms in their finest possible form, gives them their characteristics, bestows an astonishing complexity on even the smallest components within them, and creates them in a very wide variety. No created entity can bring into being any thing of beauty to compare with the miracles created by Him, nor produce the flawless order and harmony produced by Him. No intelligence on Earth, no technology, no power can produce the living systems created by Allah with their perfect mechanisms. That is because every perfection we see is the artistry of Allah, His creation and His glorious might.

Everyone in heaven and Earth prostrates to Allah willingly or unwillingly, as do their shadows in the morning and the evening. Say: "Who is the Lord of the heavens and the earth?" Say: "Allah." Say: "So why have you taken protectors apart from Him who possess no power to help or harm themselves?" Say: "Are the blind and seeing equal? Or are darkness and light the same? Or have they assigned partners to Allah who create as He creates, so that all creating seems the same to them?" Say: "Allah is the Creator of everything. He is the One, the All-Conquering." (Surat ar-Ra‘d: 15-16)