(Pro) Atheistic evolution vs Christian creationism (con).

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse." [Romans 1:19-21] "We see that things which lack knowledge, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that they achieve their end, not fortuitously, but designedly. Now whatever lacks knowledge cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; and this being we call God" -Thomas Aquinas ~Summa Theologica, Article 3, Question 2 We can indeed use our five senses to analyse the existence of divine design. "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 very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given, that for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there." [1] "Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation. If we take the well-known, William Paley's "watch maker argument" it can be understood that for this world to be working so that it is not absolute chaos, similarly to a watch, there must be a designer" [2] By taking Paley's watch analogy, we can understand that such complexity requires a designer, You can take anything in front of you and ask 'how is this here?' as you would well know, it did not just suddenly appear in front of you, it would first have required to be designed for it to fulfill it's purpose, for it to even exist. we can take a step further to look at the Cosmological argument. Cosmos; the world or universe as a well-ordered system. Necessary being; a being in which is essential, unique & special. it does not depend on anything else to exist/be true, to deny it, it would be contradiction. it COULD NOT be false. e.g. 1+2=3 contingent being; relies on something else- depends on something else for its existence or truth. it COULD be false. e.g. if you sunbathe without sun protector, you will get sun burnt. basics of the cosmological argument (summed up); The argument is based on the claim that everything existing in the universe exists because it was caused by something else; that 'something' was itself also caused by something else. However, it is necessary for something to have started this all off- something that did not and was not itself caused/created, that 'something' is God. "In the case of the argument from contingency, the distinction drawn between the universe and God is that the existence of the universe is contingent, i.e. that the universe could have not existed. Everything that exists contingently, the argument from contingency claims, has a cause of its existence. As the universe is contingent, then, the universe has a cause of its existence, and that cause is God." [4] We can agree that everything around us is indeed contingent. we can also conclude that the universe is contingent, i.e. the big bang caused our universe as it is today. There must be a necessary cause in which began the chain of causes. [see 4] One can ask, if God is an uncaused cause, why can't the universe itself be uncaused? The answer to this is God's nature. [see ontological argument below] We naturally know of god's nature " It seems that the existence of God is self-evident. Now those things are said to be self-evident to us the knowledge of which is naturally implanted in us, as we can see in regard to first principles. But as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, 1,3), "the knowledge of God is naturally implanted in all." Therefore the existence of God is self-evident." [3] Moving on to the ontological argument, This argument does not start from some feature of the world (e.g. design) but rather from a definition of God. It therefore seeks to move from a definition of God to the reality of God. It was put forward by St Anselm. Kant was considered to have demolished it but the argument ha recently generated new interest. proving god deductively P1: God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived P2: That than which nothing greater can be conceived must exist C: God must exist ~in this context God's existence is held to be logically necessary, i.e. God cannot not exist. [5] Alvin Plantinga gives an example of such an argument; "Either God exists or 7+5=14 therefore God exists" [5] proving God inductively; P1: all events require a cause P2: The universe is an event C: God is the cause of the universe ~ In this context God's existence is held to be highly probable as the best explanation of the universe. [7] ~we can claim that scientific explanations of the universe are simply theories, therefore, we can understand the explanation of the universe through God; is in balance with the explanation of the universe through science. God was the beginning of a chain of events, making the universe and all beings as it is today. Thus i have proved that the existence of a God can be proved using our 5 senses. You claim "Jesus cannot be God because he cannot be the source of all moral authority" First, i would like to point out that we are not even sure or clear if Jesus was or was not the messiah. [8] Jesus sometimes claims to be the messiah, and sometimes denies being the messiah. He also did not live up to the prophesies. (amongst other reasons- see source 8) We also need to understand that Biblical times were very different to our modern day society. Jesus was born as a human being and so grew up in this environment, he would have learnt his morals from that day and age, not as the world is today. There is not much that one man can do in order to stop slavery everywhere. Especially since the Roman empire ruled at this point in time. Going against the emperor would result in severe punishments. Jesus already has enough publicity. Also, I would like to point out that you have misinterpreted """"20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished." This quote is saying If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. we should be careful not to take the bible out of context; "5Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear and sincerity of heart, just as you would show to Christ. 6And do this not only to please them while they are watching, but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7Serve with good will, as to the Lord and not to men, 8because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free. 9And masters, do the same for your slaves. Give up your use of threats, because you know that He who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with Him." (Timothy 6:1-2) sources; 1~ http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu... 2~http://www.pantheism.net... 3~ http://www.newadvent.org... 4~ http://www.philosophyofreligion.info... 5~ https://www.uky.edu... 6~ http://www.csus.edu... 7~ http://commonsenseatheism.com... 8~http://www.shamash.org...