According to Hugh Ross¹, the ancient argument for Design, and a Designer of the universe, is still very relevant, especially with the very current updates that are available. He says:
“…the design argument (from William Paley in 1818) has consistently proved itself to be the most compelling argument for God. That’s because the design evidence is simple, concrete, and tangible.”
For more, go through the DOOR.
Ross continues, citing Paley:
In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary it had lain there forever; nor would it, perhaps, be easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired of me how the watch happened to be in that place, I should hardly think of the answer which I had given before, that for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there…. The watch must have had a maker–that there must have existed at some time, at some place or other, an artificer or artificers, who formed it for the purpose which we find it actually to answer, who comprehended its construction, and designed its use…. Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation.²
To which Ross responds in his words:
“No one of sound mind, Paley explains, would ever conclude that a watch was the product of bits of dust, dirt, and rock being shuffled together under natural processes…even if processes could operate for a very long time.”
¹ Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, How the Latest Discoveries Reveal God 4th ed. (RTB Press, Covina, CA, 2018) Comments and citation (below) come from Ross’s volume.
² William Paley, Natural Theology on Evidence and Attributes of Deity, 18th ed. rev. (Edinburgh, UK: Lackington, Allen and Co., and James Sawers, 1818, 12-14.