I too am a believer, so rock on. But I think you need to read up a little more on your denominations of faith like atheists...Don't believe much. I think you said something about them believing in evelution, which those folks have a completely different name that escapes me at this moment. How you brought up the sceince behind all those tiny organisams really does make one think. Good job.

One last comment.... God is not a bearded man who throws you in a fiery pit for disobeying Him. He is a spiritual being that exists in three forms- the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son. Perhaps you should read the Bible more...it wasn't written by simple minded goat herders. Many of the people who contributed to it were students and priests. Obviously you haven't done much research; it is very hard work. I do understand the concepts of atheism and Christianity. Perhaps it's you who doesn't, or maybe you follow some very mislead biologists and scientists. I know I don't; I make sure mine have facts and evidence. If you refuse to read the Bible, then you ought to read something that was at least written by a modern person- Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds by Phillip E. Johnson.   

Thanks for your comments BlueRain.  Since you've pointed out so many problems with my theories, I'd like to point out a few with evolution.  Can you explain the Cambrian Explosion?  Can you explain why Dawkins and Gould had such an argument over punctuated equilibrium?

Big FYI: If there was life in the universe besides us, we would know about it by now through the Hubble Telescope, satellite transmissions, space travel\exploration.... If all you want to do is prove how terrible this article is to YOU, good job. But it has several five star ratings. And by the way, how do scientists explain the Cambrian Explosion?

And actually, to fix my first point, the Earth is not "perfectly" positioned. It is within a distance range from the Sun that allows life. Would things have been different had the Earth been a bit closer or a bit farther? Yes, but life probably would have still come as long as it was within this range. And we've already evidence that there might be other planets that share this range to a star in the universe.

1. Chances of Earth being perfectly positioned- this "chance" is uncalculatable at this point, especially by you. Because to come up with this probability, first you would have to be absolutely certain that there are no other planets in the universe that contain life on them, and then you would have to prove that in a universe absent of your believed deity, that it is impossible for our planet to be the way it is. And there is no proof that there even was a "beginning." To assume a beginning to the universe would be something of a regression/ post hoc fallacy. 2. Related versus descended- Maybe you don't think so, but in this case semantics are extremely important. If I said I was "descended" from my brother, or "descended' from my aunt, I'm sure you would point out my flaw in choice of words.  3. Why aren't there hybrids? - For the same reason that rhinos are genetically related to horses and yet you don't see them popping out rhirses or hinos. I really suggest you read any book on reproduction or genetics, especially about the term reproductive isolation (did you know that there are species of giraffe that look almost exactly the same and yet they don't reproduce among themselves?). It is very clear you didn't research or you don't understand the concepts, which is understandable because in the beginning they can be hard to understand. 4. I've gone to extremes- This isn't extreme to me, I've seen it a hundred times. 5. Research the Bible- Research as in find out that its earliest drafts were written by a bunch of goat herders who loved to write in metaphors and allegories, and was then later edited by a bunch of old chauvinists in pointy hats to fit the needs of their Bronze Age political and social adjendas? That it's probably all just a lot of reifications (that's where abstract ideas are taken as concrete). Or research as in read, like about all the stonings, rapes, mass murders, slavery, abuse, and animal slaughter (by the way, did you know that if you find a dead animal, you can sell it to aliens? KJ, Deut 14:21), accompanied by the demand that I must love and fear this all powerful beared man or face eternity in a fiery pit? Boy I have, and it is not an experience I would like to repeat. Talk about ruining childhood innocence. 6. Physical proof- Yes, NatGeo did a long article about that. They apparently had proof that the disciples did go on long journeys to spread the word. However, there is not any confirmed evidence that the town of Nazareth ever existed until more than 3 centuries after Jesus' supposed death. The Old Testament parables the animosity of groups of early human tribes.  7. No persuading me to believe- Of course there is! Anyone can persuad me of anything if they can prove it. There is nothing stopping me, and it shouldn't stop anyone else. 8. Defend myself- There's no problem with that, but you should be defending the topic, not yourself. I'm not personally offended by people who think evolution is false, same as I wouldn't be offended if someone said that butterflies didn't exist or that there's no gravity. 10. I talked to scientists- Like who? Because all of the evolutionary biologists I follow (as in follow their studies or research) could have answered all your questions.

Perhaps I should've used better wording, but the chances of Earth being perfectly positioned so that it could sustain all sorts of life is indeed impossible. Things in this universe happen for a reason, not just anything. As for "related" or "descended" (all those sorts of words), they mean the same thing. If we were truly related, then why can't a human and an ape\monkey have hybrids? Forgive me if this is offending, but I feel the need to go to the extremes at this point. If you don't believe in the Bible, then do some of your own research. There is physical proof of what it says. Christian archeaologists have traveled the paths of many Biblical characters and found evidence. I can see there is no persuading you to believe, but I thought I might as well defend myself.  And I did research before I posted this article, and even talked to a few scientists also. 

I would suggest reading up on some history about the different accounts of where Jesus was at certain times and also the history of the area where he supposedly lived. As your article is about "proof of Christ", that would be the best way to go. 

I would like to address some apparent flaws in your article:

1. "Virtually impossible" is still probable. It's either impossible or it's just improbabe, two different things. Saying that our universe is complex, in a logical argument, does not lead to a god, especially not as specific as the Christian god, Yahweh, of the bible. It just means you don't understand it or how it got here.

2. You jump from "a creator" to "a creator" to "it must be Jesus". You are not going towards proof of Christianity, you are just saying, "there must be a creator because of X, and so the creator I believe is the creator". But there are thousands of possible creators, because there are other religions.

3. Not all atheists believe in evolution, they are independent of each other. Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity. In fact, there are Christians who know evolution is true.

4. Okay, you have clearly not even read the definiton of evolution, let alone read about it in a biology book, because that statement makes no sense. First, evolution is not about random animal metamorphasis, as your bible teachers have probably made it out to sound. It is slow changes in organisms over time. It isn't a spontaneous leap from one thing to another (like water to wine for example). Two, the theory doesn't say we came from monkeys. It is the ancestor OF modern apes (gorillas, orangutans, rhesus) and monkeys. So we are relatives. I recommend you do some background reading.

5. Using the Bible to prove that the bible is true is circular reasoing ie. not proof.

6. The thing about the planets is strange. At first, you get it right, that none of the known planets have what we would describe as life (though they did find very similar materials that form the basis of life here on Earth).  But then you say that there are uncountable # of planets in the universe, and that ours is the only one with life. This is a bad assertion, as not only have we not even visited the farthest planets in our own solar system, but we have not begun to search the ones outside it, yet we have seen that there are a vast amount of them. So I don't understand where you get the conclusion that there is no life. As astrophysisist Neil Tyson said "I get the people who ask 'Well have you found life yet?' That's like taking a cup and scooping some water out of the ocean and saying 'Hmm, there's no whales in here, must not be any whales'... You need a bigger sample!"

There are other things I would address but I don't have the space.