The complexity and structure of the universe imply the existence of an intelligent designer. This was the core belief behind the design argument, which was an essential component in defending natural theology. In the past, this was promoted by people such as William Paley whose work greatly inspired the Argument from Design. With the rise of Darwin’s theory of evolution however, the Paley a design argument was severely challenged because Darwin’s theory of evolution offered a purely naturalistic means, known as natural selection, to explain biological complexity without any need for higher powers. For this reason, the classical biological design argument has lost its power to persuade. Nonetheless, the discussion has remained afloat due to modern variations, especially the fine-tuning argument in cosmology. The fundamentals of physical constants have been interpreted by some as evidence of design, claiming that life can only exist in certain highly precise values in fundamental physical constants, which allows the universe to support life. Supporters of this view have largely been silenced by the critics who provided alternative explanations such as the multiverse hypothesis and the anthropic principle. While natural sciences have removed the traditional teleological argument in the realms of biology, there is an absence of definitive proof which carries on the philosophical discourse. This paper explores and analyses how the Argument from Design has transformed since Darwin, arguing its relevance alongside scientific progress and philosophical debate. Though this point is no longer valid proof of God’s existence, it continues to be a fascinating idea that keeps theologians, scientists, and philosophers occupied.