jinkx:
Actually there is a ton of proof for a creator. And I will try to explain it the best I can.
Now to understand a something you need to study it as is done in Biology, but in Biology you can only suggest what is happening, as you can never exactly know what and/or why an animal or what ever foreign being you are studying, is doing what it is doing. The only way you can is by being it. This is how God has given us the ability to study the human being. We can, to a greater degree find out why, how, and what a Human is most likely to think, feel, and react to something.
In the history of man there has been something that has given us the "ability" to govern to a degree what is considered "right" and what is considered "wrong". This "something" was not given, taught, or learned by random generation. It was made within each person. This is what most people call, that know what I am talking about, the Moral Law. Now the Moral Law is very interesting because it is the only law of nature that can be follow by a privilege we all call free-will not "instinct" as evolution would suggest. This Moral Law governs the "conscience" in
the way of stating that Theft, Murder, and many others are wrong. The Moral Law wasn't "officially" written down until the 10 Commandments.
How does this by any means prove that there is a God? Because we believe in "Right" and "Wrong". When I ague with someone or if you hear someone arguing you might here along the lines of, that's not fair or I was right because... What are the two people arguing comparing to? They are comparing to the moral law. I have never heard someone in an argument say, to Hell with your belief, instead they try to justify why what they did was right.
In evolution what is considered "right" and what is considered "wrong"? Is it only judged by the strongest person? Is "right" and "wrong" different from person to person (which if this is so, then there is no "right" and "wrong" and so people can do whatever they want). And when "Right" and "Wrong" is based on evolution we cannot even dare say Hitler was wrong in the mass murdering, Stalin's KGB killings, and many more acts of infamy. Why? Because if we evolved we could go to say that those few men that were infamous for their acts could have
evolved further than us and maybe it was right in their mind. For the funny thing in evolution is that everyone thinks that in the random selection of Evolution is always for the better. It isn't true, that's why it's "Random". For there is no such thing as "Random Selection" with a predetermined ending result.
To solve this dilemma Christianity states that there must be a "Higher Being" in which a law was given to lower beings in which it is universal,just and a "standard" in which all should live by and be judged by accordingly. And Christianity states that everything is slowly getting worse not better(as with Evolution). For if everything is slowly getting worse we might as well do nothing so that everything may
benefit (except us, which would disband that thought altogether).
There is much more evidence for the existence of God, but I would not have enough time to go through each one...
Now I will try to explain why Evolution in itself is wrong and why it can't be right both theologically and scientifically.
Long ago a Greek philosopher once said, "I think, and so I am". An Evolutionist instead believes the following phrase,"I am not, so I cannot think". This is how I can sum up the Theory of Evolution in 2 phrases. But I will explain what those phrases mean because I believe without a doubt that there will be questions as to the meaning.
When a man thinks what does he do? He/She compares two things in which then He/She can find a result. When I ask you what is Red, you can't really describe it in words, but you know what red is because you know it's not yellow or blue. Right? That's the same thing with everything else (You can think about that for a while...). In Evolution everything, more or less, came from one thing. If everything came from one thing, then how to do you compare 2 different things if they are essentially the same thing? A cat and dog are only different by, that they
have evolved slightly different at different rates, but a cat is essentially a dog and a dog essentially a cat. They are both related. They both had the same "parents" that at one point they were the same beings. So if an Evolutionist is to compare 2 things and denies one in his decision, he is essentially denying them both because they both are the same, so he would have to accept them both. That is also why
Christianity has solved that by stating that each animal is different by design and purpose. You can compare 2 things because they are
completely different.
Scientifically Evolution is wrong just by looking at the fossil records, the Taxonomy in Biology, and RNA.
If Evolution were true we would not have a limitless, classless fossil record. This would be due to so many animals evolving at different rates and in different ways (example: not all cats would evolve into dogs, ect). That would lead to an incomplete, and limitless size of the classification of animals.
In Evolution Darwin even said that for evolution to work the cells in an animal would have to become more and more basic and less complex as the cells got smaller, if this was not so Darwin said himself that he would have to discredit all his research. This now we can say that it is the exact opposite. As the cells get smaller and smaller they get considerably complex going all the way down to DNA and RNA. RNA being not a kind of body language, but a full complete body programming language of considerably complex functions. RNA "designs" the body of the Human.
Here is a small explanation of RNA:
RNA is transcribed from DNA by enzymes called RNA polymerases and is generally further processed by other enzymes. RNA is central to the synthesis of proteins. Here, a type of RNA called messenger RNA carries information from DNA to structures called ribosomes. These ribosomes are made from proteins and ribosomal RNAs, which come together to form a molecular machine that can read messenger RNAs and translate the information they carry into proteins. There are also many RNAs involved in modifying other RNAs; some of it causing
maturation of RNAs, other resulting in altered expression or products of genes.
And Evolutionist would say that this happened randomly and accidentally.... I believe it would take more faith to be an Evolutionist than a Christian due to these facts(We haven't even gone into DNA).
Now I would like to end with this. God can be proven just through the "nature" of Human Beings through out history and our own experiences. And if Evolution were to be true, peace not only could not be attained in any way shape or form, it would be the opposite of Natural Selection and survival of the Fittest. And there would be not point in living on earth, besides just to "live" whatever that may mean when it is not backed with rhyme or reason.
